Matt, I know a little about the Catholics and I can tell you that if you sin, to them you are damned. Well, tell me, just like you think you are saved even though you are still alive and kicking, do you believe that it is alright to believe that you are damned whatever you do if you sin (they strangely seem to ignore the fact that we are under grace)? I have heard on numerous occasions catholic priest say to young children that if they sinned they would go to hell.Originally posted by Matt Black:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by corinne:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Matt Black:
Corinne, with respect, your views on our knowledge of salvation seem more Catholic than Baptist to me.
Yours in Christ
Matt
Corinne </font>[/QUOTE]I was brought up Catholic so I know something of this myself. As I alluded to in my long post a couple of pages back, the Catholic and Orthodox position on soteriology is very similar to your own - that salvation is something which has to be worked on all the time and can be lost if it is not 'sustained' in that way. It is that concept that is behind the rather threatening quote by the priest to which you refer, and which I heard many a time in various guises in my youth, being educated by priests. In what way, then, do you say that your soteriology differs from the Catholics?
Yours in Christ
Matt </font>[/QUOTE]I do not consider myself out of bounds with most Baptists because I am not entirely convinced by Calvin. Whether General atonement vs. Particular atonement, election vs free will, I would rather be neither, and I feel perfectly fine to be either. Embracing the scriptures, and particularly embracing Jesus's teachings and words as related in the Bible, means I am in fact a little of both.
Calvin believed in Predestination, I have no problem with that, really. It feels quite good to think one might be predestinated to stand next to Christ.
Calvin believed that God desires only the salvation of the elect. Although I personally would like to see everyone saved (because we are all God's children), deep down I know it is not possible. I am not in favour of converting unbelievers, for example, like Catholics are. I think evangelism to the unbelieving masses is a bit of a waste of time, which does not mean that we should not try at times.
Calvin believed that God provides grace only to the elect whereas the catholics believe that God provides grace to all, though not all accept it. My view is that he does provide grace to those who are believers, and that he does withdraw that grace from those who stray away and do not return to him, so I am a bit divided in that one.
Calvin believed that Christ died only for the elect and the Catholics believe that Christ died for all men. I believe that Christ died for all a priori but the end result is that if I am an elect, he effectively died for me and not for those who choose to not believe.
Calvin believed that God predetermines some for hell. There are clearly some evil-reeking people I would not even want to try talking to, much less see in heaven, so yes. I believe there is always the possibility that these people will change but that this possibility is so remote that it is very improbably it will happen.
Calvin believed that The elect include all those born-again whereas the Catholics believe that the elect are those who persevere to the end. As you know I am closer to the catholics on that one, but that does not make me a catholic any more than believing in some Calvinist stuff makes me a Calvinist.
Calvin believed that those in grace (born-again) can't fall away whereas I think that it is possible to freely sin and lose grace.
Calvin believed that the elect are assured of their salvation. I say Yes, but only God knows who they are.
I have never pretended to be a pure Baptist and I am certainly not one. It is simply a denomination I feel close to, for some reason.
Corinne