Are Catholics Saved?

[DHK]

okay, so in your estimation, when was the foundation of the world ?

That is irrelevant and I refuse to be drawn into a Calvinistic debate.

 

[pinoybaptist]

I like that we agree on this, pinoy, even though I think we are coming at it from vastly different angles.

what other angle is there to approach it from ? The blood washed away the sinner's sins. The blood atoned for the sinner. The blood redeemed the sinner.

Find a church that doesn't, in some way, do these things. It's difficult, as churches are comprised of human beings, and human beings are sinful.

Well said. That is why I settled for the Primitive Baptists. We are just as sinful as the next guy in the church next door, but we know the who, what, why, and wherefores of our hope and redemption.

I know we've been over this before, but I stand by it...(bolded for emphasis)

I respect that, and I hope you will again give me your ear.

Paul says that whoever calls on God will be saved <snipped>

no disrespect to JamesL, but I prefer to keep our conversations focused on us, at the moment. your paragraph has different parts to it that need replying to.

That statement is true. As one poster said in another thread, nobody knows who the elect are. None of us were present when the Lord wrote their names in the book of life, therefore none of us is in any position to say who exactly are the regenerates and who are the unregenerates.
However, we know from Scripture that man is spiritually dead, and therefore whoever calls on him, presumably, calls on him because he has been brought back to spiritual union with God, reconciled, if you will.
But is this "saved" pertaining to the caller's eternity ?
or is this saved pertaining to the caller's temporal status ?

, and he goes on to say that they can't call on him unless they believe,

Well, no, not really. They cannot call on who they do not believe (and please bear in mind Paul was speaking of Jews, and Judaism, and Paul also said before hand that they have the zeal FOR God (as opposed to OF God) but not according to knowledge (emphasis). Knowledge comes from hearing, and along with knowledge, faith, therefore he comes to the conclusion that faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

The Gospel, that you seem to place in a lower status within our doctrine, is, as Paul also wrote to the Romans,

Well, no. I have the highest regard for the gospel.
My objection is when the gospel, belief in it, and obedience to it, becomes the cause of eternal salvation. That is not true.
The gospel is the source of one's temporal salvation.
To say, or teach, in any way, shape, or form that the gospel is the avenue, means, cause, instrument, or whatever for one's eternal salvation and that belief in it validates the work of Christ, instead of the other way around, first of all makes God a liar because He caused John the Beloved to write that those whom He saw in heaven came from ALL tongues, nations, tribes, and kindred.
I suppose you will agree that if the gospel becomes as preached and believed in by most pulpits today, then that excludes a whole multitude of souls from mankind if we bring into account WHEN and WHERE the gospel began to be preached and taught.
It is the SHED BLOOD OF CHRIST, and nothing else that was the instrument for our redemption, atonement, and eternal salvation.
The gospel is simply the good news, the preacher the bearer of good news.

the "power of God unto salvation" to all peoples.

true. but again we have to ask, salvation from what ?

I would argue that many modern churches have actually bought so wholeheartedly into the "God is Love" philosophy of the Joel Osteens of the world that they've forgotten that God is also the one who takes vengeance, and the God is a jealous God.

True again.

I wouldn't go that far, but you can run into some sticky situations debating the eternal fate of those who never heard the gospel on this earth. I've heard several explanations, though I won't endorse or condemn any of them. I know that Christ read, in a prophecy concerning himself, that he would "preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound."

It might surprise you, but, if you've been "lurking" lately, I have run into "some sticky debates" with those who I agree with, in many ways, soteriologically.

Any internet forum is going to have its trolls and tricksters. Some people live just to see others riled up.

yes, sir.

 

[pinoybaptist]

That is irrelevant and I refuse to be drawn into a Calvinistic debate.

It is relevant, and it doesn't have to turn into a Calvinistic debate.
When was the foundation of the world ?

 

[pinoybaptist]

That is irrelevant and I refuse to be drawn into a Calvinistic debate.

Believe it or not, DHK, I have, in other forums, come across those who, as many others, stress belief in, and obedience to, the gospel, as the be-all and end-all of one's eternal salvation.
When confronted with the term "foundation of the world" they state, to back up their doctrine, that the foundation of the world really began when Christ rose from the dead.
Now, I have forgotten (this was many years ago) exactly what follows after that and I do not want to misquote them.
I have also not visited that forum and doubt if they are still there but I will go and take a look around later,.
So, that question was not to bait you into a Calvinistic debate.
It was an honest question, and to my mind, fair.:wavey:

 

[DHK]

Believe it or not, DHK, I have, in other forums, come across those who, as many others, stress belief in, and obedience to, the gospel, as the be-all and end-all of one's eternal salvation.
When confronted with the term "foundation of the world" they state, to back up their doctrine, that the foundation of the world really began when Christ rose from the dead.
Now, I have forgotten (this was many years ago) exactly what follows after that and I do not want to misquote them.
I have also not visited that forum and doubt if they are still there but I will go and take a look around later,.
So, that question was not to bait you into a Calvinistic debate.
It was an honest question, and to my mind, fair.:wavey:

I had simply said that the "elect" are obviously those that have trusted Christ as their Savior. We have no other way of looking at it. We are not God. This is a pitfall of Calvinists that they talk of the elect from the standpoint of God, as if they could see the elect from God's point of view. But they cannot.
The elect, as far as we are concerned, are those that have trusted Christ as Savior--in spite of "when the foundation of the world is." It has no bearing on the matter. When I got saved "the foundation of the world" was totally irrelevant as it is now.

For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness, but unto us which are saved, it is the power of God.

 

[pinoybaptist]

I had simply said that the "elect" are obviously those that have trusted Christ as their Savior. We have no other way of looking at it. We are not God. This is a pitfall of Calvinists that they talk of the elect from the standpoint of God, as if they could see the elect from God's point of view. But they cannot.
The elect, as far as we are concerned, are those that have trusted Christ as Savior--in spite of "when the foundation of the world is." It has no bearing on the matter. When I got saved "the foundation of the world" was totally irrelevant as it is now.

For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness, but unto us which are saved, it is the power of God.

okay, fine with me.
thanks for clearing that up.:thumbsup:

 

[BlackSheepBaptist]

Come on....you don't even give them an opportunity to defend themselves because they cant respond. At least play fair and put this thread in a forum that allows for it.....like the 'Other denomination ' forum. Hint hint.

I want to know what other Baptists think about Catholics.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Well then....I come closest to what Pinoy stated:

Gospelly ? Not one of them. Saved,as in, by Christ's finished work ? Some, yes, especially those of the "laity".

But ive known some very biblically literate Catholics.....doctrine was another thing however.

 

[Yeshua1]

Why or why not?

saved despite their heresies/wrong theology, as any sinners get saved same way, by the Will of God, but once saved, need to get out of there in obedience to the scriptures!

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

saved despite their heresies/wrong theology, as any sinners get saved same way, by the Will of God, but once saved, need to get out of there in obedience to the scriptures!

And go where....to another false church?

 

[DHK]

And go where....to another false church?

Go to a mosque? Go to a Hindu Temple?
Error is error. Stay home and start another church. Fellowship with other believers in your household. Listen to sermons on the internet that are Baptist and fundamental. Or, seeing that you are not totally isolated go to the nearest evangelical church to you.

 

[Yeshua1]

And go where....to another false church?

To a Baptist church that teaches the essentials of the faith, is active in discipleship and witnessing...