Antihistamines for works.

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,198
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Yes, I believe that Ephesians 2 is all about salvation and faith.

I have more concerns with taking care when approaching Hebrews, not because Hebrews contains error (it does not) but because Hebrews presents hypothetical (what if) cases which can easily be misunderstood. For example Hebrews 10:26-27 [NKJV] states "For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries." which could be read to literally imply that there is no repentance possible for willful sin after a person comes to know Christ. That is not the intent of the verse and one will need to work harder to examine more of the context to understand what is really being communicated, but that is one example of my concern with verses plucked from Hebrews.

In your case, you chose the verse Hebrews 3:12 which states "Take care, brothers and sisters, that none of you may have an evil, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God." and I wished only to urge you to examine whether someone with an "evil, unbelieving heart " really qualified as 'saved'. If they do not, then the warning is for the 'visible church' (those who sit in a pew and include both the saved and the unsaved) rather than the 'invisible church' (those who are saved and received the Holy Spirit as a deposit guaranteeing their inheritance).

So my point was not a challenge to your position, but only to the applicability of one specific verse.

I do not share your view about Hebrews 10:26-27. I take that passage at face value. One who sins wilfully after making a profession of faith is cutting themselves off from the saving mercy of God in Christ for the reasons given in the passage. Hebrews 6:1-12 relates a similar case with similar dire consequences. But for me the story does not end there because Hebrews 6 and 10 are not exhaustive of the mercy of God. There is a way back. It is through repentance. The kind that turns away from sins and towards God. Romans 8:1-11 discusses the kind of mercy and grace needed for that kind of repentance. Other passages also elaborate on the theme of Mercy triumphing over condemnation. James spells it out in one pithy statement “Whoever acts without mercy will be judged without mercy but mercy can afford to laugh at judgement.” James 2:13. So when we come to Hebrews 3:12 I see the person as developing an evil heart as Adam and Eve did. The ones under consideration in Hebrews 3:12 had a heart towards God and like Adam and Eve turned away from God and towards wickedness.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,198
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
What is your definition or theology of what happened at the cross then?

At the risk of seeming trite my definition is found in the pages of holy scripture. I admit that you may see something else there. That appears to be the case on a number of things.
 

Lamb

God's Lil Lamb
Community Team
Administrator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
32,649
Age
57
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
We all claim we believe in what scriptures say. So many on here have claimed that instead of writing out what they believe. So how about answering the question?
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,198
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
We all claim we believe in what scriptures say. So many on here have claimed that instead of writing out what they believe. So how about answering the question?

When I post from the CCC some folk complain about it. They want my opinion. As if an opinion from me was any better than one from them or from anybody on the street. So I do not bother with giving the CCC much any more. If you want what the Church teaches it is in the CCC and in the much older catechisms of Saint Augustine and also the 500 year old Catechism of the Council of Trent. The story is the same in each. One is saved by grace through faith for the good works that God gives as our way of life.
 

Lamb

God's Lil Lamb
Community Team
Administrator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
32,649
Age
57
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
One is saved by grace through faith for the good works that God gives as our way of life.

Now that is something that I agree with. Very basic without adding the complications that change the meaning.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,198
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Now that is something that I agree with. Very basic without adding the complications that change the meaning.

It's what Ephesians 2:8-10 says. Just slightly condensed.
 

Lamb

God's Lil Lamb
Community Team
Administrator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
32,649
Age
57
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
So we agreed on something. Thread closure? LOL
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,198
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
So we agreed on something. Thread closure? LOL

Probably not. I am sure somebody will accuse me of teaching works righteousness soon. It appears to be the sport of the month.
 

Cassia

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2016
Messages
1,735
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Widow/Widower
I have yet to hear this being acknowledged in a comment from post 89 I think it was.

. What is good naturally is still of the old creation and not functioning from God, the better than.

I don't believe that anything anyone does is profitable toward salvation. Rewards are the incentive given that catholics/Lutherans/Arminians are clueless of.
smh that they do not believe that He is a God that rewards.

What is reasonable service? It's doing the work that accomplishes the change. Freewill is there to embrace the change. But our good does not accomplish that.
 

Cassia

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2016
Messages
1,735
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Widow/Widower
It's what Ephesians 2:8-10 says. Just slightly condensed.
I have to admit that years ago you did teach me to say things of scripture w/o expressly using scripture to do so...

So maybe dropping the catholic accent may make your speach more intelligible? just a thought...
 

atpollard

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2017
Messages
2,573
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I do not share your view about Hebrews 10:26-27. I take that passage at face value. One who sins willfully after making a profession of faith is cutting themselves off from the saving mercy of God in Christ for the reasons given in the passage.

Hebrews 10:26-27 [NKJV]
"For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries."


MY VIEW of Hebrews 10:26-27 is that it can be misinterpreted. (I doubt that you really "do not share my view".)
So let's "take that passage at face value".

Since I do not want to misrepresent Catholic teaching, I found this ...

"A mortal sin (Latin: peccata mortalia), in Catholic theology, is a gravely wrongful act, which can lead to eternal damnation, if a person is not absolved of the sin before death. A sin is considered to be "mortal" when its quality is such that it leads to a separation of that person from God's saving grace."

So a hypothetical Roman Catholic named Bob completes Baptism, First Holy Communion, and Confirmation and later commits a "mortal sin". As a "mortal sin", he has "sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth" (as described in Hebrews 10:26). As stated by you and affirmed in the quote on mortal sin I provided, Bob is separated from God's saving grace. While it is not what I believe, and it is not what you or the Catholic Church believe, Hebrews 10:26-27 can be "taken at face value" and misinterpreted to state that for Bob, "there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment". Period. Case closed. End of discussion. One strike and Bob is out. Next stop, eternal damnation. What point is there in attempting to repent, it says right there in black and white "there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins". Jesus' blood, which is the only sacrifice that removes sin "no longer remains" (so says Hebrews 10:26) and the ONLY thing that remains for Bob is "a certain fearful expectation of judgment". Bob has committed the unpardonable sin. There is no sacrifice to remove it.

Are you SURE, that Hebrews 10:26-27 can't be misinterpreted and needs to be taken "at face value"?
Personally, I think verses like 1 John 8-10 "If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us." paint a very different picture for Bob and suggest that Hebrews 10:26-27 needs a little deeper digging to get the whole picture. 'Face value' will not be adequate.
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Some thoughts as a former Catholic....


The Roman Catholic Church and Catholics on Justification (narrow)....


1. OFFICIALLY, the RCC is all over the map on this subject. I suspect you can find any and all views about it officially declared somewhere at some time. There appears to be no subject about which the RCC is more confused, more divergent, more variant. SOME statements are identical to Lutheran (which of course the RCC claims is apostate and heretical on this subject), some the opposite. You can find anything and everything.


2. CATHOLICS (including official teachers such as pastors, deacons, etc.) often teach views entirely different than those of the RCC. Many will insist "The Catholic Church says" when it says no such thing. I've learned - in time, after leaving that denomination - much of what I was taught actually wasn't Catholic at all. Theological education in Catholicism is often pathetic.


3. A LOT of confusion happens because Protestants and many Catholics use the same words but sometimes with nearly opposite definitions. For example, in this context (Justification, narrow), Protestants define "grace" as unmerited favor, blessing, gifts. "God's Riches At Christ's Expense." Unconditional, unearned, perhaps even unrequested love. Catholics however usually define it as, "God's enabling, empowering, strength." As our teachers taught us, "Grace is like the gas God puts in your tank so that you can get yourself where God calls you to be." True - both definitions have biblical support but only one applies to justification (at least Protestants would insist). Thus, both Catholics and Protestants can say, "We are justified by grace" and mean nearly opposite things. Or consider the word "salvation." Protestants tend to use this work narrowly and essentially as a synonym for narrow justification, Catholics usually use this word in the very broadest, widest sense to refer to all that happens between God and man, all that happens in terms of Christian faith and life. Thus, Catholics and Protestants can be talking about "salvation" and be totally talked past each other, about totally different things. Again, both definitions have biblical support but we're using them very differently. IMO, Catholics often mislead Protestants (perhaps unintentionally) by saying, for example, "Jesus is our Savior" but mean something nearly opposite of what the Protestant "hears."


4. On this issue of narrow Justification, here is what our Catholic teachers taught us (VERY consistently): God helps those who help themselves. Jesus opened the gate to heaven but you have to get yourself through them. Jesus made salvation POSSIBLE but you actually do it... and we get sufficient enabling to accomplish that so if we adequately tap the help we get, we will eventually achieve heaven (although finishing the job in Purgatory). That "help" comes from The Catholic Church, the saints currently and officially declared so by The Catholic Church, the "treasury of merits" of The Roman Catholic Church, the exactly SEVEN Sacraments that are owned and doled out by The Catholic Church, the Queen of Heaven (Mary). I don't recall Jesus ever been mentioned as being of any current role but I suspect most Catholic teachers would throw him in somewhere (Jesus' role was to 'open the door to heaven' and he's done with that; NOW the emphasis is on The Roman Catholic Church, Mary and all the Saints - as HELPERS, enabling us to save ourselves). Frankly, the idea of Jesus as Savior in the Protestant sense never occurred to me in my Catholic days, it was an epiphany that happened after I left that denomination.


5. Looking back.... listening to my Catholic family members.... listening to Catholics in person and on the internet.... has convinced me that much of the problem, much of the reason for the entangled MESS of Catholicism on this point, is because it does not distinguish between Law and Gospel, sanctification (Christian discipleship and growth) and Justification, self and Christ. All these are entirely mixed, entangled, confused, blended.... GOOD stuff is thrown together in the mixer, watered down with oceans of water, the "hi" button pushed, it runs for centuries, and then the entangled, mixed-up, blended, water-down MESS is poured out. IF (big word).... IF you can actually sit down with a Catholic..... IF you have patience as big as Jupiter..... IF you can either use non-churchy words or agree on vocabulary..... eventually, in time, often..... you can untangle the MESS their denomination has been pouring down their souls - and end up with a solidly Lutheran or Reformed person (professing the very thing the RCC excommunicated Luther for 500 years ago). I'm convinced...... deep down...... IN SPITE OF what their pastors, deacons, First Communion, RCIA, parish school teachers have taught them.... IN SPITE OF the RCC..... there are a LOT of Lutherans in the pews of the local RCC owned and operated parish. But it SURE is hard to tell. I credit two - a LCMS pastor and a Bible study leader - who untangled the MESS the RCC had poured down me. It was a life changing, enormous epiphany for me!!!!!



Thank you.


Pax Christi


- Josiah




.
 
Last edited:

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,198
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Hebrews 10:26-27 [NKJV]
"For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries."


MY VIEW of Hebrews 10:26-27 is that it can be misinterpreted. (I doubt that you really "do not share my view".)
So let's "take that passage at face value".

Since I do not want to misrepresent Catholic teaching, I found this ...

"A mortal sin (Latin: peccata mortalia), in Catholic theology, is a gravely wrongful act, which can lead to eternal damnation, if a person is not absolved of the sin before death. A sin is considered to be "mortal" when its quality is such that it leads to a separation of that person from God's saving grace."

So a hypothetical Roman Catholic named Bob completes Baptism, First Holy Communion, and Confirmation and later commits a "mortal sin". As a "mortal sin", he has "sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth" (as described in Hebrews 10:26). As stated by you and affirmed in the quote on mortal sin I provided, Bob is separated from God's saving grace. While it is not what I believe, and it is not what you or the Catholic Church believe, Hebrews 10:26-27 can be "taken at face value" and misinterpreted to state that for Bob, "there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment". Period. Case closed. End of discussion. One strike and Bob is out. Next stop, eternal damnation. What point is there in attempting to repent, it says right there in black and white "there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins". Jesus' blood, which is the only sacrifice that removes sin "no longer remains" (so says Hebrews 10:26) and the ONLY thing that remains for Bob is "a certain fearful expectation of judgment". Bob has committed the unpardonable sin. There is no sacrifice to remove it.

Are you SURE, that Hebrews 10:26-27 can't be misinterpreted and needs to be taken "at face value"?
Personally, I think verses like 1 John 8-10 "If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us." paint a very different picture for Bob and suggest that Hebrews 10:26-27 needs a little deeper digging to get the whole picture. 'Face value' will not be adequate.

The definition you found is anemic. A better one that is also far more theologically accurate and sanction by Church authority is this Mortal sin destroys charity in the heart of man by a grave violation of God's law; it turns man away from God, who is his ultimate end and his beatitude, by preferring an inferior good to him. Venial sin allows charity to subsist, even though it offends and wounds it. For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: "Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent." Hebrews 10:26 uses similar language to the definition. For one to sin wilfully (and persistently) after receiving truth is the key one needs to understand the nature of sins as dealt with in the passage.
For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, Hebrews 10:26 NASB​
The idea of persistence in sin with full knowledge and free consent to it is what makes this kind of sin irredeemable unless one repents. The question is "can one bring such a person to repentance?" and Hebrews 6:1-12 suggests not. It observes "it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame". But as I observed in an earlier post what is written in Hebrews is not exhaustive of the Mercy of God. There are other passages that suggest that Mercy can triumph over condemnation.

An older and more wordy definition of mortal sin comes from the 1909 AD Catholic Dictionary. It says
[A mortal sin is] A grievous offense against the law of God. This sin is called mortal because it deprives us of supernatural life and brings damnation and death of the soul. Three conditions are necessary for a mortal sin: gravity of matter, sufficient reflection, and full consent of the will. The gravity of matter is determined by Holy Scripture, by the definitions of the Church, by the testimony of the Fathers, Doctors, and theologians, by the universal belief of the faithful, and by reason enlightened by faith. Mortal sin is a revolt against God, supreme Lord, contempt of His adorable majesty, an act of monstrous ingratitude. It is an offense against Christ who redeemed us, and against the Holy Ghost who sanctifies us. It deprives one of sanctifying grace and thus prevents one from acquiring merit or sharing in the satisfying merits of the Church. It tarnishes the soul, and causes remorse of conscience, an inclination to evil, darkening of the intellect, weakening of the will. It deprives one of the right to heaven, and entails penalties, some of which are incurred in this life, and the loss of God forever as well as eternal punishment.​
But like all definitions the above is a summary and deeper reflection is needed to discover the full meaning of the concept as it is described in Hebrews 10:26-27 and in Hebrews 6:1-12.
 

Cassia

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2016
Messages
1,735
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Widow/Widower
Wow, what a mishmash of ideas. Hebrews 6 and Hebrews 10 are completely different. Hebrews 6 can be likened to the Calvinist school of thought and Hebrews 10 the Arminian school of thought. The difference is in the wording of (in the case of chap 6) repentance.
To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace. 7 Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. 8 But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned.
1 Corinthians 3:14-15

and (in the case of chap 10) those who have trampled under and counted His sacrifice as common, putting the Holy Spirit as nothing. Hebrews 10:26-29 they had received the teaching but did not enter in. Hebrews 10:19-23 The truth that was disclosed in the previous chapters that God had annulled the old covenant and had established the new.

Repentance (think John Baptist ministry of repentance) does not have to be repeated. It`s a fact and a basis. Those people have tasted that the Lord is good so why would they go back to law .. because that entails loss of rewards .. not salvation. Hebrews 10:35

God's salvation is eternal; once we obtain it, we will never lose it John 10:28-29. But we may suffer the loss of the kingdom reward, even though we still will be saved 1 Corinthians 3:8, 1 Corinthians 3:14-15

Hebrews 11:6
And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,198
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Wow, what a mishmash of ideas. Hebrews 6 and Hebrews 10 are completely different. Hebrews 6 can be likened to the Calvinist school of thought and Hebrews 10 the Arminian school of thought. The difference is in the wording of (in the case of chap 6) repentance.

Interesting perspective. I am sure that Hebrews 6 and Hebrews 10 predate Calvinism by about 1,500 years give or take a few. They predate Arminianism by about 1,600 years give or take a few.

To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace. 7 Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. 8 But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned.
1 Corinthians 3:14-15

and (in the case of chap 10) those who have trampled under and counted His sacrifice as common, putting the Holy Spirit as nothing. Hebrews 10:26-29 they had received the teaching but did not enter in. Hebrews 10:19-23 The truth that was disclosed in the previous chapters that God had annulled the old covenant and had established the new.

Repentance (think John Baptist ministry of repentance) does not have to be repeated. It`s a fact and a basis. Those people have tasted that the Lord is good so why would they go back to law .. because that entails loss of rewards .. not salvation. Hebrews 10:35

God's salvation is eternal; once we obtain it, we will never lose it John 10:28-29. But we may suffer the loss of the kingdom reward, even though we still will be saved 1 Corinthians 3:8, 1 Corinthians 3:14-15

Hebrews 11:6
And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.

I cannot speak for atpollard so I will speak only for myself. Hebrews 10:26-27 NASB points to the condemnation that follows "continuing in wilful sins" and Hebrews 6:6 NASB points to the apparent impossibility of bringing a wilful persistent sinner to repentance. The verses read a little differently in my Catholic bibles. The NASB is an evangelical-translation of most of the bible (minus the 7 canonical books that evangelicals reject as well as minus the portions of Esther and Daniel that evangelicalism also rejects) and the NASB has biases that match the views of Evangelicalism. The two passages read thus in my bible.
For it is impossible for those who were once illuminated, and have even tasted of the heavenly gift, and have become sharers in the Holy Spirit, who, despite having tasted the good Word of God and the virtues of the future age, have yet fallen away, to be renewed again to penance, since they are crucifying again in themselves the Son of God and are still maintaining pretenses. For the earth accepts a blessing from God, by drinking in the rain that often falls upon it, and by producing plants that are useful to those by whom it is cultivated. Hebrews 6:4-7 CPDV

For if we sin willingly, after receiving knowledge of the truth, there is no sacrifice remaining for sins, but instead, a certain terrible expectation of judgment, and the rage of a fire that shall consume its adversaries. Hebrews 10:26-27 CPDV
 

user1234

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2017
Messages
1,654
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Other Church
Marital Status
Separated
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Once again, a post filled with confidence and the good news of salvation and eternal security is followed by pessimism and dire warnings.
Man, morecoffee, I'm really praying you come to see the difference between salvation by/relationship with Jesus (good news), ... and religious traps (not so good)

And I mean that in the most loving way for you I can, I see it so plainly, and honestly from my heart, am praying you see it too.
But Im guessing, until you do, you will think this post was meant to be an offense of some sort. I promise you that is not the case.
 

Cassia

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2016
Messages
1,735
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Widow/Widower
Interesting perspective. I am sure that Hebrews 6 and Hebrews 10 predate Calvinism by about 1,500 years give or take a few. They predate Arminianism by about 1,600 years give or take a few.



I cannot speak for atpollard so I will speak only for myself. Hebrews 10:26-27 NASB points to the condemnation that follows "continuing in wilful sins" and Hebrews 6:6 NASB points to the apparent impossibility of bringing a wilful persistent sinner to repentance. The verses read a little differently in my Catholic bibles. The NASB is an evangelical-translation of most of the bible (minus the 7 canonical books that evangelicals reject as well as minus the portions of Esther and Daniel that evangelicalism also rejects) and the NASB has biases that match the views of Evangelicalism. The two passages read thus in my bible.
For it is impossible for those who were once illuminated, and have even tasted of the heavenly gift, and have become sharers in the Holy Spirit, who, despite having tasted the good Word of God and the virtues of the future age, have yet fallen away, to be renewed again to penance, since they are crucifying again in themselves the Son of God and are still maintaining pretenses. For the earth accepts a blessing from God, by drinking in the rain that often falls upon it, and by producing plants that are useful to those by whom it is cultivated. Hebrews 6:4-7 CPDV

For if we sin willingly, after receiving knowledge of the truth, there is no sacrifice remaining for sins, but instead, a certain terrible expectation of judgment, and the rage of a fire that shall consume its adversaries. Hebrews 10:26-27 CPDV
When they came into being doesn`t matter. That`s the interpretation they represent. Neither one of them (not to even mention RCC or others) recognise the suffering of loss of rewards.
The difference is in being burned otoh and being consumed otoh.

The main point is the reward system that God has in place that is not recognized and that`s where pergatory or some such belief falls short. I`ve run into people who would never say they believe in pergatory but who actually do unwittingly so it`s a major factor.
 

ImaginaryDay2

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Messages
3,967
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Neither one of them (not to even mention RCC or others) recognise the suffering of loss of rewards.

The main point is the reward system that God has in place that is not recognized

I'm not following what you mean by 'suffering of loss of rewards' and 'the reward system that God has in place'. Can you clarify, first; what you mean, and second; how these relate to the passages in Hebrews?
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,198
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Once again, a post filled with confidence and the good news of salvation and eternal security is followed by pessimism and dire warnings.
Man, morecoffee, I'm really praying you come to see the difference between salvation by/relationship with Jesus (good news), ... and religious traps (not so good)

And I mean that in the most loving way for you I can, I see it so plainly, and honestly from my heart, am praying you see it too.
But Im guessing, until you do, you will think this post was meant to be an offense of some sort. I promise you that is not the case.

Your complaint is that what I wrote - which is mainly scripture quotations and allusions to scripture wording - is shocking to your theological world view so rather than deal with what the holy scriptures say you complain about my posts and whine about them not meeting your theological expectations. Writing that complaint may make you feel good but it doesn't deal with what the bible says or what I said. You pray for me to see things your way. I don't want to see things your way Snerfle. The only way of seeing that saves us from being blind is to see things the way that Jesus sees them. That is why I discuss the meaning of the holy scriptures rather than spend my time offering my opinions or discussing your opinions.
 

user1234

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2017
Messages
1,654
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Other Church
Marital Status
Separated
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Your complaint is that what I wrote - which is mainly scripture quotations and allusions to scripture wording - is shocking to your theological world view so rather than deal with what the holy scriptures say you complain about my posts and whine about them not meeting your theological expectations. Writing that complaint may make you feel good but it doesn't deal with what the bible says or what I said. You pray for me to see things your way. I don't want to see things your way Snerfle. The only way of seeing that saves us from being blind is to see things the way that Jesus sees them. That is why I discuss the meaning of the holy scriptures rather than spend my time offering my opinions or discussing your opinions.
Dont be silly, you post your opinions all the time, morecoffee. :=D: You just did it again when you said you discuss the meaning of Holy Scriptures. What else is that but offering your opinion?
And you seem to like to put words, in other ppls mouths.
You dont know what im thinking, or what my so-called world view is.
And really, You? Accusing anyone of whining? Lol. Come on.

It's ok, I understand the source, but Really, I dont pray for you to believe me,
I pray for you to be saved. What is so horrible about that? Wow, I dont believe I've ever even heard you say thank you to anyone for actually caring about you enough to offer friendship and discuss things with you, or tell you Jesus loves you, or offer the gospel.

No one here that I know of has any hidden agenda or wants to try to hurt you.
Im not asking you to join my church or curse your own or shave your head and stand on one foot singing opera. It's just that when someone gets saved, all the angels rejoice, so do the saved believers that are aware of it, and Jesus is glorified.
Certainly you dont think thats a bad thing, do you?

Look, you posted a string of different bible verses together, I commented on them like you asked me too, and I asked what the point was you were trying to make by it.
Rather than answer, you accuse me of having my world view shocked, lol, whatever that's supposed to mean. So again, what is your point of posting those varied groups of bible verses for us all to read? And why post such dire warnings of judgement in the post following one of such encouraging good news? Inquiring minds want to know. :)
 
Top Bottom