Abraham was a Gentile. Paul was sent to the Gentiles (Uncircumcised) with the Grace Gospel. Peter and the rest went to the Circumcised. (The Jews)
ECT FAITH ALONE: DID JESUS TEACH IT?
- Thread starter Cruciform
- Start date
Back then, two Gospels were being preached: The Grace Gospel to the Gentiles
and the Kingdom Gospel to the Jews.
Paul: To the Gentiles.
Peter:To the Jews.
Paul preached; Faith without works to the Gentiles.
Peter preached; Faith plus works to the House of Israel.
Today, there is one Gospel; The Grace Gospel. (Paul's Gospel)
The Grace Gospel is for Gentile and Jew alike. One Gospel. Paul
says we're living in The Dispensation of Grace. (Faith without works)
and the Kingdom Gospel to the Jews.
Paul: To the Gentiles.
Peter:To the Jews.
Paul preached; Faith without works to the Gentiles.
Peter preached; Faith plus works to the House of Israel.
Today, there is one Gospel; The Grace Gospel. (Paul's Gospel)
The Grace Gospel is for Gentile and Jew alike. One Gospel. Paul
says we're living in The Dispensation of Grace. (Faith without works)
God says; He doesn't want any one to perish. 2 Peter 3:9 "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."
Christ died for the sins of ALL mankind. However, only those who
place their faith in Christ as their Savior will reap the benefits.
1) Eternal life.
2) The sealing and indwelling of the Holy Spirit.
3) Becoming a member of the Body of Christ.
4) Receiving the righteousness of Christ.
5) No judgement.
place their faith in Christ as their Savior will reap the benefits.
1) Eternal life.
2) The sealing and indwelling of the Holy Spirit.
3) Becoming a member of the Body of Christ.
4) Receiving the righteousness of Christ.
5) No judgement.
Revelation 20:12--"And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works."
Why do you suppose it says, they were judged by their works and not, their sins?
Because, Christ took care of the sin question at the cross. Now, it's a matter
of accepting or rejecting the Gospel. The unsaved (spoken of in that
verse) are being judged by their WORKS. The Saved will stand before Christ
and receive rewards for the things they did while in the flesh. There will be no
condemnation/judgement for the Saved.
The unsaved will be judged according to their works and cast into the Lake of
fire with the Devil and his angels. That's where they will spend eternity. The
Saved will spend eternity with God in Heaven.
Why do you suppose it says, they were judged by their works and not, their sins?
Because, Christ took care of the sin question at the cross. Now, it's a matter
of accepting or rejecting the Gospel. The unsaved (spoken of in that
verse) are being judged by their WORKS. The Saved will stand before Christ
and receive rewards for the things they did while in the flesh. There will be no
condemnation/judgement for the Saved.
The unsaved will be judged according to their works and cast into the Lake of
fire with the Devil and his angels. That's where they will spend eternity. The
Saved will spend eternity with God in Heaven.
Cruciform
New member
To point out the unbiblical nature of sola fide, and to prompt discussion between Catholics and Protestants.
Christ, at some point in time will return to earth and reign on the throne
of David for a thousand years, while Satan is chained up. This will take
place previous to the final judgement spoken of in the previous post.
of David for a thousand years, while Satan is chained up. This will take
place previous to the final judgement spoken of in the previous post.
Cruciform
New member
TulipBee explained:
Catholicism ~ listen to the teachings of Christ's one historic Church
Protestantism ~ listen to TulipBee's preferred interpretations (i.e., opinions) of the Bible
Protestantism ~ listen to TulipBee's preferred interpretations (i.e., opinions) of the Bible
In any case, you're off-topic.
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
So far as the OP goes, Jesus came to preach the Kingdom Gospel to
the lost sheep of Israel only. Jesus wasn't preaching "faith alone." The
faith alone concept didn't come into affect until after the ascended Christ
met Saul/Paul on the road to Damascus. Subsequently, Paul was sent to
the Gentiles with the message Christ gave to him. That being, the Grace
Gospel. Whereas, Peter and the rest continued Christ's Kingdom Gospel,
to the House of Israel.
the lost sheep of Israel only. Jesus wasn't preaching "faith alone." The
faith alone concept didn't come into affect until after the ascended Christ
met Saul/Paul on the road to Damascus. Subsequently, Paul was sent to
the Gentiles with the message Christ gave to him. That being, the Grace
Gospel. Whereas, Peter and the rest continued Christ's Kingdom Gospel,
to the House of Israel.
Cruciform
New member
Amen.
Hardly. The Catholic Church was teaching salvation by grace through faith for fifteen-hundred years before a single Protestant managed to stumble onto the scene. Try again.
Galations 2:7--"But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;" These were two separate Gospels. One to the Gentiles and the other to the Jews.
If there was only one Gospel at that time (there were two) then, why would
only Paul be sent to the Gentiles? they could have just as easily all gone
together or split up into groups. Paul had no special attachment to the
Gentiles, after all, he was a Jew as well. That's why we can see that Paul
was given a "special" Gospel to be taken to the Gentiles at that time.
only Paul be sent to the Gentiles? they could have just as easily all gone
together or split up into groups. Paul had no special attachment to the
Gentiles, after all, he was a Jew as well. That's why we can see that Paul
was given a "special" Gospel to be taken to the Gentiles at that time.
Peter and the rest recognized that Paul's message was different or they wouldn't
have agreed to send Paul to the Gentiles and they (Peter) and the rest to the
Jews.
have agreed to send Paul to the Gentiles and they (Peter) and the rest to the
Jews.
James 2:17--"Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone." James was
speaking to the scattered sheep of Israel. They had to have faith in Christ as well
as works.
Paul preached; faith without works. These two messages are not the same.
Paul preaches, faith without works, while James is preaching faith and works.
The reason being, Paul was preaching the Grace Gospel to the Gentiles, while
James was preaching the Kingdom Gospel to the sheep of Israel. Otherwise,
we would see a definite contradiction. However, there's no contradiction, just
two different Gospels being preached.
speaking to the scattered sheep of Israel. They had to have faith in Christ as well
as works.
Paul preached; faith without works. These two messages are not the same.
Paul preaches, faith without works, while James is preaching faith and works.
The reason being, Paul was preaching the Grace Gospel to the Gentiles, while
James was preaching the Kingdom Gospel to the sheep of Israel. Otherwise,
we would see a definite contradiction. However, there's no contradiction, just
two different Gospels being preached.
Any other comments related to this thread?
Catholics don't worship idols. :idunno:
The rest of your posting was basically just discussing various verses which agree with me, i.e., that it was perfectly permissible to create and make images...albeit not for idolatrous purposes.
And I'll say this:
If you object to Cruciform's OP because it contained an image of Jesus, then I'll point out that the Incarnation happened. Just saying. God became visible (albeit, of course, not qua God).
What's your point?
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
An example of the importance of the doctrine of justification in church history is the historical debate between Pelagius (360-420), a British monk, and Augustine (354-430), the Bishop of Hippo. Pelagius taught that salvation was achieved through obedience to God's divine commands. In opposition to this, Augustine maintained the Scriptural truth that sinners are unable to save themselves by their own works and are reliant solely upon the grace of God for salvation. According to Augustine, since works are unable to save, grace alone must save, and that grace is apprehended only through faith.
Augustine wrote:
"You may proclaim that ancient just men possessed ever such great virtue, yet nothing saved them except faith in the Mediator, who shed His blood for the remission of sins."
[Src: Ad Bonifactum Book 1, Chapter 21, cited in Martin Chemnitz, Examination of the Council of Trent, vol. 1, trans. Fred Kramer (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1971), p. 506.]
Thus, Augustine championed the New Testament church's doctrine of justification by grace through faith apart from works.
For this reason, many have suggested that Augustine laid the necessary groundwork for the debates that would later grip the church in the sixteenth century. It is no coincidence that Martin Luther was originally an Augustinian monk (a monastic order dedicated to upholding the teachings of Augustine). Yet in the early 1500s, Luther began to recognize that the church had greatly deviated not only from Augustine's doctrine of justification but also from the Scriptural doctrine of justification by making works a meritorious cause of salvation.
While the Reformation initially began as a protest (hence, Protestantism) against the selling of indulgences (documents promising forgiveness of the temporal punishments due to venial sin) the Protestant reformers (Luther, Calvin, and others) eventually came to challenge the entire Romanist doctrine of salvation by faith and works, constitutive traditionalism, etc. The Reformers saw these as a revival of the Judaizing tendencies opposed by the apostles and the works-righteousness opposed by Augustine and many other ancient church fathers.
Though Rome taught the necessity of Christ, it denied that Our Lord's death was sufficient, without human cooperation, to save sinners. The Reformation solas, among which sola fide is central, therefore speak not only to the necessity of Christ, grace, faith, and Scripture, but to the sufficiency of the same.
Sadly, one of the greatest challenges facing the church today is its re-evangelization. While many evangelicals may understand the doctrine of sola fide—that we must place our faith in Christ to be saved—it seems many have abandoned the Scriptural concept of sola gratia (grace alone). The synergistic conception of sola fide—faith arises out of an inherent capacity of the natural man—therefore must, by definition, draw on nature to cooperate with God's grace as the human fulfillment of a condition.
Why do many sincere Christians believe this? I speculate that it is because by nature some want to maintain an island of righteousness—a last bastion of pride in thinking that they can still contribute something, be it ever so small—to their own salvation. It would involve great humility on everyone's part to admit this to be so. If churches took more efforts to search the Scriptures and reform their doctrine on this single point, I am convinced that a great deal of blessing would be restored and God would remove much of the current worldliness in our midst.
AMR
Augustine wrote:
"You may proclaim that ancient just men possessed ever such great virtue, yet nothing saved them except faith in the Mediator, who shed His blood for the remission of sins."
[Src: Ad Bonifactum Book 1, Chapter 21, cited in Martin Chemnitz, Examination of the Council of Trent, vol. 1, trans. Fred Kramer (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1971), p. 506.]
Thus, Augustine championed the New Testament church's doctrine of justification by grace through faith apart from works.
For this reason, many have suggested that Augustine laid the necessary groundwork for the debates that would later grip the church in the sixteenth century. It is no coincidence that Martin Luther was originally an Augustinian monk (a monastic order dedicated to upholding the teachings of Augustine). Yet in the early 1500s, Luther began to recognize that the church had greatly deviated not only from Augustine's doctrine of justification but also from the Scriptural doctrine of justification by making works a meritorious cause of salvation.
While the Reformation initially began as a protest (hence, Protestantism) against the selling of indulgences (documents promising forgiveness of the temporal punishments due to venial sin) the Protestant reformers (Luther, Calvin, and others) eventually came to challenge the entire Romanist doctrine of salvation by faith and works, constitutive traditionalism, etc. The Reformers saw these as a revival of the Judaizing tendencies opposed by the apostles and the works-righteousness opposed by Augustine and many other ancient church fathers.
Though Rome taught the necessity of Christ, it denied that Our Lord's death was sufficient, without human cooperation, to save sinners. The Reformation solas, among which sola fide is central, therefore speak not only to the necessity of Christ, grace, faith, and Scripture, but to the sufficiency of the same.
Sadly, one of the greatest challenges facing the church today is its re-evangelization. While many evangelicals may understand the doctrine of sola fide—that we must place our faith in Christ to be saved—it seems many have abandoned the Scriptural concept of sola gratia (grace alone). The synergistic conception of sola fide—faith arises out of an inherent capacity of the natural man—therefore must, by definition, draw on nature to cooperate with God's grace as the human fulfillment of a condition.
Why do many sincere Christians believe this? I speculate that it is because by nature some want to maintain an island of righteousness—a last bastion of pride in thinking that they can still contribute something, be it ever so small—to their own salvation. It would involve great humility on everyone's part to admit this to be so. If churches took more efforts to search the Scriptures and reform their doctrine on this single point, I am convinced that a great deal of blessing would be restored and God would remove much of the current worldliness in our midst.
AMR
Last edited:
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
