Monty: What is it with you anyway? I swear you’ll not stop until I’m gone from this board. We understand that you don’t trust me, and you think my apology was fake. Do you have to keep repeating it, and repeating it? I’m not bashing in my posts here. I’m asking questions, and really trying to learn. Even though I am really trying to understand the teachings of the RCC, they confuse me greatly.
Big Iron/Tom: While still considering what you’ve said about following Jesus, could you please interpret this verse for me: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” John 14:6
Could you also interpret Matthew 21-23 for me? (It’s a little long to type out right now)
Here are some more verses that you may find interesting: Luke 18:9-14 (Parable of the Pharisee and Tax Collector); John 8:31-32; 14:6,12,15,21; 15:15; Ephesians 2:1-10; 1John 2:3-6; 4:15; 5:1.
Big Iron: Who is Arizona Ranger? Is that you? Because you used it after your own quote. I’m just wondering.
Well, see, I would accuse you of picking and choosing the Scripture you want to believe. You have fixed on the idea that you specifically have to accept Jesus in some sort of special “Christian” way in order to come to God. I say that the Scripture shows that God has chosen people that are outside the Jewish and Christian traditions and that your idea of Salvation is intended, specifically, to those people who do hear and understand the Word that they are called upon to respond–and if they choose not to respond, then they are damned. (“Hearing” in this case is of the heart; a person who gets preached at but who does not discover the truth of the message in his/her heart is not bound by that.) On the other hand, God is present throughout the world, and we are presumptuous if we put limits on what He can or will do to move other people to come to Him.
You are a Biblical Literalist; I am not. I suspect that you pick the narrow verses that justify your actions in your mind while ignoring the greater message; you suspect that I am watering down the strict messages of God to follow my own path. We are not going to agree on this. My only point, originally, was that you continue to make claims about Catholicism that are false. I’ve been over all this long before you were born and I’m not going to be persuaded by any arguments you present that I’ve already heard. Similarly, I doubt that I can better explain this in a way that you will understand.
For example, you make the following point:
Did you stop reading at that point? Continue through the rest of that paragraph.
In fact, the RCC believes that Jesus is in the world in a mystical fashion through the Body of Christ. We also do not believe that the Spirit is limited to following the actions of specific human Christians. You believe that a person has to hear the specific words of Jesus and then perform some physical declaration to “accept” those words in order to be Saved. We believe that all people are called by the presence of Jesus even if they have not heard his words preached, physically, and that the impulse to do good is driven by that call. It is not a contradiction; it is a different perspective (one that I am not sure you have the background to grasp at this point).
Again, we are not going to agree on this point, so there isn’t much point in debating it.
The position of the RCC is not that only we few “in the club,” as Bob puts it, are saved, but that the purpose of “the club” is to more effectively spread the Word of God. It is a pretty bad scandal that so much time is wasted among Christians bickering over points of faith rather than spreading the Word–not merely by preaching, but by working for social justice, helping people to lead better lives, and so forth. The very strict statements about who will be saved are not intended as a restriction on all people as to who will be with God: they are commands to those who do understand the Word of God to follow it, closely, themselves.
In the simplest terms I can think of:
A person who has not been granted the gift of faith in the Christian message will be saved if they follow the Spirit of God in attempting to good in their lives.
A person who has been granted the gift of faith is called to follow Jesus strictly. If you believe, but shrug off that belief as not essential to your life, you will not be saved.
In other words (one more try) the very strict messages of Jesus and Paul are aimed at believers, not the whole world of unbelievers.
I realize that this runs counter to your interpretation of Scripture, but it is quite consistent with the interpretation of a great many Christians (and not just Catholics). I do not expect you to give up your beliefs, but I find that your beliefs put a straightjacket on God: I am not willing to tell God what He can do based on a narrow reading of His Word.
Snarkberry: No; I wasn’t talking about you, I was talking about Adam.
Also to Snarkberry: I finally found my Portals CD-ROM (that’s the one with the Standard Works on it). Reason I couldn’t find it on my bookshelf was because I left it in the computer. Anyway, the part of the D&C of which I was thinking was D&C 42:25 & D&C 64:12. Essentially those are the ones that say cast out those who don’t depart from their sin.
Hey, relax Snark…you’re obviously trying. Adam ain’t.
Adam: what’s with me? You say you apologize, then you immediately attack, then you say you apologized already, then you condemn, then you say you apologized a long time ago, then you parrot bigoted, ignorant, and mistaken views.
Perhaps the reason you seem to have a problem with expressing opinions as opinions is that you appear to think that only beliefs are knowledge.
As it is, I’ll be happy (and I venture that you probably will be, also) if you’d just take the advice many others here have given you. Top of that list is quit telling lies about other faiths.
Augustine of Hippo settled that question in the early fifth century in his fight with Pelagius. Salvation comes only from God. People cannot even ask for Salvation, we can only accept or reject that which God offers to all people.>>> Tommndebb
You’re sounding dangerously close to being a Calvinist here, Tom! <g>
I also think that you’ve oversimplified the teachings of the church in your explanation of paragraph 836 of the Catholic Catechism.
That whole section of the Catechism, in its explanation of how the Church relates to non-believers, leans toward the concepts you explain. But I would argue that while the Church is willing to accept that believers in other religions may "search among shadows and images for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, teh Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as “a preperation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life.” (Par. 843) But I would argue that the only way to interpret the ultimate conclusions of the following paragraphs (pp. 844-848) is that “salvation” for non-believers only comes as the truths found in other religion leads to Christ. Par. 847 states that those, “who through no fault of their own” do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, seek God in truth “moved by grace” through the dictates of their own conscience may “acheive eternal salvation.” But then you cross reference this with par. 845 and 846,and 848, which emphasize the exclusivity of the truth of the church and the need to evangelize those who do not know the truth.
Reading all that together, I condlude that the only way one who “through no fault of his own” does not know Christ, yet seeks God with a sincere heart and “moved by grace” can indeed find salvation – but only in Christ revealing Himself to that person by the power of His Spirit. I agree with you that it is not for me or anyone else to judge, but apart from Christ, there is no salvation. I challenge you or anyone to cite specifics in the Catechism or elsewhere in officially sanctioned Catholic doctrine which says otherwise.
Even without the Catechism, the Bible teaches me this, in Romans 1:18-20.
I don’t mean to pick a fight here. I actually think you and I might agree on our conclusion. But there is no truth seperate from Christ, for even the truth in other faiths is simply a precursor to this ultimate truth. (see par. 843). ARG may be ignorant, but he did focus on a potential fudge factor in your explanation that can be fodder for theological liberalism. Most of my knowledgable Catholic friends would completely disagree with the concept that one can find salvation apart from Christ. HOW that salvation is found or understood in the mind of the believer might differ, and cultural digressions can make what is similar seem very different, but it is still salvation in Christ. John 14:6 is a universal truth. Interestingly, so is John 4: 21-24, where Christ declares that God is not worshipped in a place, or in a particular style, or by a particular ethnic group, but by “true worshipers,” “in spirit and in truth.”
Tom and I have disagreed about Catholic theology before. He knows we will continue to disagree. Its one of the reasons I am no longer a practicing Catholic. But there is a great deal of truth in Catholic teaching (much, much more truth than error, ARG). My concern with Tom’s explanation of salvation is that it borders on a universalism that belittles the necessity of the sacrifice of Christ and faith in Him. I daresay that the Bible does not teach that, and neither does the Catholic church.
You may now return to your regularly scheduled debate over whether to execute Adam.
SoxFan59
“Its fiction, but all the facts are true!”
Geez, I would have payed good money to be a SD member and a part of this discussion from its inception. I’ve belatedly followed this thread and the ones associated with it and it just seems so futile to jump in now at this stage. There’s not much I can add that hasn’t been touched upon by the many thoughtful, articulate, and most of all patient people in this forum.
Arg, you sound like an Exxon spokesman after the Valdeez {sp?} oilspill. I recommend you begin your search for a life and a clue, preferably sooner than later.
Well SoxFan, after your post (which I can say a huge AMEN to), any argument I put up will seem like child’s play. So, I think this has gone as far as it can go, at least on my end over here.
Waste: I used “real life” in quotes because this message board is real life too. The people I have spoken to include, friends, relatives, neighbors, co-workers, and complete strangers…all face to face. I’ve also spoken to many peope on the Internet in chat rooms on AOL, and I get the same answer every time…“If you’re a good person, you go to heaven.” Hey, if you think I’m lying, that your problem. But that’s what people say. And even Tom admitted that there are many who are ignorant of the official teachings of the RCC.
Tom: One thing we can certainly agree on is that no one can dare “put God in a box.” Or put a limit on His powers, or comprehend His ways. However, I take offense that you say I put God in a “straightjacket.” On the contrary, I know the truth, and the truth has set me free. (John 8:32) Also, you and I both know that where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. (2Cor. 3:17)
Come to think of it, those verses didn’t really fit that argument. But they are great Scriptures anyway.
Sox, I freely confess to having greatly oversimplified most of my points. I am afraid that, in my opinion, efforts to provide nuance or shading or extra detail when talking to Adam results in his picking phrases to challenge out of context. (Sorry, Adam, but that’s the view I get.) So I deliberately re-wove a rich and colorful tapestry using the starkest blacks and whites I could.
I have no arguments with the way that you expressed those ideas in your post.
As to the Calvin shot (and I realize it was a shot), I didn’t say that God selects who will be saved, only that Salvation originates with Him. Certainly we can ask for Salvation–but only because He has inspired us to seek it. (More oversimplification.)
Ah, my infamous misinterpretation of people strikes again. :::sigh::: Er, um, sorry.
Oh yeah, I completely forgot about those passages. But don’t they just refer to members of the LDS church? How can a person who isn’t a Mormon be cast out of the Mormon church? Maybe I’m misinterpreting the scripture, I don’t know.
Thanks. Yeah, I’m trying. It’s very hard to change after years of sin, too. But anyway, about Adam: it does seem like he has “backslid” on his apology and is back in the frackus (sp?). But I’m still willing to be patient with him. It’s not his fault he was born into a (possibly) religiously intolerant family (and correct me if I’m wrong, Adam–I’m not trying to slander you). Jesus said he would be very tolerant of the Lamanites because of “the traditions of their fathers” in the BOM. Adam is probably just following a tradition of his own parents, as we all do to some extent. I think the sooner we can get this guy into a college, the better.
Snarkberry: that’s an outstanding observation. The only problem I see is that he’ll probably end up in some college run by the folks whose mistakes he parrots.
Sure Monty, when hell freezes over. Which, btw, would end Adam’s need for heaven. ;).
trisha
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice - Albert Einstein
[[Big Iron/Tom: While still considering what you’ve said about following Jesus, could you please interpret this verse for me: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” John 14:6]] Who Else?
Well, not that I put much stock in writings of that nature, but I imagine it has to do with going through the path of Jesus, loving your brother and all that, rather than literally meaning you have to believe Big JC was “God,” etc., which would be a bit unfair, I’d say, to all those people who never fairly heard the story (quite aside from the unfairness to those who heard it and, quite reasonably, found it unconvincing).
[[Big Iron: Who is Arizona Ranger? Is that you? Because you used it after your own quote. I’m just wondering.]]
Yeah, that’s me – and you ain’t no Texas Red.
As to the Calvin shot (and I realize it was a shot), I didn’t say that God selects who will be saved, only that Salvation originates with Him. Certainly we can ask for Salvation–but only because He has inspired us to seek it. (More oversimplification.)>>>> Tom
Sorry. I meant to type in a <g> in there to emphasize the “gentle jab” it was meant to be.
By the by, I find the basic debate between the “essence” of Calvinism and the “essence” of Arminianism (did I spell that right?) to be a matter of semantics. Calvinists are big on predestination, that is, God chooses who will be saved. The Arminianist types (and I believe St. Augustine would be in this camp, as well as many evangelicals like my buddy Derek Prince) believe we choose God, and embrace salvation. Calvin’s side views salvation as a once and for always proposition, the other side believing that one can be saved, but fall into a sinful state once again and “lose” salvation. The latter believes that a Christian who “backslides” is again lost, while Calvin’s ilk believe the “backslider” must not have ever been saved in the first place.
I think there is truth in both views, as it is all a matter of perspective. The Bible clearly supports the notion of predestination (see Romans 10 and Ephesians 1:11) but from God’s omnipotent and omniscient perspective, He knows what we will and won’t do anyway. From our limited perspective in time, it appears that we can accept or reject the salvation that’s offered to us. The ultimate result of a believer being one with God is the same.
Unfortunatley, I’ve mislaid my copies of the Mormon scriptures, so I can’t follow Snark and Monty’s discussion. (I used to have a copy of the D&C and the attendant books published with it, but its somewhere in the cesspool/closet that is my at-home library. I did find my bundle of Gerald & Sandra Tanner tracts from my college days though!)
SoxFan59
“Its fiction, but all the facts are true!”
I have to disagree about this, Bob (not the part about loving your fellow man, because that’s a big part of it). God is just, which means that everyone will have a legitimate chance of hearing the gospel, whether in this life or in the next. God doesn’t condemn those who haven’t heard this message, of course. For him to do so would be completely unfair and unjust. Everyone gets a fair chance. And Adam is right, IMHO – the only one who can forgive you of your sins and bring you into heaven is Jesus Christ. There is no one else who can accomplish this. Christ is the only Savior.
The scriptures Monty was referring to (D&C 42:28 and D&C 64:12) are saying, “he that sinneth and repenteth not shall be cast out.” I had my doubts about whether this scripture meant cast out of the LDS church, or whether it meant cast out of God’s presence. But the footnote to D&C 42:28 refers to “excommunication” and “punishment” in the index. Obviously Adam can’t be excommunicated from a church to which he doesn’t belong. As for punishment for lying about other religions (if Adam knowingly did so), that’s between him and God. It’s none of my business.
I have to disagree about this, Bob (not the part about loving your fellow man, because that’s a big part of it). God is just, which means that everyone will have a legitimate chance of hearing the gospel, whether in this life or in the next. >>>Monty
True. Romans 1:18-20 makes this clear. Except for the part about “in the next life.” The scriptures are also clear that
“man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment” Hebrews 9:27
By the way, is this considered “witnessing?” Should this thread be transferred to the GD forum?
SoxFan59
“Its fiction, but all the facts are true!”
But they are great Scriptures anyway. 