Works and Salvation

[Obsidian]

Hey Spartacus, how about you lose the obnoxious sarcasm and get some sense. I never questioned Jesus. I questioned your idiotic interpretation of his command. If Jesus said that we had to obey NT morals perfectly, then we're all going to hell.

My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have one who speaks to the Father in our defense—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One. He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

The idea that we ourselves have to live perfect lives, when Jesus has already done so for us, is frankly about the dumbest theological idea I've ever heard. There is absolutely no "good news" in that type of "gospel" whatsoever. I didn't realize that even Catholics believed such an extreme idea -- at least not since the death of Novatian and a few other schismatics.

God doesn't force us to return His Love. He is always drawing us to Himself, but he's not going to drag us against our will. If we were to be dragged to Heaven against our will, then Heaven would be a place of torment anyway.

We already chose Heaven when we accepted Christ. And as far as I know, even Catholics believe that the new heaven and new earth will contain no sin. Obviously there is an alteration in free will at some point.

We still have control over our own actions. If the Holy Spirit really did take complete control over us, we'd never fail in our Christian commitments- ever. If the Holy Spirit can protect us from the big sins, from turning away completely from God, why doesn't he prevent us from turning away even a little?

He doesn't sanctify us for the purpose of getting us into heaven. He sanctifies us because 1) he wants to and because 2) sanctification gives glory to himself and to the church. Furthermore, sanctification of humanity is part of the redemption of the physical world during the Messanic era, prophesied in the OT. God never promised in the Bible that Christians would never sin.

I do think that your free will objection helps expain the matter. I didn't say that Christians lose their free will. As a general rule, free will glorifies God. The promise of heavenly rewards can augment the faith of Christians, which obviously glorifies God. What I did say, is that we lose some of our free will. We lose it because God has written his law onto our hearts in order to fulfill Jesus's commitment that "No one can take them out of my hand." If we had the exact same level of free will as OT Israel, it's hard to see how we could be any better at representing God than they were.

[MarcusAndreas]

Obsidian. I want a simple "Yes" or "No" answer to this question. Nothing more
Can a person who claims faith in Christ but unrepentantly hates moral law with his action go to Heaven?

[T-Shirt Ninja]

Can a person who claims faith in Christ but unrepentantly hates moral law with his action go to Heaven?

Mark, I think you need to realize that the Protestant answer to that question is a resounding no. We don't believe in antinomianism. I think most Protestants would call that person a false convert.

I want to ask you a question: can a person who claims Christ and loves the moral law but doesn't believe his own works count for salvation go to heaven?

[MarcusAndreas]

If he follow the law, sure. Thanks for clearing up the antinominianism issue, by the way.

[RBerman]

If he follow the law, sure.

I agree that such a person will go to heaven if he follows the law. But not in any sense because he follows the law. Do you understand the distinction, and do you agree?

[MarcusAndreas]

I see what are getting at, but no. I do not agree.

[Obsidian]

Obsidian. I want a simple "Yes" or "No" answer to this question. Nothing more
Can a person who claims faith in Christ but unrepentantly hates moral law with his action go to Heaven?

Theoretically, yes. I think we all "hate the moral law" to varying degrees, and God doesn't sanctify us 100% right at the moment of conversion. Sanctification is a process.

Practically, however, if a man puts his faith in Christ, and then lives a good while longer without ever showing any improvement in his level of morality, then I would doubt that he ever really believed.


-----------------

Also, I mentioned C.S. Lewis's position on sanctification early, and one of y'all didn't believe me. Here is a link showing that C.S. Lewis believed sanctificayion was an improvement process, not a process dependent on objective standards. It's in sections 2, 3, and onwards at this link:
http://www.philosophyforlife.com/mc32.htm

I don't cite Lewis because I view him as any authority, but because his argument seems sensible to me.

[Thersites]

Hey Spartacus, how about you lose the obnoxious sarcasm and get some sense. I never questioned Jesus. I questioned your idiotic interpretation of his command. If Jesus said that we had to obey NT morals perfectly, then we're all going to hell.

How else are we supposed to interpret the commands? (And I had hoped I'd made somewhat clear that I think it is not as neccessary to practice morals perfectly as to try to. We're gonna screw up, but we have to try).

The idea that we ourselves have to live perfect lives, when Jesus has already done so for us, is frankly about the dumbest theological idea I've ever heard. There is absolutely no "good news" in that type of "gospel" whatsoever. I didn't realize that even Catholics believed such an extreme idea -- at least not since the death of Novatian and a few other schismatics.

How is it extreme to presume that when Jesus speaks, there's an off-chance that He just might mean what He is saying?

We already chose Heaven when we accepted Christ. And as far as I know, even Catholics believe that the new heaven and new earth will contain no sin. Obviously there is an alteration in free will at some point.

In Heaven, our Free Will will not just be altered, but perfected as only the Presence of God can perfect it

He doesn't sanctify us for the purpose of getting us into heaven. He sanctifies us because 1) he wants to and because 2) sanctification gives glory to himself and to the church. Furthermore, sanctification of humanity is part of the redemption of the physical world during the Messanic era, prophesied in the OT. God never promised in the Bible that Christians would never sin.

Well, why not? If preventing Christians from falling away completely glorifies the Church, then why does preventing them from falling away at all not glorify it even more?

I do think that your free will objection helps expain the matter. I didn't say that Christians lose their free will. As a general rule, free will glorifies God. The promise of heavenly rewards can augment the faith of Christians, which obviously glorifies God. What I did say, is that we lose some of our free will. We lose it because God has written his law onto our hearts in order to fulfill Jesus's commitment that "No one can take them out of my hand." If we had the exact same level of free will as OT Israel, it's hard to see how we could be any better at representing God than they were.

Then, with the possibility allowed for falling away from the Church such that salvation is no longer secure, every person who endures to the end will glroify Him all the more- or that's how it seems to me.

And do you really think we modern Christians are doing that much better than Israel? With hundreds of scandals a year, any number of people who call themselves Christian but really don't care, the thousands of different factions, and ever-encroaching secularism? Is the modern Church really doing that much better?

[Obsidian]

Jesus never said "try to be perfect. He said to be perfect." Trying to perform a moral action nothing if you don't actually do it.

How is it extreme to presume that when Jesus speaks, there's an off-chance that He just might mean what He is saying?

By inserting the word "try" into his command, you yourself are clearly altering what he said. Does God the Father try to be perfect? I'm the one who's taking him literally.

In Heaven, our Free Will will not just be altered, but perfected as only the Presence of God can perfect it

Do you think that our bodies are called the "temple of the Holy Spirit" for nothing? We have the presence of God already.

Then, with the possibility allowed for falling away from the Church such that salvation is no longer secure, every person who endures to the end will glroify Him all the more- or that's how it seems to me.

I myself don't fully understand God's methods, at least not at present. But how have I said anything objectionable under Catholic theology? I said that the Holy Spirit sanctifies a believer, thereby inherently altering his free will to a certain extent. Don't Catholics already agree with those doctrines? I'm just expounding on their implications.

I assume that by "falling away" you mean "sin badly," but I don't accept that definition. I think Christians definitely continue to sin at times. I would define "falling away" as "ceasing to have faith." If the Holy Spirit promises to sanctify people over time, it just seems hard to accept that they could revert so far backward that they would lose all faith.

And do you really think we modern Christians are doing that much better than Israel?...Is the modern Church really doing that much better?

I think so. You're only looking at things from a limited, American-European perspective, and only at a limited timespan of about 50 years. Just think about how far the world has come since Christ founded the Chuch, about all the philosophical and theological realizations, all the scientific advancements, all the peoples we have assimilated into the religion of ancient Israel. Ancient Israel was about the size of Maryland, and most of the time most of them were worshipping idols.

[humanevitae]

Meta Mark,
I think your debating skills are excellent. What you have said is so obviously true that it is a wonder people can make mistakes on it.

One debater spoke of unmerited merit or grace. Does anyone actually think that somehow Jesus will not know they are unmerited. This argument was really off the wall.

Another asked how many works were good enough. I have never seen anywhere in the New Testament where Jesus comes out and says a quota must be met. This is a silly argument.
He asks again about the quantity of faith. As far as I know faith is not measured in numbers.
Jesus will measure what must be measured. This is just a very bad debating point.

Another point brought up against you is that faith is a prerequisit of works and works is not a prerequiste of salvation. This is a fine sounding statement, but would some one please show me where in the Bible it says this. This is a case where the debater has a nice sounding argument that is false.

I'm sorry about lambasting our Protestant brethern, but they very often say the silliest things. I know that I am guilty also, but I do desire to know the truth whether it come from a Protestant or a Catholic.

How about this one:
He actually writes as if he knows all about the Catholic Church and Church teachings. He goes on to say that the Catholic Church placed very little credance in faith during the Reformation. How does a Protestant expect to be treated civilly with a statement like this? He also quotes a very pathetic explanation of Sola Fide. Of course all this came from the pen of Luther. Let's face the facts, Luther was a renegade priest who married a nun. He did his level best to stab the Catholic Chuch in the back. This is the Church that taught him and fed him and gave him the position of priest.

There will never be a union between Protentantism and Catholicism because the Catholic Church will never accept falsehood in their teachings.

[Obsidian]

Hey let's not even get into the matter of the Catholic Church's demonic teaching on clerical/monastic celibacy, Mr. Counter-Reformation.

[MarcusAndreas]

Obsidian, I can no longer take you seriously.

[Thersites]

Jesus never said "try to be perfect. He said to be perfect." Trying to perform a moral action nothing if you don't actually do it.

By inserting the word "try" into his command, you yourself are clearly altering what he said. Does God the Father try to be perfect? I'm the one who's taking him literally.[/QUOTE]

So are you perfect? And what does it matter whether or not we are perfect, if it is faith that saves?

Do you think that our bodies are called the "temple of the Holy Spirit" for nothing? We have the presence of God already.

Yes, but not as we will experience it in Heaven.

I myself don't fully understand God's methods, at least not at present. But how have I said anything objectionable under Catholic theology? I said that the Holy Spirit sanctifies a believer, thereby inherently altering his free will to a certain extent. Don't Catholics already agree with those doctrines? I'm just expounding on their implications.

The Holy Spirit will influence us, but never will the Spirit make choices for us.

I think it would be appropriate to discuss the prophet Jeremiah here. As I see it, Jeremiah was always free to stop proclaiming the prophecies he received, but he chose to continue. The Holy Spirit influenced him immensely, but I think Jeremiah ultimately had a choice.

I assume that by "falling away" you mean "sin badly," but I don't accept that definition. I think Christians definitely continue to sin at times. I would define "falling away" as "ceasing to have faith." If the Holy Spirit promises to sanctify people over time, it just seems hard to accept that they could revert so far backward that they would lose all faith.

Nope: I meant it exactly as you would define it. Our sanctification requires not a one-time commitment, but a continually renewed one. We are capable of slowing down in our progression, stopping, or even regressing.

I think so. You're only looking at things from a limited, American-European perspective, and only at a limited timespan of about 50 years. Just think about how far the world has come since Christ founded the Chuch, about all the philosophical and theological realizations, all the scientific advancements, all the peoples we have assimilated into the religion of ancient Israel. Ancient Israel was about the size of Maryland, and most of the time most of them were worshipping idols.

Alright: Peter's denial of Jesus, Arianism, gnosticism, the willingness of certain Christians to deny the faith rather than die (Not all early christians who were arrested were willing to be martyrs) the crusades, the inquisitions, the bloody wars in and after the Reformation, the failure of the Church in Europe to become either all Catholic or all Protestant through peaceful means, the colonizing of the New World (as executed by pretty much everyone but the French, oddly enough. The Spanish, if Bartolome de las Casas is to be believed, were quite savage), the Salem witch trials (and any number of other things the Puritans did), the enslavement of Africans to serve "Christian" households, the Trail of Tears, the numerous treaties with Indian nations broken by America for the sake of "Manifest Destiny," the nativist movements of the 1850s and 1920s...

And when it comes to worshipping idols, much of Christian civilization has worshiped money, power, foolish pride, superstitions- an idol doesn't have to be a graven image.

Christianity may not look exactly the same as Israel, but it's had its fair share of scandal and sin.

[wonbyone]

Another point brought up against you is that faith is a prerequisit of works and works is not a prerequiste of salvation. This is a fine sounding statement, but would some one please show me where in the Bible it says this.

Ephesians 2:8-9. Also the jailer asked Paul and Silas what must he do to be saved( Acts 16:29-31) Paul answered the question that was posted in this thread we are saved by believing in Jesus period.

[Thersites]

Ephesians 2:8-9. Also the jailer asked Paul and Silas what must he do to be saved( Acts 16:29-31) Paul answered the question that was posted in this thread we are saved by believing in Jesus period.

But what did the jailer do after he began to believe? He put his faith into action. If he had simply started believing in Jesus, why would it matter what he did afterward?

And how does this stand in the light of other passages, such as Matthew's last judgment scene, where people are judged according to the way they act? The goats, who seem to know quite well who Jesus is, are sent to Hell despite their belief in Jesus. The sheep are taken to Heaven not just because they believe, but because they put their faith into action. Acts of charity don't just "happen" because you're a Christian- every action still requires an individual act of will on our part.