Beloved57 are you sure you’re chosen?

[musterion]

Despite it containing good news?

Paul is clear that the good news can be negated by adding things God did not include.

Musty answer the challenge.

1. Paul reminded the Corinthians of what he preached to them when they were saved. It was on the basis of grace through faith alone in the DBR. There are no works of any kind mentioned here, only faith in the DBR.

2. But elsewhere, Paul specifically excludes works as having ANY place in being forgiven and justified.

3. Paul made it clear that even adding to the DBR a work which God had originally required - circumcision - turned his gospel into "another gospel" and brought a curse upon whoever preached it.

4. Since God does not author confusion, and says exactly what He means and means exactly what He says, it is reasonable to deduce that those who believe "another gospel" are not saved even if the DBR is included in what they believe IF they are ALSO depending on works to get them into Heaven...because the DBR has now become part of "another gospel" THAT PAUL DID NOT PREACH.

YOU and CLETE preach it, but Paul did not.

Either he's correct or you two are, but one of you is wrong.

Then they are saved, in spite of what they believe, because they put their faith in Christ (and all that that entails, as per Clete's list)

No. I'd love for that to be true but it cannot be reconciled with what has been revealed.

Your claim would make God the author of confusion (which is impossible) because a gospel with specifically stated terms, backed up by other statements from the man who delivered it to us, cannot be the only valid gospel when (according to you) another gospel with different terms is also valid.

If you allow for ONE work in addition to the DBR (which Paul expressly excluded), then you have no grounds on which to exclude 10 or 100 works in addition to the DBR. You have NO grounds to object. You gave away that option when you allowed work #1.

Simple logic: a DBR+100 "gospel" is just as valid as a DBR+1 "gospel," or indeed as valid as the DBR+nothing gospel Paul preached...at least according to you and Clete.

Get it yet? Your position means Paul's gospel (as reminded to the Corinthians) is only ONE gospel that saves but is definitely not THE ONLY gospel that saves. You've opened the door to people adding as much of anything they want to the DBR and neither of you can say they're wrong.

So DBR plus any amount of works or DBR plus no works...either one will save? Okay, so here's your and Clete's salvation formula:

Gospel 1: Faith in the DBR excluding any work (Paul's gospel) = saved.

Gospel 2: Faith in the DBR plus one work = saved.

Gospel 3: Faith in the DBR plus two works = saved.

Gospel 4: Faith in the DBR plus three works = saved.

etc etc etc

As stated the other day, this is (for lack of a better term) ecumenical universalism.

Own it, JR.

Unless you're just playing devil's advocate to keep discussion going. But if this is what you truly believe, you and Clete are Pauline gospel-denying heretics.

You tell us which one you are.

 

[musterion]

Your turn, JR.

What happens if a person sincerely believes a gospel that preaches faith in the DBR and having to do even one work (say water baptism) in order to be saved?

That's exactly what the Church of Christ will tell you to do to be saved.

Are they correct?

 

[musterion]

And let me remind you that knowledgeable Roman Catholics (just as a handy example) would say that us non-Catholics can't possibly be saved because we reject their church and its sacraments, as well as on the basis of Trent's anathemas, even though they know we believe in the DBR as strongly as they do.

Are they correct, JR? Or are they wrong?

 

[glorydaz]

And let me remind you that knowledgeable Roman Catholics (just as a handy example) would say that us non-Catholics can't possibly be saved because we reject their church and its sacraments, as well as on the basis of Trent's anathemas, even though they know we believe in the DBR as strongly as they do.

Are they correct, JR? Or are they wrong?

When I was a Catholic, we were not allowed to attend another church. I wouldn't be surprised it that weren't still the case.

 

[musterion]

From this month's Bible Answers to Bible Questions.

The message of how to receive salvation today is found in Paul's epistles. We must believe (Rom 3:22) by faith ALONE (Eph 2:8-9, Titus 3:5) that we need a Savior (Rom 3:23) and that Christ Jesus is that Savior through His death, burial, and resurrection (1 Cor 15:3-4). At the moment of believe, we are saved and sealed with the Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13-14) and nothing will ever unsave us (Eph 4:30).

 

[musterion]

When I was a Catholic, we were not allowed to attend another church. I wouldn't be surprised it that weren't still the case.

They didn't want to risk you losing the brainwashing. Fair to put it that way?

 

[glorydaz]

They didn't want to risk you losing the brainwashing. Fair to put it that way?

Exactly. As I said before, while in the Catholic Church, I never once heard the gospel.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Paul is clear that the good news can be negated by adding things God did not include.

1. Paul reminded the Corinthians of what he preached to them when they were saved. It was on the basis of grace through faith alone in the DBR. There are no works of any kind mentioned here, only faith in the DBR.

2. But elsewhere, Paul specifically excludes works as having ANY place in being forgiven and justified.

3. Paul made it clear that even adding to the DBR a work which God had originally required - circumcision - turned his gospel into "another gospel" and brought a curse upon whoever preached it.

4. Since God does not author confusion, and says exactly what He means and means exactly what He says, it is reasonable to deduce that those who believe "another gospel" are not saved even if the DBR is included in what they believe IF they are ALSO depending on works to get them into Heaven...because the DBR has now become part of "another gospel" THAT PAUL DID NOT PREACH.

YOU and CLETE preach it, but Paul did not.

Either he's correct or you two are, but one of you is wrong.

No. I'd love for that to be true but it cannot be reconciled with what has been revealed.

Your claim would make God the author of confusion (which is impossible) because a gospel with specifically stated terms, backed up by other statements from the man who delivered it to us, cannot be the only valid gospel when (according to you) another gospel with different terms is also valid.

If you allow for ONE work in addition to the DBR (which Paul expressly excluded), then you have no grounds on which to exclude 10 or 100 works in addition to the DBR. You have NO grounds to object. You gave away that option when you allowed work #1.

Simple logic: a DBR+100 "gospel" is just as valid as a DBR+1 "gospel," or indeed as valid as the DBR+nothing gospel Paul preached...at least according to you and Clete.

Get it yet? Your position means Paul's gospel (as reminded to the Corinthians) is only ONE gospel that saves but is definitely not THE ONLY gospel that saves. You've opened the door to people adding as much of anything they want to the DBR and neither of you can say they're wrong.

So DBR plus any amount of works or DBR plus no works...either one will save? Okay, so here's your and Clete's salvation formula:

Gospel 1: Faith in the DBR excluding any work (Paul's gospel) = saved.

Gospel 2: Faith in the DBR plus one work = saved.

Gospel 3: Faith in the DBR plus two works = saved.

Gospel 4: Faith in the DBR plus three works = saved.

etc etc etc

As stated the other day, this is (for lack of a better term) ecumenical universalism.

Own it, JR.

Unless you're just playing devil's advocate to keep discussion going. But if this is what you truly believe, you and Clete are Pauline gospel-denying heretics.

You tell us which one you are.

Your turn, JR.

What happens if a person sincerely believes a gospel that preaches faith in the DBR and having to do even one work (say water baptism) in order to be saved?

That's exactly what the Church of Christ will tell you to do to be saved.

Are they correct?

And let me remind you that knowledgeable Roman Catholics (just as a handy example) would say that us non-Catholics can't possibly be saved because we reject their church and its sacraments, as well as on the basis of Trent's anathemas, even though they know we believe in the DBR as strongly as they do.

Are they correct, JR? Or are they wrong?

Musterion, I notice that not once in these three posts of yours have you provided ANY scripture, let alone the scripture that I have, twice, now, asked for.

Why are you being so evasive?

Provide the chapter and verse that says this:

because adding anything to the death, burial and resurrection of Christ results in another gospel, which Paul said cannot save.

CAN YOU DO IT?

As for the following:

From this month's Bible Answers to Bible Questions.

The message of how to receive salvation today is found in Paul's epistles. We must believe (Rom 3:22) by faith ALONE (Eph 2:8-9, Titus 3:5) that we need a Savior (Rom 3:23) and that Christ Jesus is that Savior through His death, burial, and resurrection (1 Cor 15:3-4). At the moment of believe, we are saved and sealed with the Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13-14) and nothing will ever unsave us (Eph 4:30).

I'm not seeing where it says we must ONLY believe what those verses say. Yes, those verses tell us, explicitly, that salvation is by grace through faith, but it's not stating at all that you must only believe that, and nothing more or less.

So Musty, for the third time, can you please provide the chapter and verse that states that we must only believe certain things, and that if we believe more than that, we cannot get saved?

I'm not saying that things that are believed that are more than what is presented by Paul will get you saved, I'm saying that believing what Paul said regarding belief will result in being saved, IN SPITE of anything else one believes.

 

[glorydaz]

Musterion, I notice that not once in these three posts of yours have you provided ANY scripture, let alone the scripture that I have, twice, now, asked for.

Why are you being so evasive?





CAN YOU DO IT?

As for the following:



I'm not seeing where it says we must ONLY believe what those verses say. Yes, those verses tell us, explicitly, that salvation is by grace through faith, but it's not stating at all that you must only believe that, and nothing more or less.

So Musty, for the third time, can you please provide the chapter and verse that states that we must only believe certain things, and that if we believe more than that, we cannot get saved?

I'm not saying that things that are believed that are more than what is presented by Paul will get you saved, I'm saying that believing what Paul said regarding belief will result in being saved, IN SPITE of anything else one believes.

What's evasive? It's Paul entire message. Nothing is to be added to the cross for salvation.

Back in the day, it was "circumcision". You must be circumcised to be saved.

Replace the word circumcision with the modern day equivalent : water baptism, communion, speaking in tongues, repentance, enduring, forgiving.

CHRIST SHALL PROFIT YOU NOTHING. CHRIST IS BECOME OF NO EFFECT UNTO YOU.

Gal. 5:1-4
Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.
Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.
For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.
Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

 

[glorydaz]

I don't think so. Here is what we confess:

Spoiler

[The Father]: I believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible.

[The Son]: I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages.

God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father; through him all things were made.

For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven, and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man.

For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate, he suffered death and was buried, and rose again on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures.

He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and his kingdom will have no end.

[The Spirit]: I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, who has spoken through the prophets.

[The Body of Christ]: I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come.

Sure.

I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins

There it is. Saved by Baptism ---else there would be no forgiveness of sins.

 

[Clete]

The Lord's last words on the cross were, "It is finished".

Nothing is to be added or can be added to the finished work of the cross, other than what the Lord Himself requires.
For some, faith and works were required.
For others NOTHING was to be added.

There is no end to what man can add to Christ's work on the cross, but is that something our Lord will allow?
Some were expected and will be expected to endure to the end to be saved.

What of those who believe they have to do something to be saved?
Can we honestly preach the gospel to those who insist on adding to the Cross?

Do you suppose that someone who has trusted in the shed blood of Christ as payment for their sin and believed all the rest of the gospel as I have presented it, if he desires to obey what happens to be a false teaching, that such obedience is sufficient to overcome the shed blood of Christ?

It seems to me that all such works will be burned up and he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.

 

[Clete]

Get it yet? Your position means Paul's gospel (as reminded to the Corinthians) is only ONE gospel that saves but is definitely not THE ONLY gospel that saves. You've opened the door to people adding as much of anything they want to the DBR and neither of you can say they're wrong.

Of course we can and do! What are you even talking about? Your entire objection seems to be a wild over reaction. We are not suggesting that is it "okay" to add to the gospel. It isn't okay, it's sin! But Christ died for all of our sin! You are effectively telling us that we are preaching that people should sin that grace may abound, which puts us in pretty good company if you ask me for Paul was accused of the same thing.


Let's take it from another tack...

Do you believe that one can lose their salvation?

I presume your answer would be no. (Please correct me if that is wrong.)

So, if one cannot lose their salvation then what if one accepts the gospel as I have presented it and then somewhere down the road is somehow persuaded to become a Catholic (or any number of other flavors of Christian for that matter). Do you then suppose that they lose their salvation?

Clete

 

[Idolater]

Musterion, I notice that not once in these three posts of yours have you provided ANY scripture, let alone the scripture that I have, twice, now, asked for.

Why are you being so evasive? ....

I would think or guess or suspect that it's Galatians 5:4 " Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace."

Especially I think when substituting there "the law" with "the Old Testament" or "Old Covenant". " Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the Old Testament; ye are fallen from grace."

Especially since Galatians 5:3 right before this verse is talking about circumcision. He's talking about people who were trying to keep the Old Testament law or Torah or Old Covenant. His clear message is, "Don't do that."

 

[glorydaz]

I would think or guess or suspect that it's Galatians 5:4 " Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace."

Especially I think when substituting there "the law" with "the Old Testament" or "Old Covenant". " Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the Old Testament; ye are fallen from grace."

Especially since Galatians 5:3 right before this verse is talking about circumcision. He's talking about people who were trying to keep the Old Testament law or Torah or Old Covenant. His clear message is, "Don't do that."

It's legalism of any sort. Nothing is to be added for salvation.
It can be something so simple as 'you must forgive others in order to be forgiven'.

We have people right here on this forum that say they have to do certain things in order to be saved.
Endure, be water baptized, etc.
Someone preached another gospel to these folks, and sad to say, it's the kingdom gospel.
If they think they are saved under that kingdom gospel, they are not members of the body of Christ.

Is anyone saved today under the kingdom gospel? Well, that's another question altogether. Will those people be like Peter who will have their sins blotted out when the Lord returns in His glory? Will they be judged and have their sins blotted out if they endure to the end and work righteousness? I don't know. It's God who judges the hearts of men.

 

[Idolater]

The major issue there, so far, is the belief that water baptism gets you forgiven of sins. It does not.

It says and I quote (from memory, because we confess this creed many Masses throughout every year), "I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins."

It doesn't say water it says one. It's the baptism of the Holy Spirit, just as the Scripture says, and yes, the sacrament is a meeting of the eternal and the temporal, just as they all are, so there is water but that is the material corollary to the eternal reality which is that Jesus Christ baptizes you. If He baptizes you before you celebrate the sacrament, which was the case with me and most every convert to the Church I'm almost certain, what is the problem?

Catholicism doesn't believe in a strict wooden literal interpretation of baptism being what saves you anyway, if you (like me) like a good Protestant, who knows how to study and interpret the scriptures, would only turn your skill upon the Catechism of the Catholic Church as well, it is easily seen.

Leaving that aside, however, this does not really answer my question.

What is the point of this confession? What effect does it have besides giving you membership as a Catholic? Does it have anything to do with getting saved? Is this confession sufficient to get someone into a saved condition or is Catholic soteriology something different? How does a Catholic believe people get saved? If a person affirmed that confession and then fell over dead, would it be sufficient to save that person?

That isn't really six different questions, I'm just struggling to find a way to articulate the question.

I'll meet them one-by-one. The point of the confession is to remind us all of what we all collectively and uniformly believe and confess. We might and do differ on a lot of other stuff, but we all agree on this and on the Apostles Creed.

The effect is mental. In reminding ourselves we practice those 'neural pathways' and strengthen them, so that our mind is continually conformed to the mind of Christ.

It almost has nothing to do with 'getting saved'. See below.

Catholic soteriology is identical to the 'Solas' which concern soteriology, by Christ alone by grace alone and by faith alone. This again is coming from my own 'Protestant' interpretation of Catholicism, based upon studying the Catechism in the light of the Scripture and with sound reason.

Basically, I'm asking you to tell me what it takes for a person to get saved and is it compatible with the gospel as I've presented it?

To answer this question we turn to the Catechism, which addresses Noncatholic Christians. The only condition specifically given which assures as far as Catholicism is concerned that a person is saved, is to "believe in Christ" (I believe this is the exact quote in the relevant text).

So for Catholics, basically, so long as you believe that you believe in Christ, you're a real Christian and going to heaven after death. Now when you examine the Catechism for what 'believing in Christ' means to Catholicism, it means believing in the Resurrection of Christ, and in His divinity, the supporting texts of which I can provide if you don't believe me or are curious.

But Catholicism doesn't even deign to pronounce just what it means to believe in Christ for Noncatholics, we only believe good Catholic doctrine for our own salvation, and honestly, there is great freedom of thought in Catholicism, and so you are able to properly treat each doctrine one-by-one, in your own time and on your own time table, as you continue to maintain the status of 'full communion', which enables you to licitly receive the Eucharist at Mass, which you would be going to weekly (to stay in full communion).

We believe it's up to your own conscience to determine what it means to believe in Him. It's up to you, it's up to God, and we pray that you do find the Church, because of the freedom, and because of the Feast (the Blessed Sacrament, Holy Communion). Keep the feast.

Clete

For your intention Clete: In the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit; amen.

 

[Idolater]

It's legalism of any sort. Nothing is to be added for salvation.
It can be something so simple as 'you must forgive others in order to be forgiven'.

We have people right here on this forum that say they have to do certain things in order to be saved.
Endure, be water baptized, etc.
Someone preached another gospel to these folks, and sad to say, it's the kingdom gospel.
If they think they are saved under that kingdom gospel, they are not members of the body of Christ.

Is anyone saved today under the kingdom gospel? Well, that's another question altogether. Will those people be like Peter who will have their sins blotted out when the Lord returns in His glory? Will they be judged and have their sins blotted out if they endure to the end and work righteousness? I don't know. It's God who judges the hearts of men.

As a Catholic and in alignment with what I honestly understand the Catechism of the Catholic Church to be teaching authoritatively, everyone who believes in Jesus Christ (basically according to their own conscience) is going to heaven after death. It doesn't stop me from believing that Catholicism is actual New Testament "church" and that we were basically made to go to Mass each week, and that if we don't go to Mass and convert to Catholicism and maintain the state of full communion, we are all 'missing out' on some of the bounty and blessings that the Lord intends for His Body the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

 

[glorydaz]

Do you suppose that someone who has trusted in the shed blood of Christ as payment for their sin and believed all the rest of the gospel as I have presented it, if he desires to obey what happens to be a false teaching, that such obedience is sufficient to overcome the shed blood of Christ?

It seems to me that all such works will be burned up and he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.

It depends on if his faith is based on anything other than the shed blood of Christ.
What was that moment of salvation based on? The answer to that is the answer to this question.

The works that will be burned up are those that occur after a person has been saved.

It's interesting to ask a person if they're saved, and they answer, "Oh yes, I was baptized back in 1984."

 

[glorydaz]

So, if one cannot lose their salvation then what if one accepts the gospel as I have presented it and then somewhere down the road is somehow persuaded to become a Catholic (or any number of other flavors of Christian for that matter). Do you then suppose that they lose their salvation?

Clete

I think this might be one of those hypothetical things like Tam saying a believer can turn from God and start worshipping satan.
I don't believe that's possible. Could be a Catholic in name only, I suppose.


Losing salvation?
Rather....fallen from grace. Do we know what that means?

Also from what Paul says in Gal. 2, those who preach any other gospel (adding to the cross) are to be accursed.

 

[glorydaz]

I would think or guess or suspect that it's Galatians 5:4 " Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace."

Especially I think when substituting there "the law" with "the Old Testament" or "Old Covenant". " Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the Old Testament; ye are fallen from grace."

Especially since Galatians 5:3 right before this verse is talking about circumcision. He's talking about people who were trying to keep the Old Testament law or Torah or Old Covenant. His clear message is, "Don't do that."

That "fallen from grace" part can't be referring to loss of salvation.
Notice what Paul says. First he scolds them, then he explains it is not from the Lord, but is confident in them through the Lord. Giving the Lord the glory again.

We also see who is to be blamed, those pushing the law on Paul's gentile believers, and they will bear the blame.

Gal. 5:7 Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth?
8 This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you.
9 A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.
10 I have confidence in you through the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded: but he that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be.

 

[glorydaz]

A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.
This is exactly what has happened to the churches today, that little bit of leaven from the law has grown to a huge blob of nothing but dough.

Adding all kinds of crap to the simple gospel.

Waxing cold.
Falling away.
False teachers.
Preaching the gospel of the kingdom on earth while trying to reach up to heaven.