False Conversions/ salvations

[lmnop9876]

I do believe it is you that fail to understand that to them saints are not "ordinary " in any sense, and unlike the scriptural definition that they are ordained of God, they are ordained by the church.
The church defines what makes a saint, investigates their life and then officially declares them saints.
They have a special position in heaven and have "specialties" like looking for lost items (St Anthony), or the "impossible" (St Jude) or protection against rats (Gertrude of Nivelles,Martin of Porres, Servatus) even computers (Isidore of Seville).
They are indeed mediators because instead of going to the throne of God, as the scriptures tell us we now may, they go to the saint and ask the saint to go to God for them .

That having omnipresent deceased men hear and answer your prayer and intercede for you would surely be an "extra Point" in your favor it might seem or else they would go directly to God as we are told we can now do in the name of Jesus .

perhaps you're thinking of the Catholic definition here? i was thinking of the orthodox idea of saints, which happens to include all people in Heaven, so there goes your theory that they're ordained by the Church.
i personally have no problem with asking another person to pray for me, i just don't think those in Heaven can hear me asking them to pray for me.

 

[holeinone]

perhaps you're thinking of the Catholic definition here? i was thinking of the orthodox idea of saints, which happens to include all people in Heaven, so there goes your theory that they're ordained by the Church.
i personally have no problem with asking another person to pray for me, i just don't think those in Heaven can hear me asking them to pray for me.

Neither do I. I think the sounds of their songs and praise to God drown out our pitiful voices

 

[lmnop9876]

Neither do I. I think the sounds of their songs and praise to God drown out our pitiful voices

but perhaps they do pray for us, I do not know. however, as they are not God, I don't think they can hear us asking them to pray for us. if they do it, they will do it without us asking them to.

 

[Catherineanne]

I find it bizarre that anyone could think that praying to the Saints is communicating with the dead. There is no such thing as a dead Christian. Can't be done. To have a 'God of the still living and the already dead' seems a rather shabby post modern divinity, to me.

The Saints in Heaven are as alive as you and I, and more so, because they have entered into eternity; their salvation is assured, and their role is now to pray eternally for the world, and all its people. By adding our prayers to theirs, and theirs to ours, we stand alongside them at the very gates of heaven.

To ignore the whole company of heaven, the hosts of angels and archangels, and the whole ranks of Saints, is rather to miss the point of the Resurrection.

Which is that Our God is the God of the Living.

As for the notion of 'false conversion', I do not believe there is such a thing. I believe that the seed once planted by God, will always bear fruit. But sometimes it will take a short time, sometimes a long time. But it never fails, just as God never fails.

 

[Reformationist]

The Saints in Heaven are as alive as you and I, and more so, because they have entered into eternity; their salvation is assured, and their role is now to pray eternally for the world, and all its people. By adding our prayers to theirs, and theirs to ours, we stand alongside them at the very gates of heaven.

And does combining our prayers with theirs make our prayers more likely to be answered or granted by God?

As for the notion of 'false conversion', I do not believe there is such a thing. I believe that the seed once planted by God, will always bear fruit. But sometimes it will take a short time, sometimes a long time. But it never fails, just as God never fails.

So, in the end, all will be saved and granted eternal life in Heaven?

 

[lmnop9876]

I find it bizarre that anyone could think that praying to the Saints is communicating with the dead. There is no such thing as a dead Christian. Can't be done. To have a 'God of the still living and the already dead' seems a rather shabby post modern divinity, to me.

The Saints in Heaven are as alive as you and I, and more so, because they have entered into eternity; their salvation is assured, and their role is now to pray eternally for the world, and all its people. By adding our prayers to theirs, and theirs to ours, we stand alongside them at the very gates of heaven.

To ignore the whole company of heaven, the hosts of angels and archangels, and the whole ranks of Saints, is rather to miss the point of the Resurrection.

Which is that Our God is the God of the Living.

i don't think prayers to departed saints is communicating with the dead, as they're not dead, they're alive. however, as they're not omnipresent, omniscient, or omnipotent, i don't think they can hear my prayers. that's not to say they don't pray for us, however.

 

[Catherineanne]

So, in the end, all will be saved and granted eternal life in Heaven?

Only God can answer those questions.

I have nothing more to say to you, here or elsewhere.

 

[Reformationist]

Only God can answer those questions.

So you are not aware if the Bible says that all will be saved or only some?

I have nothing more to say to you, here or elsewhere.

Oh. Okay. Well, good job on practicing what you preach. Good luck with that.

 

[Jon_]

Oh. Okay. Well, good job on practicing what you preach. Good luck with that.

You're killin' me, Don!

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

 

[Croooz]

.

 

[orthedoxy]

I believe that all who truly believe and truly confess will be eternally saved, though I do not believe their acts of doing either are the basis for that salvation.



I am well aware of that.



I have no idea why you equate God creating faith in someone to man being saved because of his works so I don't know how to address this.

You may not espouse salvation exclusively by works but you do claim that a person's works play just as pivitol role in their salvation as does the work of Christ.

I don't misunderstand it. I understand what you believe.



Salvation by faith and works is just as heretical as salvation by works so I don't know why you feel that this vindicates you.

I’m not saying our works saves us just that they are required for salvation.
works and faith+works are not the same thing.
Is faith required for salvation?
Is confessing required for salvation?
If so that would be grace + faith + work= salvation.
I would take it one step further. We believe in grace alone that’s why we baptize infants.
Your church doesn’t baptize infants because they say they have to come on their own and believe then they could be baptized. That to me sounds like work salvation.

I know. That is heresy.

What is your definition of heresy?
Here is what Websters dictionaries definition. “one who dissents from an accepted belief or doctrine”
Can you show me the accepted believe of the Church is faith alone?
I can show you faith and works goes all the way back to Jesus and the disciples. The Church always believed in faith plus works.
Can you tell me when did the RC Church start to believe in faith plus works?
Why are all the historic churches(RC,EO,OO) believe in faith plus works?
How can you claim your 500 year old teaching of faith alone is the accepted teaching of the Church for 2000 years?

His "foreknowledge" is based on what He purposes so, yes, His plan of salvation is based on what He purposes. It is not, however, based on any merit man generates by his obedience.

As much weight as I'm sure you put in your erroneous understanding of that passage, the point is that the sheep are not the sheep because they did good works. They are the sheep because God has set them aside according to His own purpose in election. As I previously stated, our obedience is the result of His work in us, not the cause of it.

Granted grace is required for someone to believe and the works are done by the power of the Holy Spirit. What you fail to see is in Matt 25 he is judging the works for salvation and not basing on whether the people are chosen or not. Read the verse Jesus says enter because you clothed the naked fed the hungry (he is judging salvation on the works done in faith and not without).
We can read Rom 2:5-11 “will render to each one according to his deeds” the same thing as Matt 25.
There are many places that say the same thing.
I’m not saying we are saved by our doing but by God requires faith and works in order to save us.

It is fine to distinguish between God eternally judging someone and His gracious gift of faith but separating them, as if one could ever occur without the other is utter blasphemy. God demands of fallen man faith and then graciously supplies it according to His own eternal plan of redemption. Faith is a constituent element of eternal salvation but it is not something we provide. Our faith in God is the natural, and invariable, result of His work of regeneration.


One is eternally saved based on the work of Christ on the Cross. That happened long before many believers were even born. In that regard, yes, man is eternally saved before he believes. However, there are two other ways in which salvation is spoken of in the Gospel. Man is eternally saved when God imputes unto Him the merit of Christ's vicarious atonement. He is progressively saved as God sanctifies him from his sinful flesh. And, he is finally saved when all vestiges of sin are removed from his being and he is glorified in Heaven.

I don’t see how you can say you are being saved or will be saved when God saved you and once saved you can’t loose it?
I don’t see how you can say he saved you when he died 2000 years ago and the bible says you have to believe to be saved?
Do you believe you have to receive the sacrifice before you are saved? If so then you weren’t saved 2000 years ago but at the time you believed or receive the sacrifice.

No, because God changes the heart of fallen man through His loving work of regeneration, not by His omnipotence.



It may be the limitations of your knowledge of the language but, these are contradictory statements. If the Holy Spirit's influence is sufficient to cause someone to come to God in faith then nothing else is necessary to bring it to pass. You follow up saying that it is sufficient by claiming that man must also accept it for it to come to pass. So, which is it? Is the influence of the Holy Spirit sufficient or is the Holy Spirit impotent in the face of man's will to choose either for or against God?

Let me put it this way, we can say Dan can fix my computer he is capable but I need to bring my computer to Dan in order for him to fix the computer.
Is it accurate to say Dan can fix my computer?
It’s a matter of wording if you are asking can God force you to love him I would say no or can the Holy Spirit make you believe the answer is no.

You and God get the credit for without both of your works, God cannot save you. As I said, you believe in a salvation by works.



This is an anthropomorphism about the wickedness of man, not a statement about the inability of Christ to bring His will to pass. All that God purposes shall come to pass and none can stay His hand. It's called sovereignty. Look it up.

You make it sound like if we are not Robots God is not sovereign.
I believe God can create free moral being and still be sovereign. God is in control because at the end he is going to judge us, he is in control because he can put an end to the universe at any time.

It was not His plan to do so. I agree that He could have regenerated everyone. He just chose to manifest the dispensation of His grace and carry on the line of His elect in the manner He chose to do so.

I just don’t see how you can understand the bible that way?
Genesis 6:6
The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain.
Why would he be grieved?
Another example is why would Moses intercede for Sodom and gomorrah and ask God to spare them for the sake of few believers?
If he believed the way you did he would ask God to make them believe.

orthedoxy, I am a reformed Christian. Please don't presume to tell me what I should call myself. You just worry about reconciling the abundant inconsistancies and biblical errors in your view. I'll worry about the title I bear. If it makes you more comfortable, I am simply a Christian.



If your doctrines were as they are now your denomination is in desparate need of reform so your point is moot.



I don't call myself a reformed Roman Catholic.



I have no clue why you'd dare me as I've debated those very topics with all of those heretical denominations since I came to this MB, more than 10,000 posts ago.

I’m not asking you to debate the topics. I’m just trying to point out your view of these topics was not accepted by any historic Church.

No one is making fun of you. Your denomination, and thus you, espouse heresy. That is a serious charge. We don't take such things lightly in this forum.



I am not gifted and your English is much better than my Armenian. I'll ask if I have questions.


God bless

I have to admit you are the best they have in the reformed forum.
God bless