- That's what I meant. it's not
works which saved her, it's faith. simple, uncomplicated, no
strings attached faith.
And I agree with you. It was faith that gave her
initial justification and salvation. The works bit
comes later when it is required to keep her faith alive in order
for her to ultimately reach the kingdom of heaven.
- And with this faith she had,
it drives her to do good works, to love others and to love God. It
comes naturally in time. Everyone falls away at times. King David
fell and sinned, but God calls him a man after His own heart,
Abraham lied to others to protect himself, but God calls him a man
of faith. Paul, one of the fiercest preachers in his days,
struggled and proclaimed that he does what he knows he should not
do, and does not do what he knows is right to do. Works can never
be quantified and used as a measure of salvation. God does the
saving, all of it. Our works reflect our salvation (which is a slow
life-long process)
All these folks turned back to God (repented) after they fell
into sin. If they did not, they might not have ended up in heaven
regardless of any justification they had received from God in the
past.
Works can never be quantified and used as a measure of
salvation ? Agreed if you're talking about benchmarks and
passing marks.
God does the saving, all of it ? Agreed but he needs our
cooperation.
Our works reflect our salvation (which is a slow life-long
process) ? Agreed.
All these do not change what I'm saying, which is that initial
justification and salvation (which is by the grace of God through
faith) does not guarantee that one would subsequently
cooperate with God's graces with one's works (doing good and not
doing bad, ie: not sinning) which is necessary for one's passage to
heaven.
tell smarty boy that. and.. i
wish someone would tell my gf that.
I would appreciate it then that you do not
attribute such assertions to me. It misleads the
reader.
That's a really bad excuse u
know..
It may seem so to you but not to me. God reaches out to
individuals in all sorts of ways, including through others. So if
someone, say, is curious or inspired by Mary's obedience to the
Lord and subsequently comes to know Jesus and becomes a Christian,
I would say Alleluia !
I wish that catholics will dare
to question, when times of dubious teachings rises. Question is,
would u dare to rise and question if this happened? and what can
you do to question effectively?
....
The Word of God isn't enough as
an ultimate authority? The reformation occurred because there were
thinking people who compared the corrupted teachings of the
catholic church with the words of the bible. It was the "ultimate
living authority of the pope" which failed and corruption ran
rampant, not the unchanging authority of the bible.
...
Again, what I
meant by allowing the pope to be the final authority instead of the
unchanging truth of the bible. When you believe that someone's
words is infallable, you will not think to question it, unless you
yourself know what Jesus said. If more people knew that Jesus
taught to offer the other cheek, and realised that the pope at that
time taught something which contradicted this unchanging truth,
would there be a crusade then? That's why the pope cannot be the
final authority. He can teach, and preach and share. but
ultimately, everyone must compare whatever that is being taught by
man, to what the bible teaches and see if it's contradicting.
That's what martin luthur did. and was so nearly killed by the
catholic church for it. That's the corruption which happened once,
and can happen again, if there is no check on authority and
power.
That is why it is very important to understand when the pope is
infallible and when he is not. Let me explain again.
When the pope teaches on matters of faith and morals to
the whole church in his official capacity as
Christ's representative on earth, Catholics do (and should) hold
what he teaches to be infallible because we believe that the Holy
Spirit prevents him from teaching error under those circumstances.
And these teachings would not contradict the bible which is the
inerrant word of God. But the pope is certainly not the
final authority on the stock market, on cross-border relations
between countries, on dietary best practices and what have you.
Does the believe in the pope's gift of teaching infallibility
sound stupid ? Consider the alternative.
If someone wants to know the truth, what is he to do ? You would
probably tell him to read the bible, the word of God (which all of
us should do) and interpret it for himself. But how does he know
his interpretation is correct ? The bible wasn't even written in
English. Check with a pastor maybe ? But which one ? Every
protestant pastor is teaching his/her brand of christianity, often
times contradictory, and each one holding what
he/she teaches to be the 'truth', based strictly on
the bible and nothing else. Heck, if that person does not
fully agree with any pastor out there, he may even decide to
start a new church and teach what he thinks is the truth,
again supposedly based on the word of God and the unchanging
authority of the bible. Is this what God would have wanted
?
And correction, the teachings of the Catholic Church were in no
way corrupt during the reformation, nor contradictory to the bible.
It was some of the clergy who were corrupt.
