How does one become a saint?

[James4_14]

I can not judge, I just ment that I had had no reason to believe that he was in heaven, but I can not judge that he is in hell either, I can not read a mans heart

Mixed signals are not the form of sound words. You say you do not judge but your posts say you do. You have designated others as being in Heaven by reason. Why not Martin Luther? What is your reason?

 

[Forge3]

By giving onseself completely over to God. A work of grace and choosing.

 

[Rhamiel]

Mixed signals are not the form of sound words. You say you do not judge but your posts say you do. You have designated others as being in Heaven by reason. Why not Martin Luther? What is your reason?

I do not judge, but the Church as a whole recognizes some as leading lives of extraordinary virtue and are thus worthy of emulating in the Christian life.
the Church says that some people are in heaven, but I do not think it has ever once said that someone is for sure in hell, insted trusting that God might have given them the oppertunity to repent in the final moments of this life

 

[James4_14]

I do not judge, but the Church as a whole recognizes some as leading lives of extraordinary virtue and are thus worthy of emulating in the Christian life.
the Church says that some people are in heaven, but I do not think it has ever once said that someone is for sure in hell, insted trusting that God might have given them the oppertunity to repent in the final moments of this life

Evidently you think the great Saint Martin Luther needed to repent. Repent for what? For calling the catholic church for what it was?? You have placed yourself in an untenable position. You disregard one's position in Christ and elevate their standards as seen in relation to the rcc point of view.
If not for Martin Luther Christendom would still be totally in the dark. God sent him for service and he answered the call.

 

[Tzaousios]

Mixed signals are not the form of sound words. You say you do not judge but your posts say you do. You have designated others as being in Heaven by reason. Why not Martin Luther? What is your reason?

Do you think Innocent III is in Heaven? How about Gregory VII? John Paul II? Please tell us your reasons.

 

[James4_14]

Do you think Innocent III is in Heaven? How about Gregory VII? John Paul II? Please tell us your reasons.

It is not for me to say so I will not. Simple as that. I will not put myself in a position to judge anyone....period.

***Rom 14:4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.

I only judge doctrines with Scriptures:

***Matt 7:14-20
14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

 

[Tzaousios]

It is not for me to say so I will not. Simple as that. I will not put myself in a position to judge anyone....period.

Uh huh...but Saint Martin Luther is in there, right?

 

[Tzaousios]

I only judge doctrines with Scriptures:

***Matt 7:14-20
14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

So one should conclude that you think Innocent III, Gregory VII, and John Paul II are false prophets and ravening wolves in sheep's clothing?

 

[Standing Up]

I can not judge, I just ment that I had had no reason to believe that he [Martin Luther] was in heaven, but I can not judge that he is in hell either, I can not read a mans heart

To again bring up the other thread, I at least appreciate the honesty. I disagree, but appreciate the honesty in saying RC doesn't know if non-RC are in heaven. (Presumably RC believes RCers are in heaven.)

 

[James4_14]

Uh huh...but Saint Martin Luther is in there, right?

I have never in my life put the term "saint" in front of anyone's name until now. Do you know why? It is to show that the rcc does not designate him a saint for obvious reasons. Many assume too much and elevate themselves and is the same as being a self-appointed vicar. Only God determines those who merit salvation.

 

[James4_14]

So one should conclude that you think Innocent III, Gregory VII, and John Paul II are false prophets and ravening wolves in sheep's clothing?

You may conclude whatever you like.

 

[ptomwebster]

"How does one become a saint?"

Be drafted by an American professional football franchise in New Orleans.

 

[Tzaousios]

You may conclude whatever you like.

I do not see what you mean by this other than that you would rather make insinuations than outright statements. Why won't you take a stand on the Scriptures you posted?

 

[Catherineanne]

You assume much. Jesus is our only intercessor. He is the only one Who has been on Earth that now resides in Heaven.

This is non standard Christian belief. Christ is NOT the only inhabitant of eternity. He is surrounded by the whole company of heaven; angels, archangels, principalities, powers, dominions etc, and saints.

See the Book of Revelation, inter alia, for further details.

 

[Catherineanne]

You have designated others as being in Heaven by reason. [/b]

I think you mistook what Rhamiel said. He said saints are those who are in heaven, and you took that to mean that all the saints are in heaven because they have been designated as saints on earth; ie by man.

In fact it is the other way round. They become saints by virtue of their faithful lives, which have now ended, and they have entered eternity by the Grace of God.

What Rhamiel actually meant, I think, is that anyone who has entered eternity with God is a saint, as indeed is true. This is not just those who the Church has been able to recognise as saints, but includes many tens of thousands of others known only to God, and may or may not include Martin Luther; it is not for us to judge either way those who are not designated as saints by the Church.

The Church does not create saints; it recognises what God has himself accomplished, and it does not do this lightly.

 

[Rhamiel]

To again bring up the other thread, I at least appreciate the honesty. I disagree, but appreciate the honesty in saying RC doesn't know if non-RC are in heaven. (Presumably RC believes RCers are in heaven.)

thank you, i try to be honest

I have never in my life put the term "saint" in front of anyone's name until now. Do you know why? It is to show that the rcc does not designate him a saint for obvious reasons. Many assume too much and elevate themselves and is the same as being a self-appointed vicar. Only God determines those who merit salvation.

ok, so you are not claiming to know if Martin Luther is in heaven correct?
I am just trying to understand where you stand on this issue

 

[Rhamiel]

I think you mistook what Rhamiel said. He said saints are those who are in heaven, and you took that to mean that all the saints are in heaven because they have been designated as saints on earth; ie by man.

In fact it is the other way round. They become saints by virtue of their faithful lives, which have now ended, and they have entered eternity by the Grace of God.

What Rhamiel actually meant, I think, is that anyone who has entered eternity with God is a saint, as indeed is true. This is not just those who the Church has been able to recognise as saints, but includes many tens of thousands of others known only to God, and may or may not include Martin Luther; it is not for us to judge either way those who are not designated as saints by the Church.

The Church does not create saints; it recongises what God has himself accomplished, and it does not do this lightly.

thank you so much
you are my dear sister in Christ and you have put my thoughts into words very well

 

[James4_14]

This is non standard Christian belief. Christ is NOT the only inhabitant of eternity. He is surrounded by the whole company of heaven; angels, archangels, principalities, powers, dominions etc, and saints.

See the Book of Revelation, inter alia, for further details.

I am speaking of humans. I do not care one iota of standard Christian belief. Israel believed 10 and spent 40 years in the wilderness for rejecting Joshua and Caleb. The power of orthodoxy. The book of Revelation in its entirity is yet future.

 

[James4_14]

So one should conclude that you think Innocent III, Gregory VII, and John Paul II are false prophets and ravening wolves in sheep's clothing?

Check their history and come to your own conclusion. Actions speak louder than words.

 

[Tzaousios]

I am speaking of humans. I do not care one iota of standard Christian belief.

Who said what Catherineanne was trying to explain was necessarily "standard," whatever that means to you? It sounds like you were making a pejorative reference to what she believes. It is orthodoxy.

Does this also mean that you do not care one iota about what is orthodox, making it up as you go along and however you wish to interpret Scripture?

Israel believed 10 and spent 40 years in the wilderness for rejecting Joshua and Caleb. The power of orthodoxy.

Another pejorative reference to orthodoxy, no doubt because you believe it is connected specifically with Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy.

The book of Revelation in its entirity is yet future.

This is only because you choose to believe that Dispensational Futurism is the "right" and "only" lense through which to interpret Revelation, despite however many times you may tell yourself that it is "only what the Bible plainly says."