Gospel or Curse? Which do you have?

[Raymond]

Quote:Galatians Chapter 1 :6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:

7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.

8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Quote: Romans Chapter 3 :19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;

22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.

28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

Quote:Ephesians Chapter 2 :1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;

2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:

3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

4 But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,

5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved

6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Quote: Romans Chapter 8 :32 He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?

33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth.

34 Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.

35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?

36
As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.


37 Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us.

38
For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,

39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

I myself am a former Catholic. Saved by the grace of God. I was in catholic school as a young boy and had worked up through my first confession and was working on my confirmation when my rebelious teen years came into play. Needless to say I had no interest in church at that time.

Regardless of all that, I can say that I dont ever remember being told that I needed to be born again at any time. I was told to be a good person. Do the sacraments and stay in the church.

My mother and father who spent their whole life in the Roman church can also attest to never being told that they needed to be born again.

Oh sure I did my work books, but I was not encouraged by any priest or teacher that I should read my Bible.

I now believe that a priest will never encourage you to study the scripture. Because it wont be long until you start asking him where all this ritual he does is found in the scripture. Where does it say I have to confess my sins to a priest? etc.

All you have to do is read through the book of Hebrews and it wont be long until you relize that a priest is no longer reqired by God to be the mediator between man and Himself. That mediator is now The Lord Jesus Christ. Period.

A young monk named Martin Luther studied the scripture for himself and the Church was never the same. Praise God!

As I stated in my other post its late and this will at least get the topic started. Ill pop in tomorrow to see how things are going.

Take care

Ray

[Jim]

Thank you Ray, as a coincidence, (actually I do not believe in coincidences ), my wife also was a catholic, before we got married. I introduced her to the gospel of Jesus Christ and praise the Lord, she saw the errors of the catholic church! We were wed within 1 month of this, and she is my helpmeet and love of my life next to Christ.

[Byzantine_Catholic]

Raymond --

I am not surprized that you are a former Catholic. For some reason, former Catholics are the people who are the most angry with the Church. Perhaps you have good reason. If we continue in our discourse, maybe I shall find out the reason why.

I am a former Fundamentalist. So I guess we went in opposite directions, didn't we? I am sure that you know that as a Fundamentalist, I was told repeatedly that salvation is by grace alone and was warned repeatedly that depending upon my own works for salvation is a sure way to send myself right to hell. Therefore, I hope it might raise some curiousity in you to ask yourself why one who was committed to the same position you are committed to would turn to the "Romish Gospel" as I have heard it called.

Let us discuss and study this idea of justification before God, and let us use as much scripture as possible to be our guide.

Let me begin with a question from Romans 2: 5 - 10. I will make some observations in bold within the quoted scriptures:

Quote:Romans 2: 5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;

Notice first the time of this judgment -- it is the "day of wrath and revelation". It is the Great Judgment Day for all mankind. Would you agree with this? If not, why not?

6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:

Notice what St. Paul says. Every man will be rendered "according to his deeds" It sounds like our WORKS are going to be judged. Would you agree with this. If not, why not?

7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:

This is a critical verse. Please study it carefully. It states that those who have patiently continued in well doing (GOOD WORKS) shall receive what? Eternal life.

8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,

And this is the contrast to verse 7. Those who have done evil, who were rebellious and wicked, they shall receive eternal wrath, or eternal HELL. What say you so far to this?

9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;

10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:

Jesus also says the same thing in John 5: 28 - 29:

Quote:John 5: 28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,

29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Nitice that the entire judgment of a man's eternal destiny is based not upon "faith alone" but rather by what he has DONE -- his works.

Okay.....that's point # 1.

Now, for the second point.

I know you will find this hard to understand and believe, because I remember being a Fundamentalist and I understand the mindset and how one tends to view the work of salvation. I hope you will think through what I am saying and examine it with scripture.

Salvation and eternal life are two entirely different things.

Salvation is the act of being taken from the cursed family of Adam (Romans 5:12 ) in which we all share in his disobedience, and being place, by grace through faith, into the family of God. It is an act of God's grace alone, purely through His grace. Only He could become Incarnate, live a sinless life for us, and die to pay the debt of Adam's sin. No man could do this and therefore, no man can save himself or any other man.

When we are entered into the family of God, we enter into a covenantal relationship with Him through Christ. This covenant relationship is described as a family relationship in which God becomes our Father through the adoption of faith. As sons and daughters, we have an inheritance set aside for us in the heavenlies:

Quote:1 Peter 1:4 To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you,

Inheritance is the language of family. Sons and daughters inherit, agreed?

Quote:Eph. 1: 11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:

Again, St. Paul speaks of the inheritance. This inheritance is eternal life. It awaits all who are faithful sons and daughters.

Quote:Eph 1: 14 Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

Notice that we also have a downpayment to that inheritance. This is what the Holy Spirit is to us. He is the downpayment of eternal life. He is the earnest of our inheritance.

In a covenant relationship, both sides agree to certain terms as they enter into the covenant. The marriage vows are the terms of covenant agreement as the two enter into what the olde Puritans used to rightly call 'the covenant of marrige'.

Now if either side breaks this covenant (by adultery, for instance) the marriage is over. The other party can agree to forgive and try to restore the marriage, but it is really hard work, because adultery is the kiss of death to a marriage.

In like manner, we are called the Bride of Christ, both individually and corporately. We have entered into a covenantal relationship with God through Christ and in our baptism, we make vows (or they are made for us by our parents) that we will keep the Law of God. This is covenant keeping, when we do that which is pleasing to the Lord. Sin is covenant breaking.

(BTW -- I learned this at the feet of Reformed Presbyterian authors such as North, Bahnsen, Gentry, etc. and not from Catholic sources)

Here is the important principle I want us to remember in this discussion:

COVENANTS ARE BREAKABLE!!!

All covenants can be broken. THAT is why Romans 2: 5 - 10 and John 5: 28 - 29 states that we must have good works to recieve eternal life. It is not to ENTER salvation that we do good works, but to KEEP THE COVENANT WE MADE WITH GOD THROUGH CHRIST!

I do hope you will ponder this idea. I never heard such a thing as a Fundamentalist myself, but it is thoroughly grounded in the scriptures. We are a covenantal people as Christians, therefore, the rules and principles of covenant are what guides our relationship.

I look forward to good conversation and discussion on this.

Cordially in Christ,

Brother Ed

[Jim]

Brother Ed, as moderator, I wil lsimply put this in check:

Quote:I am not surprized that you are a former Catholic. For some reason, former Catholics are the people who are the most angry with the Church. Perhaps you have good reason.

The site admin has shown no sign of aggression whatsoever, why do you attribute former Catholics with anger? If anyone has no anger, it certainly is Ray.

Maybe there is a littel bitterness on your part already?

I am simply moderating here. Leave emotions out of this. It is not fruitful, and serves no purpose but malice and provocation. You cannot predict his feelings any more than he can yours.

Don't start this thread this way. Keep to the facts and stay to the subject at hand.

Jim

[Jim]

If Ray will allow me, I will input upon this first.

1)

Quote:Romans 2: 5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;

Notice first the time of this judgment -- it is the "day of wrath and revelation". It is the Great Judgment Day for all mankind. Would you agree with this? If not, why not?

This refers to the Great White Throne Judgement for the unsaved alone. Christians will not be there. The Great White Throne judgment is the final judgment for the dead in sin and life to be transferred from Hell to the Lake of Fire. Most of the "they" in Romans 2 refers to the unsaved. The "we" as Paul notes in verse 2, refers to christians, there is a clear distinction between the two.

We will see the judgment seat of Christ, completely different than the Great White Throne Judgment, where we will answer for everything we have done in our bodies, and receive our crowns. All of our works will be tried to receive their corresponding reward, not to have our souls judged, that will be dtermined immediately at the point of death (2 Cor. 5:8; If Paul had believed in purgatory, he would have reflected this in his statement here). The names from the book of life are determined here.


Romans 14:10
But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

Paul is speaking to brothers in Christ, christians, saying "all" christians.


2 Cor. 5:10
For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

Again, in Paul's epistle to the Church at Corinth, he is again referring to christians when he says "we".

The judgment seat of Christ is simply a time of judgment to receive your rewards in heaven, whether they be many, few, or none.

The great White Throne Judgment is again for the dead in sin, burning in Hell. This is the judgement referred to Romans 2. The names from the "other book" are determined here.

Quote:Revelation

20:11
And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
20:12
And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
20:13
And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
20:14
And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
20:15
And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

as you can see there were two books. "And the books(plural) were opened. then you will see a complete change in context referring to the "book of life" in verse 12, showing that two different judgments occured, probably at the same time.

The "dead" in chapter 12 refers to everyone that has ever lived on the earth. It then makes sure we understand that two books were opened, one for the saved, and the "other" for the eternally damned.

Again, let's keep this one subject at a time.

Jim

[Agent_Smith]

Quote:I now believe that a priest will never encourage you to study the scripture. Because it wont be long until you start asking him where all this ritual he does is found in the scripture. Where does it say I have to confess my sins to a priest? etc.

I wish to address this first.

First of all, your first sentence is very general and is, for all intents in purposes, untrue. I, like BC above, am a convert to Catholicism. My dad is a Calvinist minister, and I just converted a few years ago. I too, have gone in an opposite direction.

However, your comment about not being encouraged to read a Bible by priests is just wrong. I went through RCIA class before I became a Catholic, which is the equivalent of CCD for younger Catholics. The class is meant to teach the person who wants to join the church about Catholicism. The entire class involved Church doctrine AND heavily relied on scripture as a foundation. Our priest encourages my parish regularly to steep ourselves in scripture. The burden is then upon the congregation to actually do what he says.

Now, the crux of your post seems to be that Catholicism is a "false gospel" and therefore is cursed. I believe, from your posts, that you think it is a false gospel because of the Catholic view of Tradition. However, we first have to get a few things straightened up. I'm going to break these down into arguments so they'll be easier to respond to.

A.) What is the "gospel?" The gospel message, to most protestants, means solely the written word in the Bible. However, historically and to this day, the word gospel really has a much more general meaning. "The first word common to the headings of our four Gospels is Euaggelion. The word, in the New Testament, has the specific meaning of "the good news of the kingdom" (cf. Matthew 4:23; Mark 1:15). In that sense, which may be considered as primary from the Christian standpoint, Euaggelion denotes the good tidings of salvation announced to the world in connexion with Jesus Christ, and, in a more general way, the whole revelation of Redemption by Christ." (Catholic Encyclopedia, newadvent.org). So, the gospel is, generally, based upon the greek word used to as a heading for the original documents, is the revelation of Redemption by Christ. To say then the Catholics have a false gospel is to say we have a false revelation of Redemption by Christ.

B.) The greek word Euaggelion, obviously then, does not contain any reference to solely being written documents. This in of itself almost makes a Protestant cringe, as did I when I began to think deeply about the subject. However, the Bible itself brings evidence to my point.

For all intents and purposes, Christ died circa 33 a.d. (which is being generous because their are notable calendar errors that places his birth prior to 0 a.d.). Christ's church was established at Pentecost short after that. Now, I think you can agree that what holds true for Christians now should hold true for Christians then. They didn't have some different standard to live by that we don't have today. So, when you say that all you need is yourself and your Bible, this is a completely illogical statement and shows a lack of study of early church history (I don't mean that harshly, but I knew nothing of the early church in my Protestant years, and nor was I encouraged to find out about the early church fathers).

Most historical evidence points to the gospel of Mark being the earliest written gospel. Because of its lack of mention of the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem and other evidence, it is pinpointed at being authored prior to 70 a.d. and usually is given the date of roughly 65 a.d. What does this mean? This means that Christ's Church existed for almost 30 years before the gospel of Mark was even written. And, that doesn't even mean that it had received wide circulation yet, which would've taken longer. So, that is 30 years of existence as a church before even a single New Testament book was written down. And now, 30 years after Christ's death, there is only one gospel account even written down. Other gospels followed suit, with the Gospel of John being penned circa 90 a.d. So, almost 60 years after Christ's death, there is finally four gospels at least written down, and probably not entirely widely circulated yet.

Now, as even easier evidence, look at Paul's letters. Churches had to exist before Paul could write letters to them. So, could the Churches simply use their Bible before it was even written? It is absurd to think so. The earliest indication that we have that someone was aware of multiple epistles by Paul is circa 96 a.d., even though some of the letters were written 30 years prior by conservative estimations. So, it has now been almost 70 years without at least portions of the New Testament even written down.

Now, altogether, the latest written documents were, at the earliest, 90 a.d. in the form of 3 John. So, we can see clearly that a complete set of New Testament writings didn't exist until at least 90 a.d. Without taking into account that early Christians debated about what was canonical for centuries after that point and that the vast majority of Christians at the time didn't even know some of the other writings existed yet, one can easily see that the Church existed before the New Testament was even written.

C.) Now, that brings us to the inevitable question: What could early Christians possibly go by to lead their Christian lives? It obviously wasn't the Bible, because it didn't exist yet. That brings us to the Church.

You see, the only thing early Christians could go by was the word of their Church leaders: the Bishops. It is by this that the Church gets the doctrine of Apostolic Succession. The apostles chose their successors and handed down everything they knew to them to instruct them in the ways of Christ. This was not done by Bible: it was done by mouth. This is more than apparent in the Gospel of Luke:

Quote: 1: Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
2: Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
3: It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
4: That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed. KJV

It is obvious that Theophilus was instructed FIRST, and the Gospel was written to back up the instruction.

So you see, oral tradition existed long before the New Testament was even written down or contemplated. However, this is the important thing to note: Tradition does not contradict Scripture. They go hand and hand and constitute the entirety of revelation: the "gospel" in the most general sense. This is where we get our ideas of Tradition, and we firmly believe, as Catholics, that we carry thsoe traditions on today.

Now, onto the next point, which I will cover only briefly because of the length of my first point.

Quote:Because it wont be long until you start asking him where all this ritual he does is found in the scripture. Where does it say I have to confess my sins to a priest? etc.

If you are asking specifically about Confession, which seems to be a different question entirely than the notion of Tradition, Catholics firmly believe that it is a sacrament instituted by Christ. This is evidenced clearly in scripture.

The sacrament of Confession begins more loosely and metaphorically in Matthew 18:18...

Quote:18: Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. KJV

This was stated to the disciples. Four important points come out of this:

1.) That the "binding" and "loosing" refers not to physical but to spiritual or moral bonds among which sin is certainly included; the more so because
2.) The power here granted is unlimited -- "whatsoever you shall bind, . . . whatsoever you shall loose";
3.) The power is judicial, i.e., the Apostles are authorized to bind and to loose;
4.) Whether they bind or loose, their action is ratified in heaven. In healing the palsied man Christ declared that "the Son of man has power on earth to forgive sins"; here He promises that what these men, the Apostles, bind or loose on earth, God in heaven will likewise bind or loose (newadvent.org).

This is later codified after Christ's ressurection in John 20:21-23...

Quote:21: Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.
22: And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:
23: Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained. KJV

Important poitns arise out of this scripture passage:

1.) Christ here reiterates in the plainest terms -- "sins", "forgive", "retain" -- what He had previously stated in figurative language, "bind" and "loose", so that this text specifies and distinctly applies to sin the power of loosing and binding.
2.) He prefaces this grant of power by declaring that the mission of the Apostles is similar to that which He had received from the Father and which He had fulfilled: "As the Father hath sent me". Now it is beyond doubt that He came into the world to destroy sin and that on various occasions He explicitly forgave sin (Matthew 9:2-8; Luke 5:20; 7:47; Revelation 1:5), hence the forgiving of sin is to be included in the mission of the Apostles.
3.) Christ not only declared that sins were forgiven, but really and actually forgave them; hence, the Apostles are empowered not merely to announce to the sinner that his sins are forgiven but to grant him forgiveness-"whose sins you shall forgive". If their power were limited to the declaration "God pardons you", they would need a special revelation in each case to make the declaration valid.
4.) The power is twofold -- to forgive or to retain, i.e., the Apostles are not told to grant or withhold forgiveness nondiscriminately; they must act judicially, forgiving or retaining according as the sinner deserves.
5.) The exercise of this power in either form (forgiving or retaining) is not restricted: no distinction is made or even suggested between one kind of sin and another, or between one class of sinners and all the rest: Christ simply says "whose sins".
6.) The sentence pronounced by the Apostles (remission or retention) is also God's sentence -- "they are forgiven . . . they are retained". (newadvent.org).

Now, I think it is very clear that Confession was instituted by Christ, for the Apostles (note, this declaration wasn't made to "all Christians generally, but to the Apostles themselves). The apostles were charged with the power to forgive and retain sins. It is therefore clear from the words of Christ that the Apostles had power to forgive sins. But this was not a personal prerogative that was to erase at their death; it was granted to them in their official capacity and hence as a permanent institution in the Church -- no less permanent than the mission to teach and baptize all nations (newadvent.org).

The early church fathers agreed, and I think St. Augustine said it best: "Let us not listen to those who deny that the Church of God has power to forgive all sins."

I, unfortunately, must leave at the moment. I hope this helps as a preface to some of your questions.

Peace to you all.

[Jim]

Quote:What could early Christians possibly go by to lead their Christian lives? It obviously wasn't the Bible, because it didn't exist yet. That brings us to the Church.

You see, the only thing early Christians could go by was the word of their Church leaders: the Bishops. It is by this that the Church gets the doctrine of Apostolic Succession. The apostles chose their successors and handed down everything they knew to them to instruct them in the ways of Christ. This was not done by Bible: it was done by mouth.

Romans 10:14
How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
10:15
And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!
10:16
But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?
10:17
So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
10:18
But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.


If Ray would excuse me here, I would like to say a little about your question. First, I do believe that the given verses here answer your question wonderfully.

First of all, I agree with your narrative on how the early church did not have the written Word ,and I agree with your dates too. However, while the early church did not have the written Word, we had the reason to have the apostles and disciples at that time. Romans 10:18 finishes the apostolic dispensation as the finality of John the Revelator on the Island of Patmos ended that dispensation. The church no longer needed apostolic authority. Apostolic authority was the authority of the Holy Spirit. To keep truth via way of mouth, the Holy Spirit had to intervene, therefore the need of the church establishment at Pentecost. It was the Holy Spirit which gave the power and authority to the apostles, not the apostles themselves. Apostolic authority ended and the written Word of God began. Thus ended the apostolic dispensation. The Word of God had to be give in some way, the apostles were that way. The Holy Bible, the Word of God, is our only authority now. Not the local church(it some authority but not as we are arguing), which the catholic church is no different in authority than any other local church.

What we may need to differentiate is the difference between the Universal church(all born again believers), and the local church(any body of professing believers, coming together with the specific purpose of worshipping the Lord).

Quote:The gospel message, to most protestants, means solely the written word in the Bible.

And

Quote:The greek word Euaggelion, obviously then, does not contain any reference to solely being written documents. This in of itself almost makes a Protestant cringe, as did I when I began to think deeply about the subject.

Hmmm.. I have never met a Protestant that cringes when they have heard this. On the contrary, depending on your context, I agree with you. The gospel message is the life of Christ. It is not limited to pen or anything else for that matter. Now I do believe we have a guideline to not add anything or take anything away from that Gospel as common sense would tell us that any time anything is added or taken from anything, then it is no longer whole, and therefore a lie. Not only common sense, but we are warned in Deuteronomy and the Revelation of the ramifications of doing such.

My extrapolations of your content suggest that the differences we have stem from the end of apostolic dispensation, or in your belief the transfer of apostolic succession, am I correct in assuming this? If so, please explain what exactly apostolic succession is, how it relates to the local church, and what basis there is to believe it is true.

Jim

[Agent_Smith]

I will answer all of those questions in full. I do not have the time at the moment, I just wanted to reassure you that I will in due time.

I also wanted to suggest, if possible, that this topic be split up. We already have seemingly three issues going together: 1.) Tradition, 2.) confession, and 3.) salvation. It might get cluttered all in one thread. Just a suggestion.

I shall return in a little while to discuss apostolic succession with you.

Peace to all of you.

[Raymond]

Basicly you guys typed all that and cut and paste from other websites just to tell me what I already knew, that you dont believe that the cross of Christ was sufficient to keep my salvation. It was good enough to start it, but not keep me saved.

Quote:Chapter 3

1 O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?

2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

3 Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?

4 Have ye suffered so many things in vain? if it be yet in vain.

5 He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

6 Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.
Gen 15:6 Rom 4:3 James 2:23

7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.

8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
Gen 12:3 Acts 3:25

9
So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.

10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
Deut 27:26 James 2:10

11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.
Hab 2:4 Rom 1:17

12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.
Lev 18:5 Rom 10:5

13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
Deut 21:23

14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.

That scripture is clear. Your works wont keep you saved.

Having said that Jesus also said that you will know a tree by its fruit. If you say Yes and live no then you are not saved. What you practice in your life is just a reflection of whats in your heart. A man that is truly saved will show fruit of that salvation in his life. If a man says he is saved and never shows fruit he is deceiving himself or maybe just trying to deceive others.

Also Paul wrote to existing churches be cause he was a church planter. Its only natural that the man who planted the churches should instruct or correct them in an epistle.

I was not angry with the catholic church. I think it just failed to win my heart. Or more importantly God preserved me from being in bondage to its works theology(Sovereignty of God).

Obviously the Spirit gave different gifts to different men to authenticate what ever message was being given at the time. so yes at first it was passed on by men orally but with supernatural authentication, besides many people at that time would have heard of Jesus and what had happened to Him.

Or like Philip did with the Ethiopian eunuch, he expounded Jesus to him out of the old testament.

I know there were more questions for me but thats all I can remember off the top of my head. If you guys tighten up your posts a bit it would be easier to respond.

My question for you is what are you trusting in to take you to heaven?

Ray

[Raymond]

Oh yeah I never said all I need is me and my Bible. I am under the authority of my local church.

The Bible does not say that I need Popes, Priests, Nuns, rosary beads etc.

Quote:1 Timothy chapter 2: 5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

Ray

[Jim]

And one more addition:

Quote:Ephesians 1:20
Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,
1:21
Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come:
1:22
And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,

(All emphasis mine)

[mnwickens]

The matter of confusing works and faith got me thinking. If we must perform good works, which some say is necessary to enter heaven, what happens when we do not attain that standard? God requires sinless perfection and according to Romans 3:23 all have sinned and all have come short of the glory of God.

Let us assume sinless perfection is something we must attain by our works, what happens when we do not reach the mark?

MNW

[DefensorFidei]

Jim --

Brother Ed here. Sorry to use another name, but for some reason, I am having fits logging in under my other name. Perhaps you can PM me and we can figure out what the problem is.

I didn't mean to start off the thread on a wrong foot and I apologize.

Now...to your response.

Quote:This refers to the Great White Throne Judgement for the unsaved alone. Christians will not be there.

Jim, this is simply not possible for several reasons.

1. The use of the word "EVERY" in verse 6.

Quote:Rom 2: 6Who will render to every man according to his deeds: Note that "every man" will stand before Christ at this judgment, not just the "saved".

You know, it is possible for us to form opinions of what the Bible says and then, because we have these presuppositions, to miss certain things. In essence we read right by them. I have heard this called "presuppositional blindness".

Jim, "every" means EVERY, doesn't it? It doesn't mean some! So this first of all must mean that Jesus will judge every man at this judgment seat.

Secondly, let's say for a moment that you are correct, for argement's sake. Notice the "payment" that some are receiving at this judgment.

Quote:Rom 2: 8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,

9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;

These people in these verses, who according to your interpretation are believers are receiving the CURSE of God!! They are being sent into eternal perdition!

Jim, this simply cannot be the judgment seat for believers because, according to your soteriology, believers cannot go to hell. They are elect and eternally secure and cannot lose their salvation. Yet the "reward" that some are getting here is eternal cursing!!

3. And thirdly, because it doesn't fit the covenantal mold (more on this later).

The Great White Throne judgment is the final judgment for the dead in sin and life to be transferred from Hell to the Lake of Fire. Most of the "they" in Romans 2 refers to the unsaved. The "we" as Paul notes in verse 2, refers to christians, there is a clear distinction between the two.

There is no "we" and "they". Scripture says that every manis standing here for judgment.

The reason this is being said has to do with the thought process of the Jews in Palestine during St. Paul's lifetime. Jewish males thought that they and they alone were destined for heaven. Gentiles and women would surely go to hell. Therefore, as part of his Gospel message, St. Paul was striving to make it clear to all -- especially the Jewish males who heard him -- that they too would stand before Christ in judgment. This is why he says in verse 10

Rom 2: 10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:

Quote:Romans 14:10But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

This is the judgment seat spoken of in Romans 2. Where do you get the warrant from scripture to create two separate judgments?

Quote:2 Cor. 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

Now tie this in with Romans 2: 5 - 10. This simply states that all Christians will be at that judgment seat. It says nothing about a second or different judgment seat for believers. You are implying that from the verse when you do not have warrant to do so.

And furthermore, look at your Corinthian verses. It says that we receive according to what we have done. Are you saying that Jesus will reward Christians who have "done bad" with rewards? If they have done bad, shouldn't they be sent away from the household?

Of course, this also opens up another can of worms for you. When I was a Fundamentalist, I subscribed to the idea that God didn't see the bad things I did because they were hidden under the blanket of Christ's righteousness, so that even if I had sinned, God dealt with me through Jesus and therefore didn't see that sin. As we see from the verse you quoted, that is hardly a scriptural idea, is it!!??


As you can see there were two books. "And the books(plural) were opened. then you will see a complete change in context referring to the "book of life" in verse 12, showing that two different judgments occured, probably at the same time.

The "dead" in chapter 12 refers to everyone that has ever lived on the earth. It then makes sure we understand that two books were opened, one for the saved, and the "other" for the eternally damned.

That is your opinion and is not fully supported by the text you quote. You have the right to suppose this, but it is not all that clear from the text, and certainly the earliest Christians in their writings believed no such thing.

Again, let's keep this one subject at a time.

Agreed

Brother Ed -- (please help me with that problem I am having with your registration

[DefensorFidei]

I must say that I disappointed in the watery response to my initial post which I recieved from Raymond. I would think that if I went to the trouble to outline a teaching (which -- BTW --- I did not cut and paste) that I could get a somewhat better response than that. Jim did a much better job of using scripture -- IMO -- than Ray did.

What of it, Ray? Would you perhaps take the time to discuss my contention that salvation and eternal life are two entirely different things? Certainly that must be a subject worth some discussion on your part.

Quote:The matter of confusing works and faith got me thinking. If we must perform good works, which some say is necessary to enter heaven, what happens when we do not attain that standard? God requires sinless perfection and according to Romans 3:23 all have sinned and all have come short of the glory of God.

Excuse me. WHERE in that verse does it say that we must be "as perfect as God Himself???" I used to hear that when I was a Fundamentalist. But one day I got to thinking about all that means.

Do you realize that if we, as creatures of God, were to be "as perfect as God Himself" that we would then actually BE GOD!!!

That is the teaching of pagan religions such as Buddism and others which teach that we mere mortals can attain to the "godhead" (whatever they mean by that).

It is IMPOSSIBLE for us to be as perfect as God is because He is TRANSCENDENT to all that He has created. Furthermore, scripture teaches something entirely different. It says that we will share "share" in the divine glory. but the idea of being "as perfect as God".

No.

Absolutely not.

All this verse is saying is that all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. And, as I said in my above post, the reason St. Paul wrote this to the Romans was to counter the false idea held by the Jews of that day that they were guarenteed a place in Heaven simply because they were Jewish males. This was a clear challenge to that idea. But Protestants have made it say something that it does not.

Let us assume sinless perfection is something we must attain by our works, what happens when we do not reach the mark?

Thank God that I do NOT have to reach a state of sinless PERFECTION.

More than that though, who told you that our works somehow take away our sins? Scripture says that our sins are removed when we confess them and repent of them. (1 John 1: 9 ). That is all I have to do, isn't it?

Brother Ed

[DefensorFidei]