Time To Get This Salvation Thing Straight

[Livin_the_MASS]

Time to get this Salvation thing striaght, check it out!
Pope John The II (general audience of December 9, 1987)
Quote from the book "A Cathechesis on The Creed John Paul II Jesus Son and Savior"


[quote]Christ's miracles recorded in the Gospels are signs of the divine omnipotence and of the salvific power of the Son of Man. They also reveal God's love for humanity---particularly for those who suffer, who are in need, who implore healing, pardon and compassion, They are therefore signs of the merciful love proclaimed in the Old Testaments (cf. Encyclical Dives in Misericordia). Especially the reading of the Gospel makes us understand and almost feel that Jesus' miracles have their source in God's loving and merciful heart which lives and beats in his human heart. Jesus performs them to overcome every kind of evil existing in the world: physical evil, moral evil which is sin, and finally him who is "the father of sin" in human history, namely, satan.

The miracles are therefore "for man." In harmony with the redemptive finality of His mission, they are works of Jesus which re-established the good where evil had lurked, producing disorder and confusion. Those who accepted them and who were present at them were aware of this fact, so much so that, according to Mark, "they were exceedingly astonished and said, 'He has done all these things well. He makes the deaf hear and the mute speak'" (Mk 7:37)

An attentive study of the Gospel texts reveal that no other motive than love for humanity, merciful love, explains the "mighty deeds and signs" of the Son of Man. In the Old Testament, Elijah made use of "fire from heaven" to confirm his power as prophet and to punish incredulity (cf. 2 Kgs 1:10) When the Apostles James and John sought to induce Jesus to punish with "fire from heaven" a Samaritan village which had refused hospitality, he definitely forbade them to make such a request. The evangeslist mentions categorically that "he turned and rebuked them" (Lk 9:55). (Many codices including the Vulgate added, "You do not know of what spirit you are; for the Son of Man came not to destroy men's lives but to save them.") Jesus never worked a miracle to punish anyone, not even the guilty......

If we accept the Gospels account of Jesus' miracles--- and there is no reason not to accept it other than prejudice against the supernatural--- one cannot call into doubt a unique logic which links together all those signs and demonstates their derivation from God's salvific economy. They serve to reveal his love for us, that merciful love which overcomes evil with good, as is shown by the very presence and action of Jesus Christ in the world. Inasmuch as they are inserted into this economy, the "wonders and signs" are an object of our faith in the plan of God's salvation and in the mystery of redemption effected by Christ.[/quote]

Again to limit ones salvation is wrong. The Catholic Church has the fullness of Truth and is the One True Church. It is different if one rejects this fact, but for those who are learning or do not know of the Gospel, it is wrong for one to judge this way. Judgement and Salvation is ultimaley up to God, He desires the Salvation of souls, I don't care who you are. If you reject it that is something different, but to limit one salvation is wrong.(Especially the ones learning, having the desire to really learn, or those who don't know better, This is where us Catholic Christians come in to preach the good news! That God is merciful and has A CHURCH and to teach about the sacraments and His teachings.) Again God desires the Salvation of souls, He leaves it up to us to decide,(our free will) but He never gives up on us. And to say babies who are aborted can't go to heaven, is putting yourself into a high seat! I will say in this matter "Jesus I trust in You" and that "with God all things are possiable." Again Judgement is up to God in these issues, not us. We just give witness plant seeds and pray and let the rest up the God.

In the Love of Christ,
Jason

[popestpiusx]

Hey jason, join our debate on limbo. I am not sure what room it is in. By the way, where in Indiana are you from?

[CatholicCrusader]

First, the Pope didn't say you cannot limit salvation by way of Dogma (of course, you can). Secondly, that is by far a Dogmatic declaration...a Papal audience?

[quote]Again to limit ones salvation is wrong[/quote]

The Chuch limits salvation to baptism and profession of all beliefs of the One, True, Holy, Apostolic Roman Catholic Church of Our Lord. Even protestants claim salvation is based upon believe in Our Lord as God and "personal Lord and Saviour" (which is full of errors, that one partial phrase). But, in any event, even protestants claim that salvation is limited. Surely you are no farther left than they. God bless.

[CatholicCrusader]

I'm sorry that statement was not meant to seem sarcastic. It should say: Secondly, that is FAR FROM a Dogmatic declaration...a Papal audience?

[popestpiusx]

By the way, if it is wrong "to say babies who are aborted can't go to heaven," then condemn nearly every who commented on the issue prior to about 30 years ago (siants, popes, theologians, and even councils). I'm not saying limbo is a dogma (though I know a number of theologians who would say that it is), but it is at least a legitimate position and quite defensible. It is not putting ourselves in a high seat, but rather using perfectly good reason applied to what we do know as revealed by God: Baptism (in some form) is necessary for salvation, sanctifying grace is availible only through the sacraments of the Church, and no one can be condemned without having commited an actual sin. Now I know there are many different theories on how it can come about that unbaptised infants receive sanctifying grace. I personally think they are a bit of a stretch, but others believe they are legit. I leave that for the debate.

[CatholicCrusader]

Is limbo in the Back Alley?

[popestpiusx]

I don't think it was moved, but it may have been. Let me see if I can find it. I ressurected it just the other day. It was a gret debate. Most enjoyable.

[Bruce S]

Read the [color=red][b]RED LETTERS[/b][/color], everything else is just divinely inspired commentary.

You find the question VERY clearly answered there.

[Livin_the_MASS]

If you know you need to be baptized and do not do so, than thats different!

To reject the Truth is different!

Even so Judgement is up to God and God alone, not you or me.

I pray for those Outside the Church and Inside the Church!

God desires salvation of souls, period....

Are you saying God is not merciful?

Don't put yourself in His seat, you might have to give an account for it one day!!!

Pope John is correct in his document, period.

The Pope has spoken.

Don't play games with dogma and words!



popestpiusx, no offense but I will keep that private! I' ll talk to you later about that.

[quote]Hey jason, join our debate on limbo. I am not sure what room it is in. By the way, where in Indiana are you from?[/quote]

God Bless,
Jason

[popestpiusx]

Here it is: [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=8344&hl="]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=8344&hl=[/url]

[popestpiusx]

Hey, no problem jason. I understand. Just curious cause I am from there originally.

Bruce,
What the heck are you talking about?

Jason again,

of course God is merciful, that is why he would not send anyone to hell who has not comitted an actual sin. I'm not playing games with dogma and words. I am just reading the writings of the saints, popes and councils. Read them for yourself. Then refute them if you can.

[Livin_the_MASS]

[quote name='popestpiusx' date='Mar 26 2004, 04:27 PM'] Hey, no problem jason. I understand. Just curious cause I am from there originally.

Bruce,
What the heck are you talking about?

Jason again,

of course God is merciful, that is why he would not send anyone to hell who has not comitted an actual sin. I'm not playing games with dogma and words. I am just reading the writings of the saints, popes and councils. Read them for yourself. Then refute them if you can. [/quote]
My statement was not directed to you but CatholicCrusader!!

[Bruce S]

I know SIMPLE isn't the preferred debating style around here.

The question, as I understood it, was regarding salvation. Jesus pretty much gave the anwer if one takes the time to fetter out the answer.

No Papal Bulls or Encyclicals can override the [color=red][b]RED LETTERS[/b][/color], hence my succinct reply.

[PS: for those need Bible 101, the RED LETTERS are the words spoken by Jesus in better copies of the Bible.]

[CatholicCrusader]

This is the last time I am making an exception to this Dogma. From hence henceforth, I am not going to put any stipulations or "footnotes", but, Jason, I need to clarify for you. I am not saying God cannot saved them. I am stating what the Church has taught throughout the ages infallibly, and I cannot apologize for professing the unwavering Church teaching. I merely explain the Dogma to the best of my ability, including the Dogma defined by a Council and the Pope. I just don't see how to say "if you are outside the Church you can be saved" when reading it. I think I said this on another thread, it's like the protestants taking "This IS My Body" and making it "This is NOT My Body." It is the exact opposite of what the Dogma says. For more in depth description, check my latest post (or few) in Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus in this "phorum". God bless.

[Livin_the_MASS]

I did!

Read the Saint's, St. Faustina in this case!

Even the demons know of His Justice!

He wants His Divine Mercy Glorified!

Just like you can't contradict Scripture, you can not do the same with the teachings of the Church.

As The Church grows in faith, the Teachings blossom, they don't change.

The Holy Spirit is taking care of it. I trust and Love JPII with all my heart (what Pa Pa says, than it is!)

Read the title of the book again, it is a teaching of Jesus Christ Son and Savior!

God Bless
Jason

[MC Just]

The Eucharist is the way to heaven. The hebrew Catholics have a great view on this.

[url="http://hebrewcatholic.org/PrayerandSpirituality/eucharistjewishm.html"]http://hebrewcatholic.org/PrayerandSpiritu...istjewishm.html[/url]

[url="http://hebrewcatholic.org/PrayerandSpirituality/eucharistjewisht.html"]http://hebrewcatholic.org/PrayerandSpiritu...istjewisht.html[/url]

[Livin_the_MASS]

Agreed, The Eucharist is the way, for it is God Himself. The Sacrament of Sacraments. We become one with God, vices are removed, charity filled and overflowing!

God Bless You for that statement!

In the Love of Christ,
Jason

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Bruce S' date='Mar 26 2004, 04:37 PM'] I know SIMPLE isn't the preferred debating style around here.

The question, as I understood it, was regarding salvation. Jesus pretty much gave the anwer if one takes the time to fetter out the answer.

No Papal Bulls or Encyclicals can override the [color=red][b]RED LETTERS[/b][/color], hence my succinct reply.

[PS: for those need Bible 101, the RED LETTERS are the words spoken by Jesus in better copies of the Bible.] [/quote]
These and other red letters compell me to pay heed to the voice of Christ's Church:
Jn 16:13; Jn 14:26; Lk 10:16; Mt 16:17-18; Jn 21:17;

[Bruce S]

[quote]

John 16:13

The Work of the Holy Spirit

5"Now I am going to him who sent me, yet none of you asks me, 'Where are you going?' 6Because I have said these things, you are filled with grief. 7But I tell you the truth: It is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. 8When he comes, he will convict the world of guilt[1] in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment: 9in regard to sin, because men do not believe in me; 10in regard to righteousness, because I am going to the Father, where you can see me no longer; 11and in regard to judgment, because the prince of this world now stands condemned.

12"I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. 13But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. 14He will bring glory to me by taking from what is mine and making it known to you. 15All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will take from what is mine and make it known to you.

16"In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me."
[/quote]

This talkes about the coming of the Holy Spirit, a pre-Pentecost prediction. If anything, it buttresses the Pentecostal idea of the way we are to operate.

[quote]John 14:26

22Then Judas (not Judas Iscariot) said, "But, Lord, why do you intend to show yourself to us and not to the world?"

23Jesus replied, "If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching. My Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him. 24He who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me.

25"All this I have spoken while still with you. 26But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you. 27Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid.

28"You heard me say, 'I am going away and I am coming back to you.' If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I. 29I have told you now before it happens, so that when it does happen you will believe. 30I will not speak with you much longer, for the prince of this world is coming. He has no hold on me, 31but the world must learn that I love the Father and that I do exactly what my Father has commanded me.
"Come now; let us leave.
[/quote]

Another Holy Spirit passage, applicable to all Christians.

[quote] Luke 10:16

5"When you enter a house, first say, 'Peace to this house.' 6If a man of peace is there, your peace will rest on him; if not, it will return to you. 7Stay in that house, eating and drinking whatever they give you, for the worker deserves his wages. Do not move around from house to house. 

8"When you enter a town and are welcomed, eat what is set before you. 9Heal the sick who are there and tell them, 'The kingdom of God is near you.' 10But when you enter a town and are not welcomed, go into its streets and say, 11'Even the dust of your town that sticks to our feet we wipe off against you. Yet be sure of this: The kingdom of God is near.' 12I tell you, it will be more bearable on that day for Sodom than for that town.

13"Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes. 14But it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon at the judgment than for you. 15And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted up to the skies? No, you will go down to the depths.[2]
16"He who listens to you listens to me; he who rejects you rejects me; but he who rejects me rejects him who sent me." [/quote]

This passage is directed at Evangelists trying to bring the good news to the Jews ... it is not a passage that is applicable to the Catholic Church being a dominant denomination?

[quote]Matthew 16

17Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. 18And I tell you that you are Peter,[1] and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades[2] will not overcome it.[3][/quote]

Every serious scholar, including many Christians before 1500 [read Catholics] interpreted the "rock" as the "belief" .. the foundation was the KNOWLEDGE that Jesus was the Messiah. The big rock little rock Greek translations, which I'm assuming everyone around here knows all about, so I'm not going to rehash those here.

It would seem that scripture plucking isn't going to prove any point here jason.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Bruce S' date='Mar 27 2004, 04:51 AM'] Every serious scholar, including many Christians before 1500 [read Catholics] interpreted the "rock" as the "belief" .. the foundation was the KNOWLEDGE that Jesus was the Messiah. The big rock little rock Greek translations, which I'm assuming everyone around here knows all about, so I'm not going to rehash those here.
[/quote]
I'll reply to the others later because I'm about to sign off. But I couldn't resist throwing this out real quick...

Some top protestant scholars on the "rock" of Mt 16.

[quote]David Hill
Presbyterian minister and Senior Lecturer in the Department of Biblical Studies, University of Sheffield, England

On this rock I will build my church: the word-play goes back to Aramaic tradition. It is on Peter himself, the confessor of his Messiahship, that Jesus will build the Church. The disciple becomes, as it were, the foundation stone of the community. Attempts to interpret the “rock” as something other than Peter in person (e.g., his faith, the truth revealed to him) are due to Protestant bias, and introduce to the statement a degree of subtlety which is highly unlikely. (“The Gospel of Matthew,” The New Century Bible Commentary, (London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1972), 261.)  [/quote]

[quote]Suzanne de Dietrich
Presbyterian theologian

The play on words in verse 18 indicates the Aramaic origin of the passage. The new name contains a promise. “Simon,” the fluctuating, impulsive disciple, will, by the grace of God, be the “rock” on which God will build the new community. (The Layman's Bible Commentary: Matthew, vol. 16, (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1961), 93.)  [/quote]

[quote]Craig L. Blomberg
Baptist and Professor of New Testament, Denver Seminary

Acknowledging Jesus as The Christ illustrates the appropriateness of Simon’s nickname “Peter” (Petros = rock). This is not the first time Simon has been called Peter (cf. John 1:42), but it is certainly the most famous. Jesus’ declaration, “You are Peter,” parallels Peter’s confession, “You are the Christ,” as if to say, “Since you can tell me who I am, I will tell you who you are.” The expression “this rock” almost certainly refers to Peter, following immediately after his name, just as the words following “the Christ” in v. 16 applied to Jesus. The play on words in the Greek between Peter’s name (Petros) and the word “rock” (petra) makes sense only if Peter is the rock and if Jesus is about to explain the significance of this identification. (The New American Commentary: Matthew, vol. 22, (Nashville: Broadman, 1992), 251-252.)  [/quote]

[quote]Donald A. Carson III
Baptist and Professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Seminary

Although it is true that petros and petra can mean “stone” and “rock” respectively in earlier Greek, the distinction is largely confined to poetry. Moreover the underlying Aramaic is in this case unquestionable; and most probably kepha was used in both clauses (“you are kepha” and “on this kepha”), since the word was used both for a name and for a “rock.” The Peshitta (written in Syriac, a language cognate with Aramaic) makes no distinction between the words in the two clauses. The Greek makes the distinction between petros and petra simply because it is trying to preserve the pun, and in Greek the feminine petra could not very well serve as a masculine name. (The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Volume 8 (Matthew, Mark, Luke), (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1984), 368.)
The word Peter petros, meaning “rock” (Gk 4377), is masculine, and in Jesus’ follow-up statement he uses the feminine word petra (Gk 4376). On the basis of this change, many have attempted to avoid identifying Peter as the rock on which Jesus builds his church. Yet if it were not for Protestant reactions against extremes of Roman Catholic interpretations, it is doubtful whether many would have taken “rock” to be anything or anyone other than Peter. (Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary – New Testament, vol. 2, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994), 78.)  [/quote]

[quote]Gerhard Maier
Leading conservative evangelical Lutheran theologian

Nowadays a broad consensus has emerged which – in accordance with the words of the text – applies the promise to Peter as a person. On this point liberal (H. J. Holtzmann, E. Schweiger) and conservative (Cullmann, Flew) theologians agree, as well as representatives of Roman Catholic exegesis. (“The Church in the Gospel of Matthew: Hermeneutical Analysis of the Current Debate,” Biblical Interpretation and Church Text and Context, (Flemington Markets, NSW: Paternoster Press, 1984), 58.)  [/quote]

[quote]William Hendriksen
Member of the Reformed Christian Church, Professor of New Testament Literature at Calvin Seminary

The meaning is, “You are Peter, that is Rock, and upon this rock, that is, on you, Peter I will build my church.” Our Lord, speaking Aramaic, probably said, “And I say to you, you are Kepha, and on this kepha I will build my church.” Jesus, then, is promising Peter that he is going to build his church on him! I accept this view. (New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Gospel According to Matthew (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1973), 647.)  [/quote]

Edited March 27, 2004 by Laudate_Dominum