|
|
Post by Aviar Goldeneagle on Jul 22, 2015 0:50:02 GMT
Well I guess all I was gonna say is, we all have thrown our verses around and argued over their meaning. We all read our own beliefs into the passages, and let's be honest we're not gonna change each other's. But I want to discuss the principles, the concept that somewhere there is an invisible line of "too much sin" that will push us out of God's hand and back into He11. I repeat my question, how can there be a whole God-inspired, 63(or whatever you believe)-book story of salvation, and only some vague notion of how we are supposed to "maintain" the grace that God gave us? Also, doesn't it really boil down to us progressively "earning" God's grace by works? I actually think things are pretty clear in the Bible about how we are supposed to maintain salvation. And if we want to debate faith and works any more I can give more verses. But you're right. Not everything in the Bible is clear to see, and people interpret it differently. That's why we see it differently. I believe that's why Jesus didn't just leave us with a book, but also left us with an authoritative Church to teach us. And no, it's not "earning" salvation. It's God rewarding us, because He's pleased with our obedience through our faith. And the only way we can obey God's commands, is because He freely gives us His grace to enable us to do these acts of obedience which please Him. Basically, God gives us grace. We respond to this grace with our faith. God gives us more grace. This grace enables us to keep on in our faith, and also allows us to obey Him. This obedience shows our faith and also sanctifies us, increases our justification, and makes us more holy people as we "strive for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord." But from beginning to end it's all because of God's free gift of grace. In case I haven't explained it well enough, you can check it out in the Catechism of the Catholic Church here: www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s1c3a2.htm#1987 about justification. The Catechism details all that we believe, and so you can always check that out if you want to find out what we believe. |
|
Sam
Elf
Thanks for the warm welcome all.
Posts: 12 
|
Post by Sam on Jul 22, 2015 1:42:24 GMT
Hey! Fewer smilies and I'm digging it bro! They would still have been eternally saved at the moment of belief, regardless of their future decisions. So: Yes born again. Yes possible to stop believing. No, not possible to lose eternal salvation. Hehe! Okay, so what if this person stopped believing and told God he hated Him and didn't want to go to Heaven? Would he still be saved? BTW, it's really cool to be talking to you about this stuff. I read basically every post on the old UG theological debate thread, and I thought it would be really cool to talk to you. He still would be, yes. Saved in the eternal sense, but subject to discipline and chastisement in this life potentially including his death. Kind words, thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by NightBlade on Jul 22, 2015 2:10:01 GMT
Well I guess all I was gonna say is, we all have thrown our verses around and argued over their meaning. We all read our own beliefs into the passages, and let's be honest we're not gonna change each other's. But I want to discuss the principles, the concept that somewhere there is an invisible line of "too much sin" that will push us out of God's hand and back into He11. I repeat my question, how can there be a whole God-inspired, 63(or whatever you believe)-book story of salvation, and only some vague notion of how we are supposed to "maintain" the grace that God gave us? Also, doesn't it really boil down to us progressively "earning" God's grace by works? I actually think things are pretty clear in the Bible about how we are supposed to maintain salvation. And if we want to debate faith and works any more I can give more verses. But you're right. Not everything in the Bible is clear to see, and people interpret it differently. That's why we see it differently. I believe that's why Jesus didn't just leave us with a book, but also left us with an authoritative Church to teach us. And no, it's not "earning" salvation. It's God rewarding us, because He's pleased with our obedience through our faith. And the only way we can obey God's commands, is because He freely gives us His grace to enable us to do these acts of obedience which please Him. Basically, God gives us grace. We respond to this grace with our faith. God gives us more grace. This grace enables us to keep on in our faith, and also allows us to obey Him. This obedience shows our faith and also sanctifies us, increases our justification, and makes us more holy people as we "strive for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord." But from beginning to end it's all because of God's free gift of grace. In case I haven't explained it well enough, you can check it out in the Catechism of the Catholic Church here: www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s1c3a2.htm#1987 about justification. The Catechism details all that we believe, and so you can always check that out if you want to find out what we believe. Right. My point is, it doesn't make sense that such a dire issue would be so vague, as opposed to the initial salvation (which is focused so immensely upon, but is somehow temporary?) It sounds like you're saying no and then yes. Basically, you're saying that we need to continually earn God's grace by obedience (which we all fail at routinely every day)? Either we can somehow terminate His perfect gift, or He takes it away if He is sufficiently displeased? Keep in mind how many times God guided Israel back to Him, although they also were often chastised. Did they ever fall from His love, His inheritance? No, not even today, when they are faithless as ever. Edit: Galatians has some insight on this issue. But controversial for the two of us I'm sure |
|
|
|
Post by Aviar Goldeneagle on Jul 22, 2015 3:19:26 GMT
So does that mean someone can accept Christ as their personal Lord and Saviour and then go and live in any way they please and they'd still be saved? You have an interesting view here that I haven't really heard before. Thinking about it. NightBlade: I wouldn't say it's vague (to me anyway), although perhaps not as clear as our initial salvation, although I personally think it's still clear to see there. We don't earn God's grace by obedience. He gives us His grace so we can obey Him, and then He's pleased with us obeying Him. An analogy would be a dad giving his young son five dollars to go and by him (the dad) a present for his birthday. The dad is pleased with the present his son bought him, even though he gave him the money to buy it in the first place. We take our salvation away from ourselves by deciding we no longer want it and radically disobeying God. Yes, good point. I'll think about that. Probably yes. What insights specifically? EDIT: Although perhaps it would be better not to go into them now. Only if you want to. Also, I probably won't be on tomorrow, and so will respond to any posts on Friday (perhaps Thursday for you U.S. guys XD) |
|
|
|
Post by NightBlade on Jul 22, 2015 20:40:08 GMT
So does that mean someone can accept Christ as their personal Lord and Saviour and then go and live in any way they please and they'd still be saved? You have an interesting view here that I haven't really heard before. Thinking about it. NightBlade: I wouldn't say it's vague (to me anyway), although perhaps not as clear as our initial salvation, although I personally think it's still clear to see there. We don't earn God's grace by obedience. He gives us His grace so we can obey Him, and then He's pleased with us obeying Him. An analogy would be a dad giving his young son five dollars to go and by him (the dad) a present for his birthday. The dad is pleased with the present his son bought him, even though he gave him the money to buy it in the first place. We take our salvation away from ourselves by deciding we no longer want it and radically disobeying God. Yes, good point. I'll think about that. Probably yes. What insights specifically? EDIT: Although perhaps it would be better not to go into them now. Only if you want to. Also, I probably won't be on tomorrow, and so will respond to any posts on Friday (perhaps Thursday for you U.S. guys XD) Bud. You're really saying no but yes. Strip away the fancy language down to the core. Is it the good things we do that cause God to continue giving us grace? If so, then in essence we literally are earning grace (is it really grace in that case?) K let me know what you think about the Israel thing. Yeah maybe you're right, let's not open that can haha |
|
|
|
Post by CNGoodhue on Jul 22, 2015 22:20:19 GMT
So does that mean someone can accept Christ as their personal Lord and Saviour and then go and live in any way they please and they'd still be saved? You have an interesting view here that I haven't really heard before. Thinking about it. NightBlade: I wouldn't say it's vague (to me anyway), although perhaps not as clear as our initial salvation, although I personally think it's still clear to see there. We don't earn God's grace by obedience. He gives us His grace so we can obey Him, and then He's pleased with us obeying Him. An analogy would be a dad giving his young son five dollars to go and by him (the dad) a present for his birthday. The dad is pleased with the present his son bought him, even though he gave him the money to buy it in the first place. We take our salvation away from ourselves by deciding we no longer want it and radically disobeying God. Yes, good point. I'll think about that. Probably yes. What insights specifically? EDIT: Although perhaps it would be better not to go into them now. Only if you want to. Also, I probably won't be on tomorrow, and so will respond to any posts on Friday (perhaps Thursday for you U.S. guys XD) Bud. You're really saying no but yes. Strip away the fancy language down to the core. Is it the good things we do that cause God to continue giving us grace? If so, then in essence we literally are earning grace (is it really grace in that case?) K let me know what you think about the Israel thing. Yeah maybe you're right, let's not open that can haha if I might interject, I'm pretty sure God doesn't decide whether or not we get grace by our works "But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace." -Romans 11:6 |
|
|
|
Post by NightBlade on Jul 22, 2015 23:06:47 GMT
Thank you. Good supporting verse. For some reason I was trying to find that in Galatians
|
|
|
|
Post by Alvar on Jul 22, 2015 23:26:51 GMT
Aviar Goldeneagle: I would also like to add that when we're saved, our names are in the Book of Life. If we could lose salvation, then our names would have to be erased somehow, then written in again, then erased again if we lost it again. Do what you want with that piece of information. I just thought it was an interesting thought. And another thing, John repeatedly worships the wrong person by mistake throughout the Bible. For example, after seeing all of what was going to happen in Revelations, he started worshipping the angel that showed him those things. Of course the angel said, "Don't do that, worship God." He didn't say, "You've committed a terrible sin, worshipping someone other than God, and have lost your salvation." He pointed him in the right direction, not pronounce him as "fallen away." Was John still saved? Was he still an apostle? Yes and yes. And as we know, worshipping the wrong person is a pretty "mortal" sin.
|
|
Sam
Elf
Thanks for the warm welcome all.
Posts: 12
|
Post by Sam on Jul 23, 2015 1:02:19 GMT
So does that mean someone can accept Christ as their personal Lord and Saviour and then go and live in any way they please and they'd still be saved? You have an interesting view here that I haven't really heard before. Thinking about it. Yes, that is the view. |
|
|
|
Post by Alvar on Jul 23, 2015 1:46:42 GMT
On the subject of going on anyway you like, Romans has some insight into the matter:
|
|
Sam
Elf
Thanks for the warm welcome all.
Posts: 12
|
Post by Sam on Jul 23, 2015 4:04:13 GMT
On the subject of going on anyway you like, Romans has some insight into the matter: If by this you mean it's impossible for a believer to sin continually, your day to day experience shows this to be false. If you mean, as Paul does, that it's totally at odds with who we are and it must not continue ---I certainly don't disagree. This same mindset echoed in James 3 in regards to sins of the tongue. Edit: Having said that, what do you actually mean by your statement. |
|
|
|
Post by Ellron Silvertree on Jul 23, 2015 4:38:34 GMT
I think we can all agree that salvation is a gift. Right? But for salvation to truly be a gift, it must be freely given and freely received and accepted. We can't "terminate" God's gift, but we can refuse it. That's what we do each time we sin. We don't damage or dismantle the Gift, but we damage our ability to accept that gift. This is why we confess our sins, why we repent and do penance. It's not too make up for our sins--we can't do that, and God already paid the price for them on the cross. But He also won't force us to accept His forgiveness, that would take away our free will, which is why we must ask for it. Which brings me back to the point of it being a gift, freely given. That it must be freely accepted means that it can also be rejected. Let me give an analogy. Imagine there is a very rich man walking down the street, and he comes across a homeless kid. Now this kid has done many acts against the man, attacked his character, and all that, and broken the law. But the man happens to also be the mayor (so the kid has directly broken the law set in place by the mayor) says to him today, "I will take you into my home today, and give you everything I have as yours, I will give you my complete and whole love, and erase all of your past crimes, if you just ask forgiveness and give me all of your love without holding back. All you have to do is accept the gift."
So the kids accepts, and for a few months or years, everything is awesome. The kid wants for nothing. But then one day the kid's best friend dies, and the kid gets mad at the mayor and blames him for not saving the best friend. So the kid runs away, and ignores all of the mayor's texts and calls. The mayor wants the kid to return, but he knows that all his wealth and Love would be worthless if he forced the kid back with his bodyguards or something. The gift is still there, as pure as ever, but the kid can only come back to it off his own accord.
Does that make sense?
We don't take away God's ability to save us by falling away and doing wrong, but it would be against His nature to force us to accept Him or His gift.
Sort of connected, I once heard Heaven and Heck describes this way: When we die, God gives us what it is we want most of all, with all our heart and soul. If that is Him, He brings us to Him. If that is something else, and we don't want to be with Him more than anything, then he gives us what we want--not Him. Not love. Heck is, simply, separation from God, separation from Love. Whenever we sin we act opposite of Love. Sin, therefore, separates us from Love. If you are saved and then you sin then you have put something between you and the gift, the Love that has saved you. If you don't repent, then how can you return to the Love that saved you? Is that perfect, completely self-giving Love going to force you to return?
|
|
|
|
Post by Alvar on Jul 23, 2015 4:40:42 GMT
Sam: I posted that to say what Paul was saying.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aviar Goldeneagle on Jul 24, 2015 0:11:40 GMT
NightBlade: Bah, I mustn’t be explaining this well.  Before we come to God, He is freely giving us grace. We can then respond to God and accept Him through faith and become Christians. God then freely gives us more grace. Through this grace we are able to obey God and do acts that are pleasing to Him. The Bible clearly shows that we can please God. (Phil. 4:18, Col. 1:9-10, 1Thes. 4:1, Heb. 13:16, Heb. 13:20-21). Look them up. Since God is pleased with our obedience He chooses to reward us. This is also clearly a biblical concept. (Rom. 2:6, 1Cor. 3:8, 2Cor. 5:10, Gal. 6:6-10, Rev. 2:23, Rev. 22:12). He may reward us with more grace. However, notice that it's not earning it, but it's God rewarding us because He is pleased with us. However, the only way we can please God is because He gives us the grace to be able to please Him in the first place. I dunno if I can put it much clearer than that. If I haven’t explained it well, check out these three articles. The first one is just a short question/answer and will take about 1 minute to read. The second one’s a bit longer and explains more about our works. And the third one is longer as well and more technical and explains about the concepts of reward (merit). www.catholic.com/quickquestions/why-does-the-church-teach-that-works-can-obtain-salvationwww.catholic.com/magazine/articles/we-can-work-it-outjimmyakin.com/righteousness-and-meritSo if I haven't explained well those articles should hopefully explain for me. CNGoodhue: Yes, that’s correct. Paul’s talking about how Christians are chosen by God’s free gift of grace, not on the basis of “how good they are.” But notice a little further down in v22, how St. Paul says that we must “continue in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off.” How are we to continue in His kindness? By obeying Him. So Paul is not saying that works have no part to play in salvation. What he’s saying is that we can’t obligate God to pay us with salvation because of the good things we did outside of the grace of God. Alvar: It seems to me that Revelation 3:5 implies that your name can be blotted out of the book of life: “He who conquers shall be clad thus in white garments, and I will not blot his name out of the book of life.” You can’t be blotted out of something you’re not first in. Good point. What I’ve always believed about this (and it’s certainly not an isolated belief since I believe both St. Athanasius and St. Augustine believed this too, as well as other people today) is that St. John mistook the angel to be Jesus. And if this is not the case (after doing a little research on this), I think John, as an apostle, would’ve known to worship none but God, and so he might have been overawed by the angel, thinking “this is far greater being than me” and as the angel was communicating a message from God, he might have thought worship was the proper response. In any case, he stopped when the angel told him to stop and would’ve realised it was wrong to worship the angel. And yes, the angel pointed him in the right direction. If John had replied to the angel “I know you’re only a created being. I know you’re not God, I know God wouldn't want me to worship you, but I’m going to go on worshipping you anyway, even though you’ve told me not to” then it might have been time for the angel to say “You've committed a terrible sin, worshipping someone other than God, and have lost your salvation." Sam: So how does one know if they've been born again? Ellron Silvertree: I totally agree with what you say there. And you've explained it there better than I did. Good analogy.
|
|
|
|
Post by NightBlade on Jul 24, 2015 2:38:33 GMT
Aviar GoldeneagleI'm sorry but I haven't got time to read articles right now :/ but I don't see how their different explaining can change the discrepency of concepts. Your base concept that I am questioning is, put simply, this: God's grace is only extended to us inasmuch as we please Him with works. I am aware of pleasing God and being rewarded. But I don't understand how you see "being given something because of doing what you should (aka pleasing God)" and "earning" as two different concepts. They really aren't; they are the same thing. We are rewarded by God with many things. We also disobey Him inevitably every day to an extent that you might not realize. But as Paul said it, our best offerings are "filthy rags". We can never do enough to achieve the perfection of heaven; it is a gift. And I don't know how to say it clearer, but working to earn a gift makes it no longer a gift. I call to the floor CNG's verse. If we work for grace it is no longer grace! Grace is by definition something we don't deserve! Thinking that God will give us grace only as long as we keep Him happy (good luck) is literally defeating the very definition.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alvar on Jul 24, 2015 2:40:52 GMT
Aviar Goldeneagle: I don't believe he mistook the angel to be Jesus. I don't see how he could. Would you care to explain how he mistook the angel to be Jesus? I believe that John was overawed, like you said. I don't believe that John would, or anyone else for that matter, continue worshipping the angel after it told him not to. Not to be rude, just curious, but do you believe in all of Catholic theology, or some parts along with the beliefs of a different denomination?
|
|
|
|
Post by Aviar Goldeneagle on Jul 24, 2015 2:52:14 GMT
NightBlade: Real quick post because I've gotta go out. But how do you believe God gives us grace? Does He just give us a big chunk when we first believe? Does He continually give it through our Christian lives? Why does He give it? I'll respond to you and Alvar's post when I get back.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ellron Silvertree on Jul 24, 2015 2:56:36 GMT
Avian: Thanks! I typed it up at like midnight, so I want sure how organized it was our how clear xP I normally stay quiet because a) these things tend to take up a lot of my thoughts, and I have real life other stuff to deal with xP and b) you tend to do a better job articulating much of what I have to say. However, sometimes I feel that there is something I can add, and so I did :P
Also, I'm getting the sense that grace is being defined in two different ways here. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that NightBlade is using grace in the manner of Amazing Grace--that is to say, more synonymous to salvation. And it appears, in my mind, that Avian is using grace in that "whatever the Lord asks us to do, He gives us the grace (or strength, or ability) do succeed." In this definition, grace is more like the ability or strength to accomplish everything that God sets before us. These are clearly two completely different definitions of the word, and such a misunderstanding can lead to serious confusion, so I wanted to ask just to get some clarification.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alvar on Jul 24, 2015 2:59:38 GMT
In such a situation, we should look at the original text and the different ways it's translated.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ellron Silvertree on Jul 24, 2015 3:03:25 GMT
In such a situation, we should look at the original text and the different ways they're translated. Yes, you're right. But I mean how Avian and NightBlade are using the terms in their own arguments, not in their scripture quotes. But if course we need to be clear when using those as well, like you said. |
|
|
|
Post by NightBlade on Jul 24, 2015 3:16:25 GMT
NightBlade: Real quick post because I've gotta go out. But how do you believe God gives us grace? Does He just give us a big chunk when we first believe? Does He continually give it through our Christian lives? Why does He give it? I'll respond to you and Alvar's post when I get back. Grace in it's most literal definition is being extended a kindness that is not deserved. In this case, I understand God's grace as forgiveness through the gift of His son's blood, which atoned for ALL sin. Past, present, and future. Also, the "cut off" phrase that you bring up in all those verses is, in my own understanding, being separated from favor. The term is used in the old testament meaning being removed from society, as opposed to execution. Still a bad punishment but the lesser of the two main ones. I guess you could see it comparable to being cut off completely from God, but I see it in context as lesser than being killed, or "perishing", which is a term used on the NT to mean soul in he11. Also, Paul did mention in Hebrews losing your salvation... but if you'll read the context, he was posing a rhetorical situation of impossibility. |
|
|
|
Post by Alvar on Jul 24, 2015 3:23:14 GMT
The Greek word used is charis (or xàris), which can be defined in four ways:
1) Grace, as a gift or blessing brought to man by Jesus Christ,
2) favor,
3) gratitude, thanks,
4) a favor or kindness.
So a lot of the verses which use this word could be misunderstood when translated. God could be giving us a blessing, or His favor, or His gratitude, or a kindness.
(I just now looked this stuff up)
|
|
|
|
Post by Ellron Silvertree on Jul 24, 2015 3:25:14 GMT
Aviar Goldeneagle: I would also like to add that when we're saved, our names are in the Book of Life. If we could lose salvation, then our names would have to be erased somehow, then written in again, then erased again if we lost it again. Do what you want with that piece of information. I just thought it was an interesting thought. And another thing, John repeatedly worships the wrong person by mistake throughout the Bible. For example, after seeing all of what was going to happen in Revelations, he started worshipping the angel that showed him those things. Of course the angel said, "Don't do that, worship God." He didn't say, "You've committed a terrible sin, worshipping someone other than God, and have lost your salvation." He pointed him in the right direction, not pronounce him as "fallen away." Was John still saved? Was he still an apostle? Yes and yes. And as we know, worshipping the wrong person is a pretty "mortal" sin. But, as he was mistakenly worshipping the wrong being, and stopped as soon as he realized it, John was not committing a mortal sin--not in the way Avian meant. A mortal sin, as defined by the Catholic Church, has to meet certain criteria: first, you have to know that what you are doing is a sin. Second, it must be full consent of the will--that is, you can't be forced at gunpoint to commit this sin. It has to be your own free choice, with no coercion. Thirdly, it must be a grave matter. This is what Catholics mean when they talk of a mortal sin, one that severs a believer from the Body of Christ. What John did in that passage was clearly not s mortal sin by this definition. |
|
|
|
Post by NightBlade on Jul 24, 2015 3:35:48 GMT
The Greek word used is charis (or xàris), which can be defined in four ways: 1) Grace, as a gift or blessing brought to man by Jesus Christ, 2) favor, 3) gratitude, thanks, 4) a favor or kindness. So a lot of the verses which use this word could be misunderstood when translated. God could be giving us His blessing, or His favor, or His gratitude, or a kindness. (I just now looked this stuff up) Haha good call dude. You just done what I studied to do for a whole semester and was too lazy to actually do x) |
|
|
|
Post by Alvar on Jul 24, 2015 3:51:18 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Aviar Goldeneagle on Jul 24, 2015 9:31:33 GMT
NightBlade: No that's not exactly what I'm saying. God freely gives us grace. This grace allows us to obey Him. Every good work that we do could not be done unless God gives us the grace to do it. However, we can ignore God's grace and disobey Him. Then, I believe, we have lost our salvation. So yes, in a sense, we have to keep obeying God or we will fall from grace. However, you must remember that it's God giving us the grace to do these good works. We cannot do them on our own. Earning is when you legally obligate someone to pay you because of some work you have done. A reward is when you work for someone just to help them out, and then they reward you by paying you some money, even though they were not legally obligated to pay you anything. Humans cannot obligate God to pay them with salvation because of "boasting" works done under their own power. (St. Paul destroys this in the book of Romans). However, once we are Christians, our works are now worth something because we are doing them out of love for God (Gal. 5:6), and God is pleased with them. "It's no longer I who live but Christ who lives in me." (Gal. 2:20) Can you give the passage where Paul says our best offerings are filthy rags. I couldn't find it. He would be quoting Isaiah 64:6. (Which I did find). But that's right. Our righteousness is as filthy rags before God, because we as humans can't do any works to please God when we're outside of His grace. However once we become Christians it's not our righteousness that causes us to do the works, it's Christ's righteousness in us. So then the works are worth something because it's Christ's righteousness working in us. Yes, Heaven is a gift. But I don't believe (and I don't see the Bible saying this) that God will let us into Heaven if we willfully choose to disobey Him. We have to continue to obey God's will to enter Heaven. Why does Paul say that "I pommel my body and subdue it"? What does Paul say to those who think they are standing? Does St. Paul think it's possible to fall from grace? As for CNG's verse, that's talking about our initial salvation and how God chose us to be Christians. He didn't choose us on the basis of "how good we were" before we became Christians. He chose us on the basis of His grace. Okay, I agree with that, but how does God give this grace to us? When? How? I think it is more likely that it means cut off from God. In John 15 we read about Jesus being the vine. What happens if we do not abide in the vine by obeying Him? We are cut off, thrown into the fire, and burned. That sounds like being thrown into he11 to me. That's the way I interpret the Romans verse. However, your interpretation has it's points. I shall think about it further. How so? Care to give the verses? Why would he warn of such a thing if it could not happen? ----------------------------- Alvar: I'm not certain about it, that's just what I've always believed without studying it deeply. I think the main reason would be because John would have known not to worship a created creature, and thus perhaps he thought it was not a created creature, but Jesus. Yes, that's another possible interpretation. Neither. x) But if he had continued to worship the angel, knowing full well that it was a grave sin, and giving full consent to it, then it could be mortal sin. Haha yup. I believe everything the Catholic Church officially teaches. Notice that I said "officially teaches", as detailed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. What some random priest might say may not be official Catholic teaching and as such I wouldn't believe it. I believe everything the Catholic Church officially teaches, although that includes a looot of stuff that the different Protestant denominations teach as well. (Such as God is a Trinity, that Jesus is God, that Jesus is both 100% God and 100% man, etc, and much more). Also, I wouldn't call the Catholic Church a denomination. Denominations refer to the different sects of Protestantism which broke off from the Catholic Church in the 16th century. The Catholic Church was the first Church. (Or so I believe. Others my have different beliefs.) ------------------ Ellron Silvertree: Feel free to add anything you want. What you've said (about eternal security and mortal sin) has probably been articulated better than me. 
|
|
|
|
Post by NightBlade on Jul 24, 2015 21:27:29 GMT
I think I broke the quoting system, so I'm underlining my responses xD NightBlade: No that's not exactly what I'm saying. God freely gives us grace. This grace allows us to obey Him. Every good work that we do could not be done unless God gives us the grace to do it. However, we can ignore God's grace and disobey Him. Then, I believe, we have lost our salvation. So yes, in a sense, we have to keep obeying God or we will fall from grace. However, you must remember that it's God giving us the grace to do these good works. We cannot do them on our own. I deal with this in the next paragraph. But I would disagree...some unbelievers follow God's laws better than many believers do! Did not Saul, even while persecuting Christians, follow the Law to the very letter inasmuch as humanly possible? I might add that nobody, believer or non, can fully keep the Law. When I said "as much as humanly possible", I meant literally.Earning is when you legally obligate someone to pay you because of some work you have done. A reward is when you work for someone just to help them out, and then they reward you by paying you some money, even though they were not legally obligated to pay you anything. Humans cannot obligate God to pay them with salvation because of "boasting" works done under their own power. (St. Paul destroys this in the book of Romans). However, once we are Christians, our works are now worth something because we are doing them out of love for God (Gal. 5:6), and God is pleased with them. "It's no longer I who live but Christ who lives in me." (Gal. 2:20) You're splitting hairs on definitions here. The only actual, literal difference between the two is God choosing to repay our works instead of having to. They are both still saying that we receive grace by our works, or conversely lose grace by our lack thereof. Same thing. When you see it in those words, does it really sound like what Christ and Paul were saying? You keep rephrasing the concept, but at the very core is that not what it is? Grace in exchange for obedience?Can you give the passage where Paul says our best offerings are filthy rags. I couldn't find it. He would be quoting Isaiah 64:6. (Which I did find). But that's right. Our righteousness is as filthy rags before God, because we as humans can't do any works to please God when we're outside of His grace. However once we become Christians it's not our righteousness that causes us to do the works, it's Christ's righteousness in us. So then the works are worth something because it's Christ's righteousness working in us. Right, it was Isaiah and not Paul, sorry. Anyhow, I agree with you that our works are unclean without His Spirit that makes us acceptable to Him. His Spirit in us is what allows us in His presence in Heaven, no? So logically, is it not His own Spirit that performs these works that perpetuate His grace--in other words, He is perpetuating His grace in us, through His Spirit, using works? That right there is more up my own alley of belief. Sometimes we do not listen to the Spirit (it is not controlling us as a demon would; God obviously doesn't treat us like puppets) and go our own way in disobedience. But does that cause the Spirit to leave us? No, I have witnessed it in my own life and others' lives countless times. Just as He did with Israel, He pursues us and brings us back. Yes, a few times in Scripture, the Spirit did leave, such as in King Saul's case. But in one of those cases, Samson's, the Spirit returned to him when he called upon the Lord! And even in his rebellion, the Lord was using him. However, all of that was before Christ died for our rebellion, all rebellion, which must include that which drove out the Spirit from Saul. Has there been any account of the Spirit leaving its host ever since then?Yes, Heaven is a gift. But I don't believe (and I don't see the Bible saying this) that God will let us into Heaven if we willfully choose to disobey Him. We have to continue to obey God's will to enter Heaven. Why does Paul say that "I pommel my body and subdue it"? What does Paul say to those who think they are standing? Does St. Paul think it's possible to fall from grace? As for CNG's verse, that's talking about our initial salvation and how God chose us to be Christians. He didn't choose us on the basis of "how good we were" before we became Christians. He chose us on the basis of His grace. Let's face it. Every single day we choose to disobey Him. Every day from when we were a child to the day we die. Christ's blood atoned EVERY sin. In one sentence, Christ on the cross forgave a capital felon the sins of his entire life. I agree that it is through Christ's Holy Spirit that we are motivated to obey. But that is Not the only means by which we do good, nor does it eliminate our disobedience entirely. We all are and forever upon this earth will remain, sinners. But Christ loved and died for every sin of every one of us. Must He die again to forgive every sin we commit lest we lose God's favor?Okay, I agree with that, but how does God give this grace to us? When? How? I think John 3:16 sums it up. Romans 5 also explains it well, especially this part:
"Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God. More than that, we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not put us to shame, because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us..."
Also, 11:6 "But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace."I think it is more likely that it means cut off from God. In John 15 we read about Jesus being the vine. What happens if we do not abide in the vine by obeying Him? We are cut off, thrown into the fire, and burned. That sounds like being thrown into he11 to me. That's the way I interpret the Romans verse. However, your interpretation has it's points. I shall think about it further. God will never leave us or forsake us, He said Himself. As with Israel, myself, and many of my friends, He pursues us relentlessly. Either to bring us to Him as with Paul, or to bring us back to Himself in my own aforementioned experience. Perhaps you have felt forsaken by Him? I can't speak for all but I believe with all my heart that God's love, mercy, grace and His Holy Spirit never leave us and always try to lead us back to His fold. Did Jesus not speak of the shepherd finding his wayward sheep? Did not the father still love his prodigal son, long for him every day and still consider him his beloved child? Did God not keep His hand of blessing on Israel through their rebellion, though he did punish them at times? Aren't all sins forgiven? If so, how could they break us away from Him?How so? Care to give the verses? Why would he warn of such a thing if it could not happen? ----------------------------- Hebrews 6 is where it's at. But undoubtedly we interpret the passage differently. My method of interpretation is largely logic-driven based on overall Bible context, but I do have a decent amount of college theological study under my belt as well. All I'm saying is that I'm pretty firm in my beliefs.Haha yup. I believe everything the Catholic Church officially teaches. Notice that I said "officially teaches", as detailed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. What some random priest might say may not be official Catholic teaching and as such I wouldn't believe it. I believe everything the Catholic Church officially teaches, although that includes a looot of stuff that the different Protestant denominations teach as well. (Such as God is a Trinity, that Jesus is God, that Jesus is both 100% God and 100% man, etc, and much more). Also, I wouldn't call the Catholic Church a denomination. Denominations refer to the different sects of Protestantism which broke off from the Catholic Church in the 16th century. The Catholic Church was the first Church. (Or so I believe. Others my have different beliefs.) Pretty sure that the first "church" in its purest definition was that which Jesus set up with Peter and the other apostles. And most people I know actually consider Catholicism a different religion alongside Christianity *shrugs*. |
|
|
|
Post by Ellron Silvertree on Jul 25, 2015 4:22:55 GMT
I can't figure out quoting on my phone, plus I'm quoting NightBlade's last post xP
Here goes,
"God will never leave us or forsake us, He said Himself. As with Israel, myself, and many of my friends, He pursues us relentlessly. Either to bring us to Him as with Paul, or to bring us back to Himself in my own aforementioned experience. Perhaps you have felt forsaken by Him? I can't speak for all but I believe with all my heart that God's love, mercy, grace and His Holy Spirit never leave us and always try to lead us back to His fold. Did Jesus not speak of the shepherd finding his wayward sheep? Did not the father still love his prodigal son, long for him every day and still consider him his beloved child? Did God not keep His hand of blessing on Israel through their rebellion, though he did punish them at times? Aren't all sins forgiven? If so, how could they break us away from Him?"
To be more precise, all sins are forgiven to those who ask for forgiveness. If we don't want to be forgiven, God is going to let us make that choice. C.S. Lewis put it this way in "The Great Divorce": "There are two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God "Thy will be done," and those to whom God says, in the end "Thy will be done." All that are in Heck, choose it."
If one loves something in this world so much that they would rather have that than give it up for God, then He won't force them to be with Him. I think the parallel of Judas Iscariot and Simon Peter is a good example of two ways to fall away from God. Judas is turned away by greed, and when he realizes what he has done he doesn't ask for forgiveness, he just kills himself. Peter denies Christ thrice out of fear, but later is contrite and repents, and repairs his relationship with God. And, as we know, Christ appoints Peter as the leader of His church on earth before the passion, so it's fair to assume that Peter was in communion with the Lord before he denied Him. Judas was also one of the twelve and was in communion with the Lord before he betrayed Him. But while one repented and had his sins forgiven, the other did not. Would you not agree that Judas' sins broke him away from his relationship with His Lord?
"Pretty sure that the first "church" in its purest definition was that which Jesus set up with Peter and the other apostles. And most people I know actually consider Catholicism a different religion alongside Christianity *shrugs*."
I'm going to be blunt here. Most people you know are wrong. Ask any Catholic theologian or priest or person religious or lay person worth their salt and they will tell you that the Roman Catholic church is 100% totally Christian.
And the Catholic Church agrees with you, actually--that was indeed the first Church, its Christ appointed leader, Peter, and has been led by Peter and his successors for the past two millenia. But that's a different debate entirely.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aviar Goldeneagle on Jul 25, 2015 11:10:38 GMT
NightBlade: I agree that some unbelievers follow God's laws better than many believers, however, it is impossible to please God if we are not Christians. Romans 8:8: "and those who are in the flesh cannot please God." Unbelievers who do "good things" will not be doing them out of a love for God. The only way we can please God is if we are first "in Christ". When I say God rewards us with grace, I'm meaning sanctifying grace that makes us grow in righteousness and in our justification. This grace helps us grow more Christ-like, and God rewards us with this because He's pleased with our obedience. However, whenever we obey God, He had to give us the grace to do it on that occasion. This grace is called actual grace and is different from sanctifying grace. Isn't that much different from earning grace? (Please ask more questions if I'm not being clear  Yes, since it's no longer I who live but Christ who lives in me, and God is at work in me, both to will and to work for his good pleasure. However, it's still something that I do. I have to give the assent of my intellect, and the assent of my will. (In other words, God is not obeying Himself. ) But yes, what you say there sounds basically what I believe. I think Judas is a good example of such a thing happening. catholicnick.blogspot.co.nz/2013/01/judas-refutes-eternal-security-calvinism.htmlHowever God is always searching for us and trying to bring us back--and many times those who have rejected (or even neglected the great gift of salvation) do return (King David is a great example of this), and that's a great thing. But some people continue to ignore God's grace that they've rejected and do not return. Yes, Christ died on the cross to make forgiveness for the sins of everyone in the world possible. However, when we come to Christ, only our past sins are forgiven. We still have to repent and ask for God's forgiveness every time we sin again. That forgiveness will then be granted to us due to the merits Christ won for us on the cross. So no, He doesn't have to die again and again. He's already paid it all. I think that first passage is another example of salvation being able to be lost. We must "endure" in our faith. And also, why would we need "hope" if we already knew we had Heaven? I explained in an earlier post how I view Romans 11:6. Yes, God will never forsake us, although I believe that the Bible teaches that we can forsake God. (I posted this before, but here's a list of passages.) But you have to remember that we have free will. God will always want us to come to Him, but He's not going to force us to come. Jesus will always seek for His wayward sheep, and will rejoice when He brings it back. But since He's given us free will, not everyone will return to Him. They will no longer be one of His sheep. Yes, the father still loved the prodigal son. Yes, God loves all sinners and desires that all men be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth. But just like the father didn't go out after his son and force him to return, so God will not force us to return to Him if we don't want to. The prodigal son returned of His own free will, earnestly sorry for what he had done. So if we return to God, earnestly sorry for leaving Him, He will joyfully receive us back. The prodigal son was "dead", so are sinners who leave God. But they are then made "alive" once again when they return to God's love. As for Israel I'm still thinking about it. I would see it differently since Israel was the country through which God desired to teach the nations, but I'm still thinking about it. Jesus death on the cross made it possible for all sins to be forgiven. If it automatically forgave all sins then everyone would be saved and we know that's not the case. When we come to God our past sins are all washed away, but we still have to repent of our future sins. Do you believe that we should repent of the sins we commit as Christians? Undoubtedly we do. My method of interpretation is how the Catholic Church interprets something, or within the boundaries of interpretation that they set. It would seem to me that historically it would seem much more likely that a Christian can lose their salvation. Can you name anyone before the 16th century who believed in eternal security? I don't believe anyone taught it prior to the reformation. If that is indeed the case, then don't you think that the apostles did a pretty poor job of teaching this doctrine if no one got it right for fifteen hundred years?  Well, we Catholics say that Peter was our first Pope xD. Although that's another debate entirely. With Ellron, I'd have to say that those people are wrong. I would think it very likely that they don't know what the Catholic Church actually teaches. As Fulton Sheen put it: “There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate The Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.” Many non-Catholic Christians believe that Catholics worship Mary, or that Catholics worship statues (both of which we don't ), plus other misconceptions. I think they also don't realise how deeply grounded in Scripture Catholic theology is. By the way, I'm not intending to offend you in any way by what I've said in these posts. I respect your position even if I believe it is wrong, and I totally believe you're a fellow Christian.  Also, if you don't have the time to respond to everything I've posted ('cos these posts are getting pretty long ), that's fine. Respond to what you wish.
|
|
|
|
Post by CNGoodhue on Aug 18, 2015 3:57:47 GMT
One thing I can say that Catholics have really made their mark on is the field of spiritual warfare. That's a strong spot for them.
I just got done reading a really good article about how people take 2 Peter 3:9 out of it's context and use it as a refutation to the concept of predestination (which it's actually the exact opposite). I was always baffled about that verse, but now it makes sense. Though I won't bring up that topic anymore, I think we've just about burnt it out haha.
Do you guys have another subject in mind? I actually have a question.
After researching spiritual warfare a little bit, combing over the internet for answers and stuff, it seems that the idea of silver acting as some sort of "repellent" to demonic entities is common (mostly among Catholics, who've been pretty spot on about this stuff). Does anyone know why or if the use of silver actually works, or if it's just like that crap in pop culture that has to do with werewolves?
|
|
.jpg)
Before we come to God, He is freely giving us grace. We can then respond to God and accept Him through faith and become Christians. God then freely gives us more grace. Through this grace we are able to obey God and do acts that are pleasing to Him. The Bible clearly shows that we can please God. (Phil. 4:18, Col. 1:9-10, 1Thes. 4:1, Heb. 13:16, Heb. 13:20-21). Look them up. 
Also, if you don't have the time to respond to everything I've posted ('cos these posts are getting pretty long