Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
That is correct.
The only conclusion is that there is no assurance of salvation, that one may not actually be saved.
Only God knows.
Okay, that's all I need to know. You alone are right and the "pack of Legalists, bent and angry"(!), are wrong (because they don't agree with you). They are, obviously, not born again, or they are "fallen from Grace".
How does it feel to be the sole embodiment of wisdom?
2) Post #627 - demonstration of the apostle Paul's personal "error of Cain" in the Scriptures presented therein, keeping in mind that he received his teaching from Jesus Christ personally, in the third heaven
Okay, that's all I need to know. You alone are right and the "pack of Legalists, bent and angry"(!), are wrong (because they don't agree with you). They are, obviously, not born again, or they are "fallen from Grace".
How does it feel to be the sole embodiment of wisdom?
Theology Means
Yes, I've waded, and they become clearer and clearer, especially in light of historic teachings from the ancient eastern and western church. Either way, none of the bible was written as a clear systematic theological treatment of the faith, or even as that as the intention. Yes, Paul was striving to explain the gospel better especially as controversies arose, but the church would later work on bringing it all together and teaching it in creeds, catechisms, etc, as well as define doctrine at council as needed.Agreed!
Too much standard pablum, and not enough thorough study with consistent understanding of Scripture.
Actually, the book of Romans was written precisely for that purpose, to present the full gospel--God's plan of salvation and righteousness from God for mankind, Jew and Gentile alike, and he definitely accomplishes that purpose therein.
And Peter tells us why Paul's words are misunderstood, because they "are hard to understand"
(2 Peter 3:16), and not because they are systematic doctrine, and if you've ever waded through the doctrines of Romans 2, 5, 7, 9, bringing them all into consistency with the rest of Scripture, you'll agree.
Would you care to Biblically demonstrate the misapplication?No the conclusion is that those verses are clearly being misapplied to make salvation appear more difficult, complicated and uncertain than it actually is.
And you know that he did not, how?Im not certain where you get this theology you make up? Is it JW or Mormon, as it not Catholic.
See, you just posted a total fantasy,.... whereby you say that Paul got his Gospel, Church Doctrine, when he went into the 3rd Heaven.
So, you made this up, or you got this from a liar's commentary,???
Here is where Paul said He received all the Church Doctrine and the knowledge of "justification by faith".
Take it from Paul., if that's possible for you, Clare73
"But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
And that negates being translated to the third heaven where he received it, how?17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.
18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days."
It was in this 3 yrs of separation, in "arabia", that God as Christ revealed to Paul what Paul refers to as "my Gospel"
John 1:9 is talking to people who need to be FORGIVEN, because they aren't.
The born again, do not need to be forgiven , as the BORN AGAIN are ALWAYS FORGIVEN, and always "Made RIGHTEOUS".
The Born again, have BECOME...>"the Righteousness OF GOD.....>IN CHRIST".
So, that is their salvaiton.
That is their ETERNAL SITUATION.
The born again are always """" THE RIGHTEOUSNESS""".....see that ?
They don't agree with Paul, or Christ.
Here is how you can tell.
God says, and Paul teaches....>"Justified by Faith", "without works or deeds of the law".
Another straw man.So, when you find anyone who is teaching that you ARE saved based on lifestyle, law keeping, commandment keeping, works, self effort...then you are not dealing with Justification by faith.
No "corrupted gospel" in Jude.You are dealing with what Jude describes, as a corrupted Gospel, and what Paul describes as "another Gospel".
Salvation is not based on you and your performance.
Its only based on The finished work of Jesus.
= The Cross.
So, when you find a "pack" who can't understand this, and do not want it that way, and in fact argue their righteous in place of the Blood of Jesus, then you have found Galatians 1:8.
“If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”
1 John 1:9 NASB1995
John included himself in this statement. Was he not born again?
Would you care to Biblically demonstrate the misapplication?
I kinda' prefer in the light of the NT.Yes, I've waded, and they become clearer and clearer,
especially in light of historic teachings from the ancient eastern and western church.
Enough already with the standard pablum.Either way, none of the bible was written as a clear systematic theological treatment of the faith, or even as that as the intention.
I maintain it is all reconciled when correctly understood.Yes, Paul was striving to explain the gospel better especially as controversies arose, but the church would later work on bringing it all together and teaching it in creeds, catechisms, etc, as well as define doctrine at council as needed.
In any case I'll maintain to the end that Scripture can sometimes be vague and seemingly ambiguous or even contradictory on important matters of the faith, which is exactly why sincere believers, including scholars, often soundly-and plausibly- disagree over such points.
This is a common error in reading 1 John. His writing is both gentle and inclusive, similar to a parent telling a child "we always wash our hands before eating". It is inclusive but not accusatory.
True. In Catholic teaching, our state of justice is based on who we are, not merely who we're imputed to be, who we've become by the grace of God as we now enter relationship with Him via faith. And we're expected to produce, so to speak, with the seed of grace given, depending on the time and opportunity also given with more expected of those given more. Again, the Parable of the Talents gives clarification here.A declaration of not guilty and right-standing with God's justice (justification) is not holiness.
YesThe righteousness you are ascribing to justification is actually due to faith (Romans 1:17).
If that floats yer boat. Others simply call it truth. But truth can be rather mundane at times alright.Enough already with the standard pablum.
Good things take time.Non-responsive.
But, but, Clare, what are we going to argue, er, converse, about if that's true?I think our problem is nomenclature.
He taught-much- by word and deed.Jesus is God, so, He is above "theology", exactly as God is above the law.
What Jesus had to do was fulfill the law, as a human....and live a sinless life, also.
And He did just that, perfectly.
Had He not, then His sacrifice would not have been a "one time eternal " success.
Yes the parent is not excluded from washing their hands before eating. Another similar statement would be “if we deny Him, He will deny us”. This was a message in a personal letter from Paul to Timothy. Both were saved, both were born again, both were capable of denying Christ, and both were capable of being denied by Christ.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?