Sunday, January 03, 2010

Explicit Biblical Evidence of Men Helping to Save Themselves or Participating in Their Own Salvation (Which is Always Enabled by God's Grace)

[PaultheApostle.jpg]
St. Paul was vehemently opposed to the Protestant faith alone (sola fide) doctrine and to monergism

Acts 2:38-40 And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. [39] For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him." [40] And he testified with many other words and exhorted them, saying, "Save yourselves from this crooked generation."

Romans 13:11-14 Besides this you know what hour it is, how it is full time now for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed; [12] the night is far gone, the day is at hand. Let us then cast off the works of darkness and put on the armor of light; [13] let us conduct ourselves becomingly as in the day, not in reveling and drunkenness, not in debauchery and licentiousness, not in quarreling and jealousy. [14] But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires.

1 Corinthians 9:22-27 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. [23] I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings. [24] Do you not know that in a race all the runners compete, but only one receives the prize? So run that you may obtain it. [25] Every athlete exercises self-control in all things. They do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. [26] Well, I do not run aimlessly, I do not box as one beating the air; [27] but I pommel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified.

Philippians 2:12-13 Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; [13] for God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.

Philippians 3:7-16 But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. [8] Indeed I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as refuse, in order that I may gain Christ [9] and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own, based on law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith; [10] that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, [11] that if possible I may attain the resurrection from the dead. [12] Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect; but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own. [13] Brethren, I do not consider that I have made it my own; but one thing I do, forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, [14] I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. [15] Let those of us who are mature be thus minded; and if in anything you are otherwise minded, God will reveal that also to you. [16] Only let us hold true to what we have attained.

2 Thessalonians 2:13 . . . God chose you from the beginning to be saved, through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth.

1 Timothy 2:15 Yet woman will be saved through bearing children, if she continues in faith and love and holiness, with modesty.

1 Timothy 4:16 Take heed to yourself and to your teaching; hold to that, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers.

2 Timothy 3:15 . . . the sacred writings which are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. [we do the work of reading Scripture and this in turn can save us, so we helped save ourselves by reading it]

Hebrews 6:9-11 Though we speak thus, yet in your case, beloved, we feel sure of better things that belong to salvation. [10] For God is not so unjust as to overlook your work and the love which you showed for his sake in serving the saints, as you still do. [11] And we desire each one of you to show the same earnestness in realizing the full assurance of hope until the end,

1 Peter 2:2 Like newborn babes, long for the pure spiritual milk, that by it you may grow up to salvation;

2 Peter 1:10 Therefore, brethren, be the more zealous to confirm your call and election, for if you do this you will never fall;

See related papers:

St. Paul's Teaching on the Organic Relationship of Grace / Faith and Works / Action / Obedience (Collection of 50 Pauline Passages)

Final Judgment in Scripture is Always Associated With Works And Never With Faith Alone (50 Passages) (+ Discussion)

"Work Out Your Own Salvation With Fear and Trembling" (Philippians 2:12): Does It Harmonize With Protestant Soteriology? (Dave Armstrong vs. Ken Temple) (+ Discussion)

Biblical Evidence for Infused Justification

God's Enabling Grace and the "Righteous" According to the Prophets

God's Righteousness and Ours, in the Psalms

The Interpretation and Exegesis of Romans 2-4 (Justification and Works of the Law) (Includes Very Extensive Patristic Commentary and Definitional Citations from three Protestant Bible Dictionaries)

Biblical Evidence Regarding a Vigilant, Pauline, Catholic Moral Assurance of Faith With Perseverance, in Hope

Biblical Evidence for Human Distribution of Grace and Salvation

Biblical Evidence For Merit and "Quantifiable" Grace (+ Discussion)

Dialogue: "Doing Something" for Salvation (Dave Armstrong vs. Craig Kott)

Catholic-Baptist Dialogue on "Being Good Enough" to Go to Heaven, etc. (Dave Armstrong vs. "Grubb")

Is Catholic Soteriology Pelagian? (Reginald de Piperno) (+ Discussion)

1 Corinthians 3:9 and Man's Cooperation With God

Human, Pauline, and Marian Distribution of Divine Graces: Not an "Unbiblical" Notion After All?

A Primer on Semi-Pelagianism and Arminianism

Did the Council of Trent Teach That Man is Saved By His Own Works?

Grace Alone (Sola Gratia): Perfectly Acceptable Biblical and Catholic Teaching (Rightly Understood)

Merit: Clarification of the Catholic Doctrine (Condign and Congruous Merit, Total Depravity, Prevenient Grace, Etc.) (+ Discussion)

Soteriology and Creation (Man's Cooperation, Pelagianism, Nature and Grace) (Dave Armstrong vs. Peter J. Leithart)

Second Council of Orange (529) and Catholic Sola Gratia vs. Calvinist Total Depravity, Etc.: Crucial Distinctions Noted (+ Discussion)

The Calvinist Doctrine of Total Depravity and Romans 3:10-11 ("None is Righteous . . . No One Seeks For God"): Reply to James White (+ Discussion)

Fallacious Calvinist Arguments For Total Depravity: Does Romans 1 Apply Universally to Fallen Man?

Do Catholics Believe in Predestination?

Catholic Predestination (Ludwig Ott)

215 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 215 of 215
Ken said...

Adomnan: Etymology. The Latin word "sacrificium" comes from "sacrum facere," which means "make holy."

Ok, on the English etymology from Latin; I take your word for it. Bare etymology does not give us a complete picture of meanings of words though.

But what is the Hebrew and Greek meaning of the words? There are more than one words for sacrifice and offering, right?

I will also try to look deeper into the Hebrew and Greek terms, especially the Hebrew.

Ken said...

Dave,

Adomnan wrote:

I might add, by the way, that I don't take the Adam and Eve/Garden of Eden story as "historical" in our modern sense. I see it as a description of the human condition in images and symbols.

He will have to flesh out more as to what he means, but on the face of it, it seems he does not believe Adam and Eve are historical, the first humans directly created by God.

Dave Armstrong said...

By what logical process do you conclude that from his words?

Ken said...

By what logical process do you conclude that from his words?

By what logical process can you conclude otherwise? He says he doesn't take the Adam and Eve story in the garden as history; (qualified by "historical" in quotation marks and "in our modern sense" (that is why I said, that he needs to flesh it out some and declare his position) and he calls it images and symbols.

Adomnan - spell it out more clearly - do you think Adam and Eve are historical persons, created directly by God?


I see no other way to conclude that he doesn't really think that Adam and Eve were historical, but symbols and images.

Adomnan said...

Ken, I wrote:

"I believe that the first human couple fell.."

"As Genesis puts it, Adam and Eve ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. They fell..."

Evidently, I believe that we are all descended from a first human couple, who fell.

When I say that I don't read the Genesis story as "history in the modern sense," that doesn't imply that it has no connection with historical events.

I believe that God created the souls of "Adam and Eve" directly and instantaneously. Their bodies may have been the product of evolution, however. I don't know. Seems likely in view of the fact that all lower animal species evolved physically. But perhaps the human species was an exception. For me, the historical appearance of the human species, how it took place as an event in time, is a mystery.

You'll note that Genesis says God took earth, or "dust" or "clay," and made Adam out of it by breathing a soul into him. That suggests to me that Adam's body was formed from existing matter, which is consistent with evolution; that is, his body wasn't created out of nothing on the spot. His soul, on the other hand did not come from the preexisting earth, but was "breathed" into him directly by God.

Genesis 2:7: "the LORD God formed the man [e] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being."

The human body may have evolved; the human soul didn't.

Adomnan said...

Ken: Ok, on the English etymology from Latin; I take your word for it. Bare etymology does not give us a complete picture of meanings of words though.

Adomnan: By analogy with a word like purificare (to make pure, purify), sacrificare would originally mean "to make holy."

In any event, the purpose of a sacrifice is not to punish the victim, but to make the victim holy by giving it to God. Once the victim, or it's life/blood is holy, then the priest can use it to expiate or cleanse from sin people, places and objects. This is why the priest sprinkles it or "pours it out" on people, places and objects and why it is said of the Day of Atonement sacrifice that "without the shedding (i.e., pouring out) of blood, there is no forgiveness (really, 'remission') of sins." Sacrifice remits sin by cleansing it, removing it -- not by punishing it.

Additionally, the statement "without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sins" applies in the context only to the unintentional sins expiated on the Day of Atonement. It is not a general statement that forgivess of sin always requires the shedding of blood. In the OT, sins could also be forgiven by repentance alone, without sacrifice.

Adomnan said...

Ken: But what is the Hebrew and Greek meaning of the words? There are more than one words for sacrifice and offering, right?

Adomnan: "Thusia" is sacrifice in Greek. "Prosphora" can also be used. This latter word is often translated as "offering." Sacrifice and offering are basically synonyms.

The etymology of "thusia" is somewhat uncertain, but some think it comes from a root related to smoke and breath, the idea being that a burnt sacrifice turns the victim into smoke that goes up to heaven. "Prosphora" means "bringing to" and indicates that a sacrifice is a gift; i.e., an offering (the latter word having a parallel etymology from Latin).

I don't know the Hebrew.

Dave Armstrong said...

I see no other way to conclude that he doesn't really think that Adam and Eve were historical, but symbols and images.

Then it is yet more evidence that you are A) a very poor reader, or B) not very good at logical analysis, or C) unable to comprehend opposing positions that are very different from your own; or some combination of the above.

What Adomnan wrote in no way requires (logically or grammatically) what you claim it did. You simply imposed your fundamentalist-type exegesis onto it. You couldn't comprehend anything outside of your paradigm (and of course you take the most uncharitable guess as to what a Catholic like Adomnan or myself believes about such things). You do the same with Scripture.

The fact that you simply reiterate your position rather than explain exactly what he said to make you conclude this (as a matter of simple logic) is part of the proof of my contention.

You couldn't do so because there is no sensible logical process that led to your false conclusion. You were caught in your shoddy reasoning (that goes on constantly, where Catholics are concerned).

Ken said...

Their bodies may have been the product of evolution, however. I don't know.

"I don't know" is wise caution.

So, you seem to think their bodies were products of thousands of years of soul-less monkeys, apes, and hominids and then there eventually evolved a pair where God breathed into them a soul? Seems like a lot to fit into "God took dust from the earth and formed a man . . . "


. . .


You'll note that Genesis says God took earth, or "dust" or "clay," and made Adam out of it by breathing a soul into him. That suggests to me that Adam's body was formed from existing matter, which is consistent with evolution;

Not really, does not seem consistent with macro-evolution (transition from one species to another) or the Darwinian theory of evolution. Looks like God is directly forming and creating from the dust/earth/chemicals/minerals etc. And then there is the woman He shapes from the rib of the man.

that is, his body wasn't created out of nothing on the spot.

that's what the text seems to say.

His soul, on the other hand did not come from the preexisting earth, but was "breathed" into him directly by God.

Genesis 2:7: "the LORD God formed the man [e] from the dust of the ground

Sounds like you put thousands of years into this little phrase.

and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being."

The human body may have evolved; the human soul didn't.

"may have" is cautious; good for you.

Ken said...

What Adomnan wrote in no way requires (logically or grammatically) what you claim it did.

Until he fleshed it out a little more, it was unclear and he used terms and phrases that seemed to imply he doesn't take Adam and Eve as history, but that they are images and symbols.

I have only heard the view that the bodies of Adam and Eve evolved and are consistent with the Darwinian theory of Evolution (seems to be saying that the bodies evolved over thousands of years through stages of monkeys, apes, and soul less hominids) - if I recall right, from Hugh Ross. Do you believe that also? (what Adomnan believes?)

Ken said...

I wrote:
He will have to flesh out more as to what he means, but on the face of it, it seems he does not believe Adam and Eve are historical, the first humans directly created by God.

"seems" is being careful; and asking for clarification; so I feel that is was you Dave who jumped too quickly on me with your harsh judgment.

Dave,
I think I was careful with the above and Adomnan did clarify.

However, (if this is what you guys are doing) the view of fitting thousands of years and evolutionary paradigms of Darwins' macro-evolution into the sixth day and the phrase, "The Lord made Adam from the dust of the earth" seems a stretch.

Adomnan said...

Ken, I already told you that I reject young earth creationism and any kind of fundamentalism or "biblical" literalism out of hand and don't intend to waste my time discussing these things with you or anyone else.

Adomnan said...

Ken: soul-less monkeys, apes, and hominids

Adomnan: Just a clarification. The Catholic Church teaches that all animals, and indeed all plants, have souls, the former animal souls and the latter vegetative souls. Every living thing has a "soul."

Only human beings have rational, immortal souls, because only human beings are made "in the image and likeness of God." This likeness to God demonstrates, I believe, that the first human souls were immediately created by God, as every human soul has been since.

I have a particular reason for saying that the human body may only possibly have evolved. However, my reason involves a speculation about human origins that I have not yet formulated with sufficient clarity in my own mind to air on this forum.

Dave Armstrong said...

Do you believe that also? (what Adomnan believes?)

I am agnostic on the question, and have been for several years now, though for years I was a "progressive creationist" a la Bernard Ramm.

My primary concern in this area is to oppose materialism and atheism, not evolution, though I continue to be very critical of the many excesses and unproven aspects of evolutionary theory, particularly traditional Darwinianism.

Whatever is the actual truth of the matter, I don't think it can be explained by natural laws alone; hence I am an avid proponent of Intelligent Design.

How old do you think the earth is?

Dave Armstrong said...

I feel that it was you Dave who jumped too quickly on me with your harsh judgment.

Do you think I was as harsh with you as Bishop White was with me in his latest hit-and-run post, that I documented on this blog?

If not, will you condemn what White wrote, and at least call it a "harsh judgment"? Or will that get you into too much hot water with your anti-Catholic cronies?

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 215 of 215   Newer› Newest»