Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
bookmark
Ephesians 2:8-9 For by grace you have been saved through faith; it is a gift of God. Not as a result of works lest any man should boast.
Why would one take a sideways argument using various writings from Paul when a direct discussion is in the book of James? Seems to me that it is inappropriate to leave those passages out without a reason.
It also strikes me as odd to hang arguments on the meanings of words from the KJV (or any other translation for that matter) when information on the specific Greek words is readily available.
save
Great post, thank you.
And there is where the Catholic sinks into carnal. They just can’t get away from that old “I helped so I deserve it” attitude.
Even James, at the counsel of Jerusalem, accepted Paul’s teaching that salvation is by faith alone. James did not impose the law on the Christian gentiles.
Depends on who your faith is in.. Catholics have faith in Rome, and faith in themselves to be good enough and do enough to be saved.. Sad that they will never know in this life ... and when they do..it will be too late to change it
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Instead of taking a few simple verses of scripture and believing them, this author goes off into the wild blue yonder with a myriad of philosophical guesses which apparently is supposed to be authoritative...
Though it may seem odd to summarize our discussion in that way, introducing suddenly the mention of grace, there is a reason for doing so. Romans 7, with its abstract dialectic of Law and sin, better self and concupiscence, has to be understood consistently with what St. Paul has already said in Romans 2.
Abstract??? Nonsense...Run Romans two into Romans three???
It has been pointed out to you in a previous post that there's a big change that takes place between those two chapters but as usual, this Catholic author doesn't have the spiritual acumen to to grasp it, nor the interest in believing what the scriptures says in it's simplicity...
Rom 3:21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
There he seems to treat the keeping of the commandments as a real possibility: "for when the gentiles, who do not have the Law, naturally do the things of the Law..."(Romans 2:14). In fact, he says, "God will render to each man according to his works: eternal life to those who, dedicating themselves with perseverance to good works, seek glory, honor and immortality...glory honor and peace to all who do good, to the Jew first and to the Greek" (Romans 2:7) and this in a context in which the revelation of Christ is not even under discussion yet.
Oh really???
These words certainly show that St. Paul did not regard good works as impossible, misguided, or pernicious, as some Protestant exegetes have tried to hold. Quite the contrary. But if St. Paul seems to admit justifying works in Romans 2 and to exclude them in Romans 7, the most plausible explanation is that he is speaking of the total human condition in chapter 2, where grace is at work among Jew and gentile alike, whereas in chapter 7 he is showing what happens when the Law is isolated from grace. Such isolation is exactly what is sought, when man seeks his own righteousness on the basis of law.
The real question is, is this guy spiritually blinded or is he just handling the word of God deceitfully???
2Co 4:2 But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God.
YOu can't be under the Law and under Grace at the same time...