Is Salvation not good enough?

Philippians 4:19

ChicanaRose said:

Do you get more excited with the fact that the person is following the LORD;
or with the fact that the person now "gets" your denominational theology?

The reason I ask is because my ancestors (all the way up to my grandparents) were pagans--pretty hard core too, hiring mediums and fortune-tellers.

Usually, when I share testimony about how my parents got saved, people rejoice.

This has not been the case with hardcore Catholics. It's like my parents are not "good enough" for them because they are Protestants.

Why is it that I receive from them comments like:

"Well, that's a great start for your parents. But let's pray that they will come to the fullness of truth through the Catholic church"

?

Click to expand...

Yes I've seen this sort of thing. Actually, I've seen Pentecostals act this way with nonPentecostal Protestants and actually, I've seen more ecumenicism with Catholics!

I think its tough for some people. If you have a strong commitment to your faith tradition you often want others to likewise do the same out of zeal.


I do think there is something ideological at work as well. Actually many people see Christianity as a kind of ideology, (an ideology that saves you but an ideology none the less).

Grip Docility said:

It starts with Christ. It ends with Christ. He provides what we need. He is our Armor and Cloak.

He will not fail to provide what you need.

Click to expand...

Amen but we must still choose what we will do with it. Did He not give the very same thing to the branches mentioned in John 15:2?

BNR32FAN said:

Amen but we must still choose what we will do with it. Did He not give the very same thing to the branches mentioned in John 15:2?

Click to expand...

This is going to sound cold, callous and hard nosed... but they didn't believe unto True Belief. How can a worker that teaches other workers to sew unto their own flesh, "Produce fruit'?

It is the workman that equips others to Love, Believe, Trust and allow God to guide other's, through them, into absolute Trust in the VINE, that will be approved.

I say this with heavy heart, but I cannot lie. If God the Son, who was perfect, continually said He could do no works apart from His Father, but what His Father gave Him to do... how much more should we, who are imperfect, speak in the same manner about our TRUE VINE?

His student said:

For the record - are you suggesting that this 1992 teaching aid cancels the various curses officially levied against various Protestant beliefs?...

It is my understanding that the curses cannot be reversed and certainly have not been reversed by a simple teaching tool in the form of the "Catechism of the Catholic Church".

Click to expand...

"Anathema" is a term of art in Canon Law which indicates an excommunication performed with a particularly solemn ceremony. Anathemas had nothing to do with laying on a curse. That penalty no longer exists because it was removed from the 1983 Code of Canon Law; the Church is free to abolish any canonical penalty it chooses, and it did abolish anathemas. And in any case, they never applied to non-Catholics because only Catholics are subject to Canon Law.

Anathemas did not sentence anyone to hell, were not curses, were not intended to harm the person anathematized, and did not take effect automatically. Those are all complete fabrications.

His student said:

Please "man up" when you get the time. Check it out and you'll see that I'm right.

Click to expand...

Nope, once again you're not.

His student said:

I must admit that I had not studied the Catechism before - although I have studied and discussed Roman Catholic beliefs and teachings quite a bit.

Click to expand...

It seems that you've studied Catholic teaching by listening to non-Catholics who don't know what they're talking about. I suggest you study from authentic Catholic sources, primarily the Catechism - if you haven't done that, then you haven't really studied Catholic teaching at all.

His student said:

But I also read that section to say that baptism is necessary to be incorporated in any way for salvation in the basic sense. Did I read that wrong?

Click to expand...

Read everything in the Catechism about baptism.

chilehed said:

Read everything in the Catechism about baptism.

Click to expand...

I did.

It's in the section you referred me to.

You can't miss it.

chilehed said:

"Anathema" is a term of art in Canon Law which indicates an excommunication performed with a particularly solemn ceremony.......... And in any case, they never applied to non-Catholics because only Catholics are subject to Canon Law.

Click to expand...

But you say that Protestants are considered in the catholic church and saved even if not fully associated with it through the sacraments and such.

then those partially associated catholics are excommunicated because of the things I named. Therefore they are longer a part of the church. That's either an oxymoron or a catch 22 depending on what you want to call it.

But the bottom line is that Protestants who teach the things I referred to (like me for instance) are no longer in the catholic church in any capacity and are therefore not saved.

chilehed said:

Anathemas did not sentence anyone to hell, were not curses, were not intended to harm the person anathematized,

Click to expand...

From the Catholic Encyclopedia concerning anathemas (with emphasis on the words of the Pope):

".......... we separate him from the society of all Christians, we exclude him from the bosom of our Holy Mother the Church in Heaven and on earth, we declare him excommunicated and anathematized and we judge him condemned to eternal fire with Satan and his angels and all the reprobate..........,

Grip Docility said:

I owe you an apology... chilehed...

Click to expand...

I'm not sure that you do, but if so then I gladly accept it.

Grip Docility said:

My intention was to recognize that Denominational Catholicism rarely reduces the Cross as "partially" or "insufficiently" salvic, as is the case in Protestantism, as well.

Click to expand...

I have no idea what "Denominational Catholicism" is.

Grip Docility said:

My intended point was to point out that within Catholicism and Protestantism... (Sometimes entire denominational Factions that arise)... are that there are people and factions, that arise, that are Anathema...

Click to expand...

You might want to see the clarification I gave His Student on anathemas. And while there certainly are people who call themselves Catholic who reject the teachings of the Catholic Church, that has nothing to do with the discussion (which is about what the Catholic Church actually teaches).

His student said:

I did.

It's in the section you referred me to.

You can't miss it.

Click to expand...

If you think that everything the Catechism says about Baptism is in that one section, you didn't bother to look. Stop being lazy.

chilehed said:

If you think that everything the Catechism says about Baptism is in that one section, you didn't bother to look. Stop being lazy.

Click to expand...

You know what happens when you assume don't you?

1256 The ordinary ministers of Baptism are the bishop and priest and, in the Latin Church, also the deacon. In case of necessity, any person, even someone not baptized, can baptize, if he has the required intention. the intention required is to will to do what the Church does when she baptizes, and to apply the Trinitarian baptismal formula. the Church finds the reason for this possibility in the universal saving will of God and the necessity of Baptism for salvation.

VI. The Necessity of Baptism

1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation. He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them. Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament. The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are "reborn of water and the Spirit." God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.

Look - getting back to our conversation - the excommunications are still in effect for those who teach as I and many Protestants do. No Johnny Come Lately Catechism can change that.

IMO the catechism you refer to is a tool put out by the Roman church to draw Protestants into ecumenical unity. No doubt it will lull many into complacency concerning the false doctrines of the Roman church. But I won't be one of them.

No matter how the modern catholic church tries to hide the fact - there is a radical difference between the way to salvation in Roman Catholicism and basic Protestant Christianity.

I am acknowledging now that it is possible that the R.C.'s mentioned in the OP were steeped in the Catechism you have referred to and thus were not talking about his parents achieving salvation itself but rather some kind of ecumenical growth toward unity. But the fact is that that is not the traditional message of your church. Nor, as I read things, does that Catechism negate the various anathamas in the first place.

I sincerely hope we all make it to Heaven just based on naming the name of Jesus. But I have my doubts. I consider the Roman Catholic gospel of salvation to be another gospel which (according to the Lord) is no gospel at all - no matter if it does name some of the same elements as mine.

In so far as our specific conversation here goes - I just don't care to continue. Thinking of all of the lives the Roman church has destroyed and the simple gospel they have kept people from hearing and responding to over the years from the dark ages through now (particularly in Latin America) just make me mad and it's not good for my spirit to talk about it more than I already have.

I don't know that you'll believe me. But I very sincerely hope that the way to Heaven is wider than I think it is. I hope that anyone who names the name of Christ will be saved - no matter if his doctrine is correct or not. That goes for the likes of Jason and his works gospel,Orthodox, Roman catholic, Mormons, and J.W.'s as well as all Protestant groups from Calvinists to Arminians to Oneness Pentecostals to Word of Faith and back woods snake handlers.

To be truthful though, I think the way is narrow and that a great many will not find the way because of the fine line between those who are counting on various works or church activities and those who are resting in the work of Jesus Christ at Calvary for their salvation. I pray I'm wrong. Nothing would make me happier when I get to the other side than to see that God's grace includes us all in Christ.

Grip Docility said:

The Lillie’s of the field are provided for.

Click to expand...

And life is more than the body. Whats that mean?

To All Who Will Hear:

As for the Belief Alone Proponent who will quote John 8:15 in defense of their belief:

Well, Jesus was referring to their judging by carnal (fleshy or unrighteous) means, and He was not referring to some kind of outward judgment of sin as being wrong.

If one were to skip back a chapter, they would read this:


For Jesus condemned the Jews in John 8 not because they did not believe in some fantasy candy land belief that says, "Trust in the finished work of Christ alone." No verse even says that in the Bible.

In fact, in John 8, we learn that the Jews that Jesus is talking to are said to be of their father the devil, and the lusts of their father they will do. So Jesus is condemning their actions, and not a lack of belief.

"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it." (John 8:44).

Revelation 21:8 says all liars will have their part in the Lake of Fire.

Jesus focused on desiring the Jews to obey God's Word as a part of being of God.

"He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God."
(John 8:47).

Jesus says they did not hear God's Word (i.e. they did not obey because they did the lusts of their father) and this is why they are not of God. So this refutes a sin and still be saved gospel.

This truth in John 8:47 is even confirmed by John.

"In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother." (1 John 3:10).

To Anyone Who Will Hear:

Verses I bring forth are rarely dealt with by Belief Alone Proponents. I have yet to have a Belief Alone Proponent explain how their belief is morally superior or how it would work via real world example (or parable). Instead, I sometimes get insults in how it is all me working to save myself and God plays no part in my salvation (When this is not true). I believe we are initially and ultimately saved by God's grace (Jesus and by having faith in His death and resurrection) (i.e. the Justification Process). I believe that God does the good work through me in the Sanctification Process (After one is saved by God's grace), as well. So if one accuses me of working alone to save myself, or if one accuses me of being the Second Adam, they either do not understand what I believe, or they prefer to falsely accuse me in order to lift up their own belief wrongfully. In either case, I desire for the goodness of God to be upon all regardless if anyone has wronged me with their words in a false way.

Blessings to you all in the Lord today.

Sincerely,

~ Jason.

ChicanaRose said:

Thank you for your contribution, Jason. @Grip Docility has started a thread about this issue recently:

Sola Fide (Faith Alone) Sets the Record Straight

Click to expand...

Your welcome.

Grip Docility said:

This is going to sound cold, callous and hard nosed... but they didn't believe unto True Belief. How can a worker that teaches other workers to sew unto their own flesh, "Produce fruit'?

It is the workman that equips others to Love, Believe, Trust and allow God to guide other's, through them, into absolute Trust in the VINE, that will be approved.

I say this with heavy heart, but I cannot lie. If God the Son, who was perfect, continually said He could do no works apart from His Father, but what His Father gave Him to do... how much more should we, who are imperfect, speak in the same manner about our TRUE VINE?

Click to expand...

By true belief, do you mean they were not truly in Christ? I don’t understand your statement “How can a worker that teaches other workers to sew unto their own flesh, "Produce fruit'?”

You said “It is the workman that equips others to Love, Believe, Trust and allow God to guide other's, through them, into absolute Trust in the VINE, that will be approved.” So why didn’t the workman equip the branches who are cut off in John 15:2 or those who didn’t abide in John 15:6? If God will undoubtedly make those who believe persevere how can anyone fail to abide? The Bible is very clear on this, you can only serve one master. A person either serves God or satan. He cannot serve both at the same time. So if a person is in Christ he is serving God. He cannot serve God unless he believes. Many people who advocate eternal security must say that a person who fails to abide in Christ was never a true believer. This would mean that they were never serving God and were never in Christ to begin with. But this is a contradiction to John 15:2 where Jesus specifically says The Father cuts off every branch IN ME that does not bear fruit. Another clear indication that Jesus is in fact referring to true believers is the fact that He is only speaking to His 11 faithful apostles who were undoubtedly true believers when He said in verse 4 “abide in Me and I in you for without Me you can do nothing”. Right here we have the very same example of true believers and Jesus tells them to abide (remain) in Him. If Jesus was only referring to false professors in verse 2 then why is He now telling His 11 faithful apostles whom we all know without a doubt were true believers to abide in Him if they are incapable of failing to abide? No one who advocates eternal security can answer this question. Some dodge it, many say this is referring to false professors, some even mention 1 Corinthians 3:11-15, but these either contradict what was said or do not fit situation. Those who mention 1 Cor 3 don’t fail to realize that the builder is abiding in Christ and bearing fruit by building on the foundation of Christ. Furthermore in 1 Cor 3 notice it is the works that are tested by fire not the builder. In John 15 the branches that do not abide are not bearing fruit and it is the branch itself that is cast away to wither then cast into the fire not the fruit. Advocates of eternal security always resort to some serious scriptural acrobatics in their attempts to explain away what is clearly written. John 15 is very straight forward and clearly supported by the early church writings and teachings. I understand this can be very hard to accept but at the same time very clear to see.

Grip Docility said:

What does God promise that He does not provide?

Click to expand...

What promise are you referring to exactly?

Grip Docility said:

It starts with Christ. It ends with Christ. He provides what we need. He is our Armor and Cloak.

He will not fail to provide what you need.

Click to expand...

Context Context Context Who said The Lord will provide and what was he talking about? Abraham said it to Isaac when Isaac asked where their animal for the sacrifice was. How is this even relevant to this discussion? It sounds really nice yes but it is taken out of the context in which it was spoken and presented. Why didn’t He provide for the branches that are cut off and didn’t abide?

BNR32FAN said:

By true belief, do you mean they were not truly in Christ? I don’t understand your statement “How can a worker that teaches other workers to sew unto their own flesh, "Produce fruit'?”

You said “It is the workman that equips others to Love, Believe, Trust and allow God to guide other's, through them, into absolute Trust in the VINE, that will be approved.” So why didn’t the workman equip the branches who are cut off in John 15:2 or those who didn’t abide in John 15:6? If God will undoubtedly make those who believe persevere how can anyone fail to abide? The Bible is very clear on this, you can only serve one master. A person either serves God or satan. He cannot serve both at the same time. So if a person is in Christ he is serving God. He cannot serve God unless he believes. Many people who advocate eternal security must say that a person who fails to abide in Christ was never a true believer. This would mean that they were never serving God and were never in Christ to begin with. But this is a contradiction to John 15:2 where Jesus specifically says The Father cuts off every branch IN ME that does not bear fruit. Another clear indication that Jesus is in fact referring to true believers is the fact that He is only speaking to His 11 faithful apostles who were undoubtedly true believers when He said in verse 4 “abide in Me and I in you for without Me you can do nothing”. Right here we have the very same example of true believers and Jesus tells them to abide (remain) in Him. If Jesus was only referring to false professors in verse 2 then why is He now telling His 11 faithful apostles whom we all know without a doubt were true believers to abide in Him if they are incapable of failing to abide? No one who advocates eternal security can answer this question. Some dodge it, many say this is referring to false professors, some even mention 1 Corinthians 3:11-15, but these either contradict what was said or do not fit situation. Those who mention 1 Cor 3 don’t fail to realize that the builder is abiding in Christ and bearing fruit by building on the foundation of Christ. Furthermore in 1 Cor 3 notice it is the works that are tested by fire not the builder. In John 15 the branches that do not abide are not bearing fruit and it is the branch itself that is cast away to wither then cast into the fire not the fruit. Advocates of eternal security always resort to some serious scriptural acrobatics in their attempts to explain away what is clearly written. John 15 is very straight forward and clearly supported by the early church writings and teachings. I understand this can be very hard to accept but at the same time very clear to see.

Click to expand...

Brother... the broken branches refer to The Enemy of the Gospel Jews.

There is even hope for them. Romans 11:11-36 will answer your question in full.

Israel had a chance to come out of Israel, before it was cursed for a time. The OC presence of God was Crucified. Those not in Christ, after Pentecost occurred and Paul ministered, were counted broken off from the New Man. I speak of Christ... the NEW MAN.

The official breaking off happens at the stoning of Steven.

All Love in Jesus Christ to you, brother of the BOC.

BNR32FAN said:

Context Context Context Who said The Lord will provide and what was he talking about? Abraham said it to Isaac when Isaac asked where their animal for the sacrifice was. How is this even relevant to this discussion? It sounds really nice yes but it is taken out of the context in which it was spoken and presented. Why didn’t He provide for the branches that are cut off and didn’t abide?

Click to expand...

Context, Context, Context...

Satan’s greatest lie is that we lack, because God doesn’t provide all.

Eve lacked nothing. She was nude, unashamed and clothed in the Creators perfect craftsmanship.

She had her Help Mate, all the most beautiful provision of the Garden... and peace.

By convincing and deceiving Eve that she lacked the wisdom of God, she reached for death.

God would have taught Adam and Even anything they wished to know. Instead, Eve hopped on the hard knocks express.

What He Promises, He will Provide. I assure you.

Grip Docility said:

Brother... the broken branches refer to The Enemy of the Gospel Jews.

There is even hope for them. Romans 11:11-36 will answer your question in full.

Israel had a chance to come out of Israel, before it was cursed for a time. The OC presence of God was Crucified. Those not in Christ, after Pentecost occurred and Paul ministered, were counted broken off from the New Man. I speak of Christ... the NEW MAN.

The official breaking off happens at the stoning of Steven.

All Love in Jesus Christ to you, brother of the BOC.

Click to expand...

Romans 11 only strengthens my position that branches that are grafted in can be cut off and grafted in again if they repent. In Romans 11 Paul is talking to Gentile believers explaining to them that they themselves can be cut off for unbelief, prideful boasting and arrogance just like the Jews were cut off for their unbelief.