Salvation

[Albion]

Salvation by works satisfies the hunger we have to feel forgiven by making us feel we've earned it.

I will have to think about that for a bit, TW, but one thing that everybody should realize when it comes to 'works righteousness' is that the individual in those churches never knows and never can know if he is saved or not. Right up to the moment of death.

That theology renders every promise in the Bible conditional as far as the individual believer is concerned. It cannot be what Jesus was teaching when he told his disciples to trust him!

 

[TurtleHare]

I will have to think about that for a bit, TW, but one thing that everybody should realize when it comes to 'works righteousness' is that the individual in those churches never knows and never can know if he is saved or not. Right up to the moment of death.

That theology renders every promise in the Bible conditional as far as the individual believer is concerned. It cannot be what Jesus was teaching when he told his disciples to trust him!

Ain't that the killer? Jesus might possibly be my Savior or maybe I didn't do enough and He can't save me afterall? No joy in that false gospel.

 

[Arsenios]

1. The "original Christians" were all dead by the early Second Century.

So did they succeed or fail at discipling the Faith to the next generation?

2. There was NO denomination for 300 years....

None of the Apostolic Churches are denominations... The Church at Rome, the Church at Constantinople, the Church at Alexandria, the Church at Ephesis... One Church... Fully and wholly existent in many geographic locations... When disputes arose, Churches withdrew Communion until the issue was resolved, IF it was large enough for that drastic of an action...

Among the Apostolic Churches, the Church(es) of the West has gone farthest from the Church(es) of the East than those Churches of the East with whom we are not in Communion... Yet if you look at the actual practice of the Faith in all of them, it is virtually identical...

not the RCC, not the EOC, not the OOC, not the LDS.

Lumping Apostolic Churches with the LDS destroys honest credibility...

All those denominations CLAIM to have been founded directly and personally by Jesus but it's simply a historical fact that there were no denominations at all for 300 years. The first denomination was established by the Roman Empire for the Roman Empire and Jesus didn't found it.

You might want to consider studying the History of the Church... The Church at Antioch, the Church in Ephesis, the Church in Rome, Church in Lebanon, the Church in Greece, the Church in every geographic location and especially the Church in Jerusalem, IS the Apostolic Church... Jesus ONLY founded the Church in Jerusalem, and yet he founded ALL the Apostolic Churches because of the Obedience of the Apostles to His Commandment that they all GO and DISCIPLE ALL the Nations, remember??

So are all those Churches established by Christ?
Or are they founded by men?
And the answer is YES!
The God-man discipled Godded men to disciple the Nations...

Denominations are OUR creation, PEOPLE formed them - I think wisely, but nonetheless, something BELIEVERS did (not Jesus).

Thank-you for your confession that men and not God founded YOUR DENOMINATION...

Christ Himself founded ours...

3. There was LIKELY the "oral message" (in theology, this is called "the Kyergma") that preceded the verbal inspiration of the abiding WRITTEN words of God (God's inscripturated words) - Scripture (roughly 45-70 AD).

False...

It actually began at the first Pentecost, 33AD, and continues to this day and hour -

The Written is a PART of that Praxis...

Eye witnesses had their verbal testimony - a testimony that died with them. But it is only POSSIBLE to know what this kyergma was if it was written down.

Another False...

All one needs to do is look at and compare what is the SAME in ALL the Apostolic Church practices and Services...

It's absurd for Mormons and others to insist that Jesus taught all kinds of dogmas that were "oral" but we have absoluttely no record of for CENTURIES - nothing to remotely substantiate that.

Another False - See above re Apostolic Witness world-wide... And you keep shooting your integrity in the foot by lumping the witness of the world-wide Apostolic Church with a 19th century American Protestant sect-event...

We DO know what was written and affirmed as the words of God and canonical....

Given Canonicity by the Apostolic Church, indeed - You problem is you refuse to go to that Church to be instructed in what those words mean, which is why the Reformation itself disintegrated into so many additional denominations... And is still disintegrating...

and that is found in 27 books, all in our NT. We have those objective, written, historic WORDS and we know the eye-witnesses affirmed those books and embraced them as authoritative because of the Author.

Yes, you have your self-understood words from our Bible...

We have the Faith Christ discipled to the Apostles...

To the issue: Protestants believe that Jesus is the Savior. Period. Anything that undermines that is to be rejected. Anything that lifts high self rather than the Cross is to be rejected. Anything that makes Jesus just an inspiration or teacher or possibility-maker or door-opener or helper is to be boldly, loudly rejected and repudiated. The devil uses all his strength and cunning to try to make all this as complicated and complex as he can - all to make Jesus small and self big, all to get attention off the Cross and on the mirror, to get people to say "Jesus is the Savior but to be saved YOU gotta........." which is a repudiation of Christianity, the Gospel, the Christ.

Pulling out ear-plugs and closing lips is a good thing for overcoming life-long obsessions...
Hearing is healing...
Talking is prolongation of error...
Saying the same thing over and over and over...
Expecting different results...
And then never ever getting them...

Is a CLUE...

Arsenios

 

[Arsenios]

When it comes to 'works righteousness' ...
the individual in those churches never knows
and never can know
if he is saved or not.
Right up to the moment of death.

That theology renders every promise in the Bible conditional as far as the individual believer is concerned.
It cannot be what Jesus was teaching when he told his disciples to trust him!

I agree and I thank God that I do not believe in "Works Righteousness"...
But know this - No one is SO EXALTED that he or she cannot fall from Grace into condemnation...
Knowledge of Salvation does not preclude relapsing into sinful living...
And know this: NO WORK gives us Salvation...
ONLY God gives Salvation...
Man CANNOT save himself by works...

The works discipled by the Ancient Faith only PREPARE one for personally encountering God...
THAT encounter may or may not occur in this lifetime...
It WILL occur sometime, no matter what...

Arsenios

 

[Arsenios]

Ain't that the killer?
Jesus might possibly be my Savior or maybe I didn't do enough
and He can't save me afterall?
No joy in that false gospel.

Nothing you do can give you Salvation...
THAT is God's to give...
He gives it to the repentant...
Repentance is the Way of Salvation...

Repent for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Repentance is preparation for Salvation...

Make straight the Way of the Lord!

THAT is one's WORK in the Faith of Christ...


Arsenios

 

[Albion]

None of the Apostolic Churches are denominations...

You can use whatever term you prefer, particularly when you are in your own church. Most other people use this one, and it is entirely correct usage if they do.

Lumping Apostolic Churches with the LDS destroys honest credibility...

That depends on what the common denominator is.

In this case, all those churches make claims about being connected in some way to the history of the first century church--which, when I read the post, was what I thought was the reason for all these to be grouped together. But that is the case in this instance. Its not as though any of us thinks they are peas in a pod in every other way.

 

[MennoSota]

1. The "original Christians" were all dead by the early Second Century.

2. There was NO denomination for 300 years.... not the RCC, not the EOC, not the OOC, not the LDS. All those denominations CLAIM to have been founded directly and personally by Jesus but it's simply a historical fact that there were no denominations at all for 300 years. The first denomination was established by the Roman Empire for the Roman Empire and Jesus didn't found it. But that denomination did not include all Christian congregations or all Christian people (not even all that just happened to be within the boarders of the Roman Empire at that time) , and even that denomination only lasted for a bit over 100 years until it seriously split. That's NOT anything negative about any denomination, only the undeniable historic fact that denominations are OUR creation, PEOPLE formed them - I think wisely, but nonetheless, something BELIEVERS did (not Jesus).

3. There was LIKELY the "oral message" (in theology, this is called "the Kyergma") that preceded the verbal inspiration of the abiding WRITTEN words of God (God's inscripturated words) - Scripture (roughly 45-70 AD). Eye witnesses had their verbal testimony - a testimony that died with them. But it is only POSSIBLE to know what this kyergma was if it was written down. It's absurd for Mormons and others to insist that Jesus taught all kinds of dogmas that were "oral" but we have absoluttely no record of for CENTURIES - nothing to remotely substantiate that. We DO know what was written and affirmed as the words of God and canonical.... and that is found in 27 books, all in our NT. We have those objective, written, historic WORDS and we know the eye-witnesses affirmed those books and embraced them as authoritative because of the Author.



To the issue: Protestants believe that Jesus is the Savior. Period. Anything that undermines that is to be rejected. Anything that lifts high self rather than the Cross is to be rejected. Anything that makes Jesus just an inspiration or teacher or possibility-maker or door-opener or helper is to be boldly, loudly rejected and repudiated. The devil uses all his strength and cunning to try to make all this as complicated and complex as he can - all to make Jesus small and self big, all to get attention off the Cross and on the mirror, to get people to say "Jesus is the Savior but to be saved YOU gotta........." which is a repudiation of Christianity, the Gospel, the Christ.




.

There have always been Baptists in the church...

 

[Arsenios]

You can use whatever term you prefer, particularly when you are in your own church. Most other people use this one, and it is entirely correct usage if they do.

Biblically, Paul addresses the Church in Rome, the Church in Thessalonica, the Church in Alexandria, etc etc... Those are names of geographical designation... A denomination is named after the person who has the new insight into Biblical Interpretation or doctrine, and starts a new Church in his name...

For instance, Luther for reasons of personal conscience could not abide the Latin Church's doctrines and practices, and when Rome would not repent, we ended up with Luther's Church, the Lutheran Church, designated after the Name of Luther himself...

By contrast, Paul stayed over one winter in Antioch, Syria, and established the Church in Antioch... That Church is not called the Pauline Church of Antioch, or the Paul of Tarsus Church, but simply the Church in Antioch, and it became one of the five great Archdiocesan Patriarchates, which it is to this day and hour...

It is not a denomination...
It has never been a denomination...
The Lutheran Church is a denomination...
Named after Martin Luther himself...

That depends on what the common denominator is.

The name of the founder is the denominational denominator!

In this case, all those churches make claims about being connected in some way to the history of the first century church--which, when I read the post, was what I thought was the reason for all these to be grouped together. But that is the case in this instance. Its not as though any of us thinks they are peas in a pod in every other way.

The Communion of the autocephalous Churches of the EOC all have the same identical Theology...
That Theology is the Theology of the first 7 Ecumenical Councils of the first Millennium of Christian History...
Changing doctrines is not a feature of that Theology... Not even the wording of doctrines...
It has ever been so, and heretical doctrines have been anathematized and evicted carefully...

The Ethiopian Church virtually disappeared for over a thousand years from communication with the east and the west, having no contact with either the Copts or the OOC of the EOC, and was found, when contact was re-established, that the doctrines and praxis are the same, with a slightly more Jewish feel to the services...

Orthodoxy is conservative...
It's job is to preserve the Faith given once for all to the Apostles...
It is not to develop doctrines based on the latest Bible scholarship...
It is not to ADD TO the doctrines it is preserving...
It IS to KEEP UNCHANGED what it has received...

And yes, there are and will be and have been issues in this endeavor...

Arsenios

 

[Arsenios]

There have always been Baptists in the church...

Beginning with John?

Arsenios

 

[MennoSota]

Beginning with John?

Arsenios

Yep, even under the Mosaic Law, like John was.

 

[Albion]

Biblically, Paul addresses the Church in Rome, the Church in Thessalonica, the Church in Alexandria, etc etc... Those are names of geographical designation...

Like the Church of England, then.

A denomination is named after the person who has the new insight into Biblical Interpretation or doctrine, and starts a new Church in his name...

The Christian Church, Disciples of Christ wouldn't be a denomination to you, then. Or the Community of Christ.

For instance, Luther for reasons of personal conscience could not abide the Latin Church's doctrines and practices, and when Rome would not repent, we ended up with Luther's Church, the Lutheran Church, designated after the Name of Luther himself...

By opponents, so your theory doesn't hold up.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Denominations?

The thread is about salvation.

Denominations is an entirely different topic isn't it?

 

[Albion]

Not really. If a particular view of salvation reflects the stance taken by any Christian denomination, the Catholics here (whether Eastern or Western variety) are likely to start in with their claims that their churches aren't denominations although every other denomination is a denomination etc. as if we care what they call their own churches. But that is the answer to your question.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Not really. If a particular view of salvation reflects the stance taken by any Christian denomination, the Catholics here (whether Eastern or Western variety) are likely to start in with their claims that their churches aren't denominations although every other denomination is a denomination etc. as if we care what they call their own churches. But that is the answer to your question.

Church is an ancient word and it was applied by Christians to their congregations in various cities. Denomination is a recent word and it's applied to groups of like minded churches, meetings, or groups that share a particular kind of theology or ecclesiology. Catholic and Orthodox Christians retain the ancient word Church for their self description. Denominations may use both church and denomination to self describe. It is up to them. Catholic Christians do not use denomination to self describe. These are just facts. What you make of them is up to you. But these words are not about salvation. An Anglican may be 'saved' just as must as a Catholic or a Baptist. The first is a denomination from the 16th century the last is a denomination from the 17 century. So the discussion about denominations is off topic.

 

[Josiah]

To the issue: Protestants believe that Jesus is the Savior. Period. Anything that undermines that is to be rejected. Anything that lifts high self rather than the Cross is to be rejected. Anything that makes Jesus just an inspiration or teacher or possibility-maker or door-opener or helper is to be boldly, loudly rejected and repudiated. The devil uses all his strength and cunning to try to make all this as complicated and complex as he can - all to make Jesus small and self big, all to get attention off the Cross and on the mirror, to get people to say "Jesus is the Savior but to be saved YOU gotta........." which is a repudiation of Christianity, the Gospel, the Christ.

 

[Arsenios]

To the issue: Protestants believe that Jesus is the Savior. Period. Anything that undermines that is to be rejected. Anything that lifts high self rather than the Cross is to be rejected. Anything that makes Jesus just an inspiration or teacher or possibility-maker or door-opener or helper is to be boldly, loudly rejected and repudiated. The devil uses all his strength and cunning to try to make all this as complicated and complex as he can - all to make Jesus small and self big, all to get attention off the Cross and on the mirror, to get people to say "Jesus is the Savior but to be saved YOU gotta........." which is a repudiation of Christianity, the Gospel, the Christ.

Saying the same thing
over and over and over again and again
expecting different results
and never getting them

has a name,
is a definition,
describes a syndrome

Could you say that again?
Maybe just 35 more times?

Arsenios

 

[Albion]

Church is an ancient word and it was applied by Christians to their congregations in various cities.

We all use the word church, so that isn't any issue.

Denomination is a recent word and it's applied to groups of like minded churches, meetings, or groups that share a particular kind of theology or ecclesiology. Catholic and Orthodox Christians retain the ancient word Church for their self description.

And you are perfectly entitled to call your denomination a church at every opportunity.

There is no reason for you to take the thread further off-topic by going on and on about this, especially since you are the one who decried the fact that it seemed to you to be going off-topic.

 

[MennoSota]

Saying the same thing
over and over and over again and again
expecting different results
and never getting them

has a name,
is a definition,
describes a syndrome

Could you say that again?
Maybe just 35 more times?

Arsenios

Repeat it enough and perhaps you'll actually understand. Then again, perhaps you'll remain obstinate.

 

[MoreCoffee]

To the issue: Protestants believe that Jesus is the Savior.

Thank God that protestants believe that Jesus Christ is the saviour of his people.

Period. Anything that undermines that is to be rejected. Anything that lifts high self rather than the Cross is to be rejected. Anything that makes Jesus just an inspiration or teacher or possibility-maker or door-opener or helper is to be boldly, loudly rejected and repudiated. The devil uses all his strength and cunning to try to make all this as complicated and complex as he can - all to make Jesus small and self big, all to get attention off the Cross and on the mirror, to get people to say "Jesus is the Savior but to be saved YOU gotta........." which is a repudiation of Christianity, the Gospel, the Christ.

 

[Arsenios]

Repeat it enough and perhaps you'll actually understand. Then again, perhaps you'll remain obstinate.

As a general rule, when our approach fails repeatedly, some of us actually modify our approach...

To do so has a certain "je ne sais qua" of sanity about it...

"N'est pas"?

Of course it does!

Arsenios