Salvation in Catholic and Baptist Theology

No doubt some time after he wrote that, he ceased being a "reformer" and became a "protestant," Prostesting against the evils and false doctrines of the RCC.

 

Oh yea Big time.....but you knew that.:thumbsup:

 

I for one, respect you for doing research to try your beliefs :thumbsup: Pray to God and let the truth be your resting place! For we must all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. How we lead others concerning doctrine will be part of that judgment, imho.

 

It is clear hear that the Catholic Church wanted to get away from a Zwiglian perspective where all faith is; is an intellectual assent rather than a life changing event where works naturally follow faith. Therefore You can't have your cake and not eat it as well. Works must naturally flow from faith or you haven't faith. But you wouldn't get that from the canon alone which is why the chapters of the Council must be viewed for context. We can see in this passage that works are the consummation of the faith.

and becomes more clear in this quote from Trent

I am familiar with the confession. However, Not as clear as you might suppose because even in the baptist confession we have this comment to assure works of righteousness

I think it becomes at this point a matter of emphasis. Catholics want to assure that with Justification comes sanctification. Protestants want to assure the free-ness of the gift. But both agree Faith is not intellectual assent alone (which seems to be the argument of many protestants) but with the follow up of sanctification or righteous living. as we can see the closeness of words from Trent and the 1689 confession where Trent says

Sanctification is part of Salvation. If we are not sanctified there was no point in saving us. Its like a boat on a lake with a drowning person if that person is picked up (saved) and dried off and is rowed to shore (also salvation) so that they can live their life as they should be it is good (also salvation) it wouldn't matter to rescue the person if they decided to jump back in the water because it felt good. Sanctification is what makes us Christ like and the people God wants us to be. Back to our original state before sin. However, it seems more often than not that the protestant argument is that sanctification can be taken on or not at the descretion of the person because salvation is assured. This is where the disagreement actually lies.

And the other source of contention is infused vs. imputed. The catholic believes in an actual transformation into the New Man thus infusion. However, Protestants do not by their argument hold to actual transformation until after death because they hold to Imputed grace. In otherwords Christ covers the man but his nature is still the same. Snow covering manuer. Catholics believe we indeed are grafted heirs or true adopted brothers and sisters of Christ. Not just covered but changed by grace.

 

You say the Catholic Church provided a link throughout history to the first Christians. The Catholic Church is a link to the first Christians, as one coming to teach falseness. Peter warns us---

2 Peter 2:1-3 But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves. 2 Many will follow their depraved conduct and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. 3 In their greed these teachers will exploit you with fabricated stories. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.

To be a Catholic, one must believe in everything the Catholic Church teaches, or the Church would deem you a heretic. The Popes believe they are infallible, they believe the Catholic Church is the one true Church, and not believing in even one of the teachings of the Church would make one anathema. That is what the Catholic Popes have taught.
Let me ask you, do you accept Pope Benedict XVI as your Church leader? If you are a Catholic, then you must acknowledge the Pope as the Church leader. Pope means 'father'. The Catholics even call their Pope 'Holy Father'. Jesus calls God “Holy Father,” see John 17:11. It is blasphemous calling sinful man the name reserved for God. It should make you cringe when you hear the Catholic Pope referred to as Holy Father.

Not only do the Catholic parishioners call the Pope and priests ‘father,’ the Pope and priests call each other 'father'. Jesus said not to call any one on earth 'father' and that they are all brothers. There are many other false doctrines in the Catholic religion, but starting from the top of their religion--- the Pope, that should be enough to stop there with that religion.

 

No they will assert Imputation. OR That Christ Righteousness covers us. Basically, according to the Baptist whether we are actually righteous or not is irrelevant because we are declaired righteous. This is why the famous quote is that we are dung covered by snow and God see's only the snow part of it.

For the Catholic, not only does Christ righteousness cover us but we are being progressively transformed into his image actually as we partake of his person and the graces afforded to us. Catholics claim to become righteous indeed rather than just declaired legally. Thus infused.

 

I am a Baptist and you are a Roman Catholic. You are using the same terms we use (Biblical terms) but define them differently.

Your belief in Christ, justification, regeneration, remission of sins are all instrumentally connected and dependent upon sacraments in a cause and effect relationship, whereas Baptists believe their belief in Christ, regeneration, justification and remission of sins are all internal acts effected by the Holy Spirit literally completed preceding any external observations (baptism, Lord's Supper, church membership, etc.).

Those who misrepresent our position attempt to build the straw man that we believe that salvation is merely justification by faith exclusive of any works. However, that is not our position.

The term "salvation" covers a lot more than justification by faith.

It is true that we believe that justification is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone without our participation by works, but we do not believe that justification is the totality of our "salvation" nor do we believe that justification "alone" saves us.

We believe that "salvation" is more comprehensive than mere legal acceptance and right to enter heaven (Justification) but includes regeneration of the personal condition of the believer so that he is created in Christ Jesus in true holiness and righteousness in regard to his inward man. Hence, actual righteousness is imparted by new birth which is made progressively manifest in "good works" (Eph. 2:10). However, this imparted righteousness is incomplete and progressive and the regenerated man is never brought to a completed personal condition of righteousness until glorification.

This aspect of salvation begun in regeneration and manifested in progressive sanctification [visible evidence is good works] does not obtain entrance into heaven nor does its rate of progression or level of intensity determine heaven or hell. Entrance into heaven has been determined legally by Christ's merits obtained through justification by faith and by glorification whereby we are made personally fit to enter heaven at the resurrection ALL BEFORE any judgment of works by God.

This aspect of salvation [progressive sanctification] determines temporal growth in experiential salvation, present access to promises and blessings and eternal rewards. Our sins are no longer dealt with as God would deal with enemies but with children and therefore we are no longer under the judgment of God but under the loving chastening hand of God (Jn. 5:24). Our confession or lack of confession of sins does not obtain or lose entrance into heaven but lose or maintain fellowship with God and temporal benefits of salvation. Our sins have already been fully remitted (Rom. 4:4-8) and our temporal ongoing confession only obtains temporal experiential access to the blessings of our salvation but never determines eternal salvation as that has already been accomplished. Hence, we may lose and/or win temporal battles with sin but the war with sin has already been accomplished by the Captain of our salvation for us.

In regard to this aspect of salvation the spectrum of manifest righteousness differs as greatly as between a child of God like Lot and one like Paul and all the variables in between these two. The vast spectrum of practical godliness does not determine heaven or hell nor does it determine glorification as both Lot and Paul will be equally glorified and thus glorification is not dependent upon good works of any extent in number.

Hence, Justification by faith obtains both final fitness and entrance into heaven whereas regeneration obtains a righteous nature here and now, made progressively manifest by good works ultimately determined by God's good pleasure and measure of grace and faith given to every man (Eph. 2:10b; Rom. 12:4,7).

The bottom line is your ultimate JUSTIFICATION is sacramental in nature and dependent upon your own cooperative participation whereas the Baptist view of JUSTIFICATION is totally dependent upon the finished work of Christ without personal cooperative participation. Your REGNERATION is also sacramental in nature and dependent upon your own cooperative participation whereas the Baptist view of REGENERATION is that it is the soverign creative act of God (Jn. 1:13; James 1:18; Eph. 2:10a) inseparable from justification but made manifest in "good works" by the indwelling Holy Spirit enabling us to cooperatively participate according to the measure of grace and faith given every man in order to accomplish God's purpose in our life (Eph. 2:10b; Philip. 2:13; Rom. 12:4,7).

Your "justification" is church/sacrament dependent whereas the Baptist view is epitomized by the theif on the cross without church membership, without baptism and the Supper or any other ordinance. We veiw the theif on the cross not as the exception but as the rule in regard to justification whereas, baptism, church membership and etc. we veiw as the rule for progressive sanctification.

Your gospel is a PARTNERSHIP gospel but ours has no room for man's participation but only room for Christ and His finished works "for our sins."

Your gospel is "another gospel" that was preached among the Galatians (Gal. 1:8-9) that is begun by faith but finished by joint participation or your works (Gal. 3:2-3). Our gospel is characterized by "hearing" (Gal. 3:2) and receiving the finished works of Christ FOR US whereas your gospel is characterized by your "works" for Christ (Gal. 3:2,5).

Your gospel is characterized by doing the works of the Law (God's revealed standard of right versus wrong) and your final standard of condemnation is "cursed is every one that CONTINUETH NOT IN ALL THINGS which are written in the book of the Law to do them."

Our Gospel is characterized by "But no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident the just shall live by faith. And the law is not of faith."

Our Gospel is characterized by "the just [justified] shall live by faith" in the finished works of Christ but your gospel is characterized by "the one wishing to be justied shall live by good works in addition to the works of Christ."

The difference between the Baptist and Roman Catholic view of Justification can be summarized in the following verses:

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

 

Therefore, you believe that it is okay to blasphemy because Jesus ascended back to heaven. In addition, Jesus sent His Holy Spirit to live in His people, so, Jesus is on earth inside believers.

Jesus is the head of the Church, Colossians 1:18. You go against God to appease your religion. Jesus says they are brothers, and not to call each other 'father;' Jesus says God is the Holy Father. If you loved Jesus you would have his teachings and obey them! John 14:15 "If you love me, you will obey what I command.

In the scriptures, Paul does not tell the Christians to call him 'father,' no one ever calls Apostle Paul ‘father.' Apostle Paul called everyone his brother and sister. I can give you many scriptures showing this.
You left out an important part of 1 Corinthians 4:15. 1 Corinthians 4:15 says, “Even though you have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel.”
Paul says, “You do not have many fathers.” Paul is merely noting that he is an Apostle, and as an Apostle, he is among the first and more knowledgeable among the brothers and sisters. However, in the Catholic religion, there ARE MANY fathers, in fact, thousands of fathers. This is more proof that Catholics pervert the word of God. The Bible says, "Not many fathers;" Catholic religion says, "many fathers."

The Catholic religion goes against the Word of God, and tries to pit Apostle Paul against Jesus! Why in Hell would anyone not take Jesus' words literally?

 

Moriah, your not saying that "call no man father" applies to addressing one’s biological father are you? It also doesn’t exclude calling one’s ancestors "father," as is shown in Acts 7:2, where Stephen refers to "our father Abraham," or in Romans 9:10, where Paul speaks of "our father Isaac."

Here is the problem with your literal take on Matthew 23 as I see it. Jesus seems to prohibit the use of the term "teacher," in Matthew 28. Didn't Jesus himself appoint men to be teachers in his church? "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations . . . teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you."For this I was appointed a preacher and apostle . . . a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth" (1 Tim. 2:7); "For this gospel I was appointed a preacher and apostle and teacher" (2 Tim. 1:11).

 

Your welcome!

We do not deny this cooperative work in progressive sanctification but wholly deny it in justification or regeneration. Rome makes regeneration/justification a cooperative work whereas Baptists deny this.

The seriousness of this disagreement is that Rome denies the work of Christ is sufficient to completely justify the "ungodly" (Rom. 4:5) apart from cooperative works from man. The seriousness of this disagreement is that Rome believes that the "ungodly" can particpate in the CREATIVE work of regeneration (Eph. 2:10a). Thus Rome robs the glory from God by contributing it to some extent of joint participation.

 

Abraham was not among these Christian brothers and sisters. Jesus was speaking to the sisters and brothers in Christ, this is about our spiritual sisters and brothers in Christ, not physical brothers and sisters in Christ.

Rabbi means Master, and Teacher. Jesus tells us not to call ourselves ‘Teacher,’ thus signifying a title of superiority, not that we do not teach! For an Apostle or any ‘brother’ to require that others call him the ‘teacher’ would be in defiance to the teachings of Jesus. Note that Rabbi means Teacher, and note how those in the Buddhist religion have a leader whom they call ‘Teacher.’

 

I re-read your question and missed the whole regeneration part. I answered too quickly. The baptist doctrine of regeneration is nothing like infussion. In the Baptist view God had ordained that specifically you would be chosen and others unchosen to be in his Kingdom. Therefore when God wants you to accept him he makes you alive so you can choose him but not as if you have a choice. You are at this point incapable of rejecting God. This regeneration doesn't get rid of your sin nature but adds another foriegn nature to yours by the Holy Spirit. Therefore for the rest of your life you are a dichotomy of two natures at war with each other. You don't loose the sinful nature until you die. Which all that is left is the spiritual nature. No matter how much time you spend in sanctification it doesn't deminish your sin nature it just keeps it at bay for a while.

 

That is not Baptist doctrine; that is Calvinist doctrine. Not all Baptists, including me, are Calvinists. Get your facts straight.

Not true. False premises lead to false conclusions.

Again false. Go and do some study.

Are you sinless? If not, why not?

 

Don't you think you are using the term "Baptist" too narrow here? For example, DHK is a Baptist and he does not believe what you have described as regeneration in regard to the will of man or irresistable grace or that one must be regenerated to choose God.

Furthermore, the new nature is not a "foreign nature to yours" but rather is a restoration or being renewed in the image of God that was lost in the fall (Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10; Tit. 3:5). So actually the degenerate nature is the "foreign nature" that is destroyed in death or transformation (1 Cor. 15:53-55).

 

You have a point. I was being general suppossing that most are reformed in their view. However, there are free will baptist who would disagree with this irrisistable grace view. There are differing views as well on the New Nature we recieve. I agree with your assessment about that nature however others would disagree because the fallen nature is so prevelant in our race that the Nature Given to us when we are (Born Again) is introduced or given by the Holy Spirit outside of ourselves or foriegn to our natural state. To be honest it is hard to nail a baptist down on a specific theological issues. The only way to do it is on Baptistic distinctives which don't delve to deep on certain theological issues.
However, I believe the transformation begins here. Not upon death.