Salvation

[LiveforChrist]

Hey All!

I'm just a bit confused on what exactly the Catholic Church teaches on Salvation. Could someone please summarize it for me? I know that Jesus died for all sins and that it is by his dying that we get into heaven, but how do we explain to our protestant friends about mortal sin, and how we can lose our salvation if we die in the state of mortal sin?

Bible references would be helpful.

Thanks and God bless!
LiveForChrist

[sdegutis]

I think explaining these things in a meaningful way depends largely on the specific objections to it that a person has. Otherwise, it's too broad a topic and someone could go on and on in volumes about it saying only things that the objector really has no objection with, never even hitting the real objection at its heart. It's that broad of a topic.

[sdegutis]

For example, if the specific objection is that there aren't varying levels of sin, then I would find it appropriate to quote the several things Jesus says which indicate the exact opposite. If the objection is that you can't ever lose your salvation, I would quote certain parts of the New Testament that either explain otherwise or at least imply it. If they have a problem with "works and faith" I would point to the Book of James as well as several parables of Jesus that make more sense in this interpretation than in any other, such as the wedding banquet, or the ten virgins.

But even still, you'd be hard-pressed to convince someone that your interpretation of those verses is more correct than theirs, because people often seem to want their interpretation to be right, regardless if it really is. And they'll search out proofs in Scripture that their interpretation is right, using their interpretation, ignoring the obviousness of this fallacy.

[Chuck Finley]

[quote=LiveforChrist]how do we explain to our protestant friends about mortal sin, and how we can lose our salvation if we die in the state of mortal sin?

We already understand what you believe. We just don't agree with it.

Bible references would be helpful.

Bible references are always helpful, as we believe that the Bible is to be our standard in matters of doctrine.

Another thing you might want to consider is that, when Catholics talk to us and we present Bible verses, it's extremely common for Catholics to just dismiss them by saying, "well, that's just your interpretation". If you're going to go that route and say that we've been misinterpreting these verses for 2,000 years, then please at least be respectful enough to explain how you believe we've misinterpreted them and what you believe the correct interpretation is.

To just say "Well, that's just your interpretation" is no different than a five year old saying "nuh-uh!" and will only hurt your argument.

[sdegutis]

Originally Posted by Chuck Finley

If you're going to go that route and say that we've been misinterpreting these verses for 2,000 years, then please at least be respectful enough to explain how you believe we've misinterpreted them and what you believe the correct interpretation is.

More correctly, an individual non-Catholic has been misinterpreting those verses for usually less than a century. And they may have gotten their interpretation either from their own reading of Scripture, or from someone else's ideas, who themselves have the exact same situation of how they came to interpret the Bible verses.

This can be traced all the way back to such Protestants as Luther, Calvin, et al. Before them, the entire Catholic Church interpreted the Bible the same way for a millenium and a half. These original re-interpreters usually seemed to have taken the first approach, of simply interpreting Scripture themselves.

So, anyone who takes either of these two approaches needs a serious reason to consider that private interpretation is logical, because common sense and history both demonstrate that private interpretation is not the way God intended Scripture to be interpreted. Reading the earliest Church Fathers and even reading the New Testament carefully (and especially in the original languages) will quickly show that all doctrines were always handed down. First, by the Father to Jesus, secondly from Jesus to the Apostles, thirdly from the Holy Spirit to the Apostles, and finally from the Apostles to their successors, etc. until this very day.

Plus, how would the first Christians have been able to interpret Scripture in any way when it wasn't even written down yet for the first several decades of Christianity's existence? Christianity didn't come from Scripture, Scripture came from the Catholic Church.

[MariaG]

I always cringe when I hear people say that.

Consider saying scripture came to us by the Holy Spirit through the Catholic Church. No less accurate but my fundamentalist roots feel as if the inspiration of God is being left out with the previous statement. And I have a harder time reading anymore.

God Bless

[Chuck Finley]

Originally Posted by MariaG

I always cringe when I hear people say that.

Consider saying scripture came to us by the Holy Spirit through the Catholic Church. No less accurate but my fundamentalist roots feel as if the inspiration of God is being left out with the previous statement. And I have a harder time reading anymore.

God Bless

Not to mention the fact that 2/3 of the scriptures were already written and well known by the time Christianity even began, and all of the scriptures were already written and well known and widely circulated by the time the Catholic Church was founded.

Originally Posted by sdegutis

More correctly, an individual non-Catholic has been misinterpreting those verses for usually less than a century

Thank you for illustrating exactly what I was talking about.

[sdegutis]

Originally Posted by Chuck Finley

Not to mention the fact that 2/3 of the scriptures were already written and well known by the time Christianity even began, and all of the scriptures were already written and well known and widely circulated by the time the Catholic Church was founded.

I'm not at all talking about the Old Testament. In context I thought that was clear, my apologies for being ambiguous.

The New Testament wasn't written when the Catholic Church was founded. The Catholic Church was founded on Pentecost. For several decades, as the Church preached the good news to the world, there was no New Testament. So how could Christians at this point use the New Testament as their basis for their understanding of doctrine and truth? They didn't, because the New Testament is a subset of the larger Sacred Tradition, which just means a handing down of what the Apostles received from God and handed on to their successors.

[thistle]

Originally Posted by Chuck Finley

Not to mention the fact that 2/3 of the scriptures were already written and well known by the time Christianity even began, and all of the scriptures were already written and well known and widely circulated by the time the Catholic Church was founded.



Thank you for illustrating exactly what I was talking about.

The New Testament was written by Catholics. The Apostles and other disciples were the first Catholics.

[Ambrose]

[quote=Chuck Finley;9366237]

Originally Posted by LiveforChrist

how do we explain to our protestant friends about mortal sin, and how we can lose our salvation if we die in the state of mortal sin?

We already understand what you believe. We just don't agree with it.



Bible references are always helpful, as we believe that the Bible is to be our standard in matters of doctrine.

Another thing you might want to consider is that, when Catholics talk to us and we present Bible verses, it's extremely common for Catholics to just dismiss them by saying, "well, that's just your interpretation". If you're going to go that route and say that we've been misinterpreting these verses for 2,000 years, then please at least be respectful enough to explain how you believe we've misinterpreted them and what you believe the correct interpretation is.


To just say "Well, that's just your interpretation" is no different than a five year old saying "nuh-uh!" and will only hurt your argument.

I don't think it's necessarily always a matter of misinterpretation, it many times is a matter of emphasis. For example, there are Christian sects 100% sure they are in the fullness of truth that handle poisonous snakes & think you have to as well if you have faith.

The main thing that Luther emphasized was salvation through faith ALONE. By adding that word into the Bible, it changed the entire meaning of the passage. The Catholic Church has always said you're saved by faith, but Luthers emphasis here over all other passages in scripture was a big bone of contention.

And no you haven't been misinterpreting scripture for 2000 years, it's more like 500 years. As far as the Catholic position, as you know we base our faith on Tradition, the teaching Magisterium of the Church & Sacred Scripture.

A couple of passages that we might look at to balance out our position as far as salvation goes(balance out might be a poor choice of words but it shows we don't just take one passage & emphasize it over all the others) are the following:

-James 2:24
-Matt 7:21-27
-1 Cor 13:2
-1 Cor 13:13
-James 2:19
-1 Tim 4:1
-Matt 19:17

This is not an exhaustive list, just a few passages, again combined with Tradition & the teaching Magisterium give a quick overview.

Hope that helps.

[Chuck Finley]

Originally Posted by Ambrose

And no you haven't been misinterpreting scripture for 2000 years, it's more like 500 years.

Thank you for illustrating the childishness I was talking about.

[sdegutis]

Originally Posted by Chuck Finley

Thank you for illustrating the childishness I was talking about.

I fail to see how that was childish. Just because someone presents a view as fact, which you disagree with, does not constitute immaturity in any sense of the word of which I am aware.

[Ambrose]

Originally Posted by Chuck Finley

Thank you for illustrating the childishness I was talking about.

If you have problems with the veracity of my comment, please state what it is. I try to be open to new information and points of view. Or we can further discuss the topic.

Or maybe being 'childish' as you say isn't just my domain.

[Almagore]

Originally Posted by Ambrose

If you have problems with the veracity of my comment, please state what it is. I try to be open to new information and points of view. Or we can further discuss the topic.

Or maybe being 'childish' as you say isn't just my domain.

I can't find the quote but someone calling anyone or what anyone says to be childish has no place here. I apologize for whoever said that.

I would like to correct some things and add some things if I may. Someone said something about that there was no Bible for hundreds of years after the start of the Church. While it is true that there was no Canonized Bible until the 300's there were writings of Jesus teachings from the beginning. Certainly St. Paul's letters were written during the first Century and though they weren't "scripture" until later, they were highly respected and read at weekly meetings during the times of the Apostles. Certainly, St. Paul's letters said the same thing when they were originally written ,say, in 60 AD as they did when the Cannon was formed in the 300's.

Someone said that the Scriptures were not meant for private interpretation as they were handed down as well as written. We all should be aware that it is possible for an individual to interpret a scripture in some way that the writer never intended; after all, we all vary in knowledge and intelligence. I am a Catholic and believe it is good to have an authoritative interpretation of scripture were the meaning is not easily seen.

Unfortunately, the fact that we are all human, even though the Holy Spirit is in us, can cause problems with an interpretation by the brightest and the most intelligent when emotions are intense, even if it is from the church.

Regarding explaining Catholic Doctrin to our Christian Brothers, I have never had much success with this but I wish anyone well who feels called to do that. I was a Protestant for 27 years before I became a Catholic and I can quote 20 scriptures to show that Catholic doctrine is from the Bible when many of the doctrines of protestants are not but they just dismiss everything I say.

God bless all who write or read this blog and Please God lead all of us to the fullness of the truth. Amen

[Oldmetalhead]

Originally Posted by Chuck Finley

Thank you for illustrating the childishness I was talking about.

Do you not recognize the early church fathers or the first 1,500 years of church history? If not please explain where the New Testament came from. It is not childish to wonder your position is it? I find your comments lacking the spirit of charity. For the record I am in union with The Church and believe she brought us scripture and continues in her authority to this day. If you wonder what I or any Catholic believes, The Catechism will have your answer.