italo:

Do you think I was expectn Wordtalk to see how purgatory could be derived from my posts? You who cdnt see how 'works being necessary for salvation could be derived from James 2: 20:"See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone". Naaa! I'm only posting these for anyone who might be reading with an open mind, genuinely seeking the truth.

1.  I know you don't care to see that salvation of Christian believers is NOT BY WORKS (Titus 3:5)

2.  I know that you see only what you want to see and ignore what others are saying (1 Tim. 5:21)

3.  I know it's inconvenient for you to address verses that contradict your arguments (1 Tim. 6:3)

4.  I know you do not care to see that James 2:24 has already been addressed earlier (post #18)

5.  I see you can't handle the fact that Abraham was justified by GRACE, and NOT BY WORKS (Romans 4:2)

6.  Romans 4:2 does not contradict James 2:24, because -

[list][li]IF Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but NOT BEFORE GOD[/li][/list]

[list][li]James' point in chapter 2 was that the Christian should prove their faith by their works - not the other way round as you argue: see verse 18 - 'I will shew thee my faith by my works'[/li][/list]

7.  JUSTIFICATION in the redemption we have in Christ is 'NOT BY WORKS' - both the Old Testament (Isaiah 64:6; Habakkuk 2:4) and New Testament (Romans 1:17; Galatians 3:11; Hebrews 10:38) teach this very same thing.

Sori abt d confusion bt d state or process or condition of purgation will happen in a place, hether physical or spiritual.

No problem. Yet, the Bible does not teach the Roman Catholic doctrine of purgatory.

#49 was to show that when we die, there's a place or state in the afterlife that is neither the eternal bliss of heaven or the eternal damnation of hell. Get it?

That 'place or state' is not 'purgatory'. This is why you need to clearly delineate your convictions instead of drawing conclusions half-ways by assumptions.

For #63

Yes. I will most-likely pay for all my sins, forgiven or not. If my sins are forgiven, I will pay, through suffering, prayer, acts of charity etc.

Jesus' death and resurrection has saved me from eternal punishment, not temporal punishment.

And I shdnt evn b answering because d answer to ur questions are in ur post alredi.

Why are women still undergoing pains to bring forth a child?

Why does Jesus say 'we'll render account for every careless word'?

You should hav addressed that before turning around to ask further questions.

For #64

Purgatory is taught in the Bible. Its you who refuse to see it.

You see its difficult for me to spend time answering the rest of the post when you don't even know what the argument is about after almost 70 posts.

I have said on at least 5 occasions that salvation is BY GRACE but the human response, FAITH & WORKS are necessary.

And you're saying 'I see you can't handle d fact dat Abraham was justified by grace and not by works.

Isn't it clear derz a problem smwer and its not with me?

italo:

Yes. I will most-likely pay for all my sins, forgiven or not. If my sins are forgiven, I will pay, through suffering, prayer, acts of charity etc.

I'm not discrediting you for whatever you want to believe, but your thoughts are your own and not what we find in Scripture. This is what we find in the Bible concerning salvation in Christ -

1.  It is not the sinner, but CHRIST Himself who died for our sins (1 Corinthians 15:3 - 'Christ died for our sins, according to the scriptures')

2.  It is not the sinner but CHRIST who 'gave Himself for our sins' (Galatians 1:4)

3.  It is not the sinner, but God Himself who takes away the sins of repentant believers (Romans 11:27)

4.  In taking away sins, God freely justifies those who turn in repentance towards Him (Rom. 3:24)

5.  Sins that are forgiven in Christ are -

[list][li]WASHED IN HIS BLODD - (Jesus has ALREADY 'washed us from our sins in his own blood')[/li][/list]

[list][li]TAKEN AWAY (1 John 3:5 - 'you know that he (Jesus) appeared to take away our sins)'[/li][/list]

[list][li]PURGED - (Hebrews 1:3 - Jesus has ALREADY by Himself PURGED OUR SINS)[/li][/list]

[list][li]REMEMBERED NO MORE (Hebrews 8:12 - God Himself said: 'their sins I will remember no more')[/li][/list]

[list][li]FORGIVEN - (Ephesians 1:7 and Colossians 1:14 - in Jesus Christ we already have 'the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace')[/li][/list]

6.  IF forgiven sins still have to be paid for by the sinner, it simply means you deny all the above and more for yourself.

7.  The implication of saying that you want to still pay for your own sins is found in 1 Corinthians 15:17 - "And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins". The proof that your sins are forgiven is in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. For Jesus was "delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification" (Romans 4:25). Therefore -

[list][li]to argue that you are still going to pay for your own sins is to say that you are STILL IN YOUR SINS[/li][/list]

[list][li]that also implies that you have no hope of the resurrection[/li][/list]

[list][li]it would also be tantamount to denying Jesus' resurrection[/li][/list]

[list][li]and to believe you still have to pay for your own sins is to prove one thing: YOUR FAITH IS IN VAIN!![/li][/list]

You have much to gain in what Jesus has ALREADY accomplished for you, brother. If you acknowledge all the above and more that Jesus Christ has done for all Christian believers, there's nothing - absolutely NOTHING - that you can do by your own efforts and good works to procure JUSTIFICATION in His redemption for you (Titus 3:5 - "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us".

Jesus' death and resurrection has saved me from eternal punishment, not temporal punishment.

More than that. Jesus' death and resurrection also does all the wonderful things I outlined for you - AND MORE. His death and resurrection also procures your REDEMPTION, FORGIVENESS OF SINS, JUSTIFICATION, SANCTIFICATION, RIGHTEOUSNESS, etc., etc., etc. See just above - and read the Bible for yourself (without Catholic goggles, of course).

And I shdnt evn b answering because d answer to your questions are in your post alredi.

Eh, really? And have you considered those answers carefully?

Why are women still undergoing pains to bring forth a child?

Why does Jesus say 'we'll render account for every careless word'?

You should hav addressed that before turning around to ask further questions.

I surely would be glad to address them, but how would you benefit from my answers if you would not consider them? I noticed that after addressing some of the arguments you advanced for "faith + works", I asked you to address those verses that teach that salvation is NOT BY WORKS (post #21) - why haven't you addressed them as well?

italo:

For #64

Purgatory is taught in the Bible. Its you who refuse to see it.

You see its difficult for me to spend time answering the rest of the post when you don't even know what the argument is about after almost 70 posts.

I don't see it in the Bible, it's not there - you yourself have argued with presumption on verses that do not teach such doctrines to the point where you agreed that purgatory is neither paradise nor hell nor heaven, which makes one wonder why you had inferred the purgatory doctrine from Luke 23:42-43.

Let's make things easier for you by letting this matter of purgatory rest.

I have said on at least 5 occasions that salvation is BY GRACE but the human response, FAITH & WORKS are necessary.

1. Salvation is by GRACE.

2. The human response is by FAITH.

3. The believer's proof of his or her faith is the 'WORKS' that follow AFTER receiving salvation by faith through God's grace.

Your problem is that you agree with (1) above and yet scatter everything else by combining and confusing (2) and (3) in one lump as the basis of salvation. Your doctrine, I'm afraid, is not what we find in Scripture.

Let me lay it out once again -

(a) "by grace are ye saved through faith" - Ephesians 2:8

(b) "and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God" - Ephesians 2:8

(c) "Not of works, lest any man should boast" - Ephesians 2:9

NOW, AFTER BEING SAVED - WORKS FOLLOW:

(d) "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them" (Ephesians 2:10)

The same thing is taught in other parts of Scripture -

(a)  GOD - "Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling," 2 Timothy 1:9

(b)  He did this - "not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace," - " Tim. 1:9

(c) "which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began" - 2 Tim. 1:9

And here also: Titus 3:5-7 -->>

(a) "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us,"

(b) "by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;"

(c) "Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;"

(d) "That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life."

So then, where does "works" come into all this? It comes in AFTER RECEIVING SALVATION in verse 8 -

(e) "This is a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly,"

(f)  "that ¹they which have believed in God ²might be careful to maintain good works"

(g)  " These things are good and profitable unto men."

In the (f) above, 1 comes before 2. You believe, you receive, you show the proof of your belief by how you live.

And you're saying 'I see you can't handle d fact dat Abraham was justified by grace and not by works.

What do you make of Romans 4:2 that shows Abraham was NOT justified by works?

Isn't it clear derz a problem smwer and its not with me?

I don't have a problem answering and laying out things in a logical and sequential manner.

Maybe you can help me put the matter of purgatory to rest really quickly. If there's nothing like purgatory in the bible, why is it that 1 Cor 3: 15 says "But if someone’s work is burned up, that one will suffer loss; the person will be saved,* but only as through fire". Will people be punished through the fire to be saved?

1 Cor. 3:15 - if works are unnecessary for salvation as you assert, then why is a man saved (not just rewarded) through fire by a judgment of his works?

Forgive me if you don't like "catholic goggles" but wasn't it the same Catholics that wrote the new testament, compiled the Bible and gave it to the world? And doesn't that Bible say in 1 Tim 3: 15 that the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth? And in 2 Thess. 2:15 - Does Paul not clearly command us to obey oral apostolic tradition. He says stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, either by word of mouth or letter. Does this verse not prove that for apostolic authority, oral and written communications are on par with each other? What then is wrong with "catholic googles" if it is in line with the Church's teaching?

I wouldn't want to keep up with the talk about purgatory, as I said. However, I'll oblige your enquiry.

italo:

Maybe you can help me put the matter of purgatory to rest really quickly. If there's nothing like purgatory in the bible, why is it that 1 Cor 3: 15 says "But if someone’s work is burned up, that one will suffer loss; the person will be saved,* but only as through fire". Will people be punished through the fire to be saved?

My answer to the question in bold: NO.

italo:

1 Cor. 3:15 - if works are unnecessary for salvation as you assert, then why is a man saved (not just rewarded) through fire by a judgment of his works?

Very good question. However, it misses the very point at the heart of all our discussion - that the salvation of the Christian believer is "NOT BY WORKS" (Ephesians 2:8-9; II Timothy 1:9; Titus 3:5).

The question you propose, however, supposes from 1 Corinthians 3:15 that works are necessary for salvation and "(not just reward)". Let's look at the two sides of this -

(a) if any man's work abides, he shall receive a reward - verse 14

(b) if a man's work is burned, he shall suffer loss - verse 15

We have already shown that salvation is a GIFT and NOT A REWARD (Ephesians 2:8 ). If a man works, then what he receives is not a 'GIFT' but a 'REWARD' - Romans 4:4.

So, what 1 Corinthians 3 deals with is simple: works and rewards, which is not the same thing as procuring salvation through GRACE. You can easily grasp this if it is illustrated this way -

            SALVATION -
            salvation is a GIFT
            salvation is by GRACE
            salvation is NOT BY WORKS

            WORKS -
            works are for REWARDS
            rewards are NOT A 'GIFT'
            work and grace are not mixed up (Romans 11:6)

italo:

Forgive me if you don't like "catholic goggles" but wasn't it the same Catholics that wrote the new testament, compiled the Bible and gave it to the world?

The reference to 'Catholic goggles' was facetious and was not made to deride Catholics. That was why I said earlier that "I'm not discrediting you for whatever you want to believe, but your thoughts are your own and not what we find in Scripture."

And doesn't that Bible say in 1 Tim 3: 15 that the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth?

It does - and by 'the Church', that verse was not preaching Roman Catholicism.

And in 2 Thess. 2:15 - Does Paul not clearly command us to obey oral apostolic tradition. He says stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, either by word of mouth or letter. Does this verse not prove that for apostolic authority, oral and written communications are on par with each other?

To be sure, Paul says what you are pointing out in 2 Thes. 2:15. But that does not mean we should ignore all the warnings that the same Paul gave to believers against all kinds of doctrines claiming to be apostolic.

How do we then find the doctrine of the apostles? The 'traditions' Paul spoke about should be consistent and allign with the doctrines of the NT apostles. This is why he warned that believers should not be so gullible as to be tossed to and fro with all sorts of teachngs and doctrines (Eph. 4:4); we should not be fooled into following ANY OTHER GOSPEL, even if preached by an angel or respected charismatic figure  (Galatians 1:8-9 and II Corinthians 11:3-4 & 13-14). So, if the 'traditions' you're espousing do not find a place in the teachings of the apostles, we can rest assured it could as well border on 'another gospel'.

What then is wrong with "catholic googles" if it is in line with the Church's teaching?

What is wrong with the 'goggles' of ANY church/denomination is when they proclaim their own "traditions" by special conduits that find no bearing on ANY PART OF SCRIPTURE - see Mark 7:9.

wordtalk:

Thanks 5solas. I've been trying to follow the discussions in both threads but have been quite busy as to be online to post comments. I appreciate how you handle these issues in a far simpler manner.

Humility Himself.I look forward to reading your posts, there is always something to learn. I am very happy you are back.

On purgatory,

If you answer is NO, then why does 1Cor 3:15 talk about one being punished as through the fire and being saved (which would be purgatory)?

On works,

Why then, is it that in verse 17, those who have very bad works (they destroy the body) are destroyed by God? Doesn't it show that it is mortal sin that leads to damnation, since nothing is mentioned of their faith?

And we both know I have never said salvation is by works so pls don't bother bringing up that distraction.

Wasnt the word 'catholic' which means 'universal', added to 'the church' early on to distinguish it from the many heretical sects that kept springing up. Is 'catholic' not merely an appelation but a description of 'the church' or was the church Paul was talking about not universal?

"How are we to find the doctrine of the apostles"? You ask. Is it wordtalk that should tell us the criteria for identifying apostolic tradition. Haven't we already been handed the tradition through a proven and unbroken line of apostolic succession from the first apostles to the 2nd generation apostles to the early church fathers to the present day Catholic clergy?

And if you dislike Catholic tradition so much, shouldn't you discard the Bible too. Is the Bible not a part of Catholic tradition? Is there anywhere in the Bible that we find that there should be a book that will be the sole Authorized deposit of faith? Is the word 'Bible' even in the bible? Is it not unscriptural? Were the books of the Bible not enumerated and canonized by the Catholic Church in the fourth century? How then was the early church - let's say from 200 AD to 350 AD - run? Wasn't it primarily through Tradition got from Apostolic succession?

italo:

Wasnt the word 'catholic' which means 'universal', added to 'the church' early on to distinguish it from the many heretical sects that kept springing up.

Added later - by who? We know what is meant by Roman Catholicism' - it is a whole system on its own, with many "additions" that even the Vatican can't find in any of the epistles in the Bible. NONE.

Is 'catholic' not merely an appelation but a description of 'the church' or was the church Paul was talking about not universal?

Oh c'mon, for goodness sake! We now that the word 'catholic' is not "merely" an appellation - it is a SYSTEM that receives its whole bull from the Vatican. End of. What is Roman Catholicism without the Vatican? What is Roman Catholicism without Mariology? You call it "merely" an appellation - but remove all the Vatican and Mariology and let's see what the appellation would benefit you as a catholic.

"How are we to find the doctrine of the apostles"? You ask. Is it wordtalk that should tell us the criteria for identifying apostolic tradition.

No, it's not wordtalk - at least I was not quoting any bull from wordtalk. I quoted the apostles in precisely what they said. You dont like it? Tough luck.

Haven't we already been handed the tradition through a proven and unbroken line of apostolic succession from the first apostles to the 2nd generation apostles to the early church fathers to the present day Catholic clergy?

If the tradition you're arguing has no foundation in the teachings of the apostles, you're on a different road altogether.

And if you dislike Catholic tradition so much, shouldn't you discard the Bible too.

No. The Bible is not bound to the Vatican or to Mariology and all its systems.

Is the Bible not a part of Catholic tradition?

We know that the apostles were not part of Roman Catholicism, so we can look into the Bible without having to be held down by the RC system.

Is there anywhere in the Bible that we find that there should be a book that will be the sole Authorized deposit of faith?

Is there any verse that said Christians are to just embrace every wind of doctrine?

Is the word 'Bible' even in the bible? Is it not unscriptural? Were the books of the Bible not enumerated and canonized by the Catholic Church in the fourth century?

Just because Catholicism may claim to have canonized the Bible does not mean that its authors were Roman Catholics. There are people who may collate codices of texts without themselves being adherents of the worldviews of the texts they collate.

How then was the early church - let's say from 200 AD to 350 AD - run?

In one word: it was NOT run on the foundation of Catholicism. Where was Mariology and Mariolatry before 200AD? Please tell me.

Wasn't it primarily through Tradition got from Apostolic succession?

No. Read Acts 2:42.

italo:

On purgatory,

If you answer is NO, then why does 1Cor 3:15 talk about one being punished as through the fire and being saved (which would be purgatory)?

Already addressed.

On works,

Why then, is it that in verse 17, those who have very bad works (they destroy the body) are destroyed by God? Doesn't it show that it is mortal sin that leads to damnation, since nothing is mentioned of their faith?

All sins are still sins. The question is: are you still going to pay for those sins that God has already washed, taken away, purged, remembered no more and forgiven?

And we both know I have never said salvation is by works so pls don't bother bringing up that distraction.

You've been arguing a salvation based on works even though the Bible is clear that it is NOT BY WORKS. You can't read those clear statements and still have an argument aganst them.

You have used a million words but have still not answered my questions - at least reasonably.

1 Cor 3: 15 says people will be saved after undergoing punishment as through the fire, and that clearly supports the doctrine of purgatory. If you have any other explanation of that verse, let's hear it.

Also, 1 Cor 3: 14,15,17 clearly shows that its everyone's work that will be judged on that day. Be you destined for a reward, salvation or destruction. Its not mere faith that will be judged. Infact faith is not mentioned at all.

My dear The Catholic Church is the same church that had the apostles as its foundation. The word 'catholic' is a description. Just like the apostles had to chose Mathias to succeed Judas and people like Titus and Timothy came later, so The Catholic Church has maintaind an unbroken line of Apostolic succession to this day. And I don't know why you keep mentioning the Bible, its clearly part of Catholic tradition. We decided which books were inspired and which were not. So if you reject Catholicism, you should reject the bible, the trinity as well. Its sooooo simple.

And I was talking about the time between 200 and 350 AD. Acts 2:42 was written long before then.

Forgive Gabriel the Archangel, he was the one that first said the 'Hail Mary', and whatever an angel says is what God wants him to say.

What doctrine do you follow? Let's see if its the one true doctrine the bible talks about.

This discussion seems to be spiralling out of its course and on to other things. While it is not focused on Catholicism, I'll say this much and hope you find somewhere else to discuss your problems about Roman Catholicism.

italo:

So if you reject Catholicism, you should reject the bible, the trinity as well. Its sooooo simple.

That, my friend, is a fine example of argumentative fallacy. Catholicism is not the foundation of the Bible, that is why a believer can have a Biblical worldview without resorting to Catholicism.

For example, while the Bible teaches that the sins of a Christian believer are washed, purged, taken away, FORGIVEN and no more to be remembered, Catholics like you clearly do not believe what the Bible clearly teaches! That is why you still want to pay for your forgiven sins by yourself!

Another example: while the Bible teaches that salvation is NOT BY WORKS but simply by the GRACE of God through faith, Catholics like you are still struggling to look for salvation based on your own works mixed with faith and grace as side attractions.

One could give several examples to show that Catholicism actually does not square with the doctrines of the apostles - which is why a Christian with a Biblical worldview does not need (and can actually reject) Catholicism.

And I was talking about the time between 200 and 350 AD. Acts 2:42 was written long before then.

All the same, please answer the question: Where was Mariology and Mariolatry before 200AD?

Forgive Gabriel the Archangel, he was the one that first said the 'Hail Mary', and whatever an angel says is what God wants him to say.

Let me get you right: are you saying that angel Gabriel brought Mariolatry from God?

What doctrine do you follow? Let's see if its the one true doctrine the bible talks about.

I do not follow Catholicism, and my answer is Acts 2:42. This is why I try to show you the doctrine of the apostles who clearly show that salvation is "NOT BY WORKS".

italo:

You have used a million words but have still not answered my questions - at least reasonably.

I answered your questions, although it's only fair to say it wasn't the Catholic answer you had hoped to read.

1 Cor 3: 15 says people will be saved after undergoing punishment as through the fire, and that clearly supports the doctrine of purgatory. If you have any other explanation of that verse, let's hear it.

My dear sir, in just the same way that you argue that "faith is not mentioned at all" in that passage, so also you will not find the word 'punishment' in those verses. Just because you read such words as 'fire' in verse 15 does not automatically qualify the passge to suggest purgatory.

First, the apostle was not speaking in literal terms when he said the one whose works are burned would be saved, 'yet so as by fire'. The highlighted words ("as by" makes it obvious he was speaking metaphorically, so it should not be stretched to argue 'punishment' there as if the saved person had to pass through a place filled with fire.

Second, the force of the whole passage is that though a man's work may be entirely burned up, yet he himself shall be saved. The fact that his works are burned up and do not survive shows two things:

[list](a) that his works proved nothing in his salvation. If his salvation depended on his works, then he would not have been saved since his works were burned; yet, the man himself was saved even though his works were burned;[/list]

[list](b) that the man himself did not thereby lose his salvation by the loss of his works. 'If any man's work shall be burned . . . he himself shall be saved'.[/list]

As far as salvation is concerned, the NT teaches that it is "NOT BY WORKS".

Also, 1 Cor 3: 14,15,17 clearly shows that its everyone's work that will be judged on that day. Be you destined for a reward, salvation or destruction.

Since it is the works that will be judged, why then are you trying to judge the person?

Look sir, the "works" will not save anyone. For everyone who is saved, the testimony is the same:

       1.  It is NOT BY WORKS

       2.  It is by GRACE

       3.  Grace is NOT 'work'; and 'work' is not GRACE (Romans 11:6)

       4.  thus, if it is by grace, it is no more of works
       and if it by works, it is no more of grace (Rom. 11:6)

You cannot be mixing up the two for salvation where the Bible is crystal clear that salvation is NOT BY WORKS.

Its not mere faith that will be judged. Infact faith is not mentioned at all.

If faith is not mentioned, why then are you pressing for 'punishment' which is also not mentioned at all?

To be sure, faith is mentioned as the response on our part in salvation - and I have outlined it earlier:

1. Salvation is by GRACE.

2. The human response is by FAITH.

3. The believer's proof of his or her faith is the 'WORKS' that follow AFTER receiving salvation by faith through God's grace.

Your problem is that you agree with (1) above and yet scatter everything else by combining and confusing (2) and (3) in one lump as the basis of salvation. Your doctrine, I'm afraid, is not what we find in Scripture.

Let me lay it out once again -

(a) "by grace are ye saved through faith" - Ephesians 2:8

(b) "and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God" - Ephesians 2:8

(c) "Not of works, lest any man should boast" - Ephesians 2:9

@italo,

I just wondered: have you thought carefully about what effect Jesus' death and resurrection have on YOUR SINS? I can't undertand how an informed Christian would still argue that he will still pay for his or her sins even though they were forgiven, and yet these (among others) is what Jesus has already accomplished -

wordtalk:


5.  Sins that are forgiven in Christ are -

[list][li]WASHED IN HIS BLODD - (Jesus has ALREADY 'washed us from our sins in his own blood')[/li][/list]

[list][li]TAKEN AWAY (1 John 3:5 - 'you know that he (Jesus) appeared to take away our sins)'[/li][/list]

[list][li]PURGED - (Hebrews 1:3 - Jesus has ALREADY by Himself PURGED OUR SINS)[/li][/list]

[list][li]REMEMBERED NO MORE (Hebrews 8:12 - God Himself said: 'their sins I will remember no more')[/li][/list]

[list][li]FORGIVEN - (Ephesians 1:7 and Colossians 1:14 - in Jesus Christ we already have 'the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace')[/li][/list]

Please tell me: if Jesus' death and resurrection has washed, taken away, purged and forgiven your sins - so that God no longer remembers them - why do you still want to pay for your own sins by yourself? What does that say about your response to God's grace Who has done it all for you through Jesus Christ?

Oga which one is your own true doctrine? Your own is to say Catholics did this , Catholics did dat. You can't diisprove purgatory n necessity of works, you're moving to Mary and temporal punishment. Ok, you got the written word from the Catholic book - the Bible, where do you get the tradition and oral word from? Your bedroom?

Whch one dyu wanna face, let's face it. Just when you find sm1 who puts d truth abt a topic up in ur face, u jump 2anoda topic. Dats wat ur all like.

Its better to hit the nail on the head with one word than spend a million words beating around the bush.

italo:

Oga which one is your own true doctrine? Your own is to say Catholics did this , Catholics did dat.

I don't like repeating myself. My answer has already been given when I said: "I do not follow Catholicism, and my answer is Acts 2:42." Besides, I have also noted that the discussion is swinging away from salvation now to Catholic this and that. Can I kindly ask that we leave those aside and concentrate on the subject of salvation? Thank you in advance.

italo:

Its better to hit the nail on the head with one word than spend a million words beating around the bush.

I have done so: the Bible teaches that salvation is "NOT OF WORKS".

So why does the bible tell us to 'work out our salvation'?

italo:

So why does the bible tell us to 'work out our salvation'?

We've been through that before, haven't we? You seem to often call for unnecessary repetitions, but this is what I said in post #20 -

To "work out" is not the same thing as to "work for" - the first (work out) is to demonstrate something that someone already has; the second one ("work for" is to engage in something as a means to obtain something else - and it is the second one that you argue which is not taught as the basis of our salvation in Christ.

I'll stop repeating when you give me satisfactory answers.

So you say to 'work out' is "to demonstrate something that someone already has." That's the definition you've 'manufactured' so that it suits your arguement. Can you provide proof that that's what 'work out' means from any English dictionary?

Thefreedictionary.com says work out means: "to achieve or accomplish by effort"

Dictionary.com says it means: "to bring about by work, effort, or action"

Also, the Greek word translated as “work out” is katergazo, and it means to accomplish, achieve, or produce.

So what does 'wordtalkdictionary.com' say?

^^ To all your confusion, my answer is simple: salvation is NOT OF WORKS.

The verses I have quoted so many times still remain the same: Ephesians 2:8-9; II Timothy 1:9 and Titus 3:5.

Now, my dear sir, I would hope that you consider those verses and please let me know what they mean to YOU.

italo:

So why does the bible tell us to 'work out our salvation'?

"Work out" is not the same as "work for" work out is as the name goes. It's like when you go to the gym to do work out. You work out what is already in there.

@Joagbaje,

1. The phrasal verb 'work out', as many other words, have many meanings. It could even mean 'to calculate', but the definition I gave is the one that fits the context of what St. Paul is talking about. Of course he's not talking in the context of 'exercising' just as he's not talking of 'calculation'.

2. The verb 'work out', when used to mean 'exercise', is an intransitive verb, and intransitive verbs cannot have an object. Other examples of intransitive verbs are: die, sleep. You can say 'the dog died' or I will sleep', but you cannot have an object added after it. That's the same way you cannot add on object to 'work out'. So its grammatically impossible to say 'work out(exercise) your salvation.

3. As I mentioned earlier, the word for work 'out' in the original greek text of the Bible is 'katergazo' and it means: to accomplish, achieve or produce; which is consistent with the dictionary definition I gave you.

4. When we started this discussion, I asked you whether you wanted truth or you wanted to win the argument. You said you wanted truth and I believed you because people seem to call you a Pastor (I don't know - I'v never asked you). But it doesn't seem like you are after the truth anymore because the truth is staring you in the face and you are ashamed to accept it. Just imagine how our Lord is looking down on you now. Do you not think that it will be better for Atheists who do not know Jesus to refuse the truth than it will be for one who has already come to know Jesus to refuse the truth? Because the Truth is Jesus!

@wordtalk,

Lol. I thought you wanted us to discuss in a logical sequential manner. I give you my word, I'll address the verses you brought up, but shouldn't that be after we have concluded with this 'work out your salvation' verse? Of course. And have we concluded? No!

I asked, why does the Bible say 'work out your salvation', if works are not necessary for salvation?

And you said 'work out' means "to demonstrate something that someone already has".

But all the English dictionaries in the world disagree with that definition. Infact many say it means to 'achieve by work or effort' - which is the same meaning of the original greek word 'katerzago'.

So clearly, it's either you didn't know the meaning of 'work out' or you deliberately lied just to buttress your point. Courtsey demands you apologize for either.

Now, seeing that you were wrong, do you have any better explanation to buttress your point?

If not can we take it that the verse is saying - to substitute the dictionary meaning - 'ACHIEVE - BY WORK OR EFFORT - YOUR SALVATION?

Then we can move to Eph 2: 8,9; 2Tim 1: 9, Tit 3: 5. I'm so eager.

Joagbaje:

"Work out" is not the same as "work for" work out is as the name goes. It's like when you go to the gym to do work out. You work out what is already in there.

Ah aahhhhh! Oga Joe. Why do you want to terrorize the english people's language like this na. Wetin dem do you?

italo:


2. The verb 'work out', when used to mean 'exercise', is an intransitive verb, and intransitive verbs cannot have an object. Other examples of intransitive verbs are: die, sleep. You can say 'the dog died' or I will sleep', but you cannot have an object added after it. That's the same way you cannot add on object to 'work out'. So its grammatically impossible to say 'work out(exercise) your salvation.

For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him DIE THE DEATH. ( Matthew 15:4 )

I slept a deep sleep in which I dreamt a dream in which I did a deed the tale of which I cannot tell.

@italo,

italo:

So clearly, it's either you didn't know the meaning of 'work out' or you deliberately lied just to buttress your point. Courtsey demands you apologize for either.

Before you hastily accuse me of deliberately lying, please check your use of language. I'm aware of the meaning of the Greek word 'katergazomai' (κατεργάζομαι), but it is meaningless to run with a pretext while ignoring its context. It is the use of that word in the context of Phillipians 2:12 that I have been pointing out, which again I shall delineate for you.

italo:

3. As I mentioned earlier, the word for work 'out' in the original greek text of the Bible is 'katergazo' and it means: to accomplish, achieve or produce; which is consistent with the dictionary definition I gave you.

1. The Greek word 'katergazomai' (κατεργάζομαι -  to perform, accomplish, achieve) is used in Phil. 2:12 in context of putting into action (ie., perform) what has already been given to you. It is not used to teach salvation by the works of the repentant sinner, and the next verse also makes it clear in context that "it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure" (verse 13).

2. In his epistle to the Philippians, it would be unreasonable to assume that Paul was addressing people who had not been saved! In chapter 1, he already acknowledges that those folks had received salvation through God's grace when he addressed them in 1:1 as "all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi". Why would he address them as "saints in Christ Jesus" if they had not received salvation through the grace of God?

3. The apostles did not teach a doctrine of 'salvation by works', as it is everywhere clear in the emphasis that our salvation is 'NOT OF WORKS' (Ephesians 2:8-9; II Timothy 1:9 and Titus 3:5). Only after salvation is received by faith as a GIFT (not as a reward) from God, then 'works' come into view.

Could you please now address (3) above? Please let me know what (Ephesians 2:8-9; II Timothy 1:9 and Titus 3:5) mean to YOU, where those verses teach that salvation is not by works?

italo:

2. The verb 'work out', when used to mean 'exercise', is an intransitive verb, and intransitive verbs cannot have an object. Other examples of intransitive verbs are: die, sleep. You can say 'the dog died' or I will sleep', but you cannot have an object added after it. That's the same way you cannot add on object to 'work out'. So its grammatically impossible to say 'work out(exercise) your salvation.

Pastor AIO:


For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him DIE THE DEATH. ( Matthew 15:4 )  

I slept a deep sleep in which I dreamt a dream in which I did a deed the tale of which I cannot tell. 

@Pastor AIO,
Excellent. Thank you.