- Yes 46 (50%)
- No 38 (41%)
- Don't know 7 (7%)
Comment
The Catechism of the Catholic Church includes fasting as one form of penance (paragraph 1434). The same catechism defines penance thus:
"Raised up from sin, the sinner must still recover his full spiritual health by doing something more to make amends for the sin; he must 'make satisfaction for' or 'expiate' his sins. This satisfaction is also called 'penance'." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph. 1459).
Therefore the Catholic Church definitely teaches that fasting is a way to make satisfaction for sin. It does not teach that satisfaction is the only purpose -- for instnace, in the Cathecism of Pius X, three reasons are given: "Fasting serves to dispose us better to prayer; to do penance for past sins; and to preserve us from sinning again." Still, one of the purposes, is to do penance or satisfaction for past sins.
This is contrary to the Bible; the Word of God does not teach that our fasting, or anything we do, makes reparation to the justice of God for our sins. The Bible teaches that their is only one way of reconciliation and propitiation: the cross of Jesus!
62 comments:
Pastor Mizzi,
Fasting according to modern science brings good benefits to the body, well aside from that, Bible teaches us to fast, we are not forbidden to do fasting in fact it is encouraged in the Bible.
I thought we must imitate Christ?As Jesus Himself fasted for 40 days..and for what? Do you think He needs it? He is already God. Ask yourself.
Pastor Mizzi, for the love of God, could we exchange our views and interpretation of the Bible without you calling our Holy Eucharist as Satan's "invention", mocking and making fun of our Mass.
Every word that comes out from your lips will be held acountable to God. If you don't agree with us Catholics, say so, but calling names is foul and unchristian.
It always puzzled me that the worshippers of Satan in the 60's and 70's up to present would parody the Mass when they worshipped. I could not understand why demons, who knew right doctrine but rejected obedience to it, should foster hatred of the Catholic Mass if the Mass were merely a medieval superstition. If the Mass had not been instituted by Christ, then why would Satan worshippers make it the centerpiece of rebellion? Now I see that such a parody is a sure sign of rebellion against Christ precisely because the Mass WAS instituted by Christ at the Last Supper. Mockery of the Mass is a mockery of its Founder.
James,
I have read alot of Pastor Mizzi's website and have never seen anything that is mocking or making fun of Catholics or the mass; it is always seriously and respectfully written using biblical proofs.
Hi Jennie,
As I wrote before, it is perfectly alright to disagree, if one's interpretation of the Bible is different from the other's standpoint, there is a healthy exchange of views.
If I call and label your doctrine of "sola scriptura" as a worshipping a book , call you guys, idol worshippers and an "invention of Satan", what would be your reaction? Do you think it is prejudice and insulting to you?
"Sola (only) Scriptura", is nowhere taught in the Bible.
If you say that Pastor's Mizzi's articles calling us Catholics as "idol worshippers and our Holy Eucharist as Satan's invention respectfully written then I must admit, you are blinded by the "lens" of prejudice which borders bigotry and the sad part you don't realized it.
I agree with James...I could see a prejudice judgement a mile away.
The ugly part is, we are supposed to reason out and defend our faith to others in a brotherly love as the great Apostle Peter instructed us but to call deragatory names only because you don't agree is not a Biblical proof.
I think it's not the doctrines of purgatory, Mary's Immaculate Conception, Mass etc, that REALLY matters, (though, they are Biblical)I think it's the question of Authority.
Just look at Pastor Mizzi's explanation on authority and tradition, is like...
So, following your logic, we don't need a Teaching Office (Magisterium) that is "because the Bible teach us so and so...", sounds good, right?
According to Pastor Mizzi, let yourself read and interpret the Scriptures guided by the same Holy Spirit and not rely on him (Pastor Mizzi)or anybody else to "test" if it is biblically proof. If that is the case, should I find myself disagreeing with his interpretation of the Bible according again to him, I'm mistaken and he is right because his version is Biblical and not mine.
Does it make sense to you, dear reader? but If he says there exist a disagreement, then who are we going to settle the dispute? of course WITH Authority to end it, right? Like the Supreme Court.
When Pastor Mizzi asked by what authority does the Tradition and Magisterium comes from? which he said "begs" the question (implying from the Bible again). Her's how.....
For your info....The Authority of the Teaching Office and Tradition of the Catholic Church were HANDED DOWN by LAYING OF HANDS from Jesus to the Apostles to the Bishops and to the NEXT generation of Bishops and so on, which refutes Pastor Mizzi's argument of that "begs the question". (Matt: Acts)
This is what we call, "Organic Authority".
How in world do you think the first generation of early christians from the first century managed to learn and hear the Word of God in the Gospels of Mark, Luke etc.? The NT Bible wasn't even written yet, aside from the fact of the thousands of books so called "epistles" roaming around? If you are one of the early christians, how would you know Pastor Mizzi, which one is "divinely inspired"?
It is just a matter of obedience to the Authority handed down by Jesus to "mere" sinful men.(Peter and Apostles).
Go home and be reconciled with the gift that God gave us...The Catholic Church.
Dr. Mizzi's pre-occupation with catholic "bashing" and trying his utmost to prove the catholics are wrong clouds his reasoning and judgement.
I'm glad he is not my doctor.
Guys, while I agree with you....please try to stick with the subject of fasting.
I have no idea whether Pastor Mizzi said the eucharist was 'Satan's invention' or whether he called catholics, in so many words, 'idol worshippers.' I said I have never seen anything written mockingly or making fun of catholicism. His TONE is always serious and respectful, whether you agree with his conclusions or not.
I don't know if the Catholic church teaches that fasting is a way to make satisfaction for sin; if I had to guess, I would say yes.
But only the once for all sacrifice that Jesus Christ made on the cross can make satisfaction for sin. Trusting in Him alone, as He is revealed in God's Word, is the only hope for salvation.
In Christ's Love,
Jennie
Hello Jennie,
Thanks for your question and I totally agree with you that Jesus sacrifice is only once and for all and trusting in Him alone is our only hope and salvation. This is also a Catholic teaching.I will elaborate later.
It is very Biblical to do fasting, in fact Jesus fasted for 40 days in the desert and the Bible is inundated with verses, so it’s not correct for some pastors have been saying that fasting is a man-made tradition.
Jesus said,”When you fast..” not " if you fast." He EXPECTED his followers to fast, so it is no surprise that we find them doing so: "While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, ‘Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.’ So after they had fasted and prayed, they placed their hands on them and sent them off" (Acts 13:2–3; cf. 14:23).
Aside from the physical benefits of fasting we Christians also reap the spiritual dimension of fasting, it is like a spiritual weapon for us to use to guard against much attachment to this world and that spiritual world is more important. We learn to deny ourselves pleasures, even in spite of pain—an important spiritual lesson. We declare that we recognize the need to reform and to get closer to God.
Luke 9:23-25. "And He said to all, "If any man would come after Me, let him DENY himself and take up his cross daily and follow Me"
Humility is linked with fasting in Scripture. The scribe Ezra tells us, "Then I proclaimed a fast . . . that we might humble ourselves before our God, to seek from him a straight way for ourselves, our children, and all our goods" (Ezra 8:21). These are the reasons Jesus not only approves of fasting, but expects his followers to fast.
Now as for satisfaction for sins, I would say it could be as one of the many ways, like alms giving, prayer or works of mercy (again as Jesus demanded His followers).
Does it contradict the ONCE and for all sacrifice of Jesus on the cross as satisfaction for sins? The Catholic answer is NO! Why?
2-major things to consider:
1. Understanding the Catholic teaching of “SIN”. It has 2-aspects, one is the guilt and the other is the effects of the sin (consequences/harm) to one’s neighbor and to the community as a whole, e.g. murder or abortion which is killing in itself but also has another dimension of harm to the community as well.
2. The Catholic theology agrees with you, God suffered and died on the cross ONCE and for all, never again to be repeated, Jesus’ sacrifice is ALL SUFFICIENT!....but God didn’t stop there and BECAUSE He loved us so much that HE allowed an OPENING for us humans to partake in HIS WONDERFUL works of redemptive suffering by leaving room in His mystical body for our own suffering. Again, does God need our help to do His work? NO. But God chose and not the catholics for humans to partake as members of His Body.
To quote a Bible: as Apostle Paul speaking for us...
Col 1:24-25. “Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is LACKING in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church”.
Is there something lacking in Christ's sufferings? Of course not. Understanding the language of love...partaking.
I hope it helps. God Bless.
This weekend I've been far from home, attending a Catholic funeral service for my 96 year old aunt. She died two weeks ago, but it's taken this long to gather our considerable family - Catholic & Protestant alike (and a few non-believers too), to celebrate her life (a worthy celebration, I might add). It grieved my heart deeply to hear prayers offered to Mary, songs too. Though dead two weeks, this precious band of Catholics are praying and fasting in order that her soul might be allowed into heaven.
Jesus atoned, once and for all, for my sin. I need not fast (though I do fast), or crawl on my knees until they're blodied, or perform anything in addition to His completed work on my behalf in order to achieve value or, worse, His approval. It is finished. I am His, and He will never, never let me go.
If my beloved Catholic family and friends choose to do so, they certainly don't need my permission. I would pray they find freedom, though ... in Christ alone. I might even fast as I seek the Lord on this matter.
Be blessed,
Kathleen
To Sola Scriptura adherents...
No document, no matter if it’s inspired by God or written by an ordinary man, can interpret itself. Period.
Sola Scriptura is not found in Scripture. Judaism was not a religion solely of the book. Christ Himself quoted non-Scriptural phrases that came from Jewish oral teachings. So did His Apostles. Christianity isn’t a mutation of Judaism; it is its fulfillment, its perfected form. As such, it relies on both written and oral teachings from a living, ongoing authority given to it by God. After all, man can’t be left alone to proclaim God’s truth; God must protect it constantly. If man tries, the result is chaos, a religious Tower of Babel. From the Fall onward, man’s refusal to accept God’s authority has resulted in error, sin, and spiritual shipwreck.
The good thing about Catholic teaching is the recognition of both Scriptures and Apostolic Tradition (Magisterium-servant of the Scripture) but side by side being the Authority of the Church.
"Maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you." (1 Cor 11:2b)
"So the, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter." (2 Thess 2:15)
"Keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us." (2 Thess 3:6b)
Dear Sassy Granny,
Did you see the explanation of James just above to answer your comments?
NOBODY IS adding anything to Christ' sacrifice once and for all, why are you always saying that? We all know that His sacrifice all sufficient and can't be repeated and but it was Jesus' recommendation to fast and NOT us Catholics.
Imitate Jesus, as St. Paul had asked his followers.Period.
I'm a die-hard protestant, an anything catholic is not "biblical" type of an evangelical.
But when I read the Early Church Fathers on how they practiced their faith and most were eventually martyred because of their faith IN Jesus. Wow! talk about true faith!
I couldn't imagine how a person who read them could made a conclusion that they were protestants.
Oxford Movement from England, John Henry Neumann (a protestant scholar)once said, "To be steep in history is to cease to be protestant."
It is true my brother protestants! Stop this obstinate denial of unity, admit we were wounded and divided.
Just to mention one general characteristic of the way they worship God, it is VERY Liturgical in nature.
"One faith, One Baptism" as Jesus commanded us..I invite you to swim with us across the Tiber river as hundreds of pastors have been doing!
Come Lord Jesus! Maranatha!
God's teaching authority is not passed down by man in the form of a 'magisterium' but men are chosen by Him and taught by Him (and other mature christian elders) as He sees fit.
If the 'magisterium' or tradition develops in a way that contradicts the word of God then it is invalid and has no Godly authority anymore.
There are many instances in which Catholicism, and other denominations, have departed from the truth of God's word. We should all go back to that standard alone, because it is the only word that will last forever.
Hi Jennie,
You are right that we must all put our trust in the written word of God, absolutely, without a doubt but Jennie, do you think that it could happen that inspite of our good intentions and love for the Lord we might still have a chance to misinterpret the true meaning on some of His Teachings ? We know the Scriptures are inerrant, free from error but we humans are not, regardless of what we believe and the amount of faith we put, we could do diligent study of the Scriptures but at end we could still make mistakes.
We cannot fully trust our own freedom and conscience regarding some matters or else we would end up making each own's idea of,what is good for you is not for me stuff...a kind of relativist mentality.
"If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother. But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed. "If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the CHURCH; and if he refuses to listen even to the CHURCH, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.(Matt 18:15).
Jesus said, if there are offenses, disputes we should take it to the Church as the final arbiter, but the question today, which one? which church was Jesus talking about? does it still exist today? is it the Mormon church? or Jehovah witness? the Baptist? Seventh day-Adventist? Methodist, Pentacostal, your own pastor? my own church? just me? or maybe we could say the church as whole body of believers (as we use to say).... could it render a decision and final judgement to declare that such an offender that still didn't listen to be an outcast-tax collector as prescribed in the passage?
Jesus appointed specific people, 12 to be exact, to carry out his mission. Even though Jesus has many, many followers, he called out 12 specific individuals to guide his flock. Even in Jesus' time there was a structured church (as in angels and early church fathers-very hierachical). In fact the church could not exist if Jesus had not been around to start it himself and he did, but he left it in the hands of Peter (Mt 16:13-19).
So, we see that there was a church, with a specific structure of leaders that were called by God to lead the church. This is the Catholic (Universal) definition of church.
Now, if the church is founded upon the leaders then it is safe to say that "the church" can also mean "the leaders" or "the one's with teaching authority" or we called as Megisterium.
Ironically, while one group of Protestants is touting “once saved always saved” another group is stating that you can never really be sure who has REAL faith until the end because it might turn out that one is “overcome” by the world at the last minute. Maybe the salvation really never “took” in the first place.
I’m just curious, which of these groups is “rightly dividing the word of God” and which is wrongly dividing it? They can’t both be right yet both claim scripture as their sole rule of faith. So much for the doctrine of sola scriptura.
Dear, dear posters ... The reason I keep harping on the same theme is that you keep saying you agree, and then you post something like this:
" Jesus’ sacrifice is ALL SUFFICIENT!....but God didn’t stop there and BECAUSE He loved us so much that HE allowed an OPENING for us humans to partake in HIS WONDERFUL works of redemptive suffering by leaving room in His mystical body for our own suffering. "
The "but" insertion leaves little doubt that you add to Christ's atonement. It isn't necessary.
As for being divisive ... nothing could be further from the truth. Let's not forget Paul's challenge to Peter, or the many other precedants given for navigating wrong teachings.
If we are to reason together, or if we're to give a reason for the hope that is within us, or if we're to correct error (biblical mandates all), then it behooves us to reason respectifully along these lines.
I'm OK agreeing to disagree. Just don't expect me to buy your extra-biblical perspectives. They are not the same as, nor are they equal to God's word.
Be blessed,
Kathleen
I agree with Sassy Granny totally.
And Anonymous, 'the Church' in scripture is 'the ecclesia' or 'the congregation' not the hierarchy or leadership. WE as believers are the church, and Christ is our head. When you start putting people and things in between Christ and His people, you negate all that He died to accomplish, when He tore the veil of the temple in two, and made the way for us to be forgiven and come to God in person: no priests, no Mary and saints to intercede, no hierarchy, only Christ, as revealed in His word and taught by the Holy Spirit and received by faith.
I’m not expecting you to “buy” , I’m just explaining our side using the same Holy Scripture and for Jennie we also believed that the “Church” is made up of Jesus as Head and the whole body of believers both living and dead with Christ AND the leaders started by Jesus giving the keys and NAMING of Simon Bar Jonah to Peter(Rock) and all the Apostles handed down to generation to generation.(if you want further discussion, google any "catholic".
Let me think what you’ve driving at, "no wrong act or sinful deed can ever affect the believer’s salvation” and "To deny the assurance of salvation would be to deny Christ’s perfect redemption”… is this correct?
These are “buts” from the Bible:
Regarding the issue of whether Christians have an "absolute" assurance of salvation, regardless of their actions, consider this warning Paul gave: "See then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness; OTHERWISE YOU TOO WILL BE CUT-OFF." (Rom. 11:22; see also Heb. 10:26–29, 2 Pet. 2:20–21).
Jesus said,” He who ENDURES TO THE END will be saved" (Matt. 24:13)”.
Jesus told us, there are those who "believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away" (Luke 8:13). It is in the light of these warnings and admonitions that we must understand Scripture’s statements concerning our salvation.
For example, Philippians 2:12 says, "Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, WORK OUT YOUR SALVATION with fear and trembling." This is not the language of self-confident assurance. Our salvation is something that remains to be worked out.
Concerning his present state, he wrote, "I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby justified . It is the Lord who judges me" (1 Cor. 4:4). Concerning his remaining life, Paul was frank in admitting that even he could fall away: "I PUMMEL MY BODY and SUBDUE IT, lest after preaching to others I myself SHOULD BE DISQUALIFIED" (1 Cor. 9:27).
Of course, for a spiritual giant such as Paul, it would be quite unexpected and out of character for him to fall from God’s grace. Nevertheless, he points out that, however much confidence in his own salvation he may be warranted in feeling, even he cannot be 100 percent sure either of his own present state or of his future course.
"Are you saved?" The Catholic reply: "As the Bible says, I am already saved (Rom. 8:24, Eph. 2:5–8), but I’m also BEING saved (1 Cor. 1:8, 2 Cor. 2:15, Phil. 2:12), and I have the hope that I WILLbe saved (Rom. 5:9–10, 1 Cor. 3:12–15). Like the apostle Paul I am working out my salvation in fear and trembling (Phil. 2:12), with hopeful confidence in the promises of Christ (Rom. 5:2, 2 Tim. 2:11–13)."
James, I appreciate your thoughtful & thought-provoking response. The discussion concerning fasting has, unfortunately, taken a sharp seque to a larger doctrinal discussion.
Begging Pastor Mizzi's permission, let me just say this: what differentiates the saved from the unsaved has everything to do with Who does the saving. If I work for my own salvation, of course I can lose it. But I don't. Jesus called & saved me. He can't and won't lose me. He is a most effective Savior!
That said, we must reliaze that a "Christian" (of the true variety) is a person who has, by faith, received and fully trusted in Jesus Christ as the only Savior (Jn 3:16; Acts 16:31; Eph 2:8-9).
That makes the believer a new creation from the inside out (2 Cor 5:17); redeemed (1 Pet 1:18-19); justified (Rom 5:1); a recipient of eternal life as promised, with their name penned into the Lamb's Book of Life. They are further promised to never (never) be forsaken.
The Bible declares that a true Christian will not live a continually immoral lifestyle (1 John 3:6). (2) The Bible declares that anyone who departs the faith is demonstrating that he/she never truly was a Christian (1 John 2:19).
Further, Paul asks a crucial question in Rom 8:33-34 "Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies. Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus, who died more than that, who was raised to life - is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us."
So, who will bring a charge against God's elect? No one will, because Christ is our advocate. Who will condemn us? No one will, because Christ, the One who died for us, is the one who condemns. We have both the advocate and judge as our Savior.
Jn 3:15 states that whoever believes in Jesus Christ will "have eternal life." If you believe in Christ today and have eternal life, but lose it tomorrow, then it was never "eternal" at all. Hence if you lose your salvation, the promises of eternal life in the Bible would be in error.
No, a Christian cannot lose salvation. Nothing can separate a Christian from God’s love (Rom 8:38-39). Nothing can remove a Christian from God’s hand (Jn 10:28-29).
God is both willing and able to guarantee and maintain the salvation He has given us. Jude 24-25, “To Him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy - to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen.”
Amen!
God bless you,
Kathleen
P.S. So much for my "brief" response. My apologies.
James, you said:
'Let me think what you’ve driving at, "no wrong act or sinful deed can ever affect the believer’s salvation” and "To deny the assurance of salvation would be to deny Christ’s perfect redemption”… is this correct?'
Where did you get these quotes from? I didn't say them, nor did Sassy Granny from what I read. Then you went on to use verses to try to show that there can be no assurance of salvation, which is an erronious catholic doctrine.
First of all, I don't know what Sassy Granny believes about it but the Bible doesn't teach 'once saved always saved' in the way that many Baptists teach it. Yes, there is assurance of salvation as long as a believer remains in the faith. The bible also clearly teaches apostasy; but apostasy is not just committing a grave sin and therefore losing salvation, it is defecting from the faith; turning against Christ, and denying Him. You are using verses that refer to the possibility of apostasy to prove no assurance of salvation. Assurance belongs to every faithful believer, even when we sin. But we must not willfully rebel and continue in sin.
The bible teaches both assurance and apostasy.
Jennie
Does God need leaders in the likes of Moses, David, Peter, Paul or the Apostles to complete His plans? NO, No. God's power can do whatever He pleases however, it is GOD who chose otherwise to work with sinful men with their hierachy to complete His plan.
Why does God choose leaders and work with men? I don't know but the Bible (Paul) gave us a hint, as we are all members of the Body of Christ, it pleases God that we help and administer the needs of one another and we should follow His designated authorities.
God's Kingdom is also hierachical, e.g. the different position and dominions of angels.
So also in His church their are visible heads of "Bishops, priest and deacons" as what the Apostle Paul described it, so therefore it is Biblical.
Now, Jennie, if you have a problem
in some difficult point of your life or maybe just struggling to interpret the Bible, where and who do you go to? Your pastor, right? Does he/she in anyway come between you and Jesus and therefore negate ALL what Jesus had done,as "once and for all?"
“There are almost as many sects and beliefs as there are heads; this one will not admit Baptism; that one rejects the Sacrament of the altar; another places another world between the present one and the day of judgment; some teach that Jesus Christ is not God. There is not an individual, however clownish he may be, who does not claim to be inspired by the Holy Ghost, and who does not put forth as prophecies his ravings and dreams.”
Martin Luther
“I never approved of a schism, nor will I approve of it for all eternity. . . . That the Roman Church is more honored by God than all others is not to be doubted. St, Peter and St. Paul, forty-six Popes, some hundreds of thousands of martyrs, have laid down their lives in its communion, having overcome Hell and the world; so that the eyes of God rest on the Roman church with special favor. Though nowadays everything is in a wretched state, it is no ground for separating from the Church. On the contrary, the worse things are going, the more should we hold close to her, for it is not by separating from the Church that we can make her better. We must not separate from God on account of any work of the devil, nor cease to have fellowship with the children of God who are still abiding in the pale of Rome on account of the multitude of the ungodly. There is no sin, no amount of evil, which should be permitted to dissolve the bond of charity or break the bond of unity of the body. For love can do all things, and nothing is difficult to those who are united.”
Martin Luther to Pope Leo X, January 6, 1519
more than a year after the Ninety-Five Theses
quoted in The Facts about Luther, 356
Col 1:24-25. “Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is LACKING in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church”.
Shouldn't the Bible say that Paul's suffering was nothing of value because Christ's "once and for all" had completed all the sufferings for the sake of His Body, that is the Church?
James explanation of the verse makes a lot of sense and is the Catholic teaching of Partaking of Redemptive Suffering for the Body of Christ.
Regarding 'it is finished'. The protestant interpretation of this verse certainly is wrong considering what Paul says about the Resurrection and the fact that Christ had not risen yet. If Christ is not risen then you are still in your sins is what Paul says. And if Christ had not risen then it was not complete because sin and death had not been conquered yet. Golgotha is utterly meaningless without the empty tomb. Protestants make a mistake by focusing everything on the death of Christ. Salvation encompasses much more than that. The incarnation itself was redemptive and salvific. The life of Christ was salvific. The crucifixion and death was salvific. And the resurrection was salvific. The protestants who subscribe to the theology in this thread have made everything Christ did previous to His death meaningless. They have also made everything after His death meaningless too, including the Resurrection, the Ascension, Pentecost, and even the conversion of the individual sinner because as they say 'it is finished'. Christ made the sacrifice, the idea that you need to convert to be saved is basically saying that Christ's sacrifice wasn't good enough or complete enough.
So Sassy granny should I just believe "the once and for all" and make it a slogan of our faith? and just sit back and relax?
Ignore practically the whole Bible and what Jesus said over and over again in the Bible:
"One came up to him, saying, `Teacher, what good deed must I do, to have eternal life?' And Jesus replied 'If you would enter life, keep the commandments'" (Matt. 19:16-17).
"He who has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me; and he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him" (John 14:21).
"But by your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous judgment will be revealed. For he will render to every man according to his works…”(Rom. 2:2-8).
Matthew 25:31-46
"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'
"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you DID NOT DO for one of the least of these, you DID NOT DO for me.'
And so many, many more! Well, I guess we should throw them away too, because Christ had it, “once and for all”.
To Mark ... Whether I believe OSAS or not, the point of my post is not to grant liberty to embrace sin. The true believer (saved by Christ alone) will certainly stumble, and sin ... afterall, Paul speaks of such in his conflicted expose of the wretched man (Rom 7:21-25). He also addresses head on the question you pose:
"What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?" Rom 6:1-3
Here's the deal, I am a new person. Christ created me such. The old man is gone; fini! My flesh may join Paul in choosing to sin, by my spirit never will. It is the Lord's. I am His. He resides within me and, I dare say, does not come and go as I one day have salvation, then one day I don't, then the next I do again. He's here to stay, and He promises to never leave nor forsake me. I am, and will always be His workmanship:
"For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this 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." Eph 2:6-10
Why else would we need the Holy Spirit to teach, lead, comfort, encourage & convict us?
In the scriptures you cite, Mark, Jesus makes reference about those that HAVE or DO NOT have His commands. It clearly demonstrates a divide between those that ARE, and ARE NOT saved. I HAVE His commands because I have HIM. It's the Person, not the law that saves AND keeps me. My boast is in Him.
"Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of observing the law? No, but on that of faith. For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law." Rom 3:27-28.
To know more about where or, rather, in Whom to boast we are told: 1 Cor 1:31, 1 Cor 4:7, 2 Cor 1:12, 2 Cor 10:17, 2 Cor 12:9,
"May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world." Gal 6:14
May God lead us, as promised, into all truth,
Kathleen
P.S. I like the distinction you've made between assurance & apostasy, Jennie. It's a huge discussion all by itself. Blessings.
Hi Jennie,
I totally agree with you that the Bible teaches about apostasy and faith and you could be “cut-off” as St. Paul warned if you committed the sin of apostasy (falling out of faith). You are actually very close to Catholic teachings because we too don’t adhere to most of Evangelicals “once saved always save” doctrine.
This is one of my point, the other protestants adhere to that slogan other protestants don’t, some accept the grace of baptism some don’t, some accept Jesus as God some don’t, some accept this and some don’t and so forth and so on…and to come to think of it, ALL are claiming to be guided by the same Holy Spirit.
Going back to the subject, it’s not only apostasy that can “kill” your soul but by grave, free and deliberate act of will to disobey God.
Some quotes from the Bible:
Notice St. Paul addressed these warnings to the people and Church in Corinth who are already believers and his followers:
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (NIV): "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived:NEITHER the sexually immoral nor idolaters, nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."
Some more:
Leviticus 20:13: "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."
In Matthew 25:31-46,if you read
the entire chapter, noticed that Jesus didn’t make a distinction between believers and pagans:
On the last day, Jesus will say to those on His right hand, "Come, enter the Kingdom. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was sick and you visited me." Then Jesus will turn to those on His left hand and say, "Depart from me because I was hungry and you did not feed me, I was thirsty and you did not give me to drink, I was sick and you did not visit me." These will ask Him, "When did we see You hungry, or thirsty or sick and did not come to Your help?" And Jesus will answer them, "'I tell you the truth, whatever you DID NOT DO for one of the least of these, you DID NOT DO for me.Then THEY WILL GO AWAY to eternal punishment, but the righteous TO eternal life."
I would like to quote some more from the Bible but because of the limited space wouldn’t allow me.
If you have other interpretations of these passages, then walk with God.
Every blessing to you, Jennie.
James,
Actually the Matthew 25:37 to be exact, Jesus addressed the ones on His Left(goats) as "righteous" or "God's approval" and not pagans.
Matthew 25:37..."Then the righteous will answer Him, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry, and feed You, or thirsty, and give You something to drink?"...then they were thrown to eternal darkness.
So the burden is more heavier to those who believed in the Lord and DID NOTHING.
"...from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked".
1 John 2:19
"They went out from us but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us."
If a Protestant leaves his faith, many people say that he never had faith to begin with, and therefore, when he made his public pronouncement of faith, he was never saved to begin with. Supporters of this idea use the aforementioned passage in John to prove this idea. Now on the surface, it would seem as if this verse would provide ample support for the idea of a person never having faith in the first place, and therefore not saved. It seems also as if this could apply to every person who left the faith. But as with all Scriptural passages, we must look at the surrounding text to find out what John really means.
If we look at 1 John 2:18, the previous verse, we see that this cannot in fact be used to support this notion about people who left the faith: "Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come." So John is clearly speaking in verse 19 about the "many antichrists [who] have come," to which he refers in verse 18. The people about which John is speaking are evil people, people in league with Satan who have come to ruin Christ’s plan on earth, not Christians who have simply lost their way. Thus, this quote is not ample evidence that the Protestant who has left the faith never had faith to begin with, because the quote is not referring to that Protestant. Truly, the quote does say that some who were never true Christians left the faith, but the quote does not prove that all who lost their faith were never Christians in the first place.
I will try to make an explanation on Sassy granny's quotation from the bible:
Romans 8:38-39
"For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, not anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord."
Paul is very specifically speaking about forces that are external to the individual, i.e. demons, angels, spaces of time. In reality, this is a verse that points to the everlasting love of our God; it does not point to the possibilities of our DISOBEDIENCE.
Paul is telling us that God has made our salvation so secure, He would never allow any force (not even one of his angels!) to disrupt it.
Nowhere in this verse does Paul say anything about what our choices, what our actions, what our sins could do to our salvation. And you ask why not? Because that is not what he meant. In fact, if one were to look at the rest of Paul’s writings, particularly at 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Galatians 5:21 and Ephesians 5:5, he tells us that yes, actually, our sins do create the possibility of losing our salvation. If we are to take this as many Protestants do, that this is a proof text for the "once saved, always saved" belief, then we must admit that Paul contradicted himself in all of his other writings. Since Paul was guided by the Holy Spirit, we then must admit that either 1. the Holy Spirit contradicted itself, or 2. the Holy Spirit caused Paul to contradict himself. Somehow, this just does not jive with our idea of God
Another quote by Sassy granny from the Bible, John 10:28-29.
"I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. I and the Father are one."
Here we have yet another verse that seemingly proves the Protestant doctrine of eternal security. Yet once again, if we examine the context surrounding this verse, we see that this cannot be the case. As Jesus is speaking, he prefaces this verse with two metaphors—the story of the robber who tries to steal the sheep (John 10:1-10) and the story of the hired hand who does not protect the sheep when the wolf appears (John 10:14-16). If we are to follow the context that Jesus has set up for us, it is clear that Jesus is speaking of himself as the faithful shepherd, the protector of the sheep. He is emphasizing that he will never leave his sheep, nor will he allow any external force (as we saw in the previous verse, Romans 8:38-39) to take the sheep from his fold. Jesus is not speaking, however, of what a sheep might do to abandon the fold. This is clearly in line with the gift of free will, which God gave us. Jesus will keep us protected, the good shepherd, as long as we choose to remain in the fold. But he cannot make our choices for us, and if we leave the fold, we could possibly lose our salvation as a result. From this passage, we can be assured of the steadfastness of God’s plan for our salvation. What we cannot be assured of is how faithful we will be.
There is only one thing in the entire universe where God cannot do a thing, that thing is our free will.
Jennie,
I'm sorry if I mixed your comments with Sassy granny.
I think it's pretty obvious that Sassy granny believes in "once saved always save" doctrine, to quote her:
"No, a Christian cannot lose salvation. Nothing can separate a Christian from God’s love (Rom 8:38-39). Nothing can remove a Christian from God’s hand (Jn 10:28-29).
She was mistaken to think these verses support her "Christian cannot lose salvation" doctrine because Paul was telling us that God gave us Salvation thru Jesus Christ' and that He will not permit EXTERNAL FORCES even angels to break it apart.
Paul didn't say anything about our free will to leave or sins which I think makes a lot of difference.
The same thing with John 10:28 where Jesus speak about Himself being a faithful Shepherd who protects His sheeps and never allow EXTERNAL FORCES to snatch us from His hands (emphasized: Jesus own words: "NO ONE can snatch them out of My Hands"). Nowhere again would'll find Jesus saying sheeps who choose to sin and leave the fold.
To Sassy Granny,
Thanks for your reply and you know what I totally agree with most of what you said and it is also catholic teachings, Amen sister, Amen!
However there is one point you said that a christian cannot lose salvation.Yes, Jesus is our Good Shepherd and He will NEVER, EVER forsake us and you qouted John 10:28-29.
I will just refer you to the comments of Anonymous, James and Lex above to answer your point by point because my answer is the same as theirs.
Righteous and believers in the Church of Corinths for whom Paul addressed his warnings HAVE the COMMANDS OF GOD and believed in Jesus or else Paul wouldn't call them brothers in Christ and as his followers and Jesus wouldn't call them Righteous on the last day.
Yes we believed that the Person of Jesus Christ saves "IF" we have faith "IN" Him and "OBEY" His Commands.
I said OBEY and NOT JUST HAVE! a big difference!
To Sassy granny,
You quoted Rom 3:27-28 ..." For we maintain that a man is justified by faith APART from observing the law."
Is there any contradiction of what Paul is saying because he also said:
“... For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail,BUT FAITH WORKING TROUGH LOVE" (Gal. 5:4-6).
“But by your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous judgment will be revealed. For he will render to every man ACCORDING TO HIS WORKS: to those who by perseverance in GOOD WORKS seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life” (Rom. 2:2-8).
If Paul didn’t teach faith alone then what is meant by Paul in Romans 3:28. Just from the wording ‘apart from’ does not mean the same thing as ‘alone’.
Therefore, justification by faith alone is not the same thing as justification by faith apart from works of the law. When Paul refers to ‘works of the law’, it is referred to the Mosaic Law and ceremonial rituals such circumcision. Why must Paul separate ‘works of the law’ from the concept of faith and why would Paul mention faith as ‘faith working through love’ in Galatians 5:6 and ‘obedience of faith’ in Romans 1:5 & 16:26? From this we can see that faith is interwoven with love and obedience not just assenting to Christ’s work on the cross.
Assurance we may have (IF we have faith IN Him and KEEP His Commandments); infallible certitude we may not.
This is Catholic teaching that balances faith and good works of love.
We believed that good works are the fruits of faith and also, good works COMPLETE the faith without which faith is dead.
Wow ... Looks like Pastor Mizzi has quite a collection of "reasoners" growing here. It blesses me, and it challenges me. Good things!
To believe as you do (Anonymous, James, Mark, Lex, 2000 Yr Old) ... you you have to negate the entirety of the Book of Hebrews (delineating the sufficiency of Christ's sacrifice, AND His daily ministrations on the believer's behalf). You also have to negate the entire Letter to the Galatians (whereby believers are told to "get over the 'works' that they think have any merit.")
Remember ... a tree doesn't determine what kind of fruit it bears. I don't determine the fruit I bear either. My fruits are 100% the work/result of the H.S. in me. -- No jokes about being "fruity", either! :)
Romans 4:7 But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that THE EXCELLENCE OF THE POWER MAY BE OF GOD AND NOT US, 8 We are hard-pressed on every side, yet not crushed; we are perplexed, but not in despair; 9 persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed— 10 always carrying about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, THAT THE LIFE OF JESUS ALSO MAY BE MANIFESTED IN OUR BODY. 11 For we who live are always delivered to death for Jesus’ sake, THAT THE LIFE OF JESUS MAY BE MANIFESTED IN OUR MORTAL FLESH.
Here's the deal. If I'm dead (and I am), then it is Christ Who lives in me, and works through me. It is not me who does the working (remember, such working is as filthy rags), but Him. Thus I am not working in an attempt to achieve anything, and least of all to prove anything, or to supplement His already completed work on my behalf.
That's what makes grace so priceless. It's free, yet so very, very costly. He calls. He chooses. He saves. He justifies (as Hebrews demonstrates). He sanctifies. He keeps.
Thus I am confident in so great a salvation because I am confident in so great a Savior!
My best and warmest to all,
Kathleen
James,
You said:
'This is one of my point, the other protestants adhere to that slogan other protestants don’t, some accept the grace of baptism some don’t, some accept Jesus as God some don’t, some accept this and some don’t and so forth and so on…and to come to think of it, ALL are claiming to be guided by the same Holy Spirit.'
It is true that there are many sects among christians; (I don't like to classify myself or all thes groups you have alluded to as 'protestants' as if they are all groups who have left catholicism) but some are not even truly christian if they deny the deity of Christ. The point I want to make is that even if there are differences in doctrines and practices, it doesn't mean they are not being taught by the Holy Spirit. God deals with each of us in different ways, and we learn things at different times, and at different paces. Each person and congregation and denomination is not perfect yet; but someday He will make all true Christians into one united Bride. Until then true believers must exercise love and understanding towards each other as we learn from Him.
James and Mark,
I think you both quoted from Matthew 25 about the sheep and the goats. That passage shouldn't be used to try and prove that we are saved by our works; that would contradict the gospel message of the rest of scripture that teaches we are saved by Christ's sacrifice on the cross, if we have faith in Him. Of course then our faith shows forth in works AFTER we are justified. That passage is, I believe, referring to the end of this age when Jesus returns to begin His millennial reign, not the final judgment. These people are those who either helped or harmed God's people during the Tribulation. This is my understanding.
Amen, Sassy Granny! All glory to Jesus!
Romans 4:
4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.
5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:
7 “ Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
And whose sins are covered;
8 Blessed is the man to whom the LORD shall not impute sin.”
Romans 11:
32 For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all.
33 Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past finding out!
34 “ For who has known the mind of the LORD?
Or who has become His counselor?”
35 “ Or who has first given to Him
And it shall be repaid to him?”
36 For of Him and through Him and to Him are all things, to whom be glory forever. Amen.
Love in Christ,
Jennie
To Sassy granny,
Amen sister, amen !
Praise be to Jesus, my Redeemer, my King and my Saviour! To Him Alone all the Glory!
The amazing grace of faith from our Lord is free and I rejoice from my heart with this awesome gift, an underserved gift for us to be with Him, Amen!
You nailed it, "That's what makes grace so priceless. It's free, yet so very, very costly. He calls. He chooses. He saves. He justifies (as Hebrews demonstrates). He sanctifies. He keeps.
I say, again Amen! Amen!
However,sister, you deviated from our point of discussion which is ,"can a christian lose his salvation?" or How? inspite of ...He gives, He saves, He keeps....
The verses you quoted 1 John 3:6 , I john 23. Rom 3:27-28 ,John 10:28-29 were sufficiently answered.
To be short, God's all powerful and His Mercy and generosity is infinite but one thing He cannot do anything is... our FREE WILL to choose by accepting or rejecting Him by willful and deliverate disobedience to His commandments.
The good thing about Catholic doctrine is that faith is interwoven with love and obedience not just assenting to Christ’s work on the cross.
If you just read about faith in the Catechism of the Catholic Church...just a sample...
161 Believing in Jesus Christ and in the One who sent him for our salvation is necessary for obtaining that salvation. "Since "without faith it is impossible to please [God]" and to attain to the fellowship of his sons, therefore without faith no one has ever attained justification, nor will anyone obtain eternal life 'But he who endures to the end.'
Morever, as with Pastor Mizzi's exegesis..."genuine/ saving" faith must be accompanied by works of love in order for faith to be "genuine/saving" otherwise it's dead.
So sassy granny , we catholics didn't negate Books of Hebrews and Galatians when we talk about " faith" in fact we are very consistent with ALL, I mean ALL the verses and Books you mentioned.
How come Paul said these:
“…BUT FAITH WORKING TROUGH LOVE" (Gal. 5:4-6).
"For it is not those who hear the law who are just in the sight of God; rather, those who observe the law will be justified."- Romans 2:13
"…for the day of wrath and revelation of the just judgment of God, who will pay everyone according to his works: eternal life to those who seek glory, honor, and immortality through perseverance in GOOD WORKS, but wrath and fury to those who selfishly disobey the truth and obey wickedness."
"…one the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge people’s hidden WORKS through Christ Jesus" -Romans 2:16
"So then each of us shall give an account of himself to God."-Romans 14:10-12
Gal 6:4 "For all must test their own work."
“Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Also another book was opened, the book of life. And the DEAD WERE JUDGED ACCORDING TO THEIR WORKS, as recorded in the books.”
More in Gal 6:2, James 5:20, James 2:14-16, 1 Cor 9:16, Jer. 17:10; 32:19.
Praise be to Jesus and the Church He established as ONE!
Jennie,
God Bless!
Actually we are very close in our understanding of faith... we also believe that works are not only a manifestation (fruits) of faith, but we also believe that the Word of God is saying that works (love)complete our faith.
The use of the word faith is different from what the catholics and evangelicals understanding, but I think it's close.
First the common agreed point, that faith is a grace from God and unmerited gift to men.
Now for the disagreement:
For evangelicals, faith is a combination of intellectual assent (and)that produces good works of love.
For catholics, they distinguish separately between faith(intellectual assent) and good works of love (an act/cooperation/free will).
Now in the real world application:
There are people who don't know Jesus(not on their own fault)but still do work of love to their fellow men, ex. remote indian tribes and there are also people who believe Jesus (intellectual assent) but are indifferent and complacent to other people's need.
The question is, which side makes more sense for the "word" faith?
In Christ' love,
James
Jennie,
I don't want us to throw verses to one another, just a question to clear things up:
Does Paul contradict himself when he wrote:
"...BUT FAITH WORKING TROUGH LOVE" (Gal. 5:4-6)."...for the day of wrath and revelation of the just judgment of God, who will pay everyone according to his WORKS." (Romans 2:5-8)
AND
For it is by grace you have been saved, through FAITH—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. "Eph 2:6-10
To us Catholics we don't see any contradiction because our doctrine of faith is through love, eventhough they are two separate entities they are intimately INTERWOVEN to each other...just like the Father and the Son.
By the way, do you think it's not only the sin of apostasy that could "kill" the soul and thus, not inherit the kingdom of God as Paul said?
Every Blessing
Maranatha! My King, Jesus!
Jennie,
I didn't say that the different denominations or christian churches who profess the Holy Trinity and deity of Christ were abandon by the Holy Spirit.
In fact if you read the Catechism it says and I quote:
819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth" are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements." Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him, and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."
The point I'm driving at is, if Jesus really loves us, true love demands that He should give us a means to know the FULLNESS of Him.
If Jesus is One with the Father, His church should also be one, as He Himself prayed...."that all maybe ONE".
Do you honestly think, this is unity Jesus prayed for? with different doctrines not to mention the doctrines for life and for secular world?
By the way speaking of christian and secular world, do you know that before the 30's ALL, I mean ALL Churches agree that artificial contraception is unnatural and contrary to the Will of God?
Look where we are today, after the floodgates were opened, rampant pornography, women as only "pleasure", some churches even advocate abortions and some churches homosexual marriages, what's next?
May God help us!
Hi guys, thank you for your comments. I wish I had the time to read them all. I noticed that some of you are calling me 'pastor' -- I'm not! I'm an ordinary Christian fellow. God's blessings to all.
Mmmm ... "deviated from the discussion"? Let's see, the original topic related to fasting as I recall. But let me just say this, James. I have not been attempting to prove/disprove the once saved, always saved doctrine of many Protestants. My intent has been to demonstrate that works of any sort (fasting specifically), aren't necessary to achieve or even to keep one's salvation. Jesus paid it all. It is finished!
We are not talking apples and apples here. I say Jesus IS the Law, the very sanctuary & offering & festivals depicted throughout the O.T. He was and is THE Life, the Way, the Truth. He resides in me. He keeps me. I have been given to Him by the Father, and He will not lose me. I am dead to self, born new in Him. How could I possibly "work" on my own if I'm dead? And, if I can't work on my own, He must be a most sufficient Savior!
Jennie's post rightly adds the scripture from Romans 4:5 - "But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness ...".
The Catholic Catechism would have us believe the works themselves make for righteousness, whereas I'm saying they do not. Christ in me, and Christ working through me constitutes whatever is my righteousness. Anything apart from that is a filthy rag, a counterfeit work.
As far as the "Dead were judged according to their works" (Rev 20:12), you're talking the Great White Throne Judgement, and not the Bema Seat of Christ. I will not be in attendance at the former, as I have been invited to & included in the latter ... I am not judged as are those who do not have Jesus. They WILL BE judged according to the Law. I will not receive a sentence born of wrath, but I will receive whatever crown (or lack thereof) Jesus grants me. My works will then be tested, and the truth about them will revealed (either honored, or burned as the rubble of my life). I am His Bride; they are His enemy.
I am also the church (of one or many), and the gates of hell will not prevail against me/us. My/our Redeemer lives!
So now I return again to an earlier post, wherein I remind myself that any boasting on my part is worthless. I take my case to the very Throne of God to which I now have access, and I rest my case with the all-sufficient Mediator that daily takes it up on my behalf. He, my Savior AND Mediator, is my boast.
To God be the glory!
Kathleen
Ooops! That would be me. My apologies, Joe. I think I may have assumed in error. I'm just plain Kathleen too.
God bless you, and thank you for hosting such a worthwhile site & subject matter.
Kathleen
Dear Sassy granny,
I agree with most of what you said, so I say Amen!Amen!
However, the one point you made where you implied that works of love is unnecessary or "filthy rags" to me is a grave error and not biblical.
When Apostle Paul wrote both faith and love (good works) emphasizing each one in different verses as if he is contradicting himself but actually not if you read them carefully in context, what Paul's driving at is, the awesome grace of Faith is gift by God to men, an undeserved, unmerited gift to us and Paul also emphasized that we need to respond (love)to that gift (faith) in order for it to be "alive" and "complete" otherwise it's dead faith or like a gift that we threw it away.
Paul didn't teach "faith alone" but rather "faith working through love" (Gal 5:4-6).
This is my point.
Ps thank you Joe eventhough we don't agree on the some interpretations of the Bible, let me call you my brother in Christ.
Every blessing to all!
In Christ,
James
Just a note...
You are misrepresenting true Catholic Teaching, to quote you, "The Catholic Catechism would have us believe the works themselves make for righteousness".
This is utterly false, nowhere do the Catholic Catechism teach that we "earn" our salvation.
If you really want to know the teaching on the other side with honesty and fairness, please read the official "Catechism of the Catholic Church" or google any "catholic" and find out.
OOpss, sorry, Sassy granny...
To be honest to myself and thru the Teaching of the Catholic Church, I stand corrected....
I don't agree to most of what you wrote.... about the Rev 20:12. I truly don't know how and where you get those ideas/interpretations from , by the way I looked at it, these ideas are not even shared by most major protestant churches and just trying to dodge the plain and simple texts written "...DEAD WERE JUDGED ACCORDING TO THEIR WORKS".
Not everyone who says to me "Lord, Lord" (means people who believes Jesus) will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who DOES the will of my Father in heaven. (Mat 7:20)
Sorry again but I guessed we are the point where we couldn't agree with what the Bible truly taeches.
I suggest the only thing we (myself included) could do is to ask Our Lord with a "humble" heart to show us the FULLNESS of His Truth, that I'm sure He won't disappoint.
Every Blessing and on the next topic!
Well said, James.
Eschatology is a fascinating subject. The Bema Seat of Christ versus the Great White Throne Judgement is not some strange idea I cooked up, but a well-established Protestant belief. No need to dig deeper than that.
As to my grave error in discounting works of love, I meant no such thing. What I said, and what I mean, is that anything we do from the flesh does not - no matter how noble - constitute an acceptable work, otherwise the Mormons would have us hands down! It is Christ's work in and through us alone that garners righteousness.
I apologize for mis-representing Catholic teachings/doctrine. I didn't think I was. My reading of it leads me to believe Jesus' atonement wasn't enough; that I need to "do" works and/or be consigned to Purgatory, or be rejected altogether in order to keep my salvation. It just seems like that's what is being taught.
My best and warmest,
Kathleen
Jennie,
If you want to discuss futher from the point of view of a "christian" (non-catholics) google "historical christian" with Aimee Cooper.
God Bless!
Hello Joe,
I apologize for misnaming you; I figured everybody must know something I don't, and followed along:) The discussion has been interesting, though it's been impossible to keep to the subject!
James,
You said:
"For evangelicals, faith is a combination of intellectual assent (and)that produces good works of love.
For catholics, they distinguish separately between faith(intellectual assent) and good works of love (an act/cooperation/free will).
Now in the real world application:
There are people who don't know Jesus(not on their own fault)but still do work of love to their fellow men, ex. remote indian tribes and there are also people who believe Jesus (intellectual assent) but are indifferent and complacent to other people's need.
The question is, which side makes more sense for the "word" faith?"
To answer your last question, James, I would say 'neither one is faith.' The first one is dead works without faith in Christ and the second one is dead faith without works of love.
I don't agree on your defining faith as 'intellectual assent.' Anyone can intellectually 'believe' something, but faith is different; it's a gift from God first of all; it's trust in God that He will do what He says He will do, which trust in turn leads to justification (through Christ's sacrifice) and to obedience to His word. "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." Abraham heard God's command and promise, and trusted in it, and then obeyed God and continued to obey throughout his life. He was saved through his faith in God; and he endured to the end.
Mark,
You said:
"Does Paul contradict himself when he wrote:
"...BUT FAITH WORKING TROUGH LOVE" (Gal. 5:4-6)."...for the day of wrath and revelation of the just judgment of God, who will pay everyone according to his WORKS." (Romans 2:5-8)
AND
For it is by grace you have been saved, through FAITH—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. "Eph 2:6-10
To us Catholics we don't see any contradiction because our doctrine of faith is through love, eventhough they are two separate entities they are intimately INTERWOVEN to each other...just like the Father and the Son."
I don't see any contradiction in those two passages, either. Faith is a gift from God, and AFTER SALVATION it then leads to works of love.
Also, I agree emphatically with Kathleen when she said that "the day of wrath and revelation of the just judgment of God, who will pay everyone according to his WORKS" is referring to the judgment of the unsaved, not of the saved. The believers will be judged as well, but not in wrath, and not at the same time as the unbelievers. We believe that 'the judgment seat of Christ' referred to in Romans 14:10 and 2 corinthians 5:10 is for believers; we will be rewarded or punished according to what we have done, but not condemned.
You also asked:
"By the way, do you think it's not only the sin of apostasy that could "kill" the soul and thus, not inherit the kingdom of God as Paul said?"
I believe that apostasy, or defecting from the faith, is the only thing that can cause a christian to lose salvation. I believe rebellion in the form of ANY harbored sin can LEAD to apostasy; but the sin itself can be forgiven if repented of before apostasy occurs.
James, You said:
"Do you honestly think, this is unity Jesus prayed for? with different doctrines not to mention the doctrines for life and for secular world?
By the way speaking of christian and secular world, do you know that before the 30's ALL, I mean ALL Churches agree that artificial contraception is unnatural and contrary to the Will of God?
Look where we are today, after the floodgates were opened, rampant pornography, women as only "pleasure", some churches even advocate abortions and some churches homosexual marriages, what's next?"
James, Joe has several articles on his website about Christian unity and why there are so many 'protestant sects.' I read them a while back but I remember that joe explained it very well and I agreed with his conclusions, if you would care to read them. I think they were under the 'answers' section.
As far as the contraception issue goes, James, I agree with you; and the evangelical churches have failed in this respect and contributed to the downfall of our culture by failing to uphold biblical standards; they have gone along with the world and failed to be salt and light; but this is a very touchy subject, and many dear christians use contraception, or have used it and then stopped after being convicted about it (myself included). But, like I said in an earlier post, no person, congregation, or denomination is perfect yet. We all get 'motes' in our eyes and need help to get them out; and some are in danger of ceasing to be 'the church' at all: we are each responsible to 'search ourselves to be sure we are in the faith' as it is revealed in God's word, not by any traditions of men.
Love, in Christ,
Jennie
Hi Anonymous,
I've read alot on Aimee's site but never commented, though we did email back and forth a few times. To clarify, Aimee is a former evangelical who converted to catholicism, who very eloquently speaks for her faith, but I couldn't agree with her that Roman Catholicism is the original Church, or that the primacy of the pope is valid, or that the magisterium is good and necessary; and she couldn't agree with me that God's word alone is our rule, and that ended our communication, for now.
Dear Jennie,
God Bless!
Just a comment of what you said about faith and good works(love) to you, “ faith always produces good works”.
First,
The Bible and the Catholic teaching is clear that faith holds a first and prominent role in the salvation of every person, an undeserved gift. (Eph 2:8-9,Heb 11:6)The Bible is equally clear that there must be a balanced relationship between our faith and its expression in good works.(James 2:14-18,1 Cor 15:58 Heb 6:10, Col 3:23-24).
Second,
The Bible teaches that faith produces good work and also teaches that love (good works) completes faith without which, faith is dead and useless, but implying as “always or quarantees “ that good works will surely follow faith is not true, nowhere in Bible you could an idea. Yes, God gave us the undeserved gift of justification without us having to work in order to merit it (coz’ there is no way we could earn it) in other words it is an unmerited gift. But remember for our part, God gave us free will and it is still our free will to decide to cooperate and respond (an act: love) with faith…as the saying goes, true relationship and true love works FREELY both ways (reciprocating) or else it’s not true love.
You said ONLY Apostasy can cause Christian to lose salvation, I agree with you that apostasy can cause to lose one’s salvation but not “ONLY”. You missed my point, of course God will forgive us of any sin (including apostasy) provided IF we repented (e.g. former atheists) of it and turn to God’s grace. My point is, a Christian could lose his salvation by willfully, deliberately disobey God by the sins as outlined by St. Paul IF you didn’t repent on them before you die.
I’m sorry I don’t adhere to “millennial reign” and “rapture” doctrines. To my readings of the Bible, Jesus said he will come like a thief in the night, nobody knows when, that’s it, let us leave it as such.
I read Joe’s article about Christian unity compared with Catholic unity. I beg to disagree with him to what he called “disunity” within the Catholic Church were the same as “disunity” within the protestant churches, which he gave an example as: some Catholics allow and some are against artificial contraception or abortion as proof.
What he fails to understand is that the so called “disunity” of the Catholic Church is a matter of disobedience of some catholics AFTER the Proclamation , declaration of a doctrine as revealed truth by our Magisterium (Apostolic Teaching). While in the Protestant side the so called “disunity” is a matter of Doctrinal separation. A very big difference.
About contraception and its history, if you believe that TRUTH is ONE, can not change, true from the old and true today: like God is the Truth....prior to Lambeth Conference in 1930’s ALL Churches were one and agreed that it is unnatural and against the Will of God, but because of cultural pressures almost all Christian churches “cave-in”.
Now some churches even justify by allowing some stages of abortion and embryonic stem cells, cloning, gay marriage and a lot more daunting issues presented by this secular world.
Who stands alone to proclaim that contraception is still against God’s Will? Who speaks for Christ? How are you going to be certain that this church is teaching the truth of Christ regarding issues of Life?
To us Catholics life issues are very important because the only Author is God and we make it a part of our doctrine.
You can see also the official defense of Catholic teaching against contraception, just google “Humanae Vitae” and “Theology of the Body”.
This is in my honest opinion of the importance of that Great Promise by Jesus to Peter and His Church...”the gates of Hell will not prevail against you”.
If the church even how small the “crack” is to us in its teachings (heretical) then the Promise of Christ is forfeited.
Every Blessings,
James
Dear jennie,
If you care to look at this link about the faith and its nature:
http://newadvent.org/cathen/05752c.htm
God Bless,
James, I would merely say that the the imitation of the Catholic Mass is largely due the preconception of non-Christians as to what a church service should look like, based upon a variety of presuppositions and whatnot.
James,
I don't think I said or implied that good works ALWAYS follow saving faith. If a person has true saving faith, however, good works should follow and the person should have the ability and desire to do good works because of the presence of the Holy Spirit and the love for God because of what God has done for him/her. What I did say or imply is that good works mean nothing before salvation, and after salvation I should add that only works done 'in the Spirit' rather than in the flesh are counted before God. We need to learn to do everything in His power and love and not in our own, which is hard to learn.
No, I don't think I missed your point, James, about apostasy. The bible doesn't teach that believers can be lost if they sin and die before repenting. We all sin every day, and no one would be saved if it depended on our own perfection or whether we happened to repent in time. I don't have time to finish this post, now, but I'll try to come back later and add to it.
God bless you,
Jennie
Hi James,
There are so many passages referring to different aspects of Jesus' return; It's one of the most written-about events in the Bible. There is so much more to it than the thief in the night references; in 1 Thess. 5 it says:
2 For you yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so comes as a thief in the night. 3 For when they say, “Peace and safety!” then sudden destruction comes upon them, as labor pains upon a pregnant woman. And they shall not escape. 4 But you, brethren, are not in darkness, so that this Day should overtake you as a thief. 5 You are all sons of light and sons of the day. We are not of the night nor of darkness. 6 Therefore let us not sleep, as others do, but let us watch and be sober.
So the Lord's return should not be like a thief to the believer who is watching; there are many prophecy books that refer to Christ's return: Revelation, Daniel, Zechariah, Zephaniah, Micah, Ezekiel, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, Malachi, Matthew, Luke, and others. We need to be familiar with prophecy so we can recognize events as they happen and be ready. I don't believe the bible necessarily teaches a pre-tribulation rapture where believers will be taken out before tribulation begins at the end of the age (which is upon us) if you are paying attention. I've noticed that the catholics I know (or read their articles or blogs) don't seem to understand prophecy and aren't taught the importance of it; they aren't watching as Jesus said.
Well, I need to go, but I'll comment some more if I can.
Jennie
James,
I see what you are saying about catholic disunity as opposed to protestant, but I don't agree with your conclusion that it is fundamentally different. Protestants obviously are not under one(man-made, as I believe) hierarchy like catholics are, and some that you would call protestants are not even believers, so you can't lump them all together. Protestants that are true believers are unified in all that matters. We can come together and worship in Christ's love, even though we have minor differences in practice or doctrinal interpretation. These differences are not important, for the most part. Like I said before, we (individuals and denominations) are all at different points in our growth and understanding. We are unified in love and in important doctrine. Of course, in this time of 'falling away' which I believe is the end times, there are churches and individuals that have left the faith. Jesus and the Apostles warned of this. There are many branches in the Vine, but we are all one in Him if we remain in Him.
It is not a good thing to be unified under a hierarchy if that hierarchy is teaching false doctring (traditions) that are opposed to scripture. You and I disagree that catholicism teaches false doctrine. Unity is only good if we are unified under Christ as revealed in His word.
Hello guys,
I guess this is my last comment.
We just walk and cling with Lord as faithful as we can!
God bless!
If you look at the "reasons" of why were comtemporary, respected brilliant and scholarly Evangelical giants of their own protestant faiths with the likes of Peter Kreeft,Richard John Neuhaus and G.K. Chesterton moved to catholism is nothing but brilliant and grace.
Also google "converts to catholism" and look at the lists of intellectual giants of every generation swimming across the Tiber.
Who is to say which is important and not?
Minor differences in protestants?
Take for example baptism... the Church has decided that the references to Baptism in Scripture must be interpreted as teaching baptismal regeneration, no exceptions. In fact, the Council of Trent bases this teaching on John 3:5 where Jesus said: "Except a man be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven."
Now, granted, you may have a different interpretation of that verse. In fact, yours may even sound better than ours. It's easy to believe that the water is merely symbolic. The Bible uses symbols all the time.
But the $64,000 question is: is the Bible using symbols in John 3:5? How would we know for sure?
We seem to have at least two possibilities. In fact, there are other possibilities. Some Protestants believe the water refers to the word of God, and base that interpretation on Ephesians 5:26. Others believe the water refers to the amniotic fluid in the mother's womb. Others believe the water is more than just a symbol but still doesn't save anyone.
So, in effect, we have five different interpretations of John 3:5, and they all sound very good, but there can only be one correct interpretation and the others are devilish imposters. The context of John 2-4 doesn't help too much in settling on one meaning. So what do we do? Well, the good Catholic will ask: what did John mean when he wrote the words of John 3:5?
Well, we need to ask John what he meant. But, of course, John is dead. Fortunately, however, we know what John meant because he told his fellow apostles, and they told the disciples, and they told the churches. When we examine the record of the churches (and we know them be reading the documents of those times) it is a fact that every church, every Father, every council, and every other body with any semblance of ecclesiastical authority said that the interpretation which holds that the water is the miraculous means of grace and actually procures justification is the only correct answer, and all the others are pious frauds.
Dear Jennie,
I'll try to explain your quotation about faith and the relationship of works(love0.
Jennie said:
"If a person has true saving faith, however, good works should follow.."
Comment: There is no Scripture verse which says that faith results in works. This is the major fallacy of Protestant thought. Rather, works must be consciously and consistently added to faith by an act of the will. This principle is precisely why Abraham fell into some disbelief and bad works in Genesis 16 when he took Hagar as a wife, and in Genesis 17 when he laughed at the promise of God.
The idea that once the button of faith is pushed the conveyor belt of works will automatically start running. Faith does not inevitably produce good works. Faith only gives one a better disposition to do works. The whole book of James addresses the issue of Christians who have faith but are not producing the works they should. Read especially James 3-4, not to mention their despising of the poor man in both 2:1-5 and 2:15-16 after it is said that they have faith in James 2:1.
"Saving" faith or "non-saving" faith is a Protestant invention, since Protestants are desperate to distinguish between two types of faith, "saving" and "non-saving." James isn't addressing the "type" of faith. He is addressing whether the person who says he has faith will now add works to that faith. If he does not add works, it does not mean that he has no faith. It only means that he refuses to add works, and thus he cannot be saved.
You quoted Romans 4:4-10ff
Another problem is that they fail to understand the KIND of works that cannot be used for justification. Paul is clear in Romans 4:4 that "works of debt," which are works done prior to faith, are non-salvific, works not done in faith and grace are works of debt, since he already told us that works done in faith and repentance to God are salvific in Romans 2:6-7, 13.
God Bless
Dear Jennie,
This is always the case when protestants try to say that the Catholic church is ruled by one man and hierachical in structure, that according to them is not biblical.
May I say that God established as such because you could see in His Nature...God is one man rule and His Kingdom (Heaven) is VERY HIERACHICAL wherein the Archangels and angels follow their rank, position and dominions.
As well as the Catholic Church, wherein it is written and described in the Bible (Apostle Paul) as with Bishops as head, presbyters (priests) and deacons.
Now, I ask you dear protestant pastor/christian do you have a bishop above you, as the bible described it as hierachical?
Post a Comment