[paladinan]

[paladinan]
As to your question: all mediation between God and man is done by Jesus alone... but Jesus Himself enacts that mediation through His Body, which is the Church. The extent to which we can mediate for one another is precisely the extent to which we are incorporated in the Body of Christ.

[HossB86]
Uh. No. There is one mediator between God and Man.

...just as "there is none righteous... not one" (Romans 3:10)--unless you count St. John the Baptist (Mark 6:20); his parents, Sts. Zechariah and Elizabeth (Luke 1:6), St. Simeon (Luke 2:25), Joseph of Arimathea (Luke 23:50), and so on. "None" means "none", after all... right? (See here for the Greek analysis of the words--they're all the very same word, "dikaios", with varying case endings for varying parts of speech.)

...just as "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23)--unless you count unborn children (including those at the zygote and blastocyst stages), infants, children below the age of reason, adults with severe mental disabilities, etc. "All" means "all", after all... right?

... just as we are to "call no man on earth your father" (Matthew 23:9)--unless you count St. Paul ("For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel." [1 Corinthians 4:15]), St. Stephen ("Brethren and fathers, hear me [...]"), or the Lord Jesus, in a parable of His ("Father Abraham, have mercy upon me..." [Luke 16:24]). "No man" means "no man", after all... right?

Now... are you going to supply me with some tortured explanation of how these words don't mean what they say? ;)

One mediator between God and Man. Mankind is part of the body of Christ (at least those who are saved by grace through faith)

But not faith ALONE. Just saying. :)

so those who are receiving mediation by Christ cannot extend mediation to another that Christ alone can give!

All right: there's the initial assertion. Now: why not? To my ears, that sounds analogous to someone saying, "Jesus can't pray to anyone, because He's God." What is there in the intrinsic nature of those who are receiving mediation that they CANNOT extend mediation (albeit a subordinate one)?

James 2 has been misquoted and twisted by Rome.

Easily said, not easily proven, FRiend...

Faith saves.

Of course, it does! Every faithful, well-informed Catholic knows and believes that incontrovertible fact. But faith ALONE does not save... or else St. James (along with the Holy Spirit) is simply lying in James 2, which I--for one--refuse to believe.

Works are a result of faith.

Yes, and no... but they're certainly not "dispensible" re: justification and salvation. Faith without works is dead, and we are justified by works--NOT by faith ALONE. (I suppose I should check: do you have James 2:24 in your Bible? What are the words, exactly?)

Again, let's visit the thief on the cross. What works had he done? He was being crucified to death for being a thief! I don't think that qualifies as what Rome considers "saving works."

Of course not! Sins are not "saving works". But St. Dismas's case was an extraordinary situation, as I discussed in the thread about 'sola Scriptura'; in cases where only a short time is available, "works" can be as humble as the effort needed to endure one's suffering patiently for the sake of Christ, or to choose to trust Him with everything you have. ("Believe" is a *verb*, after all... it's a "work", albeit one which ordinarily requires corporal or spiritual works of mercy to accompany it in order for it to be "alive and saving", cf. James 2, Matthew 25, etc.)

His FAITH saved him. Faith provided to him from above.

That's true... but not faith ALONE. His ability to "act" was severely limited... but he did what he could. (If anyone suggests that bearing one's sufferings patiently is neither hard nor meritorious, I'd ask them to think again. Come to think of it, Protestantism really doesn't know what to do with suffering, in general. Count the number of times you've heard a Protestant pastor or speak expound on Colossians 1:24, for example, to see what I mean.)

Well, you need to keep reading it over and over and over. And praying for the Holy Spirit to open your heart, eyes and mind to God's truth.

:) ...and I should do that because I don't yet agree with you? I assure you, the practice of praying for light when reading the Scriptures is something Catholics have done for at least 1400-1500 years before Protestantism ever came to be. I do so; my wife (who's far holier than I) does so. I do plan to keep reading it, over and over (I'd have done that, even if I'd never met you online), and I do plan to keep praying for light, over and over... if that makes you feel better!

[paladinan]
She was in need of a savior; but she was not a sinner.

[HossB86]
Really? If she was sinless, she needed no savior.

That does not follow. "Saving" by redemption and forgiveness is one method; but "saving" by prevention is another (albeit one unique to the Blessed Virgin). If you were to stop a burglar from shooting me, I'd be just as eager to thank you for "saving my life" as I would be if you'd been a surgeon who operated successfully on me AFTER I'd been shot by that burglar.

how about Romans 3

See above.

"Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith. For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law."

Re-read that passage. Catch the part(s) about justification by faith apart from works of the law?

Yes. You might jump over and catch my comment about that referring to the "Law" (Mitzvot) of the Old Covenant, on the "sola Scriptura" thread.

That Christ is put forth as a propitiation by his blood for us to receive by faith? What about faith and works? If it's so essential, why is it that it doesn't appear every time faith is mentioned?

Come, now... that's a mere fallacy of appeal to silence, which doesn't fly. One mention (e.g. James 2, Matthew 25, Revelation in multiple places about being judged by works/deeds) is worth a million silences. In fact, as an exercise: look at every last reference to the Bible talking about the final judgment... and see what criteria are used to judge those who stand before God. Hint: it always involves something which St. James emphasizes...

Because works don't save.

Not ALONE, no... since that would be the heretical idea of Pelagianism (condemned by the Catholic Church, almost a thousand years before Luther was born). I'd gently suggest that the word "alone" is what causes most of the trouble in Protestant theology... They don't add to our salvation.

I'm not sure what you mean by that. Salvation is a boolean value (true/false), not a graduated scale; how can anything "add" to it, in any way?

Faith saves.

It does. It just doesn't save ALONE. (Haven't I said that before?)

[paladinan]
(?!) Pardon? Why do you say that omniscience is required in order to intercede for someone? Neither logic nor Scripture say anything of the sort.

[HossB86]
Really?? How does Mary hear the prayer of millions of "faithful Catholics" every single day? Only God is capable of that!

Heaven is in eternity (i.e. outside of time), not in time; eternity is not simply "an infinite string of years", but it's completely OUTSIDE of time altogether. No one in eternity "waits" for anything, or "remembers" anything; everything is present in one, absolute "NOW". To suggest that omniscience is needed to address more than one concern from Heaven is akin to saying that omniscience is needed to play more than one note on a piano at the same time; one who is ABOVE and BEYOND the flow of time has all eternity in which to contemplate each and every concern. There's no "rush" or danger of being "overwhelmed".

Logic nor scripture say anything of the sort about Mary being a mediatrix, sinless, assumed bodily to Heaven -- the Catholic Cult speaks of it in scripture's silence and calls it "Holy Tradition." But it's NOT scriptural. It's made out of whole cloth.

Now, I have to stop you, here: in your defense of "faith alone", you appealed to the silence of Scripture (despite St. James saying that we are NOT justified by faith alone--which is as clear a condemnation of the idea as anyone would like... but I digress); but now, you object to it here? Where does Scripture ever mention even one sin of the Blessed Virgin? Plenty of sins were mentioned regarding the other disciples, yes? Put your money where your mouth, is, then, and show me where Scripture highlights any sin on her part. Otherwise, you're left with mere opinion and speculation, based on a hyper-fastidious reading of verses which are plainly not to be taken at reductionist face-value. You might as well look for a fresh coat of varnish on Jesus when He called Himself a "gate" (cf. John 10:9)!

So... instead of all the other sturm and drang,

:) Full points for drama, double points for drama in a foreign language!

explain how a sole mediator can have subordinate mediators?

See above, re: "call no man father", "no one is righetous", "all have sinned".

You're asking me to define mediator

I am. Are you going to take me up on that?

I asked you how you reconcile one vs. many?

See above.

Define "one" -- and then try to explain in some tortured manner that "one" is not one but many..."

:) "Tortured." Now, where have I heard that, before...?

Waiting...

I commend your patience! (Real life intrudes again, right now, in fact. Back when I have time...!) Hoss

[HossB86]

...just as "there is none righteous... not one" (Romans 3:10)--unless you count St. John the Baptist (Mark 6:20); his parents, Sts. Zechariah and Elizabeth (Luke 1:6), St. Simeon (Luke 2:25), Joseph of Arimathea (Luke 23:50), and so on. "None" means "none", after all... right? (See here for the Greek analysis of the words--they're all the very same word, "dikaios", with varying case endings for varying parts of speech.)

They were sinners. Each and every one. Their faith saved them... FAITH. But they were sinners. Born that way. Conceived that way. None righteous...not one MEANS what it says. Sorry. But it does. Rome's explanation once again falls short of truth.

Now... are you going to supply me with some tortured explanation of how these words don't mean what they say? ;)

Firstly, I've said nothing about father. You've obviously confused me with someone else - secondly, it does mean what it says... it's God's word after all....

But your explanation above is still tortured -- and wrong. Sorry.

Now: why not?

Hmmm. Maybe... because God said so??? There is ONE mediator between God and Man -- not some, not a few, not many, and certainly no subordinates listed.... that's why not. Why does Rome think it can say there IS a thing that God says doesn't exist? Rome trumps God? That's why it's a cult.

Easily said, not easily proven, FRiend...

RE: James 2: I defer to Dr. R.C. Sproul:

"Justification - Paul and James Easily Reconciled

"In Romans 3:28 Paul says, "For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law." In James 2:24 we read, "You see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone." If the word justify means the same thing in both cases, we have an irreconcilable contradiction between two biblical writers on an issue that concerns our eternal destinies. Luther called "justification by faith" the article upon which the church stands or falls. The meaning of justification and the question of how it takes place is no mere trifle. Yet Paul says it is by faith apart from works, and James says it is by works and not by faith alone. To make matters more difficult, Paul insists in Romans 4 that Abraham is justified when he believes the promise of God before he is circumcised. He has Abraham justified in Genesis 15. James says, "Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?" (James 2:21). James does not have Abraham justified until Genesis 22.

This question of justification is easily resolved if we examine the possible meanings of the term justify and apply them within the context of the respective passages. The term justify may mean (1) to restore to a state of reconciliation with God those who stand under the judgment of his law or (2) to demonstrate or vindicate.

Jesus says for example, "Wisdom is justified of all her children" (Lk 7:35 KJV). What does he mean? Does he mean that wisdom is restored to fellowship with God and saved from his wrath? Obviously not. The plain meaning of his words is that a wise act produces good fruit. The claim to wisdom is vindicated by the result. A wise decision is shown to be wise by its results. Jesus is speaking in practical terms, not theological terms, when he uses the word justified in this way.

How does Paul use the word in Romans 3? Here, there is no dispute. Paul is clearly speaking about justification in the ultimate theological sense.

What about James? If we examine the context of James, we will see that he is dealing with a different question from Paul. James says in 2:14, "What use is it, my brethren, if a man says he has faith, but he has no works? Can that faith save him?" James is raising a question of what kind of faith is necessary for salvation. He is saying that true faith brings forth works. A faith without works he calls a dead faith, a faith that is not genuine. The point is that people can say they have faith when in fact they have no faith. The claim to faith is vindicated or justified when it is manifested by the fruit of faith, namely works. Abraham is justified or vindicated in our sight by his fruit. In a sense, Abraham's claim to justification is justified by his works. The Reformers understood that when they stated the formula, "Justification is by faith alone, but not by a faith that is alone.""

R. C. Sproul - Knowing Scripture; InterVasity Press, p. 83, 84"

Seems fairly easy to explain. And proven. Or, maybe this:

Matthew Henry's commentary on the verses in question: Sorry about the formatting -- this is the way it was presented....

"2:14-26 Those are wrong who put a mere notional belief of the gospel for the whole of evangelical religion, as many now do. No doubt, true faith alone, whereby men have part in Christ's righteousness, atonement, and grace, saves their souls; but it produces holy fruits, and is shown to be real by its effect on their works; while mere assent to any form of doctrine, or mere historical belief of any facts, wholly differs from this saving faith. A bare profession may gain the good opinion of pious people; and it may procure, in some cases, worldly good things; but what profit will it be, for any to gain the whole world, and to lose their souls? Can this faith save him? All things should be accounted profitable or unprofitable to us, as they tend to forward or hinder the salvation of our souls. This place of Scripture plainly shows that an opinion, or assent to the gospel, without works, is not faith. There is no way to show we really believe in Christ, but by being diligent in good works, from gospel motives, and for gospel purposes. Men may boast to others, and be conceited of that which they really have not. There is not only to be assent in faith, but consent; not only an assent to the truth of the word, but a consent to take Christ. True believing is not an act of the understanding only, but a work of the whole heart. That a justifying faith cannot be without works, is shown from two examples, Abraham and Rahab. Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness. Faith, producing such works, advanced him to peculiar favours. We see then, ver. 24, how that by works a man is justified, not by a bare opinion or profession, or believing without obeying; but by having such faith as produces good works. And to have to deny his own reason, affections, and interests, is an action fit to try a believer. Observe here, the wonderful power of faith in changing sinners. Rahab's conduct proved her faith to be living, or having power; it showed that she believed with her heart, not merely by an assent of the understanding. Let us then take heed, for the best works, without faith, are dead; they want root and principle. By faith any thing we do is really good; as done in obedience to God, and aiming at his acceptance: the root is as though it were dead, when there is no fruit. Faith is the root, good works are the fruits; and we must see to it that we have both. This is the grace of God wherein we stand, and we should stand to it. There is no middle state. Every one must either live God's friend, or God's enemy. Living to God, as it is the consequence of faith, which justifies and will save, obliges us to do nothing against him, but every thing for him and to him."

Again, understandable and clear. Not tortured and misleading.

Of course, it does! Every faithful, well-informed Catholic knows and believes that incontrovertible fact. But faith ALONE does not save... or else St. James (along with the Holy Spirit) is simply lying in James 2, which I--for one--refuse to believe.

Ephesians 2 says: "2 And you were dead in the trespasses and sins 2 in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience— 3 among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body[a] and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.[b] 4 But[c] God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved— 6 and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them."

This in no way contradicts James -- James does not say Faith AND works save... he says works are the FRUIT of faith -- and that works without faith shows that there is no faith. No faith? No salvation. It's simple. God's word does not contradict itself. It's Rome's heretical and false teaching that contradicts God's word that has led so many people down the wide path of destruction.

Now... Mediator. Let's see:

According to Dictionary.com, a Mediator does the following:
"1. to settle (disputes, strikes, etc.) as an intermediary between parties; reconcile. 2. to bring about (an agreement, accord, truce, peace, etc.) as an intermediary between parties by compromise, reconciliation, removal of misunderstanding, etc. 3. to effect (a result) or convey (a message, gift, etc.) by or as if by an intermediary."

Easy definition? Christ. As stated by God. What does God say about Mary being a mediatrix?

I asked you how you reconcile one vs. many?

See above.

See above fails. Now, define one. And explain how that differs when God says that there is ONE mediator between God and Man, and that mediator is Christ and how Rome says one means Christ AND Mary?

Sounds suspiciously like faith AND works false-doctrinal creep.

Hoss