Donations for the month of December


We have received a total of $140 in donations towards our goal of $175.


Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Search

Member Spotlight
Anthony C.
Anthony C.
NJ/PA
Posts: 192
Joined: May 2016
Show All Member Profiles 
Forum Statistics
Forums30
Topics6,549
Posts50,772
Members921
Most Online373
Mar 5th, 2017
Top Posters(All Time)
Pilgrim 13,309
Tom 3,320
chestnutmare 2,868
J_Edwards 2,615
Wes 1,856
John_C 1,748
RJ_ 1,582
MarieP 1,578
gotribe 1,057
Top Posters(30 Days)
Tom 28
Pilgrim 21
Recent Posts
Presuppositional Apologetics
by Tom. Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:42 PM
Adam created holy, so how could he fall?
by Pilgrim. Fri Dec 15, 2017 1:40 PM
Christmas
by Pilgrim. Fri Dec 15, 2017 6:01 AM
Key teaching of Dispys is Gnostic
by PerpetualLearner. Thu Dec 14, 2017 4:11 PM
Glorious Bach
by goldenoldie. Thu Dec 14, 2017 10:46 AM
Nothing New Under the Sun?
by PerpetualLearner. Wed Dec 13, 2017 12:25 PM
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 6 of 11 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 10 11
#565 - Sun Jun 09, 2002 6:05 PM Re: Roman Catholicism and salvation [Re: Pilgrim]  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Pilgrim wrote: Well, if you are wanting to bow out of a new discussion due to some offense to the word "Romish", you are certainly entitled to do so, although I personally consider it a unwarranted excuse. Perhaps the word has a totally different connotation to you than it does to me? But again, you are free to tuck your tail between your legs and run away from probably the most fundamental issue that divides Rome from Protestantism.<br> <br>[color:purple]Scott replies: I'll not get into a testosterone battle with you Pilgrim. Any semi-unbiased reader here can tell that I have not "tucked my tail between my legs and ran." If you insist upon using a slur to open a thread, well, that speaks volumes and certainly does not merit my time and effort to respond to - and again, the semi-unbiased reader can surely tell that as well. I note that you (carefully) say "perhaps the word has a totally different connotation..." oh yes, "perhaps" it does, but "perhaps" it doesn't? <br> <br><font face="Brush Script MT" class="bigger">Scott<<<</font><br>

#566 - Mon Jun 10, 2002 6:13 AM Re: Roman Catholicism and salvation  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p> Trent States: "If any one saith, that the good works of one that is justified are in such manner the gifts of God, that they are not also the good merits of him that is justified; or, that the said justified, by the good works which he performs through the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ...does not truly merit increase of grace, eternal life, and the attainment of that eternal life, -- if so be , however, that he depart in grace, -- and also an increase of glory: let him be anathema." <p><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>Hi Scott,<br><br>Let's see if we can bring to light the point(s) of contention.<br><br>Trent states that "the good works of one that is justified....are also the good merits of him that is justified..." <br><br>I believe that Trent is saying that our works wrought in Christ are our merits by which we are justified; whereas you would say that our works are not the meritorious basis by which we are justified. Agreed?<br><br>Next, I would say that trent also teaches that the "justified" by good works merit increase of grace, eternal life, and the attainment of that eternal life (if the justified remains in grace) and increase of glory. <br><br>In other words, those who are initially justified by grace through baptism may attain eternal IF by grace they perform good works, which in turn may merit increase of grace and eventually the attainment of that eternal life. <br><br>To this you respond with: "If one merits an increase in grace through works, that doesn't increase one's salvation - again, that's an either/or situation - but one can attain greater rewards due to works, hence an increase, perhaps, in one's position (level of heaven or amount of rewards) but not an increase in the attainment of salvation."<br><br>You say, Scott, that one's meritorious works "doesn't increase one's salvation". I must differ with your view of Trent because Trent states that good works does not only merit increase of grace but eternal life. You keep insisting that one through works does not add to his salvation because that's a done deal. Is it? I would argue that salvation is not a done deal in Roman Catholic theology because justification is not a one time act; it is a legal fiction as it were. This is precisely the reason why one must merit increase of grace and eternal life, just as Trent states. <br><br>Do you deny that one by grace must merit eternal life?<br><br>Thoughts?<br><br>Ron <br>

#567 - Mon Jun 10, 2002 5:12 PM Re: Roman Catholicism and salvation  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Ron writes: You say, Scott, that one's meritorious works "doesn't increase one's salvation". I must differ with your view of Trent because Trent states that good works does not only merit increase of grace but eternal life. You keep insisting that one through works does not add to his salvation because that's a done deal. Is it? I would argue that salvation is not a done deal in Roman Catholic theology because justification is not a one time act; it is a legal fiction as it were. This is precisely the reason why one must merit increase of grace and eternal life, just as Trent states.


[color:"purple"]Scott replies:[/b] Ron, you're still insisting upon the Protestant definition of justification. With regard to "eternal life" how can one possibly gain "more" of something that is "eternal?" Again I assert, what one can gain "more" of is "rewards" based upon works done in the state of grace. In that respect, one can see where the "increase" is in the benefits/rewards one might receive in "eternal life." My view is not inconsistent with Trent.


In JMJ,

Scott<<<


PS- More later, but I need to run now...


#568 - Mon Jun 10, 2002 6:45 PM Just wondering...  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


CathApol,<br>Let's just say for the sake of argument that I was in a terrible car accident. You found me and it was obvious that I only had minutes to live. Could you offer me Christ's salvation if I repented of my sins and believed in Jesus as my Saviour and Lord? Would I need your priest or your church's baptism to be ushered into the Kingdom of Heaven? OR would Christ's finished work plus nothing be sufficient alone to bring me into His presence for ever? <br>Just wondering. [Linked Image]<br>Susan

#569 - Mon Jun 10, 2002 10:28 PM Re: Just wondering...  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Susan said: CathApol, Let's just say for the sake of argument that I was in a terrible car accident. You found me and it was obvious that I only had minutes to live. Could you offer me Christ's salvation if I repented of my sins and believed in Jesus as my Saviour and Lord? Would I need your priest or your church's baptism to be ushered into the Kingdom of Heaven? OR would Christ's finished work plus nothing be sufficient alone to bring me into His presence for ever? <br>Just wondering. Susan <br><br>[color:purple]Scott replies: First off, there is nothing I can do for you, for Christ has already done it. If you sincerely repented of your sins and believed in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior, then that may indeed suffice for your salvation. I say "may" because I am not The Judge that will make that final decision in your life.<br> <br>As for Baptism, though that is a requirement - Trent also teaches of "the laver of regeneration (baptism) or the desire thereof." So, if you're sincere in your repentence and desire to follow Christ in all that He commanded - so much as is possible in your final moments of life, it is Church teaching that this desire can suffice for the actual Sacrament.<br> <br>Let me answer your questions the way you presented them now:</font color=purple><br> <br>Let's just say for the sake of argument that I was in a terrible car accident. You found me and it was obvious that I only had minutes to live. Could you offer me Christ's salvation if I repented of my sins and believed in Jesus as my Saviour and Lord? <br><br>[color:purple]Yes, as clarified above, Christ has already offered you this.</font color=purple><br><br>Would I need your priest or your church's baptism to be ushered into the Kingdom of Heaven? <br><br>[color:purple]Not necessarily, and if you desired Baptism, I could perform it for you - as could anyone. If you were to die before Baptism, then Baptism of Desire may suffice.</font color=purple><br><br>OR would Christ's finished work plus nothing be sufficient alone to bring me into His presence for ever? <br> <br>[color:purple]You've already stated that you're sorry for your sins (repented) and have accepted Jesus as your Lord and Savior, so you can't claim "nothing" here. If you had done "nothing" at all, (didn't repent and didn't believe) then though Christ's Finished Work would indeed be sufficient for you - you did not accept His Free Gift and you would likely be condemned to hell.<br> <br>In JMJ,<br><font face="Brush Script MT" class="bigger">Scott<<<</font><br> <br>PS- Thanks for the honest question.<br></font color=purple>

#570 - Tue Jun 11, 2002 6:16 AM Re: Roman Catholicism and salvation  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Trent States: "If any one saith, that the good works of one that is justified are in such manner the gifts of God, that they are not also the good merits of him that is justified; or, that the said justified, by the good works which he performs through the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ...does not truly merit increase of grace, eternal life, and the attainment of that eternal life, -- if so be , however, that he depart in grace, -- and also an increase of glory: let him be anathema." <p><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>Hi Scott,<br><br>I think we might be about done. When one seems as willing as you to deny the plain meaning of language there's not a whole lot more I can do. Proof is not persuasion.<br><br>Trent states that man must merit eternal life, and not just the rewards that are credited to those who obtain eternal life. For some reason, however, you have chosen to spin the plain meaning of Trent and reduce it to the notion that man only merits rewards. You stated that the "increase is in the benefits / rewards one might receive in 'eternal life.'" However, the portion of the canon to which I have referred is not speaking of the rewards that one might obtain in addition to eternal life, but rather it speaks to that which is attained -- eternal life itself! <br><br>Whereas you say that man may merit the "rewards one might receive in 'eternal life'" but not eternal life, Trent states that man must "truly merit increase of grace, eternal life, and the attainment of that eternal life..."<br><br>Your whole argument falls back on the idea that man is initially justified apart from works. From this premise you then wish to conclude that man does not attain eternal life by works and merit since he is already in a state of grace. Accordingly, you reason that the works performed by those in a state of grace must therefore only be associated with the rewards reckoned to the justified in glory. Said works must never be considered the grounds by which one may enter into glory. <br><br>Scott, what I believe you have either failed to grasp or refused to admit is that Trent teaches that man's works (wrougth in Christ by grace) are the basis of his meritorious standing before God. In pristrine Roman Catholic dogma anyone who is initially justified through baptism (by the working of the works) must then by grace "truly merit increase of grace, eternal life, and the attainment of that eternal life." <br><br>Scott, your issue would seem to be with Roman Catholicism not individual Protestants. You may have the last word on the matter.<br><br>Still hopeful,<br><br>Ron

#571 - Tue Jun 11, 2002 7:27 AM Re: Just wondering...  
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 213
Jason1646 Offline
Addict
Jason1646  Offline
Addict

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 213
New Hampshire
SWW: Would I need your priest or your church's baptism to be ushered into the Kingdom of Heaven? <br><br>Scott: Not necessarily, and if you desired Baptism, I could perform it for you - as could anyone. If you were to die before Baptism, then Baptism of Desire may suffice.<br><br><br>Jason: SWW, it gets even better. You could have never known, never even heard about baptism, Jesus Christ, the Bible, etc., and yet you could very well be saved in Roman Catholicism by the ever expaning Baptism of Desire clause!<br><br>Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience. (Lumen Gentium, Article 16 from the Documents of Vatican II)<br><br>This leads to the inevitable conclusion that the Holy Spirit Himself works through the customs and traditions of false religions in order to offer them the possibility of salvation. Pope John Paul II even goes so far as to suggest that it is the Holy Spirit who brings about these other religions in order to sow the seed of salvation through them:<br><br>Furthermore, the salvific action of Jesus Christ, with and through his Spirit, extends beyond the visible boundaries of the Church to all humanity. Speaking of the paschal mystery, in which Christ even now associates the believer to himself in a living manner in the Spirit and gives him the hope of resurrection, the Council states: "All this holds true not only for Christians but also for all men of good will in whose hearts grace is active invisibly. For since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partners, in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery".<br><br>Hence, the connection is clear between the salvific mystery of the Incarnate Word and that of the Spirit, who actualizes the salvific efficacy of the Son made man in the lives of all people, called by God to a single goal, both those who historically preceded the Word made man, and those who live after his coming in history: the Spirit of the Father, bestowed abundantly by the Son, is the animator of all (cf. Jn 3:34). <br><br>Thus, the recent Magisterium of the Church has firmly and clearly recalled the truth of a single divine economy: "The Spirit's presence and activity affect not only individuals but also society and history, peoples, cultures and religions... The Risen Christ ...is now at work in human hearts through the strength of his Spirit'... Again, it is the Spirit who sows the 'seeds of the word' present in various customs and cultures, preparing them for full maturity in Christ"....Whatever the Spirit brings about in human hearts and in the history of peoples, in cultures and religions, serves as a preparation for the Gospel[/b] and can only be understood in reference to Christ, the Word who took flesh by the power of the Spirit 'so that as perfectly human he would save all human beings and sum up all things'"(Pope John Paul II, Dominus Iesus, June 16, 2000)<br><br><br>So not only is the person in the car accident, found by a Catholic, in a position to be saved by a Baptism of Desire, but the Holy Spirit might work through the ritual of some pagan on an island to make known to him in a mysterious way the paschal mystery, and if this person strives with a clear conscience to please God according to the light he has, Roman Catholicism grants that had he ever heard of Christ or the Gospel and Baptism he would have desired it and is therefore saved.<br><br>A far cry from the Ecumenical Council of Florence:<br><br>"The sacrosanct Roman Church...firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart "into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels" (Matt. 25:41), unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, and almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church." (Council of Florence, from Henry Denzinger, The Sources of Catholic Dogma (London: Herder, 1954), p. 230, #714).<br><br>So, SWW, you're in luck, you live after Vatican II!<br><br>The Church recognizes that in many ways she is linked with those who, being baptized, are honored with the name of Christian, though they do not profess the faith in its entirety or do not preserve unity of communion with the successor of Peter...Likewise we can say that in some real way they are joined with us in the Holy Spirit, for to them too He gives His gifts and graces whereby He is operative among them with His sanctifying power. Some indeed He has strengthened to the extent of the shedding of their blood...Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related in various ways to the people of God. In the first place we must recall the people to whom the testament and the promises were given [Jews] and from whom Christ was born according to the flesh. On account of their fathers this people remains most dear to God, for God does not repent of the gifts He makes nor of the calls He issues. But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Mohamedans, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind. Nor is God far distant from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, for it is He who gives to all men life and breath and all things, and as Saviour wills that all men be saved. (Lumen Gentium, Articles 15 and 16 from the Documents of Vatican II)<br><br><br>If you thought it was fun watching Catholic apologists deal with Trent's statements on merit in Justification, wait until you see how they spin these statements to agree with one another. [Linked Image]<br><br>Blessings,<br><br>Jason

#572 - Tue Jun 11, 2002 10:38 AM Re: Roman Catholicism and salvation  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 87
lazarus Offline
Old Hand
lazarus  Offline
Old Hand

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 87
Morgantown, WV
What is meant by ..." and also an increase of glory"? Is this referring to heavenly rewards? <br><br>Also, if Scott thinks Trent teaches justification apart from works, we we do,... who in the world is Trent's anathema being directed? What's the beef if Rome and protestants already share the same view? <br><br>

#573 - Tue Jun 11, 2002 10:45 AM OUCH, that must hurt! [Re: Jason1646]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 87
lazarus Offline
Old Hand
lazarus  Offline
Old Hand

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 87
Morgantown, WV
Thanks Jason....<br><br>...it just keeps getting scarier and scarier, eh?<br><br>blessings,

#574 - Tue Jun 11, 2002 12:05 PM Re: Roman Catholicism and salvation [Re: lazarus]  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Hey Laz,<br><br>An "increase in glory" refers to heavenly rewards. What is noteworthy is that Trent says that we can merit "also an increase of glory." In other words, the "also" is something extra, which is to say that not only can we merit our eternal life but "also" an increase of glory. There's just no getting around it, Catholicism teaches another gospel.<br><br>Ron

#575 - Tue Jun 11, 2002 2:26 PM Re: Roman Catholicism and salvation  
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 213
Jason1646 Offline
Addict
Jason1646  Offline
Addict

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 213
New Hampshire
Scott,<br><br>Your thesis has repeatedly been that Catholicism teaches that those that are justified are saved - period, and that good works done in a state of grace don't add to salvation or increase justification because justification is the final phase in the economy of salvation.<br><br>I think it would be interesting for you to reconcile your position with the teaching of James 2:20-26. Particularly I would like to see you reconcile:<br><br><br>Scott's thesis: Works do not contribute to Justification, for justification cannot be increased and one must already be in a state of grace (justified) in order to do good works.<br><br>with<br><br>James 2:24: You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.<br><br><br>If works do not contribute to one's justification, how is it that James says that a man is justified by works? If works done in a state of grace do not cause or increase salvation or justification, but only rewards, how is it that works justify? Might I assume you follow the Reformed exegesis of this passage?! [Linked Image]<br><br><br>Sincerely,<br><br>Jason.<br><br>

#576 - Wed Jun 12, 2002 5:42 PM Re: Just wondering... [Re: Jason1646]  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Jason,<br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>If you thought it was fun watching Catholic apologists deal with Trent's statements on merit in Justification, wait until you see how they spin these statements to agree with one another. [Linked Image]<p><hr></blockquote><p><br>How sad when people put their faith in men who can lie! I hope that our Catholic friend is still here lurking and really starts to search the Scriptures to see what is really true. <br>It makes me think of Proverbs16:25 There is a way that seemeth right unto a man but the end thereof are the ways of death.<br>Yes, it is scarey.<br>Susan

#577 - Sun Jun 16, 2002 12:13 AM Re: OUCH, that must hurt! [Re: lazarus]  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Why is it that it seems you just believe whatever Jason presents? Jason has (again) only presented part of the story and then attempted to "spin" it into nonsense. The Church never says those outside absolutely WILL be saved. Church teaching on Invincible Ignorance and Baptism of Desire still leaves the judgment of culpability to God. <br> <br>Scott<<<<br> <br>

#578 - Sun Jun 16, 2002 12:32 AM Re: Roman Catholicism and salvation [Re: Jason1646]  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Jason writes:Scott,<br><br>Your thesis has repeatedly been that Catholicism teaches that those that are justified are saved - period, and that good works done in a state of grace don't add to salvation or increase justification because justification is the final phase in the economy of salvation.<br><br>I think it would be interesting for you to reconcile your position with the teaching of James 2:20-26. Particularly I would like to see you reconcile:<br><br>Scott's thesis: Works do not contribute to Justification, for justification cannot be increased and one must already be in a state of grace (justified) in order to do good works.<br><br>with<br><br>James 2:24: You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.<br><br>If works do not contribute to one's justification, how is it that James says that a man is justified by works? If works done in a state of grace do not cause or increase salvation or justification, but only rewards, how is it that works justify? Might I assume you follow the Reformed exegesis of this passage?! <br> <br>[color:purple]Scott replies: Jason, first off let's be truthful and tell the whole truth which is something that seems to be either a challenge for you to do, or a deliberate attempt to "spin" things in your favor. I have not only said "Works do not contribute to Justification, for justification cannot be increased and one must already be in a state of grace (justified) in order to do good works." In fact, I said that maybe once or twice. I then clarified that the Catholic Church does not always use the terminology of "justified" and "sanctified" in the manner in which I did - so your statement that I have "consistently" presented that position is false. Please retract.<br> <br>Second, I did say that there is no "increase in salvation" because "saved is saved." I added there may be differences in the rewards or "level of heaven" - but one cannot be "more saved" than another. Using an imperfect, but close, analogy: a light bulb is either on or off. If you put a dimmer on the light bulb, that doesn't change the fact that it is either on or off - only how bright it may be shining when "on."<br> <br>Third, I have nothing to reconcile to James 2:24 when one uses a less strict interpretation of "justified." In fact, if anyone has anything to reconcile it would be one who holds to a "sola fide" position, and denies that works have anything to do with justification.<br> <br>So, I ask again Jason, if you're going to represent me and/or my Church - could you please present a fuller representation of my/our position? In fact, it would be better to leave the explaining of Catholicism to Catholics. <br> <br>Scott<<<<br></font color=purple><br>

#579 - Sun Jun 16, 2002 8:24 AM Re: Gross Misunderstanding needs clarification  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,313
Pilgrim Offline
Head Honcho
Pilgrim  Offline

Head Honcho

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,313
NH, USA
Cathapol,

Let me play the "moron" here just for fun. IF what you are proposing and claiming is the "whole truth", i.e., that your clearer use of terms is in fact what Trent, Vatican II and the Catholic Encyclopedia actually teach:
Justification is a one time thing which cannot be increased nor decreased. That works will naturally flow from one who is justified and they only increase or decrease rewards for the justified. That once justified there is no possibility of hell.
then why was there so much disagreement by the Reformers with Rome? Why did Rome pronounce myriad "anathemas" upon what the Reformers taught on the matter of Justification (Sola Fide), when in fact they taught exactly the same things?

Either the Reformers and most Protestants since them have totally misunderstood the OFFICIAL Catholic documents in regard to the doctrine of Justification, and/or Rome has consistently been likewise guilty of totally misunderstanding what the Protestant doctrine of "Sola Fide" teaches.

Would you like to provide an explanation as to how this most unfortunate misunderstanding came about and continues even to this day? I'm sure there are many besides myself who would be most grateful to get this "breach" repaired. grin


In His Grace,


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Page 6 of 11 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 10 11

Who's Online Now
1 registered members (goldenoldie), 18 guests, and 100 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
drewk, patrice, Robert1962, Ron, billmcginnis
921 Registered Users
Shout Box
December
S M T W T F S
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31
Today's Birthdays
No Birthdays
Popular Topics(Views)
666,201 Gospel truth
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.052s Queries: 16 (0.003s) Memory: 2.7260 MB (Peak: 3.0337 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-12-16 05:13:26 UTC