Does Roman Catholicism teach a work-salvation?

antiskeptic

StealthRolex wrote: »

I am bewildered as to how you got from my saying that if a child should die immediately or soon after baptism they would go straight to heaven to you suggesting child murder is good, me saying it's not, and then saying I am denying the obvious and skipping a point - you made an assumption that made an ass of yourself.

I'm asked why you wouldn't murder your child given the fact you believe he/she would go straight to heaven to be with God forever. Most parents love their children so much that they'd willingly die for them (agape love). Why not you in this case?

One could ask if Hitler was a member of a denomination that held to osas would he be in heaven.

I'm not sure mere membership of a denomination means anything. But if actually saved and OSAS true then it's not hard to see what the answer would be. By grace - certainly not by work.

One could equally ask then if regardless of that if Hitler at somepoint in his life had both grace and faith and was "born again" and therefore by default osas then he must be in heaven.

Indeed.

I don;t think we know enough about Hitler to answer this one way or another but the concept alone is interesting if we apply it to someone who was or is actually osas and then subsequently started a race or creed hating Reich. Maybe it could happen in the future.

As far as thought-experiements go, this isn't raising much by way of intersting answers.

If Hitler is OSAS is he in heaven?? Doh!

antiskeptic, it is probably about time you started reading the Catholic Catechism if you really want answers about Catholicism and what it teaches. Every answer provided here is twisted by you to try to trip us up over works or whatever and really smacks of the work of some spirit that is out to get Catholicism.

I think our conversation has leaked into all sorts and has become pointlessly loose.

Works it is then - and whether they play a role in your salvation. Works are being defined as you having to to do/not do this/that/other in order not to scupper your chances of salvation.


If the Cathechism says no (even though you do) then by all means introduce that evidence.

antiskeptic

lmaopml wrote: »

Hi Antiskeptic,

Hi.

..but what you are 'actually' describing is a point in time when you accept Jesus as your Lord and saviour!

After a fashion. There's no point in going off course into what the point of salvation involved.

You 'admit' that there is some 'effort' required but not that it 'contributes' to your saving...So you 'work' too...

Indeed. I work at obeying God because he is my Father. I work at obeying God because he loves me and I get inklings into loving him (and I look forward to the day when the sin-boundary between me and him is fully demolished, so I can love him unrestrainedly). I work because I think he deserves my best. I work because he's a great God.

I just don't work in order to influence getting something I've eternally got already. That's be illogical

Works based salvation; it 'has' to be [ see how it feels..] He 'reads' the bible, it has to be a work....

Not sure what you mean here.

If you make 'no effort'....and believe by saying that you are 'saved' that it is so..even if you sin relentlessly afterwards, and go as far as rejecting God, which you seem to believe - It really just sums up to saying 'I believe'...!

I don't believe that my saying so makes it true. I believe that's what the Bible teaches. Plus it makes a whole load of sense for all kinds of reasons - but that's a secondary consideration.

None of this relies on me. It relies on what God figures to have done. This is his gig afterall.

Is that what Jesus went to all that trouble for? Really? ...and gave us such a huge gift and the dignity of freewill too? It doesn't mesh with either the philosophy of free will or the full context of Jesus teachings...He wants us to call others home too...to let him 'work' in us...

I've got this huge gift: salvation. And I can't lose it
I've got freewill and sometimes I exercise it for God and sometimes against.
I work to call others home - with him working in me.

What doesn't mesh?

...our 'merit' is abiding, through our free will, in participating in 'his' work...We receive more 'Grace'...to be 'saved'.....Gosh..

We are saved by 'grace'...

You are saved in part by merit. Things you merit are things you earn. Things you earn you earn by working/doing. The work is abiding.

Interestingly:

4. Christianity: Spiritual credit granted for good works.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/merit

lmaopml

Ok, Antiskeptic..

..but you and I both know that saying Catholics 'work' our way is an injustice....

I think there is a 'thin line' there somewhere, where both perspectives can meet...

I say our 'merit' is foundational to the concept of freewill....

You claim 'freewill' but reject the importance of a huge part of the Gospels to 'co - operate'...with God's will as a 'side show' that doesn't have any consequences...even if you are still 'saved' you are more at a 'distance'...

Do you think Christ came to tell us it's 'ok' to be at a 'distance' so long your 'saved' and that is the fullness of his message?

This makes no sense to me...

osas also makes no sense to me as either a doctrine of being 'saved', i.e. that one 'must' believe we are 'saved' in order to be 'saved'...that one must adhere to at all costs..

...or as 'even' dare I say it totally at odds with faith and works...

It's just that you choose to ignore that our 'works' in allowing Christ to work 'in' us... by cooperation with Christ's will, and in doing so we gain 'saving grace'...

but that's ok..I know we're all finding our way..me too...and I get head fumbled many times, but I see it as a challenge to try to understand and make life interesting and fulfilling...

We're all seeking truth..:)

antiskeptic

lmaopml wrote: »

..but you and I both know that saying Catholics 'work' our way is an injustice

The term 'work' is an umbrella terms for a whole range of activities - some of which Roman Catholicism doesn't proscribe.

If there are things you do/don't do that go to influence whether you are saved or not then that's work.

I think there is a 'thin line' there somewhere, where both perspectives can meet...

My gaining salvation didn't involve my doing/not doing then. It doesn't involve it now. So I'm not so confident...

I say our 'merit' is foundational to the concept of freewill....

The trouble for this view is the dim view the Bible has of the will of the lost:

- enslaved to sin (addicts in other words and they can't be described as having free will)

- dead to God

- under the sway and rule of the wicked one

From whence the idea that lost men have free will. Saved people - that's a different matter: they can indeed choose to do Gods will or not.

You claim 'freewill' but reject the importance of a huge part of the Gospels to 'co - operate'...with God's will as a 'side show' that doesn't have any consequences...even if you are still 'saved' you are more at a 'distance'...

You seem to be ignoring my stating that there are consequences - very serious ones. Just not one's relating to my loosing my salvation.

Why distance? I can choose to obey God just as you do - unless you're saying that the threat of damnation gives you more impetus to obey (which I'd agree it does, if for the wrong reasons)

Do you think Christ came to tell us it's 'ok' to be at a 'distance' so long your 'saved' and that is the fullness of his message?

Perhaps you could elaborate on this distance.

osas also makes no sense to me as either a doctrine of being 'saved', i.e. that one 'must' believe we are 'saved' in order to be 'saved'...that one must adhere to at all costs..

I don't think you have to believe you are saved in order to be saved. Just as I don't think you have to believe you've got cancer in order to have cancer (excuse the parallel but it's late).

It's just that you choose to ignore that our 'works' in allowing Christ to work 'in' us... by cooperation with Christ's will, and in doing so we gain 'saving grace'...

And if you don't allow Christ to work in you you risk damnation.

but that's ok..I know we're all finding our way..me too...and I get head fumbled many times, but I see it as a challenge to try to understand and make life interesting and fulfilling...

We're all seeking truth..:)

And every now and then you arrive at a destination. OSAS is but one of them

lmaopml

antiskeptic wrote: »

The trouble for this view is the dim view the Bible has of the will of the lost:

- enslaved to sin (addicts in other words and they can't be described as having free will)

I am sorry you believe me to be 'lost' antiskeptic; especially when I just believe I have been 'found'...but my faith is firm, and my focus is on 'today' and God's will...not tomorrow and my 'salvation'.....as weird as that may sound...

- dead to God

- under the sway and rule of the wicked one

From whence the idea that lost men have free will. Saved people - that's different matter: they can indeed choose to do Gods will or not.

There is a prayer; it's a really simple but profound prayer in Catholicism, it's 'O Sacred heart of Jesus, I place all my trust in thee...' I try to 'live' that, even if I do come across as a 'satan' worshiper to some...which is weird..

You seem to be ignoring my stating that there are consequences - very serious ones. Just not one's relating to my loosing my salvation.

Why distance? I can choose to obey God just as you do - unless you're saying that the threat of damnation gives you more impetus to obey (which I'd agree it does, if for the wrong reasons)

I'm not worried about tomorrow, I'm looking after today! For the 'distance' aspect, look to your first post on this thread where you describe how sin 'distances' someone....and 'this' is the message Jesus brought?

Perhaps you could elaborate on this distance.

My view would be that nothing can separate me from God - in the sense of losing my salvation. I can (and do) offend God with my sin and that does result in greater distance/less intimacy between me and God.

...again, this is your idea of Jesus message. While I understand the concept of being 'saved' in grace, I don't understand rubbishing the part we play, especially for one who advocated free will ( even if it is only a 'distance' thing )....Why advocate and concentrate a whole lifetime on emphasising being saved by 'distance' in 'nominal' grace? That's not what Christ wanted, with respect, imo...

I don't think you have to believe you are saved in order to be saved. Just as I don't think you have to believe you've got cancer in order to have cancer (excuse the parallel but it's late).

Well then why do you presume it's important to condemn what 'we' collectively as Catholics believe when you are so much in error about what we 'actually' believe? ...and your own doctrine will not 'gain' you 'salvation' until you actually know you are saved...( and I'm sorry, I'm not trying to undermine your faith, I'm sure it's good and true, but it's not good to condemn and bear false witness - I'm sorry, but it's not )

We don't concentrate on 'salvation' for 'salvations' sake.....we simply love God soley because he is our God and all that is 'good' and mercy and justice..

And if you don't allow Christ to work in you you risk damnation.

..Christ works in us when we are cooperating with him....and he wants us to cooperate, because like all 'gifts' those that are given 'freely' count most. We give ourselves to Christ 'freely' as much as he gives himself to us..... That's the 'tilt' factor between believing we have no 'will'....and have a 'will'....

..which is the 'image' of God...

And every now and then you arrive at a destination. OSAS is but one of them

Perhaps we tally a while with all things...I don't claim any great knowledge, all I do know is when I see what I actually 'believe' misrepresented...especially when I see a great beauty to my faith..which I'm sure you do too...

I hope to meet you sometime when we know everything there is to know...

StealthRolex

God loves all sinners, even those in Hell. The thing about those in Hell is that they hate God and you cannot have love and hate in the same place.

God loves those in Hell. God punished in a lake of fire those whom he loves. God abandons those he loves to an eternal existance of agony and anguish. He leaves without hope and without any chance of future redemption, those whom he loves. "The smoke of their torment might rise forever and ever". But God loves them in ensuring that smoke does right.

Could you suggest a Bible verse that goes a way to supporting this bewildering notion. I'm asking you to leave aside the claim that God can do the illogical here...

Well, a bewildering notion it is and try as I might I cannot find Biblical support so my comment that God loves sinners in Hell is without foundation and I retract it.

That said...

I found Sr Faustinas Diary in which He records this

Write: I am Thrice Holy, and I detest the smallest sin. I cannot love a soul which is stained with sin; but when it repents, there is no limit to My generosity toward it. My mercy embraces and justifies it. With My mercy, I pursue sinners along all their paths, and My Heart rejoices when they return to Me. I forget the bitterness with which they fed My Heart and rejoice at their return.....Tell sinners that no one shall escape My Hand; if they run away from My Merciful Heart, they will fall into My just Hands. Tell sinners that I am always waiting for them, that I listen intently to the beating of their heart...when will it beat for Me? Write, that I am speaking to them through their remorse of conscience, through their failings and sufferings, through thunderstorms, through the voice of the Church. And if they bring all My graces to naught, I begin to be angry with them, leaving them alone and giving them what they want.

and as Sirach says

Sirach 15:15-17: If you will, you can keep the commandments, and to act faithfully is a matter of your own choice. He has placed before you fire and water: stretch out your hand for whichever you wish. Before a man are life and death, and whichever he chooses will be given to him.

So while God loves us all, sinners as we are, Hell is real and in the initial banter I detected an undercurrent suggesting that if God loves sinners he cannot send them to Hell.

I trust this demonstrates that while God loves us all with a perfect love and does not want us to go to Hell there are some who reject this and it is not God that chooses Hell for us but our choice.

PDN

lmaopml wrote: »

I am sorry you believe me to be 'lost' antiskeptic; especially when I just believe I have been 'found'...but my faith is firm, and my focus is on 'today' and God's will...not tomorrow and my 'salvation'.....as weird as that may sound...

You know these debates are pretty pointless if we misrepresent one another's positions.

I don't see that antiskeptic referred to you as currently being 'lost' at all. He made a general statement about salvation and free will.

We seem to be having to point this out rather frequently, but the vast majority of Protestants happily accept, despite our differences, that it is perfectly possible to be a Catholic and to have saving faith in Christ. There has never been a bull issued on behalf of all Protestants along the lines of Boniface VIII's Una Sanctum.

antiskeptic

lmaopml wrote: »

I am sorry you believe me to be 'lost' antiskeptic; especially when I just believe I have been 'found'...but my faith is firm, and my focus is on 'today' and God's will...not tomorrow and my 'salvation'.....as weird as that may sound...

I've not suggested that you're lost - I've merely said the lost (as a category of people) don't appear to have a free will. Biblically speaking that is.

You might well be a found person and if you are (and if the Roman teaching is wrong), then you are a found person who happens to labour under incorrect Roman teaching. All found people labour under incorrect teaching in some area or other. No one has the all truth in all areas. There are, you would agree, different degrees of error possible. But the basis by which you are saved ranks as major place to be in error, if one is in error.

There is a prayer; it's a really simple but profound prayer in Catholicism, it's 'O Sacred heart of Jesus, I place all my trust in thee...' I try to 'live' that, even if I do come across as a 'satan' worshiper to some...which is weird..

I'm not suggesting that Roman Catholix place "all their trust in me". I'm suggesting that a salvation which involves both God's grace + your works fits the general description of a works-salvation. If even 5% of your salvation rests with what you do/don't do (and 95% with God) then it's a works-salvation.

You never answered my question by the way - one which sought your direct clarification on the matter of where works fit in.

antiskeptic earlier wrote:

I understand you saying that it is only by the grace of Jesus that you would be saved (if you are to be saved). The question is: does your work/perservering in faith influence his applying this particular grace to you? Let me put it another way:

Does your confessing of your sin more influence him to save you?
Does your not committing mortal sin more influence him to save you?
Does your going to mass or partaking of other sacrements more influence him to save you?
Does the effort involved in persevering in faith more influence him to save you?
Does the quality of your life more influence him to save you?
Does the communing and relationship that might arise from such activity more influence him to save you?
Does your remaining more in the centre of the narrow path than falling of the edges more influence him to save you?
Does your being a Catholic more influence him to save you?


If "no" to all these questions (and any other effort-based questions that might arise), if saying that these things have no bearing whatsoever on your chances of being saved by grace then I would concede Roman Catholicism does not teach a works-salvation.

I'm not worried about tomorrow, I'm looking after today! For the 'distance' aspect, look to your first post on this thread where you describe how sin 'distances' someone....and 'this' is the message Jesus brought?


My view would be that nothing can separate me from God - in the sense of losing my salvation. I can (and do) offend God with my sin and that does result in greater distance/less intimacy between me and God.

...again, this is your idea of Jesus message. While I understand the concept of being 'saved' in grace, I don't understand rubbishing the part we play, especially for one who advocated free will ( even if it is only a 'distance' thing )....Why advocate and concentrate a whole lifetime on emphasising being saved by 'distance' in 'nominal' grace? That's not what Christ wanted, with respect, imo...

I'm more than a little confused about what you mean here:

What does "saved in grace" mean. It's not a term I've used. Saved by grace perhaps .. but not saved in grace.

I'm not rubbishing the part we play, I'm rubbishing the idea that the part we play contributes in any way to our being finally saved.

I have no idea what being "saved by 'distance' in 'nominal' grace" means. To clarify: I am a child of God (I became a child of his at the age of 38, being born-again one day in late autumn) and will now forever be, a child of God. As a child of God (ie: not a lost person) I have had free will restored and can choose to disobey my father. That disobedience brings negative consequences to me - one of which is the sense of 'distance' between me and my father.

Grace something that God issues in my direction. I am subject to his grace. Because it's his, it cannot be 'nominal'.

Well then why do you presume it's important to condemn what 'we' collectively as Catholics believe when you are so much in error about what we 'actually' believe?

I'm not at all sure I am in error in relation to Roman Catholic works. You've been less than forthcoming in whether or not your work influences your being finally saved. Others have been clearer:

This thread isn't interested in the biblical justification for works-influential-in-salvation It's not even majoring on the motivation you should have for doing work. It's focus is on whether or not your doing works influences your salvation.

...and your own doctrine will not 'gain' you 'salvation' until you actually know you are saved...( and I'm sorry, I'm not trying to undermine your faith, I'm sure it's good and true, but it's not good to condemn and bear false witness - I'm sorry, but it's not )

We can all agree that the proof of any theology is in the pudding and that none are proven until the fat lady sings. That doesn't mean we can't ask whether the Roman Catholic theolgy teaches what is being suggested of it.

I'm not condemning it here. I'm asking whether it teaches works influential in salvation.

We don't concentrate on 'salvation' for 'salvations' sake.....we simply love God soley because he is our God and all that is 'good' and mercy and justice..

If only it were so simple. If official teaching warns (overtly or covertly) that impeding the work of the Holy-Spirit-in-you could have negative eternal consequences, then your motivation is automatically compromised You simply cannot be exposed to such knowledge and then state in the same breath that your motivation can remain pure.

The Energy Minister who is found to take gifts from Big Oil Companies is in precisely the same position. His motivation in office is tainted by association and he cannot argue that his decisions won't be influenced unduly. Not only can no one else trust his decisions, he cannot even trust his own.

..Christ works in us when we are cooperating with him....and he wants us to cooperate, because like all 'gifts' those that are given 'freely' count most. We give ourselves to Christ 'freely' as much as he gives himself to us..... That's the 'tilt' factor between believing we have no 'will'....and have a 'will'....

..which is the 'image' of God...

I've no issue with you holding you have freewill. My issue is that your free-will is compromised by the knowledge that if you don't cooperate you could get yourself damned as a result. You do agree that if you embarked in a direction whereby you resisted and denied the efforts of the Holy Spirit to have you do good work could negatively impact on your being saved. Don't you?

Perhaps we tally a while with all things...I don't claim any great knowledge, all I do know is when I see what I actually 'believe' misrepresented...especially when I see a great beauty to my faith..which I'm sure you do too...

It may well be that your motivation at this moment is driven by love for God (my motivation to honour and cherish my wife is driven by love - even though I know that if I fail really badly in doing so I could lose her: analogous to the Roman position perhaps)

But what about the times when things get tough and you're in the valley and God is nowhere to be found. It's then that the doubt will come and the motivations won't be seen, by even yourself, as pure. It's then, when in sin, that your concentration will tend to turn to your salvation (knowing as you now do, of the existance of Hell)

OSAS isn't saved from troubles and strife. And it's not that you don't get around to doubting God's promise never to leave you. But having that rock to cling to, that safe knowledge that nothing will separate you in a final sense, is the final thing that stops you getting washed away in the storm.

It's not something you've got the luxury of.

I hope to meet you sometime when we know everything there is to know...

Ditto.

antiskeptic

StealthRolex wrote: »

Well, a bewildering notion it is and try as I might I cannot find Biblical support so my comment that God loves sinners in Hell is without foundation and I retract it.

Appreciated.

That said...

I found Sr Faustinas Diary in which He records this



and as Sirach says

Unfortunately, the only common ground between us for sources of God's word are the 66 book Bible.

So while God loves us all, sinners as we are, Hell is real and in the initial banter I detected an undercurrent suggesting that if God loves sinners he cannot send them to Hell.

That wasn't my intent.

My position is that God couldn't send his children to Hell. And that a person only becomes a child of God on being born again.

I trust this demonstrates that while God loves us all with a perfect love and does not want us to go to Hell there are some who reject this and it is not God that chooses Hell for us but our choice.

And in the Roman Catholic faith, your work is the way in which you state your choice.

StealthRolex

antiskeptic wrote: »

Unfortunately, the only common ground between us for sources of God's word are the 66 book Bible.

An incomplete bible therefore we have no common ground.

antiskeptic wrote: »

My position is that God couldn't send his children to Hell. And that a person only becomes a child of God on being born again.

Did I say God sends people to Hell. No, I said people choose Hell - God gives them what they want.

antiskeptic wrote: »

And in the Roman Catholic faith, your work is the way in which you state your choice.

Prove that - with reference and citation from a reputable Catholic resource.

StealthRolex

On Salvation - From the Catechism:

Judgement

I. THE PARTICULAR JUDGMENT

1021 Death puts an end to human life as the time open to either accepting or rejecting the divine grace manifested in Christ.592 The New Testament speaks of judgment primarily in its aspect of the final encounter with Christ in his second coming, but also repeatedly affirms that each will be rewarded immediately after death in accordance with his works and faith. The parable of the poor man Lazarus and the words of Christ on the cross to the good thief, as well as other New Testament texts speak of a final destiny of the soul--a destiny which can be different for some and for others.593

1022 Each man receives his eternal retribution in his immortal soul at the very moment of his death, in a particular judgment that refers his life to Christ: either entrance into the blessedness of heaven-through a purification594 or immediately,595 -- or immediate and everlasting damnation.596

At the evening of life, we shall be judged on our love.597
II. HEAVEN

1023 Those who die in God's grace and friendship and are perfectly purified live for ever with Christ. They are like God for ever, for they "see him as he is," face to face:598

By virtue of our apostolic authority, we define the following: According to the general disposition of God, the souls of all the saints . . . and other faithful who died after receiving Christ's holy Baptism (provided they were not in need of purification when they died, . . . or, if they then did need or will need some purification, when they have been purified after death, . . .) already before they take up their bodies again and before the general judgment - and this since the Ascension of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ into heaven - have been, are and will be in heaven, in the heavenly Kingdom and celestial paradise with Christ, joined to the company of the holy angels. Since the Passion and death of our Lord Jesus Christ, these souls have seen and do see the divine essence with an intuitive vision, and even face to face, without the mediation of any creature.599
1024 This perfect life with the Most Holy Trinity - this communion of life and love with the Trinity, with the Virgin Mary, the angels and all the blessed - is called "heaven." Heaven is the ultimate end and fulfillment of the deepest human longings, the state of supreme, definitive happiness.

1025 To live in heaven is "to be with Christ." The elect live "in Christ,"600 but they retain, or rather find, their true identity, their own name.601

V. THE LAST JUDGMENT

1038 The resurrection of all the dead, "of both the just and the unjust,"623 will precede the Last Judgment. This will be "the hour when all who are in the tombs will hear [the Son of man's] voice and come forth, those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of judgment."624 Then Christ will come "in his glory, and all the angels with him. . . . Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate them one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats, and he will place the sheep at his right hand, but the goats at the left. . . . And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."625

1039 In the presence of Christ, who is Truth itself, the truth of each man's relationship with God will be laid bare.626 The Last Judgment will reveal even to its furthest consequences the good each person has done or failed to do during his earthly life:

All that the wicked do is recorded, and they do not know. When "our God comes, he does not keep silence.". . . he will turn towards those at his left hand: . . . "I placed my poor little ones on earth for you. I as their head was seated in heaven at the right hand of my Father - but on earth my members were suffering, my members on earth were in need. If you gave anything to my members, what you gave would reach their Head. Would that you had known that my little ones were in need when I placed them on earth for you and appointed them your stewards to bring your good works into my treasury. But you have placed nothing in their hands; therefore you have found nothing in my presence."627
1040 The Last Judgment will come when Christ returns in glory. Only the Father knows the day and the hour; only he determines the moment of its coming. Then through his Son Jesus Christ he will pronounce the final word on all history. We shall know the ultimate meaning of the whole work of creation and of the entire economy of salvation and understand the marvelous ways by which his Providence led everything towards its final end. The Last Judgment will reveal that God's justice triumphs over all the injustices committed by his creatures and that God's love is stronger than death.628

on works

1430 Jesus' call to conversion and penance, like that of the prophets before him, does not aim first at outward works, "sackcloth and ashes," fasting and mortification, but at the conversion of the heart, interior conversion. Without this, such penances remain sterile and false; however, interior conversion urges expression in visible signs, gestures and works of penance.

1815 The gift of faith remains in one who has not sinned against it. But "faith apart from works is dead": when it is deprived of hope and love, faith does not fully unite the believer to Christ and does not make him a living member of his Body.

II. GOOD ACTS AND EVIL ACTS

1755 A morally good act requires the goodness of the object, of the end, and of the circumstances together. An evil end corrupts the action, even if the object is good in itself (such as praying and fasting "in order to be seen by men").

The object of the choice can by itself vitiate an act in its entirety. There are some concrete acts - such as fornication - that it is always wrong to choose, because choosing them entails a disorder of the will, that is, a moral evil.

1756 It is therefore an error to judge the morality of human acts by considering only the intention that inspires them or the circumstances (environment, social pressure, duress or emergency, etc.) which supply their context. There are acts which, in and of themselves, independently of circumstances and intentions, are always gravely illicit by reason of their object; such as blasphemy and perjury, murder and adultery. One may not do evil so that good may result from it.

on hell

1033 We cannot be united with God unless we freely choose to love him. But we cannot love God if we sin gravely against him, against our neighbor or against ourselves: "He who does not love remains in death. Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him."612 Our Lord warns us that we shall be separated from him if we fail to meet the serious needs of the poor and the little ones who are his brethren.613 To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God's merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called "hell."

1035 The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, "eternal fire." The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.

1037 God predestines no one to go to hell; for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want "any to perish, but all to come to repentance":

Father, accept this offering
from your whole family.
Grant us your peace in this life,
save us from final damnation,
and count us among those you have chosen.

1755 alone would indicate that works for the purposes of salvation are selfish

StealthRolex

Salvation through works is a lie perpetrated by non-Catholics against their Christian bretheren that is wholly and utterly in contradiction with the Bible and the Catholic Faith.

It's only purpose is to persuade Catholics and others that Roman Catholicism is unChristian and that those who subscribe to Catholicism are not saved.

Any one who persists in maintaining this "works-salvation" lie is putting their mortal soul at risk.

The source of this lie is the errant "faith alone" doctrine, a doctrine that itself is unbiblical and hence unchristian as it leads souls not to heaven but to hell.

The argument that "faith and works" implies "works" is like saying 2 and 2 is 2.

The Catholic Church does indeed teach that works are important however She also teaches much more - she teaches the entirety of what must be done to gain Heaven. Even so it is not guaranteed. One final act of hatred and malice can be enough to undo a lifetime of good. It is our hearts and souls that decide. When we die we are at the mercy of Jesus Christ, the Divine Mercy.

The Protestant Churches cannot teach this because it has reduced the Bible to a travesty. Their Bible has 66 books.
Have you noticed that 6 is a number that God does not like much?
The Catholic Bible has 73. Have you noticed that God prefers the number 7?
God created a 7 day week and rested on the 7th.
God did not create a 6 day week and 6 appears somewhere else.

This causes problems in discussion when a Catholic presents a teaching from the Bible that a Protestant does not regard as being part of their Bible.

Not only that but when we refer to the Church fathers - those who maintained the NT Bible through oral tradition before it was committed to paper - the Protestants can dismiss what they don't like by declaring "sola scpritura" despite the fact that they were valid sources before the Reformation.

When you come across this lie as the perpetrator if they are "sola fide". If they are then point them to James 2 were "faith alone" is condemned.

Faith without works is dead

Faith alone is dead

Ask them do they read the Bible - is that not work?
Ask them do they go to service - is that not work?
Ask them do they feed the hungry - is that not work?
Ask them do they choose to be Christians - is that not work?
Ask them do they preach - is that not work?
Ask them do they pray - is that not work?
Ask them do they distribute bibles - is that not work?

Ask them if they "do" anything as part of their Christian life - is that not work?

Then it is obvious that their church or denomination or sect also teaches a work salvation.

To argue the Catholicism teaches a "work-salvation" is to argue that works are not required for salvation. Yet those that argue it themselves do work.

Is not arguing with your Christian brethen work?

And if you do the work of arguing with your Christian brethern to what end do you do this work?
For the salvation for their souls or ours? Is that not work for salvation?

Maybe they want to be Catholics but lack the courage and faith to give up the sins engrained since their phoney churches were founded by mortal sinful men.

We must pray that all, Christian and non-Christian, to open our hearts to the Truth that comes from the Holy Spirit, recognize our errors and sins and seek the forgiveness of Jesus Christ

[edit: any objections from Catholics to the above if I am in error gratefully received]

antiskeptic

StealthRolex wrote: »

An incomplete bible therefore we have no common ground.

So be it.

Did I say God sends people to Hell. No, I said people choose Hell - God gives them what they want.

Semantics. Hell cannot contain the children of God.

Whilst there is much detail in the Bible-we-share about becoming a child of God there isn't a stitch on unbecoming a child of God.

Prove that - with reference and citation from a reputable Catholic resource.

I'm drawing that conclusion from what you've said. Follow the logic and see if you agree.

IF I choose not to obey God in doing the works he would want me to do AND that results in my going to Hell AND Hell only contains those that choose it THEN my failure to do the works God sets me consitute the means whereby I chose Hell.

Unless you can point out a hole in the logic (ie: any statement that you disagree with within the logic statement above) then the logic stands as a statement of your position.

StealthRolex

John 14:12:"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I go to the Father."

Matthew 18:3: ...and said, "Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven."

This second tells us to Become like Children and Trust God, not ourselves. It has nothing to do with being childish. It is about having a childlike trust in our Father in Heaven.

Notice how Matthew and John use the future tense - salvation is something we do not yet have. It comes to us in the future.

How does osas square with future?

antiskeptic

StealthRolex wrote: »

Any one who persists in maintaining this "works-salvation" lie is putting their mortal soul at risk.

Somehow I don't think you've appreciated what you've just said:

If "lying" is something I do that has a bearing on my salvation then you are speaking a works-salvation.

The Catholic Church does indeed teach that works are important however She also teaches much more - she teaches the entirety of what must be done to gain Heaven. Even so it is not guaranteed.One final act of hatred and malice can be enough to undo a lifetime of good.

According to the definition of a works-salvation being used here, the underlined section is a statement of work that must be done (or not done) in order to achieve/ avoid losing salvation.

The Protestant Churches cannot teach this because it has reduced the Bible to a travesty. Their Bible has 66 books.
Have you noticed that 6 is a number that God does not like much?

Curious, seeing as he invented it

The Catholic Bible has 73. Have you noticed that God prefers the number 7?
God created a 7 day week and rested on the 7th.
God did not create a 6 day week and 6 appears somewhere else.

Good grief! Enough already..

StealthRolex

St Paul was totally "born again," yet he said "Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel" (1 Cor 9:16)

When the Bible says "woe to ..." it means that there is grave danger, including hell. (Mat 11:21, 18:7, 23:13-16, 23-29, 24:19, 26:24, Mk 14:2, Lk 6:24-26, 10:13, 11:42-52, 17:1, 21:23, 22:22, Jud 1:11, Rev 8:13, 9:12, 11:14, 12:12)

aside -
If Hell exists, and the Bible says it does, and sinners can go to Hell, and the Bible says they do, and sinners are the Children of God because God created us all - Christian and non-Christian alike - then it follows that human sinners in Hell are the Children of God.

back to business-

The above paraphrased quotation was found here on a website billed as Catholicism for Protestants and it serves well since I gave away my copy of "Catholicism for Dummies"

The guy behind this website is pretty good and well worth a read for Catholics and Protestants alike:

A couple of years ago the Pope and Lutheran World Federation cosigned a document entitled "Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification" (JDDJ) agreeing on the role of faith in salvation. St. Cyprian said "No one is safe by his own strength, but he is safe by the Grace and mercy of God."

I could never in my lifetime, do enough good works to get into heaven on my own strength. There are not enough little old ladies in the world that I could help walk across the street, to pay the price that Jesus paid for my salvation. We Catholics don't think we can work our way into heaven, honest! On the other hand we don't think we can sit on our butts and expect Jesus to be pleased.

Section 1996 of the Catechism says:

Our justification comes from the grace of God. Grace is favor, the free and undeserved help that God gives us to respond to his call to become children of God, adoptive sons, partakers of the divine nature and of eternal life. (Jn 4:14; 7:38-39.)

Sections 161-162 the Catechism says:

(161) "Believing in Jesus Christ and in the One who sent him for our salvation is necessary for obtaining that salvation ...therefore without faith no one has ever attained justification...(162) Faith is an entirely free gift that God makes to man...

The Catechism also talks about our response to faith, (sections 161-162 and 1997-2000) which is to go out into the world and do as Jesus would have us do. Which is what we call Charity.

A couple of years ago almost every teenage Evangelical was wearing a bracelet that said WWJD, which was an acronym for "What Would Jesus Do?" This is basically what Catholics call Charity. When Catholics say the we must practice Charity, we are not saying you must give money to some benevolent organization (although that is a charitable action). We are basically saying "Ok, now that you have given your life to Jesus, do what Jesus would have you do and do this for the rest of your life, one day at a time." (Mk 13:13, Jam 1:2, Mt 10:22, Mt 24:13). Catholics believe we must "endure until the end" with our faith. (Heb 11:6)

StealthRolex

Someting that most Evangelicals aren't aware of is that when Luther left the church and wrote his own Bible, he added the word "alone" to Romans 3:28

Luther added an extra word to his Bible:

"For we maintain that a man is justified by faith [ALONE] apart from observing the law.

Revelation 22:18-19 says:

I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book.

When challenged about this Martin Luther responded:

If your Papist annoys you with the word ('alone'), tell him straightway, Dr. Martin Luther will have it so: Papist and ass are one and the same thing. Whoever will not have my translation, let him give it the go-by: the devil's thanks to him who censures it without my will and knowledge. Luther will have it so, and he is a doctor above all the doctors in Popedom. (Amic. Discussion, 1, 127,'The Facts About Luther,' O'Hare, TAN Books, 1987, p. 201.)

... and we since know that not only was Luther constipated he suffered greatly before he died.

Luther by all accounts was not a very nice person and still reaps what he has sown

[source previously noted]

StealthRolex

antiskeptic wrote: »

Somehow I don't think you've appreciated what you've just said:

If "lying" is something I do that has a bearing on my salvation then you are speaking a works-salvation.

I think you'll find it more correct to describe it as a works damnation. You are doing work that is sinful and risking your soul.

Give up this sin of falsehood and bearing false witness against your Christian bretheren.

antiskeptic

StealthRolex wrote: »

I think you'll find it more correct to describe it as a works damnation. You are doing work that is sinful and risking your soul.

Huh?

It follows that if I don't do the work that is sinful then I reduce the risk to my soul (and increase the chance of salvation).

I'm reminded of the Calvinist Convolution: "God predestining only some to salvation doesn't mean God predestines the rest to damnation"

Huh?

Give up this sin of falsehood and bearing false witness against your Christian bretheren.

Read the OP, specifically who it is that is the author of the OP. The author of the OP is defining a "works-salvation" as a system wherein your doings/not doings contribute towards your being saved.

Wouldn't what you have said fit that bill?

antiskeptic

StealthRolex wrote: »

... and we since know that not only was Luther constipated he suffered greatly before he died.

Perhaps one of these days you'll enlighten us as to the significance of Luther being constipated (assuming that he was). Until then we are left wondering about the great many righteous people who have suffered greatly before they died in wondering what on earth you are trying to imply.

antiskeptic

StealthRolex wrote: »

So while God loves us all, sinners as we are..

..I trust this demonstrates that while God loves us all with a perfect love

Compare the above with your quote from Sr. Faustina below..

Sr.F wrote:

"I am Thrice Holy, and I detest the smallest sin. I cannot love a soul which is stained with sin; but when it repents, there is no limit to My generosity toward it. My mercy embraces and justifies it."

On the one hand you say that God loves us all. On the other you say 'God says' he cannot love them who are stained with sin and unrepentant.

I know you hold that God can operate illogically. Is this an example of same?

StealthRolex

antiskeptic wrote: »

Compare the above with your quote from Sr. Faustina below..





On the one hand you say that God loves us all. On the other you say 'God says' he cannot love them who are stained with sin and unrepentant.

I know you hold that God can operate illogically. Is this an example of same?

Again with the misrepresentation which is why you are on my ignore list.

Show he where he is says "I cannot love a sinner"

He says he cannot love a soul stained with sin. This is not the same as saying he cannot love the sinner.

No doubt you will twist it to suit your argument and make implications such sinner=soul.

Again I urge you. Repent of your sins and seek forgiveness. Seek the Truth.

antiskeptic

StealthRolex wrote: »

Again with the misrepresentation which is why you are on my ignore list.

This is getting odder and odder. An ignore list which enables you to see my posts.

Show he where he is says "I cannot love a sinner"

He says he cannot love a soul stained with sin. This is not the same as saying he cannot love the sinner.

No doubt you will twist it to suit your argument and make implications such sinner=soul.

I am inclined to meander in that direction given what 'God' says next


He's told us that he cannot love a soul stained with sin. And then goes on to say "...but when it repents" ( the "it" being the soul in this case). But we also have Christ telling us that he came to call sinners to repentance - which presumes sinners can repent too.

So: souls able to repent and the sinner able to repent but the soul and the sinner aren't the same thing? Which raises the scenario where the soul repents but the sinner doesn't.

What happens then?

Again I urge you. Repent of your sins and seek forgiveness. Seek the Truth.

I'd consider it if I knew which part of me need repent: the sinner bit or the soul bit. Or both..

StealthRolex

antiskeptic wrote: »

This is getting odder and odder. An ignore list which enables you to see my posts.

The ignore option is not permanent and I can choose what I will respond to.

antiskeptic wrote: »

He's told us that he cannot love a soul stained with sin. And then goes on to say "...but when it repents". The "it" being the soul in this case. Then we have Christ telling us that he came to call sinners to repentance - which presumes sinners can repent too.

So: souls able to repent and the sinner able to repent but the soul and the sinner aren't the same thing? Which raises the scenario where the soul repents but the sinner doesn't.

While the body is alive the sinner and the soul are inseparable.
While the soul is within the body the soul is cleansed when the sinner makes a heartfelt confession, repents and does penance for their sins.
It is impossible for the sinner to repent and the soul not to or for the soul to repent and the sinner not to.

The issue arises upon the death of the sinner when the soul is released from the mortal body and can no longer avail of confession or repentance and is at the Mercy of God.

antiskeptic wrote: »

I'd consider it if I knew which part of me need repent: the sinner bit or the soul bit. Or both..

You- body and soul unless you can separate them.
Go to confession and your soul will go with you. And go soon - your mockery of Catholicism and the words of Jesus shows that Satan has you in his grip. Your mind has been filled with lies and you are blind to the truth.

antiskeptic

StealthRolex wrote: »

The ignore option is not permanent and I can choose what I will respond to.

But how can you know there is something to respond to if the ignore is on?

While the body is alive the sinner and the soul are inseparable.
While the soul is within the body the soul is cleansed when the sinner makes a heartfelt confession,..

According to God in Sr Faustina's diary, it is the soul that repents - not the sinner. Which is why I conclude a separation between soul and sinner according to the word of God you're working from.

Go to confession and your soul will go with you. And go soon - your mockery of Catholicism and the words of Jesus shows that Satan has you in his grip. Your mind has been filled with lies and you are blind to the truth.

It's less mockery and more enquiring into the curious mechanics of Catholicism.

You could hardly expect me to put my trust in a system that consists of such a bewildering array of nons-sequiturs, semantical wriggling and sheer self-contradiction. So I'll pass on your offer.

lmaopml

PDN wrote: »

You know these debates are pretty pointless if we misrepresent one another's positions.

I don't see that antiskeptic referred to you as currently being 'lost' at all. He made a general statement about salvation and free will.

We seem to be having to point this out rather frequently, but the vast majority of Protestants happily accept, despite our differences, that it is perfectly possible to be a Catholic and to have saving faith in Christ. There has never been a bull issued on behalf of all Protestants along the lines of Boniface VIII's Una Sanctum.

Hi PDN,

Ironically, this is the very reason why I was interested in the view of Catholics from my protestant brothers and sisters. I understand not 'everybody' misrepresents, but some seem to either, just not understand or not want to, or come from a position that is entrenched in a much deeper philosophy of how we actually view our own nature; this is why antiskeptic and I are chatting. I think we're getting on quite well so far too....although, we've yet to get to the nitty gritty I suppose..lol...

...considering the vast nature of the topic, I am sorry if I misrepresented what antiskeptic mentioned, I can only say it was late and I wasn't being deliberate or intentional....

..that's why I'm still here chatting

lmaopml

Hi antiskeptic,

I will go back to your earlier post when I have time to sit down and write an 'epic' reply later..lol....

..but for now, I think our view on free will is at the epicentre of our alternate views on salvation....So I would really like to understand your idea on how freewill philosophy works from a osas position...and how 'active' is your will? I'm also interested in the notion that some have no will, until they encounter Jesus...

Also, the way you believe that nothing you ever do, even down to sinning relentlessy and not repenting, means you could 'lose' your salvation....

To be fair, yes the Catholic position would be that one can lose their salvation by rejecting God...and not being repentant...to utterly reject him to the end, is returning the gift of salvation...So in effect, we seperate ourselves..

I'm just thinking here that perhaps you see the 'merit' as contributing to our salvation as a 'work', when in fact - from our perspective, and if you could bare with me, cause I know I ramble sometimes....

We see ourselves, I guess, as being co-operative after our encounter with Jesus, because we have 'free will', the only 'merit' is this 'co-operation' that we have in relation to binding our wills and subduing our own to allow God to live more fully in us....By doing so, we receive more 'Grace'...We don't 'deserve' Grace initially by our own doing, but we see it as an ongoing gift that we keep sanctified by repentence, and allowing God to work in us...

So, in effect while we do deserve 'merit' for allowing God to do his 'will' through us more fully - it's to receive 'more' Grace, a cleaner 'soul' if you will...and it's 'this' that saves us...not all the good deeds, because they belong to 'God', not us...

Jeepers, I hope I expressed that ok...

We don't believe that without Grace somebody who is a 'good' person and does 'good' things off their own bat and thinks this is enough to be 'saved' has the message of the Catholic church correct. I'm not saying there are people who 'do' believe this is the case, just that they are in error about the teachings...

Interesting to think, without actually getting to the bible so much in this chat, that one can see an alternate position perhaps more clear...

..we can always look at the bible later and see what it has to say, but I quite like the narrative way this is going for now...

StealthRolex

antiskeptic wrote: »

You could hardly expect me to put my trust in a system that consists of such a bewildering array of nons-sequiturs, semantical wriggling and sheer self-contradiction. So I'll pass on your offer.

If you can prove that of the Catholic Church you have my interest.

From what I can see the non sequiturs, semantic wriggling and self contraction exist only in you own mind either because you invented them or because you have bought in to the lie of an alternative man made church that uses a stripped down bible based on phoney doctrine constructed of non sequiturs, semantics and contradiction.

While you are pondering where you prove what you say of the Catholic Church is true - and you should stick with authorized Catholic resources to support your assertion, I'll kick off with OSAS as an unbiblical lie that is leading souls, including yours if it is true that you are an adherent of it, to Hell and Damnation for all eternity.

What does OSAS say about the Apostle Judas Iscariot?

Judas was called and chosen by Jesus to follow Jesus as one of the Apostles so it can be taken that he was Once Saved as he gave up everything when he was called for a life of poverty to follow the Saviour.
He had faith and could heal and drive out demons and Jesus trusted him as a close friend.

Where is he now - Heaven or Hell?

If Once Saved Always Saved is true you should be able to answer that without contradicting the Bible or making stuff up.

ISAW

antiskeptic wrote: »

So: souls able to repent and the sinner able to repent but the soul and the sinner aren't the same thing? Which raises the scenario where the soul repents but the sinner doesn't.

What happens then?

I'd consider it if I knew which part of me need repent: the sinner bit or the soul bit. Or both..

Interesting question.
It relates to the idea of whether people are mind body and spirit. Individual triuine identities
but anyway,

Is the sinner the soul? Not necessarly. Is Jesus Christ the Father? Is the Spirit the christ ? Is the spirit the Father? Are all three God? The ONE God?

Do you have a physical body?
Are you more then that physical body?

Well then I suggest you worry about the bits that need looking after.

smurfhousing

Behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to render to every man according to his works.

- Rev. 22:12

These works can be good or bad, with good or bad rewards. Like the sheep and the goats at the final judgement, our works will indeed play a key role.

What say ye, antiskeptic?

lmaopml

To be honest, I thought it would be really cool to have a 'chat' just about how we describe our belief in a narrative fashion...It is hard to get over this and try to just 'talk'..sometimes

...in fairness, I am not trying to lay any biblical 'bombs' at the moment, and as far as I can see neither is antiskeptic, we're just trying to 'talk'...and give dignity to eachother as God's children collectively...to 'understand'...

We will of course have some 'spats', but that's ok...it's necessary to understanding..

..and understanding is a good thing? Let's try?

antiskeptic

StealthRolex wrote: »

If you can prove that of the Catholic Church you have my interest.

Your response to the issue of souls repenting/sinners repenting might well suffice. The other issue is the one where your doing/not doing influencing your salvation not being considered a work.

What does OSAS say about the Apostle Judas Iscariot?

That he wasn't ever born again. He wasn't ever saved (assuming that he was damned)

Judas was called and chosen by Jesus to follow Jesus as one of the Apostles

Correction ..disciples.

so it can be taken that he was Once Saved as he gave up everything when he was called for a life of poverty to follow the Saviour.

"It can be taken", can it? I much prefer "it can be shown - scripturally".

Plenty of people followed Christ around. Plenty of people where disciples of his. It doesn't mean they were saved. It means they were disciples and follow-arounders of his.

He had faith and could heal and drive out demons and Jesus trusted him as a close friend.

So? Does healing and driving out of demons mean you are saved? Or does it mean you have been empowered by God to do so?

Where is he now - Heaven or Hell?

If never saved and he died in that state then according to the Protestant viewpoint, he is in Hell (or irrevocably destined to be cast there come Judgement)

If Once Saved Always Saved is true you should be able to answer that without contradicting the Bible or making stuff up.

Your wish has been my command!

antiskeptic

smurfhousing wrote: »

Behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to render to every man according to his works.

- Rev. 22:12

These works can be good or bad, with good or bad rewards. Like the sheep and the goats at the final judgement, our works will indeed play a key role.

What say ye, antiskeptic?

What say I?

I say the verse in Revelation doesn't mention anything about the nature of the works: good or bad. You're inserting that view into the text (a dodgy, if easy-to-fall-into-practice called eisegesis)

One could just as easily assume the work here is only good - but that each man has different levels of good work to his account. That view would be somewhat supported (but far from proven) by the fact that Jesus only comes with rewards to hand out. Not punishment.

But like I say, eisegesis isn't a sound way of forming your doctrine. So we cant' conclude this way or that from this text.


I Cor 3

12If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, 13his 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. 14If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward. 15If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames

This section on the other hand does indicate something of good and bad works and tells us to which the reward goes (strengthening my interpretation of 'reward' in the above Revelations verse). Unfortunately for you're position however, the person whose work is found useless is still saved. But it ties in nicely with my position: work important - just not unto salvation.

JimiTime

StealthRolex wrote: »

your mockery of Catholicism and the words of Jesus shows that Satan has you in his grip. Your mind has been filled with lies and you are blind to the truth.

I'd like to suggest something in the charter for this kind of nonsense. We can all indulge in, 'You don't agree with me or my denomination, therefore Satan has you in his grip'. As much as I understand the RC or Jehovahs Witness belief that they are the club to be in, the manifestation of it in the form of the above should be dealt with severely IMO. Its even worse than the 'Thats not very Christian of you' comments.

philologos

JimiTime wrote: »

I'd like to suggest something in the charter for this kind of nonsense. We can all indulge in, 'You don't agree with me or my denomination, therefore Satan has you in his grip'. As much as I understand the RC or Jehovahs Witness belief that they are the club to be in, the manifestation of it in the form of the above should be dealt with severely IMO. Its even worse than the 'Thats not very Christian of you' comments.

Couldn't agree more!

It's harmful to the character of the forum, which was for the most part cordial, although heated from time to time. If you want to argue a hardline Catholic, Calvinist, Arminian or anything else type of view, do so, but such allegations are merely petty.

antiskeptic

lmaopml wrote: »

Hi antiskeptic,

Hi..

I will go back to your earlier post when I have time to sit down and write an 'epic' reply later..lol....

Sure thing. No hurry.

..but for now, I think our view on free will is at the epicentre of our alternate views on salvation....So I would really like to understand your idea on how freewill philosophy works from a osas position...and how 'active' is your will? I'm also interested in the notion that some have no will, until they encounter Jesus...

As stated: I share the view that lost men haven't got a freewill - that such a thing was lost at the fall. That much seems pretty clear from the various ways in which the Bible decribes the will/heart of lost men:

- their mind, body and spirit are enslaved to sin
- they are under the sway and rule of the wicked one
- they are God-hating and God-slandering
- they love wickedness and are ever finding new ways to do wicked (take a look at the world if you need proof of this one)

You might picture mans fallen will as a boat with a rudder jammed in the direction "doing evil all the time". And man would do only evil all the time if his will was left to his own devices. But it's not. God has given man a conscience and the conscience also influences a man. Towards good.

And so you have something similar to a freewill (which is a will that can move in two opposite directions). You have a situation where man can move in one direction due to his own effort. And be moved in the opposite direction by God's effort.

All that need occur in order that a man move in God's direction is for a mans will to do nothing. If it does nothing man will be moved towards God. By God.


After salvation things are different. The person is born-again and awake to find themselves freed from their only-evil nature. They now have a freewill in the normal sense of the word and can choose for/against God themselves. Satan entices them in one direction still, God exhorts them to go in the other direction. The saved man chooses to obey God or not. But his choice doesn't have any effect on his salvation.

That decision has been made already - it needn't be revisited.

Also, the way you believe that nothing you ever do, even down to sinning relentlessy and not repenting, means you could 'lose' your salvation....

Indeed.

To be fair, yes the Catholic position would be that one can lose their salvation by rejecting God...and not being repentant...to utterly reject him to the end, is returning the gift of salvation...So in effect, we seperate ourselves..

There you have your "works salvation". Works being that which you do/don't do which go to deciding whether you are saved or not. It makes no difference whether you haven't salvation and your works prevent you getting it. Or whether you have salvation and your works snatch it out of your hands.

The whole notion is ludicrous on a number of fronts. You mean to tell me that a person could really believe in eternal Hell whose torment doesn't bear thinking about and they would deliberately reject God so as to end up there. It doesn't stack up.

I'm just thinking here that perhaps you see the 'merit' as contributing to our salvation as a 'work', when in fact - from our perspective, and if you could bare with me, cause I know I ramble sometimes....

No worries.

We see ourselves, I guess, as being co-operative after our encounter with Jesus, because we have 'free will', the only 'merit' is this 'co-operation' that we have in relation to binding our wills and subduing our own to allow God to live more fully in us....By doing so, we receive more 'Grace'...We don't 'deserve' Grace initially by our own doing, but we see it as an ongoing gift that we keep sanctified by repentence, and allowing God to work in us...

So, in effect while we do deserve 'merit' for allowing God to do his 'will' through us more fully - it's to receive 'more' Grace, a cleaner 'soul' if you will...and it's 'this' that saves us...not all the good deeds, because they belong to 'God', not us...

Jeepers, I hope I expressed that ok...

You did .. but didn't escape the dilemma. You can add as many tiers to the thing: your will produces this, which produces that, which produces the other, which produces salvation. The tiers don't matter - you will does.

If you bind your will, if you don't refuse, if you don't, if you don't. Your salvation is reliant on what you do. And because it is reliant on what you do you have something to boast of. Sure - God might make 99% of it possible but without this 1% done by you, you won't be saved.

You can be proud of your 1%. And that isn't permitted in scripture.

We don't believe that without Grace somebody who is a 'good' person and does 'good' things off their own bat and thinks this is enough to be 'saved' has the message of the Catholic church correct. I'm not saying there are people who 'do' believe this is the case, just that they are in error about the teachings...

Okay. But off whose 'bat' is your will operating when it permits the Holy Spirit to operate through you unto good works? If not your bat I mean.

Interesting to think, without actually getting to the bible so much in this chat, that one can see an alternate position perhaps more clear...

..we can always look at the bible later and see what it has to say, but I quite like the narrative way this is going for now...

Me too. The problem with the Bible is that a verse flung in here or there doesn't really do justice to the issue to hand. We both seem to agree that it need be by God's grace at all point. Your task now is to remove yourself from that 1% contribution

StealthRolex

So Jimi, Jackass, you want a forum where "Say it like it is" is not tolerated, would that be a fair assessment?

Tell me where I'm wrong apart from being slighty OTT which I accept.

Tell what is wrong when a question that has been answered - "does the Catholic Church teach a works-salvation?" is give the answer "No it teaches we are saved through Grace from which faith and works follow" is persistently twisted into " if you "do" or "any works for whatever reason" implies "works salvation" even unto accepting a free gift from the Holy Spirit is described as "works".



There is One God
There is One Heaven
There is One Hell
We have One Soul
There is One Saviour
We get One Chance
We have One True Church to help us get to Heaven
There is One Way to get to heaven

We are part of One Family and like All Families there is One Father.

Our Father gave us One Guide, One Shepard, One Pope to help us.

This thread is discussion salvation. If you have any care for your own immortal souls it would pay you to seek, find and accept the Truth before it is too late.

Moreover the concept of OSAS is downright dangerous and it would be remiss of any Christian not to point out the dangers associated with a doctrine whose sole purpose is the damnation of souls.

Hell Exists
Hell Contains the souls of sinners
Souls have gone, are going and will go to Hell.

To say otherwise is to risk your own soul and those of others.

The Truth sets us Free. Lies enslave us to sin

PDN

StealthRolex wrote: »

So Jimi, Jackass, you want a forum where "Say it like it is" is not tolerated, would that be a fair assessment?

Tell me where I'm wrong apart from being slighty OTT which I accept.

No, they want a forum where posters abide by the Charter.

Bigotry, crude generalisations and unreasonable antagonism will not be tolerated. This rule encompasses all intolerance towards creeds, beliefs, lifestyles or opinions that differ from one's own.

Wolfsbane has been warned in the past for straying too close to the line in his criticisms of Roman Catholicism - and you would be well advised to consider yourself similarly warned.

You are entitled to post that you disagree with someone else's position or beliefs, and you may point out weaknesses or logical inconsistencies that you see. But blanket accusations about Catholics or Protestants being blinded by Satan are unacceptable, contrary to the Charter, and will attract infractions.

We want this forum to be a place where Protestants, Catholics, Orthodox and others can discuss things openly but also by treating one another with respect.

Festus

Jakkass wrote: »

Couldn't agree more!

It's harmful to the character of the forum, which was for the most part cordial, although heated from time to time. If you want to argue a hardline Catholic, Calvinist, Arminian or anything else type of view, do so, but such allegations are merely petty.

If it's petty what's the fuss?

Looks like Stealth just went a bit overboard in the face of some trying to tell him his faith is a lie.

Settle down lads - plenty of time in eternity when will all know the truth

philologos

StealthRolex wrote: »

There is One God
There is One Heaven
There is One Hell
We have One Soul
There is One Saviour
We get One Chance
We have One True Church to help us get to Heaven
There is One Way to get to heaven

We are part of One Family and like All Families there is One Father.

Our Father gave us One Guide, One Shepard, One Pope to help us.

I've asked you this before, but you didn't really deal with it. I'm wondering does this mean that you think that Christians who aren't Catholic are going to hell?

antiskeptic

StealthRolex wrote: »

Tell me where I'm wrong apart from being slighty OTT which I accept.

Your wrong that the OSAS doctrine purpose is the damnation of souls. At least, you haven't made a case for why you're right about it

There is One God
There is One Heaven
There is One Hell
We have One Soul
There is One Saviour
We get One Chance
We have One True Church to help us get to Heaven
There is One Way to get to heaven

I'd agree with it all. The only bit I'd quibble about is the one true church. Whilst agreeing that Christs church helps people to "get to heaven", I'd disagree that it and the R.Catholic church are one and the same

Tell what is wrong when a question that has been answered - "does the Catholic Church teach a works-salvation?" is give the answer "No it teaches we are saved through Grace from which faith and works follow"
is persistently twisted into " if you "do" or "any works for whatever reason" implies "works salvation" even unto accepting a free gift from the Holy Spirit is described as "works".

I'm quite happy to accept that the Roman Catholic salvation isn't a works salvation according to their definition of a works-salvation. According to the defintion of a works-salvation being used here however, it most certainly is.

"There are things you must do/not do in order to increase your chances of salvation (although there are no guarantees of salvation given)"

I've got a works- based job. If I do certain things then I get the wages that go with that job. Now you can decide to focus on my choice to work and my accepting the offer to do the job for a particular wage if you like. It alters not one iota the fact that I've a works-based job.

If I (chose to) do what's required, I get paid the wage. If I don't I won't. That's work for you.

StealthRolex

PDN wrote: »

No, they want a forum where posters abide by the Charter.



Wolfsbane has been warned in the past for straying too close to the line in his criticisms of Roman Catholicism - and you would be well advised to consider yourself similarly warned.

You are entitled to post that you disagree with someone else's position or beliefs, and you may point out weaknesses or logical inconsistencies that you see. But blanket accusations about Catholics or Protestants being blinded by Satan are unacceptable, contrary to the Charter, and will attract infractions.

We want this forum to be a place where Protestants, Catholics, Orthodox and others can discuss things openly but also by treating one another with respect.

Accepted

StealthRolex

antiskeptic wrote: »

Your wrong that the OSAS doctrine purpose is the damnation of souls. At least, you haven't made a case for why you're right about it




I'd agree with it all. The only bit I'd quibble about is the one true church. Whilst agreeing that Christs church helps people to "get to heaven", I'd disagree that it and the R.Catholic church are one and the same




I'm quite happy to accept that the Roman Catholic salvation isn't a works salvation according to their definition of a works-salvation. According to the defintion of a works-salvation being used here however, it most certainly is.

"There are things you must do/not do in order to increase your chances of salvation (although there are no guarantees of salvation given)"

I've got a works- based job. If I do certain things then I get the wages that go with that job. Now you can decide to focus on my choice to work and my accepting the offer to do the job for a particular wage if you like. It alters not one iota that I've a works-based job.

If I (chose to) do what's required, I get paid the wage. If I don't I won't. That's work for you.

You are completely missing the point and the highlighted definition above is one you constructed.

There is no way on earth no matter how long we live we can ever ever ever do enough works to gain salvation. Therefore works-salvation does not exist.

The logic that says it is impossible to do enough works implies works are not required is pseudo-logic.

The logic that says doing works is works-salvation is twisted logic.

The facts are faith without works is dead and faith without grace is impossible.

philologos

StealthRolex wrote: »

The facts are faith without works is dead and faith without grace is impossible.

We've agreed with this the whole way through the thread, read back!

StealthRolex

Jakkass wrote: »

I've asked you this before, but you didn't really deal with it. I'm wondering does this mean that you think that Christians who aren't Catholic are going to hell?

Apologies if I missed it.

It's not my call and I cannot even suggest it without committing a sin.

No one can say who is going to hell and who is not beyond what the Bible tells us. What we can say is under what circumstances one is likely to go hell, namely not being in a state of grace or being in mortal sin upon death.
We are all at Gods Mercy once we die.

The Catholic Church holds the keys and maintains the Truth so Her directions are the only correct directions for how we should live our lives is this life.

StealthRolex

Jakkass wrote: »

We've agreed with this the whole way through the thread, read back!

Jakkass I know you accept it and that's fine - antiskeptic does not it appears

antiskeptic

StealthRolex wrote: »

Jakkass I know you accept it and that's fine - antiskeptic does not it appears

Oh I accept it all right. It's just that what I accept about it and what you accept about it are two different things

antiskeptic

StealthRolex wrote: »

You are completely missing the point and the highlighted definition above is one you constructed.

There is no way on earth no matter how long we live we can ever ever ever do enough works to gain salvation. Therefore works-salvation does not exist.

A mortal sin is both something you do and something that reduces your chance of salvation to zero (if you have it on your unrepentant 'account' - according to you). If you don't commit mortal sin, whilst you are not guaranteed salvation, your chances of salvation increase from zero.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but we now have something you don't do (mortal sin) increasing your chances of salvation. Could you point out the problem with the definition that says that very same thing?

StealthRolex

antiskeptic wrote: »

A mortal sin is both something you do and something that reduces your chance of salvation to zero (if you have it on your unrepentant 'account' - according to you). If you don't commit mortal sin, whilst you are not guaranteed salvation, your chances of salvation increase from zero.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but we now have something you don't do (mortal sin) increasing your chances of salvation. Could you point out the problem with the definition that says that very same thing?

Antiskeptic, it does not work like that so this is the correction: You cannot increase our chances of salvation by not committing sin. Salvation depends on grace, a free gift from the Holy Spirit. You cannot go and demand grace. You do not automatically received grace for doing or not doing things. The Holy Spirit decides whether you merit it or not and may or may not grant it.

You can of course ask for it.

antiskeptic

StealthRolex wrote: »

Antiskeptic, it does not work like that so this is the correction: You cannot increase our chances of salvation by not committing sin.

You can. Commit mortal sin and you have no chance. Don't commit and you have a chance - if not a guarantee. Having a chance is more of a chance than having no chance at all.

So chance is increased. Do you understand what 'chance' is?

Salvation depends on grace, a free gift from the Holy Spirit. You cannot go and demand grace. You do not automatically received grace for doing or not doing things. The Holy Spirit decides whether you merit it or not and may or may not grant it

I understand it's not guaranteed, that it's not automatic. The question here is whether things you do have a bearing on your gaining salvation. Mortal sin is one such example: it has a bearing on your gaining salvation ie: you don't gain it.

And it's something you do.