Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Frumanchu
You answered your own questions whether you realize or not.

One thing that is getting lost in the translation is that in RC teaching, Salvation is not realized until we have passed to our eternal reward. That's the goal. No one is just "saved" because they read the bible and believe what it says. There's a lot more involved.

And who, exactly, are the "elect"? Everyone is invited. That would mean that all people are the elect. Whether or not any one person partakes is a matter of free will, not God's.

And I guess I don't understand why, when God sent His only Son to us, he would have chosen just anyone to be the vessel of passage.

441 posted on 10/09/2002 11:12:14 AM PDT by Desdemona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 414 | View Replies ]


To: Desdemona
One thing that is getting lost in the translation is that in RC teaching, Salvation is not realized until we have passed to our eternal reward. That's the goal. No one is just "saved" because they read the bible and believe what it says. There's a lot more involved.

Salvation is bought with a price...the blood of Jesus Christ shed upon the cross. You must ask what we are saved FROM. We are saved from the just penalty of our sinfulness. The atoning sacrifice of Christ, the perfect Lamb of God, satisfies the just requirements of the absolute righteousness God demands. In one sense, salvation occurred at Christ's death, and in another it will be fully realized at judgement. My point is that this sacrificial atonement is avoidable given the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception because God could simply suspend original sin in His elect (regardless of definition) and eliminate the need for atonement. If, as your church maintains, Mary was completely sinless, she didn't need a savior. She was righteous and could stand before God.

And who, exactly, are the "elect"? Everyone is invited. That would mean that all people are the elect. Whether or not any one person partakes is a matter of free will, not God's.

That's a whole other debate, Des. Suffice it to say at this time that the language and context when the term "elect" is used seems to clearly indicate that it is a group separated from the whole, not a term applied to the whole.

And I guess I don't understand why, when God sent His only Son to us, he would have chosen just anyone to be the vessel of passage.

I guess I don't understand then why God would choose a Pharisee who persecuted His Son's followers to become an Apostle to the Gentiles. His ways are not our ways.

474 posted on 10/09/2002 1:00:15 PM PDT by Frumanchu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 441 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson