Justification

[Briguy]

Thanks guys, good well thought out posts.

Cure, I do agree on several things you said. I think what you are missing is the whole first part of the verses you quoted. The first part is the foundation to the second part. Paul is not talking about his pre-converted self, he is talking about his struggles now. He admits that there is still evil in his deeds. The version you use may be different in a few places so I ned to go back and read it in KJV and maybe NASB. I can't even say look at a certain verse because your version does not include the verses. The word "freed" was used in respect to sin and death and this after Paul saying he is wretched or miserable in your version. Paul was freed from the sin and death that dwells in his flesh, his members, but even freed admits the battle contines and that doing wrong is still common. All that preeceeds later where he says that if you live according to the flesh you will die. Couple of thoughts here. The death could be physical death as he speaks of in 1 corithians in respect to taking the Lord's Supper, with unconfessed sin. I'm sure you know those verses. Otherwise, he is saying that to live in the flesh means you have not cleansed your soul/spriit with the blood of the Lamb. If the flesh is what God sees when you die, you will have eternal death, because the flesh is not seperate from the soul in this case they are stained with sin together. When a believer dies God sees right to the clean heart, and welcomes His son or daughter home to be with him forever. There is no flesh to see.

Anyway, back to my greater point which Adam, you touched on but did not really answer. It is not the fact that those millions Baptized in the Catholic Church sin that is the problem. It is that you are claiming that the Baptism has supernatural significance, and to top it off it is performed by a priest, who has supernatural powers (just meaning the ability to forgive sin, absolve sin, call on bread and wine to turn to body and blood, etc...) What I am saying is that for all that "power" there should be some affect on any person who goes through it. As you well know, for millions, that event in their lives, which you say adopts them into God's family, and fills them with the Holy Spirit, means nothing to them by the time they can think for themselves. Baptism does not cause them to sin less the the unbaptized child, etc... When I was growing up the only people I knew that had lives that showed an impact of their faith, were those "religous people". Now I guess i would say they were fundamentalists. In the midwest, where I am from, I have talked to zero Catholics that do anything but go to church on Sunday and maybe play Bingo. The churches have festivals sponsered by Beer manufactures, give booze for prizes, have only secular bands, have a beer tent for drinking, etc... Ok, I am sorry because that was almost a rant. I can only speak of my limited exporsure here in the midwest and in no way claim that this behavior is worldwide. My greater point is just that Baptism should have a huge impact if it really has eternal implications.

More to come, sorry I got off topic,
In christ,
Brian

Edited October 7, 2004 by Briguy

[Briguy]

Hi Guys, my last post didn't work for some reason. I did it early this am but it is not here now. I have a really bad cold and so it probably wasn't very good anyway. I will try again later. Sorry about the delay. Cure and Adam, your posts are very good. Sorry about the delay in response.

In Christ,
Brian

[Briguy]

Oh man, I am sick, now the post is there. When I opened up the thread Cure's name was up for the last post. Man, was that weird. Please don't be offended by my post where I ranted, I felt even worse this AM.

More later,
In Christ,
Brian

[Brother Adam]

Baptism does indeed change the soul, however we still have free will. A person can get married in the Baptist or Cathoilc Churches, and it has a supernatural effect of God blessing their marriage, but it doesn't mean that the husband or wife can't turn their back on their spouse. Before and after our initial salvation we still have the free will to make our own choices. Some people will choice to continue following the Lord their whole lives, some will part. Bapists, as I understand it, believe the free will to reject God after salvation no longer exists. Yet, the scriptures do not teach this. St. Paul warns those he writes to not to reject the grace they have been given and fall into sin that causes death (sometimes translated mortal sin).

Regarding your comment about Catholic Parishes that offer beer and have bingo. The stance of the Catholic Church is that games of chance, when using money that is in surplus after money has been set aside for the Lord and charity and all basic needs, is not sinful, nor is drinking so long as it is in moderation. As most people know drinking a glass of red wine with dinner on occassion offers many health benefits for the heart and can reduce chances of heart disease (as one example) and that in our state alone, $586 Billion dollars went directly to public schools through the State Lottary. Often Bingo ends with 50-90% of the proceeds going to charity. However, I don't excuse Catholics who take it too far, spending what they don't have and drinking until they are drunk. The Church is very clear that these are sinful.

On the flip side to those Catholics who end up rejecting the Lord, there are hundreds of millions of Catholics worldwide and millions in our own country who are frevently devoted to the Lord. You are meeting many of them right here at phatmass - a site who's charism is rap music! Catholics run and own more hospitals for the poor, more ophanages, and more missions than any other non-Catholic group combined. Priests, sisters, and brothers, take vows of poverty, and share their belongings (sound familiar?), and while the Church is rich in history and art, it is hardly rich financially. Last year it ran a deficit, but it is not the will of the Church to close hospitals or orphanages to get out of that deficit.

And I will seriously send you free literature if you PM or email me your address. Not to try to convert you, which is never my goal, but to simply offer you further understanding of who Catholics are. I have no problem with someone being a Protestant, though we are always joyful when someone returns to the fullness of the faith. I have no bitterness about my Protestant past, but appreciate it. I was taught many valuable lessons by my Lutheran and Baptist leaders. But I do weep when I hear about Fundamentalists spreading lies about the Church, often in ignorance through the writings of Boettner, Chick, McCarthy, MacArthur, Swaggart, and other full time anti-Catholics. I'll never understand that position. To make your life's work to attack something you won't be honest about. Which is why I offer free books from time to time - to help educate.

God Bless,
Bro. Adam

[Brother Adam]

I also wanted to mention that those apostolic abilities that are given to the priesthood are by no means through the priests own power. The priestly ability to absolve sin given to them in the gospels is by the power of Christ. The ability to act in persona christi is totally through the grace of God. From the Lord's Supper when Christ is fully present, body, blood, soul, and divinity and is worshipped, to the annointing of the sick, to marriage. It is all by the power of God.

It makes me wonder - that Fundamentalists fully accept that two become one in marriage - in effect it is a sacrament - that this action between two people could effect God's grace and a supernatural change takes place, but refuse to believe God when he says "This is my body, this is my blood". That a change, by the grace of God, takes place.

That Fundamentalists believe in the power of healings, but refuse to believe that the act of confession has any effect.

I strongly suggest the book "Catholicism and Fundamentalism" by Keating. If you were to read only one book about Catholics in your lifetime, this would be the book to read.

I have rambled on enough already! lol.

God Bless,
Bro. Adam

[Briguy]

Rom.4
[1] What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?
[2] For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.
[3] For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
[4] Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
[5] But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Rom.8
[1] There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
[2] For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
[3] For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
[4] That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
[5] For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
[6] For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
[7] Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
[8] So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
[9] But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
[10] And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

Hi Cure, the verses in 4 obviously precede the verses I listed in chap. 8 You must have the early thought in mind while reading the later thought. The verses from 4 need no explanation as they stand pretty well on their own. It is a teaching on how we are counted as righteous and it is clear it is on the merit of belief/faith and not works. That in mind we see in chapt. 8 that we are flesh and Spirit. If we are of the Spirit, we have the Spirit of Christ in us. That Spirit cleans the inner man and makes us worthy to have a relationship with God. We still have a flesh but we are not of the flesh. Those of the flesh (unbelievers) are dirty inside and out and their sin is counted against them. Those of the Spirit have no sin of the Spirit because it has washed clean. We still wear this flesh however and this flesh can be tempted and corrupted and do wrong. Thank God the flesh stays behind when we die because we could not enter heaven with the stains the flesh carries with it. This is not an invitation to sin and we are to put on the full armor of Christ and take on the enemy and beat temptation and sin as much as we can. Again I could go on and on but I think you see what I am trying to say. You reconcile the flesh and Spirit issue and the fact that believes, the elect, still sin and you believe Purgatory is the answer. I believe that what I said was the answer. My way stays within the confides of scripture. Yours requires a doctrine outside of scripture.

Adam, nice posts and I may take you up on your offer. I like to learn as much as I can. My wife may shoot me if I have a Catholic book in the house so I will speak to her first and get back with you. I will respond directly to what you said later.

In Christian charity,
Brian

[Brother Adam]

Hi Brian,

Well, I have copies of the Koran, Gita, Book of Mormon, Science and Health by Mary Eddy Baker, The Jehovah Witness version of the Bible, and writings of the Dahli Lama. Having these books as reference though don't mean I'm going to become Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, or Mormon. They are great for reference though. Instead of looking like an idiot when talking about Islam and referencing a Catholic, I can reference the Koran directly.

So if you are ever discussing the Catholic faith with another Baptist and they say "Catholics worship Mary" you can say "While I disagree with many things in Catholicism, they don't worship Mary, according to such and such a Catholic source".

Perhaps if you approach it like that the wife won't be so opposed! I understand that it can seem scary. My wife almost broke off our engagement because I was studing Catholicism, without any intent to convert. When we grow up with a certian stereotype of Catholicism it is scary to think it could be wrong.

On your commentary to Cure, I'd like to comment briefly. Catholics agree salvation comes by faith and not following the old law. We are condemned through the law, and could never hope to achieve salvation by working through the law. Romans 8:6-10 speaks to me in conjunction with Romans 1:5 that though we are born anew in Christ we still must be obedient to him. And that call to obedience is requred because we can still choose to not be obedient to Him.

I'll try to go sniff out Cure and find out where he disappeared to.

[Cure of Ars]

Briguy, I want to give my understanding of the Catholic position so that you will fully understand where I am coming from. Salvation, Biblically speaking is like an inheritance that is gained by a slave child that is adopted by a rich father. There is nothing that a slave can do to earn the privilege of being a part of the family and there is no amount of work that would be able to earn the inheritance that is mine as being a member of the family. It is totally a free gift. But being in a family there are responsibilities. The father gives responsibility depending on the ability of each child and he also gives the means for the child to do the work. The child cannot say that I do not need to do work and I do not have to obey the father. Work are required to remain in the family and there are sins that could exclude someone from the family if that family member does not repent from sin and is not sorry for the sin committed. Biblically speaking one can forfeit their inheritance and although the father will always have love for his children he will not force them to be a part of the family.

So to sum up, no amount of work can earn the right to be in the family and no amount of work can earn the inheritance. But if one does not do the work, by God’s grace, of being a child in the family they will forfeit their inheritance.


[quote]Hi Cure, the verses in 4 obviously precede the verses I listed in chap. 8 You must have the early thought in mind while reading the later thought.[/quote]

But chapter 4 is obviously preceded by what is said in Chapter 2;

[quote] By your stubbornness and impenitent heart, you are storing up wrath for yourself for the day of wrath and revelation of [b]the just judgment of God, who will repay everyone according to his works: eternal life to those who seek glory, honor, and immortality [u]through perseverance in good works,[/u] but wrath and fury to those who selfishly disobey the truth and obey wickedness.[/b] Yes, affliction and distress will come upon every human being who does evil, Jew first and then Greek. But there will be glory, honor, and peace for everyone who does good, Jew first and then Greek. There is no partiality with God. (Romans 2:5-8)[/quote]

And a little later Paul says;

[quote]All who sin outside the law will also perish without reference to it, and all who sin under the law will be judged in accordance with it. For it is not those who hear the law who are just in the sight of God; rather,[b]those who observe the law will be justified[/b]. (Romans 2:13) [/quote]


This is clearly saying that works are a part of salvation although it never says that salvation can be earned. But latter Paul says something that makes it look like he is contradicting himself.

[quote]For we consider that a person is justified by faith apart from works of the law. (Romans 3:28)[/quote]

Paul and the Holy Spirit are not confused. Paul is talking about two different systems. On system is the system of the slave that tries to obligate God to give him salvation by his good works. These works Paul calls “works of the law” but these works cannot save because it is impossible to make God a debtor to a slave.

The other system is the system of grace through faith in Christ. Through faith in Christ we enter into the family of God and gain the inheritance of salvation. But by grace "faith working through love" is needed to remain in the family.

[quote]The verses from 4 need no explanation as they stand pretty well on their own. It is a teaching on how we are counted as righteous and it is clear it is on the merit of belief/faith and not works.[/quote]

The distinction is not between faith and works but instead works apart from grace that gives the “obedience of faith” (Roman 1:5). Faith and works cannot be separated like I have said in the past. James explicitly says this in scripture when he says, “See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.” (James 2:14-26)

Now with this explination in mind lets look at the passage again;


[quote]Now we know that what the law says is addressed to those under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world stand accountable to God, since no human being will be justified in his sight by observing the law; for through the law comes consciousness of sin. But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, though testified to by the law and the prophets, the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction; all have sinned and are deprived of the glory of God. [b][u]They are justified freely by his grace[/u] through the redemption in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth as an expiation, through faith, by his blood, to prove his righteousness because of the forgiveness of sins previously committed, through the forbearance of God--to prove his righteousness in the present time, that he might be righteous and justify the one who has faith in Jesus. What occasion is there then for boasting? It is ruled out. On what principle, that of works? No, rather on the principle of faith. For we consider that a person is justified by faith apart from works of the law. [/b]Does God belong to Jews alone? Does he not belong to Gentiles, too? Yes, also to Gentiles, for God is one and will justify the circumcised on the basis of faith and the uncircumcised through faith. Are we then annulling the law by this faith? Of course not! On the contrary, we are supporting the law.

What then can we say that Abraham found, our ancestor according to the flesh? Indeed, if Abraham was justified on the basis of his works, he has reason to boast; but this was not so in the sight of God. For what does the scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness."[b] A worker's wage is credited not as a gift, but as something due.[/b] But when one does not work, yet believes in the one who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness. So also David declares the blessedness of the person to whom God credits righteousness apart from works: "Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord does not record." Does this blessedness apply only to the circumcised, or to the uncircumcised as well? Now we assert that "faith was credited to Abraham as righteousness." Under what circumstances was it credited? Was he circumcised or not? He was not circumcised, but uncircumcised. And he received the sign of circumcision as a seal on the righteousness received through faith while he was uncircumcised. Thus he was to be the father of all the uncircumcised who believe, so that to them (also) righteousness might be credited, as well as the father of the circumcised who not only are circumcised, but also follow the path of faith that our father Abraham walked while still uncircumcised. It was not through the law that the promise was made to Abraham and his descendants that he would [b]inherit[/b] the world, but through the righteousness that comes from faith. [/quote]

Circumcision is on of the “works of the law” that Paul is saying cannot justify. What Paul says in the rest of the bible clearly shows that works do matter and are important when done with Christ’s grace.

[quote]Circumcision means nothing, and uncircumcision means nothing; what matters is keeping God's commandments. (1 Cor 7:19)[/quote]

[quote] For in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love. (Gal 5:6)[/quote]

[quote]For neither does circumcision mean anything, nor does uncircumcision, but only a new creation.(Gal 6:15)[/quote]




I have a question for you. If justification is a one-time event (and not a process) then when was Abraham justified? Was it when he had faith and was circumcised like it says in the passage above or was it when he had faith and was going to offer Isaac like it says in James 2:21? Or was it when Abraham had faith and left his homeland like is says in Hebrews 11:8? Which one was it?



Ok there are still some things that I want to talk about mostly about human flesh not being evil when in the Spirit or something that we should be glad to cast away but rather something holy, the temple of God that will be raised. I also want to talk about purgatory. But this is longer than I like my posts to be so it will have to wait until another time.

Edited October 9, 2004 by Cure of Ars

[Briguy]

Hi Cure, here is part of Romans 4 in the NASB:

Is this blessing then on the R166 F72 circumcised, or on the F73 uncircumcised also? For we R167 say, "FAITH R168 WAS CREDITED TO ABRAHAM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." 10 How then was it credited? While he was circumcised, F74 or uncircumcised? F75 Not while circumcised, F74 but while uncircumcised; F75 11 and he received R169 the sign of circumcision, a R170 seal of the righteousness of the faith which he F76 had while uncircumcised, so that he might be the R171 father of all R172 who believe without being circumcised, that righteousness might be credited to them, 12 and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also follow in the steps of the faith of our father Abraham which he F77 had while uncircumcised. 13 For the R173 promise to Abraham or to his descendants F78 that R174 he would be heir of the world was not through F79 the Law, but through the righteousness of faith. 14 For if R175 those who are of F80 the Law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise is nullified; 15 for the R176 Law brings about wrath, but where R177 there is no law, there also is no violation. 16 For this reason it is by F81 faith, in order that it may be in accordance with grace, R178 so that the promise will be guaranteed to all R179 the descendants, F82 not only to those F83 who are of the Law, but also to those R180 F83 who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the R181 father of us all,

I bring this up for two reasons. I understand your point about the "works of the law" compared to the works a Christian does. I view it as a more simple concept then you. Actually I can only view things as simple concepts because my mind does not work in deep and mysterious ways. We can't be saved by following to the letter of the law, I think that is the point of adding "law" to the word works. It is not a simple act of doing things right that save us, there is more. Abraham had done more already and so when "works" are mentioned in Chap. 4 thw page has turned and we are on to the works done by believers. Abraham is Pauls example to those in the new covenant, and so it is pertinent even if Abraham operated in a different dispensation. The famous works of Abraham are moving to where God said and offering up Issac. These are not really like the "works of the law" idea. It was a believers obedience, not a religous obedience. Paul is clear that Abraham "belief" is why he had right standing with God, and that the obidience followed. Abraham obeyed because he first believed. Had Abraham messed up, which actually I'm sure he did quite a few times but we don't get that list in scripture, he would not have belonged any less to God. That is the point. True conversion will produce a change in a person. If the persons falls from time to time and even doubts God, it does not mean they are less his children. Your example falls short in that we are not all God's children. It is those who recieve Him that are declared his children. All, however, are his creation but to be grafted in to eternal life and to be forever a child of God takes a second birth (lets speak of adults here to keep it simple). The next point in what I copied is that circumcision is said to be a sign and a seal. And so was Baptism in the early church. It was a sign of being burried to an old self and being washed cklean and born anew. It sealed the fact that a person was a follower of the new sect. It sealed in the persons heart that their new conversion was real, it also showed others the seriousness of the commitment because joining "the way" opened up persecution. What I am saying is that Abraham was right with God before circumcision and we are right with God before Baptism but we can sign and seal what we have in faith by acts as baptism, church membership, etc...

Works follow true faith. Workers can grow weary and lose heart and even lose their first love. They still are children of God but need others to bring them back into fellowship. That is why we are told to take care of other believers, even more so the those outside the faith. If believers did not fail and fall weak they would not need the help of others.

Justified is one time because God sees the heart and knows who are His children. It can't possibly be a process because God does not require "proof" of who are His. He sees who are His even before someone is his. Therefore to God justification can only be a one time event. To the world however, we must endure, persevere, do good deeds, etc... because we must continually "prove" to the world who we are in Christ, if we are to draw them in. I hope that clears my posistion up some. I should be able to respond more to your post later.

hi Adam, I know what you are saying and i am open to reading a book just to see more and understand better. I was having a conversation with my wife and the friend that lead me to the Lord 13 years ago, over the weekend and I did defend several Catholic principles that I know to be mis-spoken of. My wife is leary of anything Catholic. She only has met wordly Catholics in our area. All she knows is the big beer festival down the street and the drunken party and loud music that go with it. She has not met the likes of you, Cure, Grant, Carson, Ron, brother ed, etc... so her point of reference is different then mine.

More later,

In Christ,
Brian

[Cure of Ars]

[quote]Actually I can only view things as simple concepts because my mind does not work in deep and mysterious ways.[/quote]

Although I admit that my concept of what Paul is talking about is a little more complicated than yours I don’t think it is that hard to understand. I know this is true because I am not that smart. It actually makes the bible a lot simpler because you can take it at face value when it talks about works in relation to salvation. You don’t have to force it through a “faith alone” paradigm. To understand how Catholics read the bible in regards to what Paul is saying you just need to remember the two types of systems that Paul and even James are talking about in scripture.

[quote]We can't be saved by following to the letter of the law, I think that is the point of adding "law" to the word works.[/quote]

I agree like I said. Paul is using the word works and law to show he is talking about the system of debt. Being “under the system of law” like a contract that tries to earn salvation and it tries to make God a debtor. But man cannot make God a debtor like Paul says;

[quote]Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How inscrutable are his judgments and how unsearchable his ways!  "For who has known the mind of the Lord or who has been his counselor?" [b]"Or who has given him anything that he may be repaid?"[/b]  For from him and through him and for him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen. (Rom 11:33-35)[/quote]



This system of works is opposed to the system of grace which lives by “by the principles of law” which is


[quote][b]For the whole law is fulfilled in one statement, namely, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." [/b]But if you go on biting and devouring one another, beware that you are not consumed by one another. I say, then: live by the Spirit and you will certainly not gratify the desire of the flesh. For the flesh has desires against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; these are opposed to each other, so that you may not do what you want. [b]But if you are guided by the Spirit, you are not under the law. [/b] (Gal 5:14)[/quote]

Paul makes the distinction between the two systems very clearly when he says;

[quote]A worker's wage is[b] credited not as a gift, but as something due.[/b] But when one does not work, yet believes in the one who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness. (Rom 4:4)[/quote]

And again in Ephesians:

[quote]For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not from you; it is the gift of God; it is not from works, so no one may boast. For we are his handiwork, created in Christ Jesus for the good works that God has prepared in advance, that we should live in them. (Ephesians 2:8-10)[/quote]

The system of grace is by faith, but it is not by faith alone, doing works by grace are important because we need to remain in the family of God to receive the inheritance of salvation. As children of God we are called to “please” God by our actions even though our actions are not perfect. Just like a father is pleased with a child who does not do something perfect but tries. Let me give some biblical examples;

[quote]And without faith it is impossible to [i]please[/i] God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him. (Hebrews 11:6)[/quote]

[quote]…offer your bodies as living sacrifies, holy and [i]pleasing[/i] to God…(Rom 12:1-2)[/quote]

[quote]So we make it our goal to [i]please[/i] him, whether we are at home in the body or away from it.  [b]For we must all appear before the judgement seat of Christ[/b]…(2 Cor 5:9-10)[/quote]

[quote]For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Live as children of light, for light produces every kind of goodness and righteousness and truth.  Try to learn what is [i]pleasing[/i] to the Lord. (Eph 5:8-10)[/quote]

[quote]…an acceptable sacrifice, [i]pleasing[/i] to God. (Phil 4:18)[/quote]

[quote]… so as to be fully [i]pleasing[/i], in every good work bearing fruit and growing in the knowledge of God, strengthened with every power, in accord with his glorious might, for all endurance and patience, with joy (Col 1:9-11)[/quote]

[quote]Children, obey your parents in everything, for this is [i]pleasing[/i] to the Lord. (Col 3:20)[/quote]

[quote]and receive from him whatever we ask, because we keep his commandments and do what [i]pleases him[/i]. (1 John 3:22)[/quote]

There is more but this should be enough.

[quote]If the persons falls from time to time and even doubts God, it does not mean they are less his children.[/quote]

It is possible to fall from grace. This concept is throughout the bible. I could give many examples but I want to stay a little bit focused so I will only give one.

[quote]Working together, then, we appeal to you not to[b] receive the grace of God in vain.[/b]  For he says: "In an acceptable time I heard you, and on the day of salvation I helped you." [b]Behold, now is a very acceptable time; behold, now is the day of salvation.[/b] (2 Cor 6:1-2)[/quote]


God’s children do fall from time to time but they can repent and ask for forgiveness to the Father. If the child refuses to repent, is not sorry, and does not ask for forgiveness then they have rejected the father and are not in the Spirit.


[quote]Your example falls short in that we are not all God's children. It is those who recieve Him that are declared his children.[/quote]

If you are not God’s children then you are under the law and cannot be saved. My example does not fall short it is the main idea that Jesus taught. That God is our father.


[quote]All, however, are his creation but to be grafted in to eternal life and to be forever a child of God takes a second birth (lets speak of adults here to keep it simple). The next point in what I copied is that circumcision is said to be a sign and a seal.[/quote]

Circumcision prefigured baptism just like Adam prefigured Jesus. Baptism is the fulfillment of Circumcision because it give what is symbolizes just like Jesus fulfilled what Adam could not do. It’s simply typology.

[quote]And so was Baptism in the early church.[/quote]

Give an example from any of the early Church fathers.

[quote]Justified is one time because God sees the heart and knows who are His children. It can't possibly be a process because God does not require "proof" of who are His.[/quote]

This statement is unbiblical. Look what God said to Abraham;

[quote]But the LORD'S messenger called to him from heaven, "Abraham, Abraham!" "Yes, Lord," he answered.  "Do not lay your hand on the boy," said the messenger. "Do not do the least thing to him.[b] I know now how devoted you are to God, since you did not withhold from me your own beloved son.[/b]" [/quote]

God did not just look into Abraham’s heart but instead he looked at his faith by what he did. This proof was not for others because the only person around was Isaac. And God says "I know now" not "Isaac now knows". The bible has the same concept here;


[quote]Forgive and deal with [b]each man according to all he does[/b], since you know his heart (for you alone know the hearts of men), so that they will fear you and will walk in your ways… (2 Chron 6:30-31)[/quote]

God knows what is in man’s heart but the proof that God sees is “according to all he does”. Here is another example;

[quote]In this you rejoice, although now for a little while you may have to suffer through[b] various trials, so that the genuineness of your faith,[/b] more precious than gold that is perishable even though tested by fire, [b]may prove[/b] to be for praise, glory, and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ.  Although you have not seen him you love him; even though you do not see him now yet believe in him, you rejoice with an indescribable and glorious joy,  [b]as you attain the goal of (your) faith, the salvation of your souls.[/b] (1 Peter 1:7-9)[/quote]

[quote]I hope that clears my posistion up some. I should be able to respond more to your post later.[/quote]

I think I understand your position but I would like to give you more time to explain some of the difficulties that I have shown.


Your brother in Christ

Edited October 11, 2004 by Cure of Ars

[Brother Adam]

[quote]hi Adam, I know what you are saying and i am open to reading a book just to see more and understand better. I was having a conversation with my wife and the friend that lead me to the Lord 13 years ago, over the weekend and I did defend several Catholic principles that I know to be mis-spoken of. My wife is leary of anything Catholic. She only has met wordly Catholics in our area. All she knows is the big beer festival down the street and the drunken party and loud music that go with it. She has not met the likes of you, Cure, Grant, Carson, Ron, brother ed, etc... so her point of reference is different then mine. [/quote]

Hi Brian,

First, I am so sorry for the actions of such worldly Catholics. They poorly represent our faith, and many of them may very well be "in name only" Catholics, as someone may grow up in a Baptist Church and have always attended, but never truly developed a relationship with the Lord.

When you have 1 Billion members and poor educational materials for the last 40 years in our country, there tend to be many nominal Catholics. It really is sad. Please remember that the Catholic faith is never defined by even what a majority of laymen might think in a given place. It is defined by the will of Christ, and the teachings remain the same despite the horrid behavior of some.

Your wife sounds a great deal like mine was, having never had a positive experience with other Catholics growing up. My only experience with a Baptist before I turned 17 was someone I rode the bus with who tried to convince me that matter didn't really exist and I was a figment of my own imagination.

Anyways, I'll send a PM reminder asking for your address when and if you want any material.

Finally, Thank you. I appreciate immensely that you would help clear up misinterpretations others may have about the Catholic faith. I wish you could have been in mass this Sunday. The readings and sermon all revolved around our salvation by faith in Jesus Christ. As many times they do. Have you ever been to a liturgical service before (not necessarily a mass)?

God Bless,
Bro. Adam

[Briguy]

1 And (1) working together with Him, (2) we also urge you not to receive (3) the grace of God in vain--
2 for He says,
"(4) AT THE ACCEPTABLE TIME I LISTENED TO YOU,
AND ON THE DAY OF SALVATION I HELPED YOU."
Behold, now is "THE ACCEPTABLE TIME," behold, now is "THE DAY OF SALVATION"--
3 (5) giving no cause for offense in anything, so that the ministry will not be discredited,
4 but in everything (6) commending ourselves as (7) servants of God, (8) in much endurance, in afflictions, in hardships, in distresses,
5 in (9) beatings, in imprisonments, in (10) tumults, in labors, in sleeplessness, in (11) hunger,
6 in purity, in (12) knowledge, in (13) patience, in kindness, in the (14) Holy Spirit, in (15) genuine love,
7 in (16) the word of truth, in (17) the power of God; by (18) the weapons of righteousness for the right hand and the left,
8 by glory and (19) dishonor, by (20) evil report and good report; regarded as (21) deceivers and yet (22) true;
9 as unknown yet well-known, as (23) dying yet behold, (24) we live; as punished yet not put to death,
10 as (25) sorrowful yet always (26) rejoicing, as (27) poor yet making many rich, as (28) having nothing yet possessing (29) all things.

ADJECTIVE: Inflected forms: vain·er, vain·est
1. Not yielding the desired outcome; fruitless: a vain attempt. 2. Lacking substance or worth: vain talk. 3. Excessively proud of one's appearance or accomplishments; conceited. 4. Archaic Foolish.

Cure, I included a little more of 2 Cor. I have two possible explanations for the verses you included. It could be that the word vain could mean here what the normal definition implies. Meaning that people of faith have a faith that is not bearing fruit as it should and the verses to follow are showing what a fruitful faith looks like. What I am saying is that those being spoken of may be believers that just came to faith and haven’t begun to “work” for the Lord as of yet, probably because of lack of instruction. Or---

Those who believed in vain, did not believe at all and are just going through the motions. You see when Paul wrote to the Corinthian Church, he wrote to those who gathered at the assemblies. Some would be like any church today, having some who are there but not really believers. Either way, this is not a proof of falling from grace.

On Abraham, God never said what you are saying he said Cure, an angel did. This is a losing argument for you because God knew what Abraham would do before he did it. If I recall God counted Abraham righteous about 14 years prior to this event. No, what Abraham did was seen by two men and angels and God. The place where Abraham was going to sacrifice Isaac is proclaimed to be forever named “the Lord will provide” (something like that anyway). The point is that no matter who spread the story it spread and was for that purpose, it happened for them then and us now, not for God as he knew what was going to happen before it did. Hundreds of millions of people have read that story of Abraham and his willingness to sacrifice his only son. It was truly an event for all ages, not one between just God, Abraham and Isaac. Abraham did what he did because he was justified not to be justified. God saw his heart, a believing, faithful heart and Abraham was justified. Abraham proved his faith to others by his obedience. I know this is a concept where we totally part ways but logic is on my side. For example: If I watched Barry Bonds hit his 700th home run live and then someone comes to me with a video tape of BB hitting his 700th HR , do I need the video tape to prove the HR was hit? Of course not. In fact the person knew I saw it live they would not bother bringing me the video tape because they would know that I knew already. Abraham did not surprise God by his actions with Isaac, God already knew. God used Abraham as an example of great faith and trust. Abraham was justified to God 14 years before that but as we read the story Abraham is justified (proved righteous) to us, the readers and to the people of his time as the story and legend spread, which it did because the place ended up with a name. What you said about God saying “I know” is just not logical or accurate. As I said there is a n angel speaking here and not God directly.

More later
In Christ,
Brian

[Cure of Ars]

[quote]On Abraham, God never said what you are saying he said Cure, an angel did.[/quote]

First off let me say that I agree totally that God knows what is in man’s heart and he knows what we are going to do. Why does God test us when he knows what we are going to do? I really don’t know. And why does God look at what we do as proof even though he can see into our heart? I don’t know. I'll I know is that he does and I don’t think this is being illogical because God’s ways and thoughts are totally beyond me. I believe it because it is what scripture says.


The following are my reasons why I think that Abraham and God where having a conversation and not Abraham and an angel.

1. Angel literally means messenger and this was what the angel was doing. God was speaking through the angel.

[url="http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/choice/1097631899-1310.html"]http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/cho...31899-1310.html[/url]

2. Abraham is speaking to God not the Angel because Abraham uses the title Lord in Verse 11.

3. The angel says the following;

[quote]"Do not lay your hand on the boy," said the messenger. "Do not do the least thing to him. I know now how devoted you are to God, since [b] you did not withhold from [u]me[/u] your own beloved son.[/b]"(Gen 22:12)[/quote]

Now answer this question for me. Abraham did not withhold Isaac from “me”, is this “me” referring to the angel or God? (look at verse 1)

Why does God speak to himself in the third person in the first part of the sentence? I don’t know.


[color=red][Disclaimer my interpretation of the scripture and apologetic arguments are not infallible, I could be wrong ] [/color]


Side note:

Did you know that the mountain that Abraham named “God will provided” could reasonable be the same mountain that Jesus was crucified on? If you look at Genesis 22:2 God tells Abraham to go to the land of Moriah. If you look at 2 Chron 3:1 it says that the Temple was built on “Mount Moriah”. Isaac prefigured Christ when he carried the wood of the sacrifice on his shoulders. God really did provide the sacrifice, his only begotten son. I love OT typology.

Edited October 13, 2004 by Cure of Ars

[Briguy]

Hi Cure, I must admit that the whole Abraham talking to the angel and to the Lord is confusing. I see one possibility but I am not confident of it. It could be that some words are from the angel and some from God, through the angel. The angel could have been speaking for himself when he said "me". Look at the KJV rendering below:

11] And the angel of the LORD called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I.
[12] And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.
[13] And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket by his horns: and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt offering in the stead of his son.
[14] And Abraham called the name of that place Jehovah-jireh: as it is said to this day, In the mount of the LORD it shall be seen.
[15] And the angel of the LORD called unto Abraham out of heaven the second time,
[16] And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the LORD, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son:

When the angel talks to Abraham and tells him not to hurt Isaac it does not say "saith the Lord" (v.12) Also, there is a third person thing going on there, where the angel says God as a third person and then says me (small m) in the first person. When later the angel speaks a second time he does say "saith the Lord" (v.16). That is about the best I can figure. Perhaps the Hebrew words would reveal more but I don't know.


You mentioned 1 Peter 1: 7-9 above and the quote you used, when read from my perspective, seems to better represent what I have been saying, even in your version. I see it as saying that true faith produces a goal, the goal being salvation, which will be attained. It doesn't reall say the goal will only be attained if you do good in the trials, it says that the trials refine the faith and cause usto praise, etc... There is not language here to say that we won't attain the goal, once we have faith.

Cure, that would be really cool if you are right about the place Abraham was going to sacrifice Isaac was the same place that God did allow His Son to be sacrificed. It would make sense considering the likenesses in the two accounts. I always thought it was cool that both Jesus and Isaac carried "wood" on their backs, the very wood that would be there demise. Anyway, Thanks for the great "heart" that you post with. I will look and see what other answers I owe you and Adam and try to post later.

In Christ, our Lord,
Brian

[Brother Adam]

Pft. I owe you more answers than you owe me . I've been so darn busy at work and with school coming up so soon. I'm also going to be on TV again this Thursday. Wait. That's tomorrow. Eep. lol.

I have been enjoying the conversation between you and Cure though. I'll just "but" in whenever I think I can be of any use