Outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation??

I just read this. Do you make any sense of it:

The context of this entire thread is salvation, not whether or not Christ approves of what we do. Please stick to the context.

399 posted on 1/14/02 6:12 AM Pacific by P8riot

And we don't always call priests father. You can call them by their first name if you want to.

You might, but it shows disrespect for their station. Most priests that I know prefer to be called Father or .

You can look it up yourself...and you're welcome! ;-D (*Did I address you?*)

Yes you did, indirectly, by replying to Theresa's reply to my reply. At any rate which passage are you referring to? There are several. I am not sure that this is an exhaustive list:

Matthew 11:15 - He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Matthew 13:9 - Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Matthew 13:43 - Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Mark 4:9 - And he said unto them, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Mark 4:23 - If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.

Mark 7:16 - If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.

Luke 8:8 - And other fell on good ground, and sprang up, and bare fruit an hundredfold. And when he had said these things, he cried, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Luke 14:35 - It is neither fit for the land, nor yet for the dunghill; but men cast it out. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear. Revelation 2:7 - He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.

Revelation 2:11 - He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death.

Revelation 2:17 - He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.

Revelation 2:29 - He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

Revelation 3:6 - He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

Revelation 3:13 - He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

Revelation 3:22 - He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

Well, I COULD have said that the phrase is found in many places in the NT, but as I said, I WASN'T TALKING TO YOU. I intend to resume that non-practise forthwith.

Well, I COULD have said that the phrase is found in many places in the NT, but as I said, I WASN'T TALKING TO YOU. I intend to resume that non-practise forthwith.

Nasty, Nasty, Nasty.

Ephesians 2:8-9 - "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast."

"Ephesians 2:8-9 - "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.""

Right. Not one thing I wrote contradicts this.

I was agreeing with you....

"Thus, since perfection is the standard by which he judges us, salvation must originate with God, since we have no natural desire toward him."

I agree that salvation originates with God but disagree that we have no natural desire toward him. We do have a natural desire toward him but we are dragged down by original sin and by temptations toward adding to our imperfect state by actual sin.

"God's salvation is provided through the vicarious death of Christ and his subsequent resurrection, "

Of course.

"to shun this or to say that other ways are also valid is to say that Christ died in vain, and that God made a mockery of him."

See you just don't understand what I am saying. Never once have I written that anyone who is saved is saved by his own religion on his own merits or by his own works. Not once have I said that other ways are also valid in and of themselves. (I would say though that other ways are only valid insofar as they mirror Christianity.) Never once would I or have I asserted that anyone could get into heaven had not Jesus died on the cross to open the gates of heaven. And I have asserted that no one who is saved and in heaven is anything but a Christian believer, though they may not have been explicitly Christian in life.

And honestly I think your position is more likely to make it seem like Christ died in vain, at least for the millions of people who never heard of him, or others who having heard the good news, for some reason, (not thier fault) that only the searching perfect God can know where not able to come to see the good news for what it really is.

I just don't understand why you don't understand.

I agree that salvation originates with God but disagree that we have no natural desire toward him. We do have a natural desire toward him but we are dragged down by original sin and by temptations toward adding to our imperfect state by actual sin.

It seems that you are saying that man can fall farther than he did in the garden. I will maintain that man is totally depraved, and deserving of Hell from his birth, there is no need to fall farther. I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this point.

"God's salvation is provided through the vicarious death of Christ and his subsequent resurrection, "

I'm glad we agree on this point.

See you just don't understand what I am saying. Never once have I written that anyone who is saved is saved by his own religion on his own merits or by his own works. Not once have I said that other ways are also valid in and of themselves. (I would say though that other ways are only valid insofar as they mirror Christianity.) Never once would I or have I asserted that anyone could get into heaven had not Jesus died on the cross to open the gates of heaven. And I have asserted that no one who is saved and in heaven is anything but a Christian believer, though they may not have been explicitly Christian in life.

And honestly I think your position is more likely to make it seem like Christ died in vain, at least for the millions of people who never heard of him, or others who having heard the good news, for some reason, (not thier fault) that only the searching perfect God can know where not able to come to see the good news for what it really is.

I will maintain that Jesus died only for the elect (those that would come to know him), not for every man woman and child on the Earth. If he had died for the whole world, then we could, by our own will, render his sacrifice as worthless by shunning him. To say that he died only for the elect validates his sacrifice in that it accomplished what he meant for it to accomplish.

As for those who came before, it is said that Christ also descended into Hell to bring them into relationship with him.

As for those who "never heard", Romans Chapter 1 states that God reveals himself in his creation so that man is without excuse (my paraphrase).

We will perhaps never agree on this either.

Thank you for being patient with me.

As for your parenthetical statement (I would say though that other ways are only valid insofar as they mirror Christianity.). When you say mirror, do you mean approximate or directly reflect Christianity. What about LDS, and Jehovah's Witnesses, that deny the transcendent divinity of Christ?

You stated: "If he had died for the whole world, then we could, by our own will, render his sacrifice as worthless by shunning him. To say that he died only for the elect validates his sacrifice in that it accomplished what he meant for it to accomplish."

It's interesting you talk about the elect, I just reread this recently to be sure I remembered it correctly. "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not His son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved." John 3:16-17 It certainly sounds to me as though Christ meant THE WORLD, when He said "THE WORLD." Perhaps you have a different idea...

As far as your "Nasty nasty nasty" comment goes, I rendered you all the courtesy you extended to me.