Aren't some Catholics saved?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Ask Jesus : One Thread

"But surely some Catholics are saved?"..,is often the response to the truth about Catholicism. I am more charitable than Rome, which anathematizes those who say they are saved. Yes, some Catholics may be saved, but only by believing the same gospel whereby other lost souls are saved. Nor can one believe two contradictory propositions simultaneously.

One can't believe that Christ obtained redemption through His blood and also believe that redemption is being accomplished through works, suffering, ritual, and indulgences; one can't believe that salvation is by faith and "not of works" and at the same time believe that good works earn salvation.

It is often said in its defense that the Roman Catholic Church professes the orthodox creeds and therefore that all Catholics are Christians. The ancient creeds, however, do not contain the gospel. Certainly neither the Apostles' nor the Nicene creeds do. They declare the diety of Christ, His virgin birth, and that He "suffered under Pontius Pilate," but they do not specify that He died for our sins and that we have eternal life through faith in Him. So it is fallacious to suggest that the Roman Catholic Church is evangelical because it subscribes to "the ancient church creeds."

In a recent survey of 2,000 homes in Spain only two persons knew clearly what the gospel was, and they were Protestants. The other 1,998 were Catholics who thought good works, church attendance, etc. would get them into heaven. In fifteen years of evangelizing in Spain, missionary friends of this author have never met even one Catholic who was saved or knew how to be saved. Knowing that Catholics are lost causes evangelicals to work day and night to bring them the gospel!

This author has contacted a multitude of Catholics who were saved and left that Church. Not one had ever heard the true gospel preached there [inside the Catholic Church]; all were saved by believing a gospel that is anathema to Catholicism. It is love and compassion for Catholics, that they might be saved, that motivates such a book as this:

Dave Hunt "A Woman Rides the Beast"

It isn't good people who are saved--it is forgiven people who are saved : )

-- (faith01@myway.com), August 25, 2004

Answers

*bump*

-- ("faith01@myway.com"), August 25, 2004.

It is often said in its defense that the Roman Catholic Church professes the orthodox creeds and therefore that all Catholics are Christians.

A: Catholics are not Christian because of the Creed. They are Christian because the Catholic Church is the only Church founded by Jesus Christ, and the only Church He ever intended to exist. He promised He would be with the Holy Catholic Church until the end of time. That is why the members of His own Church are Christian.

"In a recent survey of 2,000 homes in Spain only two persons knew clearly what the gospel was, and they were Protestants."

A: It has been a very long time since Spain was 99.9% Catholic, so that's a pretty strange survey, if it actually happened.

"The other 1,998 were Catholics who thought good works, church attendance, etc. would get them into heaven."

A: Now that's really curious! 1,998 Catholics who all hold beliefs directly opposed to what the Catholic Church teaches! The Catholic Church has consistently taught for 2,000 years that salvation is a free gift of God which cannot be earned or merited. However, the Catholic Church also teaches the fullness of biblical truth, and therefore teaches that even though good works and participation in the Church don't directly save you, they represent obedience to God, and you don't get saved by rejecting the will of God.

"In fifteen years of evangelizing in Spain, missionary friends of this author have never met even one Catholic who was saved or knew how to be saved."

A: Well, you are half right. Ot's true you will never meet a Catholic who is saved - or anybody else for that matter, because the Bible tells us that we WILL be saved IF we persevere to the end. It doesn't say that anyone is assured of salvation in this life. That idea is a modern tradition of men. But as far as knowing how to be saved, Catholics had a monopoly on that for 1,500 years before denominational religion was invented. Do you seriously think that no followers of Christ were saved until the 15th century? That our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, Almighty God Himself, was incapable of saving people without Luther's help??

"Knowing that Catholics are lost causes evangelicals to work day and night to bring them the gospel!"

A: "The" gospel?? Which gospel would that be? The Baptist gospel? The Presbyterian gospel? The Pentecostal gospel? The Anglican gospel? The Lutheran gospel? The Methodist gospel? There are just so many different ones! And all so different! If Baptists are really so sure they have the truth, why aren't they evangelizing Lutherans? If Pentecostals have the fullness of truth, why aren't they trying to convert Congregationalists? It does seem a bit bizarre when thousands of denominational groups who can't with one another on any doctrinal truth all think it is their place to "evangelize" the Church founded by Christ Himself, which Christ said the Holy Spirit would guide to all truth, and which has had constant, unchanging truth since the time of the Apostles.

"Not one had ever heard the true gospel preached there [inside the Catholic Church; all were saved by believing a gospel that is anathema to Catholicism."

A: If the Catholic Church didn't preach the gospel, you would never have heard the gospel. After all, whatever you know of the gospel you got from a book of Catholic writings, compiled by the Catholic Church for its own use. Everything that is in the Bible was taught by the Catholic Church for three centuries before the Bible was even compiled. Which is how it got into the Bible in the first place.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), August 25, 2004.


Faith,

You won't get the truth from Dave Hunt.

Paul M already pointed out that Catholic teaching is not "that good works earn salvation."

Please use as much critical thinking when you read his stuff as you do when you read the Catechism of the Catholic Church. He's writing what certain people want to hear and does not show an interest in the truth.

Don't you think that people who think Catholics are not "saved" want to hear that out of 2,000 people surveyed (in a notoriously Catholic country), that the only 2 that knew what the gospel is were Protestants who were saved like them? Wouldn't they also want to hear that all Catholics still believe that they can be saved by their own works? The Catholic Church he's fighting exists in his own mind.

-- Andy S ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), August 26, 2004.


Maybe it's time to return to the Church, Faith. You have been given answers to your questions, yet you continue to ignore what is plain as day. The problem is that you do not believe. Instead, you choose to believe illogical information about His Church. You are falling for the propaganda while closing your mind to the facts.

If you are so against the "Roman Organization", why do you insist on using the latin name--Jesus? Why not "Joshua" or "Yashua"?????

...........

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), August 26, 2004.


Oh Paul..,

So many errors., not enough time to respond.

I will simply say that frst of all..the apostles., who wrote the Scriptures--were not Roman Catholics. I will also remind you that the early believers knew their Scriptures and these Scriptures were widely known and circulated long before some Roman Catholic council sat down behind closed doors to affirm what was already known. In the same way that the Jews knew the Word of God and knew what was inspired and what wasn't--so too, did the early believers.....

There is only one gospel, Paul.

....the good news that Jesus Christ died for our sins.., and has risen and is seated at the right hand of God--and that whosoever believes this and puts their faith in Jesus to save them--is saved.

Salvation is the deliverance from the power of sin and the penalty therein. Only after we are saved., can we even hope to be able to follow Christ--in this life. So salvation has to be something that we experience now.. The eternal blessing of salvation is eternal life-- which we can know is ours today--the Bible does indeed say so.

Eph. 2:8-10 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this [salvation] not from yourselves, it is the gift of God-- not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

1 John 5:13-15 I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life. This is the confidence we have in approaching God: that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us. And if we know that he hears us-- whatever we ask--we know that we have what we asked of him.

How then, Paul-- do we overcome the world if we are not first saved-- born again by the gospel of Jesus Christ?

1 John 5:1-5

Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves the father loves his child as well.This is how we know that we love the children of God: by loving God and carrying out his commands. This is love for God: to obey his commands. And his commands are not burdensome, for everyone born of God overcomes the world. This is the victory that has overcome the world, even our faith. Who is it that overcomes the world? Only he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God.

Notice that salvation through being born again is what enables us to overcome the world through the gospel of Jesus Christ. It isn't through following church rules and doing all the sacraments that saves...it is because we are saved--that we can follow Christ.

-- ("faith01@myway.com"), August 26, 2004.



Faith,

I said,

Please use as much critical thinking when you read his stuff as you do when you read the Catechism of the Catholic Church. He's writing what certain people want to hear and does not show an interest in the truth.

I wrote this not realizing it sounds like I was referring to Paul M and not Dave Hunt. I know you already use critical thinking when you read Paul M's replies. I meant to use the same type of critical thinking when you read Dave Hunt. I think you understood what I meant. Just wanted to be clear :)

-- Andy S ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), August 26, 2004.


Andy..,

I really don't want to discuss the author Dave Hunt--but rather.., the points he makes.

I disagree with your assessment of Him. I appreciate that Paul delved right into the points made.., and I was glad to engage and debate/refute Him.

But if you are going to dismiss the points because of who wrote it-- then the discussion derails. I agree with the author that Catholics do not know what it means to be saved.., or to be born-again. As a Catholic myself--all of this was quite foreign to me when I first heard the gospel being preached. So what Dave says rings very true for me. Most Catholics I know are not even familiar with the Bible, with the exception of what excerpts they might be fed at Mass. But the *good news* is not preached.

-- ("faith01@myway.com"), August 26, 2004.


"A: "The" gospel?? Which gospel would that be? The Baptist gospel? The Presbyterian gospel? The Pentecostal gospel? The Anglican gospel? The Lutheran gospel? The Methodist gospel? There are just so many different ones! And all so different!" - Paul

Oh shut up with this argument already.

"If Baptists are really so sure they have the truth, why aren't they evangelizing Lutherans?" - Paul

Because the disagreements are on non-essentials. They consider themselves brothers/sisters in Christ (most do). No need to evangelize fellow brethren.

"It does seem a bit bizarre when thousands of denominational groups who can't with one another on any doctrinal truth all think it is their place to "evangelize" the Church founded by Christ Himself, which Christ said the Holy Spirit would guide to all truth, and which has had constant, unchanging truth since the time of the Apostles." - Paul

Blah blah blah. No proof for these "thousands of denominational groups". The source of this this number also lists serveral thousands Romanist denominations (If you insist on claiming this, then we have the right of claiming the Romanist organization is splintered into thousands of denominations as well). Either way, your organization is not as united as you think. Protestantism is more united than you think. Put a end to this type of rhetoric, it gets you no where.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), August 26, 2004.


David...

Paul clearly doesn't understand what the gospel of Jesus Christ is..[not the apostle Paul--I mean Paul from the Catholic board]

1 Corinthians 15

1Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.

3For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance[1] : that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5and that he appeared to Peter,[2] and then to the Twelve. 6After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born. 9For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me was not without effect. No, I worked harder than all of them--yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me. 11Whether, then, it was I or they, this is what we preach, and this is what you believed.

Romans 10

8But what does it say? "The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,"[4] that is, the word of faith we are proclaiming: 9That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. 11As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame."[5] 12For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile--the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, 13for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."[6]

-- ("faith01@myway.com"), August 26, 2004.


"The Catholic Church has consistently taught for 2,000 years that salvation is a free gift of God which cannot be earned or merited." - Paul

Why did they anathematize the "faith only" Protestants who realized this truth? Also, you cannot argue that they were promoting this "dead faith only" salvation. If you do try this, then you are truly ignorant of their writings and history, and of our position too.

"because the Bible tells us that we WILL be saved IF we persevere to the end." - Paul

You can either read those passages as prescriptive (endurance brings about salvation) or descriptive (the saved do and will endure). Only one view is consistent with the rest of the bible, and it's not your view ;)

As to eternal security being a "modern idea", I do not know how you can say this if Jesus taught it (John 6).

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), August 26, 2004.



Faith,

I am not dismissing the arguments based on who is presenting them (i.e., I have nothing against Dave Hunt if he speaks the truth). My point is that Dave Hunt is not speaking the truth about Catholicism. It doesn't matter who he is. That is what I was trying to warn you about.

I don't know what you experienced in the Catholic Church, but if what you learned agrees with what Dave Hunt is saying about Catholicism, then you never experienced the real teachings of the catholic Church.

As far as your assessment of Ephesians and the First letter of John go...

Paul (the Apostle to the Gentiles) uses both past, present, and future tense for salvation in his Epistles. You can’t ignore the future tense also.

Is Paul not talking to the “saved” here?

Eph 5:3 For let fornication and all uncleanness or covetousness not be once named among you, as becomes saints,

Eph 5:4 neither baseness, foolish talking, jesting, which are not becoming, but rather giving of thanks.

Eph 5:5 For you know this, that no fornicator, or unclean person, or covetous one (who is an idolater), has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.

And what about John?

1Jo 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

1Jo 1:9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

1Jo 2:4 He who says, I have known Him, and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

1Jo 2:5 But whoever keeps His Word, truly in this one the love of God is perfected. By this we know that we are in Him.

And…

1Jo 3:6 Everyone who abides in Him does not sin. Everyone who sins has not seen Him nor known Him.

1Jo 3:7 Little children, let no one deceive you. He who does righteousness is righteous, even as that One is righteous.

1Jo 3:8 He who practices sin is of the Devil, for the Devil sins from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was revealed, that He might undo the works of the Devil.

1Jo 3:9 Everyone who has been born of God does not commit sin, because His seed remains in him, and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God.

1Jo 3:10 In this the children of God are revealed, and the children of the Devil: everyone not practicing righteousness is not of God, also he who does not love his brother.

And…

1Jo 3:15 Everyone hating his brother is a murderer. And you know that no murderer has everlasting life abiding in him.

1Jo 3:18 My children, let us not love in word or in tongue, but in deed and in truth.

1Jo 3:23 And this is His commandment, that we should believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as He gave us commandment.

1Jo 3:24 And he who keeps His commandment dwells in Him, and He in him. And by this we know that He abides in us, by the Spirit which He gave to us.

So no fornicator...” has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.”

and… “he who practices sin is of the Devil.”

and… “everyone not practicing righteousness is not of God, also he who does not love his brother”

and… “Everyone who sins has not seen Him nor known Him. “

and “Everyone hating his brother is a murderer. And you know that no murderer has everlasting life abiding in him”

and… “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. “ So what are we poor sinners to do?

Here’s the good news: “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”

I read this that we cannot sin and know that we are saved. That means that someone who is “saved” does not sin. If they have sinned, then they aren’t saved unless they repent and confess their sin to receive forgiveness and be cleansed from all unrighteousness.

But is it a one time deal? Is your interpretation that anyone who is saved will never sin? If so, then how can you know you are saved unless you do not sin? If someone who sins was never saved, then how does one know that they are truly saved until they die without having committed sin from the time they think they were “saved”?

How would that be different from what Catholics believe? Aren’t you always worried that if you sin, then you aren’t really saved? If you die as a fornicator, and you weren’t really saved, then you go to hell.

Catholics say something similar. If someone dies in fornication (or some other grave sin that kills the love of God in them) and does not repent before death, then they go to hell.



-- Andy S ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), August 26, 2004.


David,

Are you saying that differences in beliefs about:

1. The effectiveness and requirement of water baptism

2. Free will and predestination

3. Celebration and meaning of the Lord's Supper

4. Women ministers.

Are not important differences between Protestants? If they aren't, then why are any denominations at all? Why can't everyone just accept all the beliefs of the other denominations? Does any denomination have the whole truth? Or does it not matter? If not, why not?

-- Andy S ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), August 26, 2004.


"The other 1,998 were Catholics who thought good works, church attendance, etc. would get them into heaven."

this is not an incorrect statement. it is, indeed, a crude summary describing the lives of Catholics the world over, trying to lead good Christian lives with salvation in mind.

and there are plenty of good protestants who, despite obvious theological difficulties, also try to be "good people" living "good lives", with the same objective in mind, viz salvation.

maybe we should all stop going to Mass (where prayer = faith) and start mugging old grannies (get some bad works under our belts), and Faith would come back to the fold.

-- Ian (ib@vertifgo.com), August 26, 2004.


Faith,

Most Catholics I know are not even familiar with the Bible, with the exception of what excerpts they might be fed at Mass. But the *good news* is not preached.

I think you're judging your Catholic brothers and sisters too harshly. I've known some like the ones you describe and I've known most just the opposite. I bet if you look hard enough you'll find all kinds of people everywhere. Just because most of the people you know who claim to be Catholic, do not believe or live the Church's teachings, doesn't mean those teachings are wrong.

Dave Hunt doesn't present the real teachings of the Church. He presents what people think the Church teaches. That's what I was trying to point out.

-- Andy S ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), August 26, 2004.


"Are you saying that differences in beliefs about:" - Andy

I am saying these differences are in church practice. What day one goes to church is not an issue to anathematize someone. Or if one church uses pianos and others don't. One is not damned if they don't believe in predestination. One is not damned for doing communion monthly or weekly. One is not damned for sprinkling or immersion baptism.

"Are not important differences between Protestants?" - Andy

Read the Historic Protestants confessions and see how much they agree on.

"If they aren't, then why are any denominations at all?" - Andy

Because the issue it not with Sola Scriptura. It's with the human heart.

"Why can't everyone just accept all the beliefs of the other denominations?" - Andy

I think they do accept them, otherwise they wouldn't see each other as fellow brethren. It's the RC's that make a big deal of it.

"Does any denomination have the whole truth?" - Andy

I don't know what you mean by "whole truth". If you mean the essentials of the faith, then yes. But if you mean 100% perfect doctrine, then no.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), August 26, 2004.



David,

I think they do accept them, otherwise they wouldn't see each other as fellow brethren. It's the RC's that make a big deal of it.

I don't think every denomination accepts women ministers, homosexual unions, or the necessity of water baptism. I admit ignorance on the exact teachings of all Protestant denominations, though.

What do you mean by the RC making it a big deal where other churches do not? I think the big deal is what it means to be in union with the Catholic Church (not Christianity as a whole). The Church recognizes Christian baptism and marriage even if these are not done in the Catholic Church. The Church does not teach that everyone who is not a "card carrying member" of the Catholic Church is damned to hell. As you said, the issue is with the human heart.

I do beliive though, that whatever we believe, that there is some objective truth. I also believe that this objective truth is important. So, whether baptism is just a symbol or imparts real grace, whether Christ intended for women to be ordained ministers of the flock, and whether God blesses homosexual unions with the sacrament of marriage all pertain to some actual truth.

When you say that no Protestant denomination has 100% perfect doctrine, what do you mean? Do you mean "correct" when you say "perfect"?

-- Andy S ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), August 26, 2004.


"I don't think every denomination accepts women ministers, homosexual unions, or the necessity of water baptism." - Andy

What? All historic protestant denominations accept the necessity of baptism. Even the newer ones, like Assemblies of God. The ones that don't (and ones that accept women ministers/homosexual unions), have denied Sola Scriptura.

"I admit ignorance on the exact teachings of all Protestant denominations, though." - Andy

A good place to start is by reading the 2nd London Baptist Confession of Faith of 1689 and the Westminister Confession of Faith. "What do you mean by the RC making it a big deal where other churches do not?" - Andy

It's the RC's (some, not all) that try to paint "Protestantism" as (e.g.) a city that is under attack, no control, no government, just chaos and confusion. Then they try to paint RCism and Utopia, with peace and prosperity, etc, while failing to see the chaos and confusion in their own denomination, and failing to see the unity Protestants have on the essential of the faith.

Protestants (except the extremists) don't anathematize each other over non-essential issues. They can accept there are some divisions (even apostle Paul some divisions are good) and still see each other as fellow brethren.

"When you say that no Protestant denomination has 100% perfect doctrine, what do you mean? Do you mean "correct" when you say "perfect"?" - Andy

Yes, I mean perfect as 'correct'.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), August 26, 2004.


David,

What? All historic protestant denominations accept the necessity of baptism. Even the newer ones, like Assemblies of God. The ones that don't (and ones that accept women ministers/homosexual unions), have denied Sola Scriptura.

When I say necessity, I mean the difference between water baptism being a symbol of what's already occurred (and therefore not "necessary") and a real regeneration of the spirit. My understanding is that some Protestant faiths believe baptism to be a symbol while others believe it to be a real spiritual regeneration.

A good place to start is by reading the 2nd London Baptist Confession of Faith of 1689 and the Westminister Confession of Faith.

Thanks David. I'll have to check that out.

It's the RC's (some, not all) that try to paint "Protestantism" as (e.g.) a city that is under attack, no control, no government, just chaos and confusion. Then they try to paint RCism and Utopia, with peace and prosperity, etc, while failing to see the chaos and confusion in their own denomination, and failing to see the unity Protestants have on the essential of the faith.

I think we all know the truth isn't always as simple as we'd like it to be, which ever side we take. I think we need to always make a disctinction between the actual teachings of a faith and how some members of that faith (or enemies of that faith) try to paint the reality of living that faith. I think that most Catholics would agree that there are people calling themselves Catholic who do not live or believe some essential teachings of the Catholic Church. Does this make the teachings wrong because there is dissent? Truth is truth no matter how many people believe it to be true.

Protestants (except the extremists) don't anathematize each other over non-essential issues. They can accept there are some divisions (even apostle Paul some divisions are good) and still see each other as fellow brethren.

How do you define extremists? Who decides among the Protestant denominations which doctrine(s) are essential to consider another Christian a brother in Christ? Is it based on what the majority of believers believe to be true?

Yes, I mean perfect as 'correct'.

If no Protestant denomination has 100% correct doctrine, then how does a believer know whther the doctines (or beliefs their denomination follows) are true or not? Does this imply that no faith can know they follow the truth about Christ? How can any faith claim that a particular doctrine is correct if any one of their beliefs could fall into the less than 100% category? How do they know that doctrines held for centuries (such as the Trinity) do not fall into that category?

-- Andy S ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), August 26, 2004.


Hi Andy.,

Sorry it took so long to respond--but I am so busy., that I can't sit here like I want to do. I am creating a Garden of Eden in a room at my church for Sunday School --which picks up again right after Labor Day Weekend with a new curriculum. It's the 2-5 yr olds Bible verse room.,and they will be starting with the book of Genesis...so I am painting the entire room, the sky., a 3-dimentional Garden., and I made a tree of life., and of course--lots of cute animals for them to see. I'm knee deep in paint--but loving it : )

You said:

My point is that Dave Hunt is not speaking the truth about Catholicism. It doesn't matter who he is. That is what I was trying to warn you about.

I appreciate your trying to get me to see what you see--but I disagree. I think Dave Hunt is pretty right on about alot.

I don't know what you experienced in the Catholic Church, but if what you learned agrees with what Dave Hunt is saying about Catholicism, then you never experienced the real teachings of the catholic Church.

What I am refering to is not church teachings--but the lack of specific biblical teachings--in particular--the gospel of Jesus Christ. I know I never heard it preached in church--and I know that I never see it preached even here on the Catholic board.

Paul (the Apostle to the Gentiles) uses both past, present, and future tense for salvation in his Epistles. You can’t ignore the future tense also.

Is Paul not talking to the “saved” here?

Paul is teaching the church how to be a Christian example...he knows that Christians are still going to sin--and he is telling them why they should and can avoid it. Paul is warning believers not to be like these sinners..such men., who cannot inherit the kingdom of Christ.

Eph 5:3-7

But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God's holy people. Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which are out of place, but rather thanksgiving. For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person--such a man is an idolater--has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things God's wrath comes on those who are disobedient. Therefore do not be partners with them.

And what about John?

John is saying that although we are forgiven in Christ unto salvation- -we can still sin., and need to be careful. We need to live remorsefuly if we do sin., and we can't purposely sin--assuming we are forgiven--because in truth..a truly forgiven sinner would not want to sin.

But is it a one time deal? Is your interpretation that anyone who is saved will never sin? If so, then how can you know you are saved unless you do not sin? If someone who sins was never saved, then how does one know that they are truly saved until they die without having committed sin from the time they think they were “saved”?

This sounds confusing to me. We are sinners by nature. We will sin even after we are saved. It isn't good people who go to heaven--it is forgiven people. This forgiveness doesn't have to do with little everyday sins--but it has to do with being forgiven the debt that every man incured at the time of the fall and the curse which is death to all. Jesus paid that debt--for us--in our place. It is a gift to us who will receive it. Once we are saved from that penalty-- we are born-again and we can now live better lives and sin does not have the same power over us. But we will mess up. But a truly saved sinner will be remorseful. And forgiveness in this respect does not have anything to do with salvation from the penalty of the original sin...

How would that be different from what Catholics believe? Aren’t you always worried that if you sin, then you aren’t really saved? If you die as a fornicator, and you weren’t really saved, then you go to hell.

No--that is a Catholic worry because they do not understand what salvation is., and what it is that we are saved from. Salvation is deliverance from the power of sin and the penalty that we inherited from the original sin made in the Garden...

Catholics say something similar. If someone dies in fornication (or some other grave sin that kills the love of God in them) and does not repent before death, then they go to hell.

Someone who is truly saved could never really commit a grave sin....and when the Bible says that if we repent--which means to turn from sin., and confess with our lips that Christ is Lord and believe with our hearts that He died for our sin and we accept His atoning sacrifice as a substitute for us-- then we are saved. It has nothing to do with confessing other sins we commit in our days. The Bible does say we should confess to each other when we sin against each other and we should seek forgiveness from God in humble gratitude-- but this has nothing to do with judicial redemption and salvation from that ultimate sin.

I know I am sounding confusing--but I am tired.

Maybe tomorrow I can better explain myself.



-- ("faith01@myway.com"), August 26, 2004.


Faith, you mentioned "little sins" and you said "Someone who is truly saved could never really commit a grave sin." Can you please explain your view about the difference between the two. Also, please elaborate on what constitutes a "grave sin," in your opinion. Thanks.

-- Emily ("jesusfollower7@yahoo.com), August 26, 2004.

David said: What? All historic protestant denominations accept the necessity of baptism. Even the newer ones, like Assemblies of God. The ones that don't (and ones that accept women ministers/homosexual unions), have denied Sola Scriptura.

Well I heard that the Salvation Army Church and the Quakers both rejected baptism as for today. They do not practice baptism. Because of this, would you (David) classify their followers as non-believers?

-- Emily ("jesusfollower7@yahoo.com), August 26, 2004.


From the intial post:

I am more charitable than Rome, which anathematizes those who say they are saved

Sophism! An anathema excommunicates.

What Dave Hunt talks about is Judgement - the Judgement of Dave Hunt!

Yes, some Catholics may be saved, but only by believing the same gospel whereby other lost souls are saved

In other words, if I'm not protestant, I'm going to hell.

Great! Dave Hunt. Right up there with the Sedevacantists!

I guess some people are still unable to understand what a mortal sin is and what the "unforgivable sin" is. Two different sins.

Unrepentance to death is the unforgivable sin. All can be saved. Are you repentant? Dave Hunt?

It isn't good people who are saved--it is forgiven people who are saved : )

Right0, faith01!

This is what the Church teaches. To be forgiven, you must repent AND confess! Repentance is the key. God will always forgive. Humans will not always repent.

The Didache teaches that we must confess in Church! Do you not believe this? Btw, this is Apostolic Teaching, not just Church Fathers or Scripture.

As a former Catholic, did you not go to Mass and profess: I confess to Almighty God, and to you, my brothers and sisters, that I have SINNED through my own fault, in my thoughts and in my words, in what I HAVE DONE and what I have FAILED TO DO...?

Everyday?

Do you do it now? I ask you seriously: What's the difference between then and now? What do you know now that I don't know? How are you saved and I am not? How is it that I know that I won't know until I die, but you already know.

What about those serious sins?

God bless!

-- Vincent (love@noemail.net), August 26, 2004.


Hi Emily..,

What I am trying to explain is that I think that forgiven sinners-- those who have received Christ as their Savior--are saved from the penalty of original sin. Christ paid that penalty for us. This is the sin that we need to be forgiven of in order to see eternal life-- rather than to die. Death is the curse and judgement for original sin..,the sin committed by Adam and Eve--whose judgement was passed on to all men.

In order to enter heaven--we must be sinless., for no sin may enter heaven--according to Scripture. There is no one sinless except our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. We enter heaven based on His perfection. That is why He was able to be the atoning sacrifice to pay that penalty prescribed by God., and then enter heaven. He is perfect. The way we benefit is that we receive this gift of salvation through Jesus Christ. He is our redeemer--our atonement--He was our substitute--so that we do not have to pay this debt if we are found in Him. This is salvation., that we have been delivered from the penalty and there is no longer any condemnation for those in Christ. We enter heaven having had His perfection and righteousness applied to us.

God looks at those who have received His Son as their Savior and He says--the debt you owe--has been paid. You are forgiven. We do not face the same judgement that the rest of the unbelieving world does. We are judged perfect, and spotless in Christ's name.

This is the good news.

However--now that we are saved from that fate--we need to work out our salvation by following Christ and living a changed life. We are born-again. We now have the power to possibly become more Christ- like. But--we are still sinners caught up in the natural body. We will still make mistakes and sin. But as forgiven sinners--we will still go to heaven. We need to remember Christ and go to God when we mess up--and be strengthened and renewed so that we can continue to grow and do better. Not until Christ returns and we are raised incorruptable--can we expect to be perfect. But as saved Christians we have been given the power to grow and mature in God's family.

To me--a grave sin is something like murder. A truly saved Christian could never commit such a crime. I believe that you really can know a true Christian by their fruit. Unless this person is mentally ill due to something beyond them--a born-again Christian will be remorseful-- and will not intentionally sin. If you know a supposed Christian who is cussing like a truck driver--whoring around in the bars every night., getting drunk and seems to be filled with hate--for example., you can be pretty confident that that person does not know Jesus.

Every day sins that Christians may fall into for various reasons are not the sins that we need to be forgiven of unto salvation. We will be judged by what we do in this life at that last day--but that judgement is not for salvation [we are already judged righteous in Christ]., but for rewards in heaven.

1 Cor. 3:11-15

"For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man's work. If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward. If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames."

I realize that this is the verse that the Catholic Church believes supports the doctrine of purgatory. But that is not the understanding of all Christians.

Faith

-- ("faith01@myway.com"), August 27, 2004.


Vincent..,

You asked:

Do you do it now? I ask you seriously: What's the difference between then and now? What do you know now that I don't know? How are you saved and I am not? How is it that I know that I won't know until I die, but you already know.

I think my response to Emily will explain what I know that you don't seem to know. And that is that salvation is present.., and that eternal life is a blessing bestowed on saved sinners--and that we are not judged anymore [unto salvation]--for there is no longer any condemnation for those found in Christ.

I think the difference is recognizing what salvation is--and what it means to be saved--and from what you are being saved. The penalty of death was prescribed because of original sin. And though we still die physically--we can be saved and live eternally with God if this penalty is paid. Either you can pay it yourself and not enter heaven-- because you will never be perfect., or you can rely on Christ to pay it for you.

-- ("faith01@myway.com"), August 27, 2004.


Faith,

Thanks for your last post. I think it explains a lot. The way you explained things sounds a lot like what I understand Catholic teaching to be. I think what you call being "saved" and eternal security is what Catholics would call the "grace of final perseverance."

A Catholic would say that someone who dies unforgiven would go to hell. You would say someone who dies unforgiven was never saved (and goes to hell). How are these different? They seem the same to me.

If I understand your definition of "saved" correctly, I can say that any Catholic who dies in a state of friendship with God was "saved."

You said, Someone who is truly saved could never really commit a grave sin....

The practical application of being "saved" seems to be that we know someone is "saved" when we can say they die in friendship with God without committing grave sin, such as murder. I still don't see how that is different from Catholic teaching that someone who is going to heaven will never commit a grave sin without repenting. Please tell me where you see the difference.

-- Andy S ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), August 27, 2004.


Faith,

What do you see is the main difference between what you believe about salvation and what Catholics believe? The more we talk, the less differences I see.

-- Andy S ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), August 27, 2004.


One difference is that I see salvation in Christ as something we have now and can depend on. I do not believe that we can lose our salvation. I think we are saved from that one ultimate penalty given because of that one ultimate sin--which boils down to rejection of God and disobedience.

When you reject God..disobedience and all sorts of sinful behavior is inevitable. We are all under the curse and we are all caught up in the sinful nature we received from Adam and Eve.

Catholics seem to think that we can lose our salvation--or that eternal life cannot be assured until death.

But the Bible says that we can know that we are saved and that we have eternal life in Christ. This is the *good news*...the gospel of Jesus Christ.

What kind of good news is there in the Roman Catholic gospel that says you cannot be sure of eternal life and there is a chance that if you sin and don't confess it to a priest on your death bed--all bets are off and *oops*...you are now hellbound?

The difference in my opinion comes between a personal relationship with Jesus Christ verses head knowledge about Him. When you are truly in Christ--you can be sure you are saved...you experience a rebirth. My life did a complete flip-flop when I experienced being born-again.

-- ("faith01@myway.com"), August 27, 2004.


Have to go paint---

See ya later : )

-- ("faith01@myway.com"), August 27, 2004.


"What do you see is the main difference between what you believe about salvation and what Catholics believe?" - Andy, to Faith.

Andy, do you believe in justification by Faith Alone?

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), August 27, 2004.


Faith said:
To me--a grave sin is something like murder. A truly saved Christian could never commit such a crime. I believe that you really can know a true Christian by their fruit. Unless this person is mentally ill due to something beyond them--a born-again Christian will be remorseful-- and will not intentionally sin. If you know a supposed Christian who is cussing like a truck driver--whoring around in the bars every night., getting drunk and seems to be filled with hate--for example., you can be pretty confident that that person does not know Jesus.

Every day sins that Christians may fall into for various reasons are not the sins that we need to be forgiven of unto salvation. We will be judged by what we do in this life at that last day--but that judgement is not for salvation [we are already judged righteous in Christ]., but for rewards in heaven.

Wow, Faith. That is almost exactly the Catholic understanding of mortal versus venial sins. It seems our beliefs have more in common than I thought.

David, you mentioned "faith alone," but what Faith described above does not seem to fit "faith alone." According to what she said here that I quoted, works are also necessary to get to heaven. It is kinda the reverse of the Catholic teaching, but it's still there. Ok, let me explain. Catholics say that we need to continue in the good works in order to remain saved or remain in the state of grace. Faith says we need to continue in the good works or else we never really were saved. To me it's the same result, although I think the Catholic reasoning makes more sense. Otherwise the person is left with more free will before coming to Christ than after.

-- Emily ("jesusfollower7@yahoo.com), August 27, 2004.


Emily,

As much as you'd like both sides to agree, we don’t. There is a difference in saying the saved person will naturally endure and that endurance brings about salvation. As I told Paul M., only one view is consistent with the rest of the Bible.

Also, Grace by definition is unmerited favor. How can one say we are saved by grace, but we need to meet certain predetermined conditions in order to "remain in the state of grace"? This is not biblical.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), August 27, 2004.


You are right David..,

We cannot earn a gift--otherwise, it is no longer a gift.

Salvation is a gift.

Working out our salvation is not the same as earning it. Working it out simply means that now that we are saved--we have the power to endure and do the right thing.., not to be saved--but because we are saved : )

-- ("faith01@myway.com"), August 27, 2004.


Emily..,

I still think that the Roman Catholic doesn't understand what it is they need to be forgiven of--unto salvation. It surely isn't venial sins--or even grave sins for that matter. We need to be forgiven the debt we owe under the curse of the fall. We need to be saved from that curse--which is death.

Jesus took that penalty upon Himself and died on the cross--in our place. We need to receive that sacrifice, accepting Jesus as our Savior. This way--God can consider our debt paid in full. We are forgiven the debt we owe. Then--as saved sinners--we can lead a changed life- and follow Christ....

The Catholic Church seems to think we need forgiveness of particular things weve done wrong in order to remain saved. But salvation has nothing to do with sins in general...that's why when we make a mistake and sin.., we can still be assured eternal life in Christ.

-- ("faith01@myway.com"), August 27, 2004.


Faith,

You said, What kind of good news is there in the Roman Catholic gospel that says you cannot be sure of eternal life and there is a chance that if you sin and don't confess it to a priest on your death bed--all bets are off and *oops*...you are now hellbound?

But Catholics do believe that we can be sure of eternal life, if we die truly loving God. Catholicism teaching is not that you must confess all sin "to a priest on your death bed." If possible, sure. But if I repent in my heart but do not have the opportunity to confess in the sacrament of confession, then my sins are still forgiven and I would go to heaven at death. The scenario you described is NOT Catholic teaching.

I think your confusion lies with the fact that even though Catholics believe we to are "saved" (using your definition) we know that God still allows us to freely choose Him everyday. We can still reject salvation. It is not about fear, it is about loving God and obeying Him out of love and faith.

The "Roman gospel" you describe is not the Gospel I learned growing up in the Catholic Church.

If someone who is "saved" cannot lose their salvation whatever they do or don't do, are you saying that God does not allow them to freely choose HIm anymore. That they are somehow "forced" to love Him? I don't think you are saying this. How do you reconcile free will with eternal salvation? Salvation "no matter what" because you believe yourself to be "saved" sounds more like Calvinism to me. I hope David will correct me if I'm misrepresenting Calvinist theology.

-- ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), August 27, 2004.


David,

You said, Andy, do you believe in justification by Faith Alone?

Please define your use of the term for me. Please tell me how works fits in with is definition, if at all.

You made a comment to Emily:

Also, Grace by definition is unmerited favor. How can one say we are saved by grace, but we need to meet certain predetermined conditions in order to "remain in the state of grace"? This is not biblical.

The "conditions" for remaining in a "state of grace" can all be boiled down to one thing: loving the Lord. This means Christ lives within us. Do we not have any choice in whether we love the Lord? Are you saying that someone who is saved by grace will freely choose to love the Lord because they are saved? How is this different in a practical sense, to saying in order to be saved we must love the Lord by His grace?

-- Andy S ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), August 27, 2004.


Italics off

-- Andy S ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), August 27, 2004.

Repost to make clear:

David,

You said, Andy, do you believe in justification by Faith Alone?

Please define your use of the term for me. Please tell me how works fits in with is definition, if at all.

You made a comment to Emily:

Also, Grace by definition is unmerited favor. How can one say we are saved by grace, but we need to meet certain predetermined conditions in order to "remain in the state of grace"? This is not biblical.

The "conditions" for remaining in a "state of grace" can all be boiled down to one thing: loving the Lord. This means Christ lives within us. Do we not have any choice in whether we love the Lord? Are you saying that someone who is saved by grace will freely choose to love the Lord because they are saved? How is this different in a practical sense, to saying in order to be saved we must love the Lord by His grace?

-- Andy S ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), August 27, 2004.


Repost to make clear:

David,

You said, Andy, do you believe in justification by Faith Alone?

Please define your use of the term for me. Please tell me how works fits in with is definition, if at all.

You made a comment to Emily:

Also, Grace by definition is unmerited favor. How can one say we are saved by grace, but we need to meet certain predetermined conditions in order to "remain in the state of grace"? This is not biblical.

The "conditions" for remaining in a "state of grace" can all be boiled down to one thing: loving the Lord. This means Christ lives within us. Do we not have any choice in whether we love the Lord? Are you saying that someone who is saved by grace will freely choose to love the Lord because they are saved? How is this different in a practical sense, to saying in order to be saved we must love the Lord by His grace?

-- Andy S ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), August 27, 2004.


That's what I get for posting near bed time...

-- Andy S ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), August 27, 2004.

One last comment:

Working out our salvation is not the same as earning it. Working it out simply means that now that we are saved--we have the power to endure and do the right thing.., not to be saved--but because we are saved : )

Don't forget that Catholics do not believe that we earn salvation. It is a free gift. Good works can only come about by His grace which is, of course a free gift. All good works come from God and are attributed to God first and foremost. When you hear the term "man's merit" in relation to Catholic teaching, here is what is meant (from the Catechism):

CCC 2008 The merit of man before God in the Christian life arises from the fact that God has freely chosen to associate man with the work of his grace. The fatherly action of God is first on his own initiative, and then follows man's free acting through his collaboration, so that the merit of good works is to be attributed in the first place to the grace of God, then to the faithful. Man's merit [man's free acting], moreover, itself is due to God, for his good actions proceed in Christ, from the predispositions and assistance given by the Holy Spirit.

So we must cooperate with God's grace and we can only do good by His grace and in Christ with the power of the Holy Spirit. We can argue the "man's free acting" part, but the point is that we do not earn salvation. It's always a gift because all good comes from God and we are never deserving of it.

-- Andy S ("aszmere@earthlink.net"), August 27, 2004.


Well, I should have just gone to bed and never gone online, much less posted.

..........

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), August 27, 2004.


That's exactly how I feel rod. But look at me, I'm still posting. Can't stop myself....must.....stop...posting................

-- Andy S ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), August 27, 2004.

Maybe I'll check the EZboard :)

-- Andy S ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), August 27, 2004.

Hello again,

faith01 and David, are we back to once saved always saved? As far as I know lots of protestants don't hold to this. If fact, we know that at least 1500 years, this doctrine was not held. Does this mean everyone in the entire world for 2000 years until this very moment who did not hold to this, died and went to hell?

Think carefully. Bear in mind when you answer, anathemas are for temporal discipline -- on earth, and from within the Church -- and do not condemn a person who has died to hell.

I await your response, and I'm not concerned about scriptural exegesis. Because from your response it will allow one to judge if Augustine, Aquinas, indeed, even Saint James the Apostle and a host of others have gone to hell based on what they held to.

Peace,

-- Vincent (love@noemail.net), August 27, 2004.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ