Agreed with this, but the problem is that the Evangelical interpretation is the most obvious face-value reading of what’s actually stated in the New Testament. Reaching the Catholic interpretation (or any other interpretation that doesn’t lead to eternal damnation for anybody who doesn’t believe this thing) requires some reading between the lines and, also, coming from the starting point that “a good God would never be so cruel”. But if objective morality comes from God and is stated plainly in the Christian Bible, then our ideas of “good” and “bad” could be in contradiction to objective “good” and “bad”, so our starting point has to be what the Bible plainly says (and it is plain on this point), not our own ideas of “good” and “bad”.
1 Like
I disagree. Show your work.
1 Like
To clarify, I’m not referring to the “faith alone” part. There are actually plenty of places in the New Testament that say you need to back the grace you received with good works, but Evangelicals tend to de-prioritise these verses. I’m referring to the idea that you can only be saved by believing in Jesus. This is stated explicitly many times in the New Testament. Anything to the contrary is, at best, implicit. Catholics argue, for example, that the evidence of people praying for the dead in the Bible suggests there must be some kind of intermediary state between Heaven and Hell where souls can still be saved. I think this is a fair interpretation, but it has to be teased out of the text. The “You must believe in Jesus” stuff, on the other hand, is explicit and, therefore, the most obvious interpretation. I’m not saying it’s the only or correct interpretation. I’m still grappling with this.
1 Like
Rather than guessing the answers to important theological questions that weren’t clearly answered in the Gospels due to time constraints maybe it was the Holy Spirit answering those questions later:
But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, will teach you all things . . . .
– John 16:25
I don’t think I’ve heard this before, what’s that about?
1 Like
Yes evangelicalsdo mostly deprioritise this I agree, therefore this thread. An I feel often deprioritising it, is just a cop out. Groups like the Salvation army do not ignore that however and they’re mostly protestant.
James plainly and directly says that without Good works faith is DEAD .
My understanding (which is probably quite different from other’s) is that salvation by faith alone means we cannot do something so wonderful that God owes us a ticket to heaven. We get salvation by grace. We also have our own view about the hierarchy of sin levels when we cannot know God’s view on humanity’s sin.
4 Likes
Yes , that’s the idea. However this can be interpreted as 'Oh well I’ve been saved so I can take it easy now. I don’t have to help others as it will never be good enough anyways."
Then some will say “If I’m saved I’ll do good things anyways.”
Does everyone whose saved do good things ? Are all acts of kindness considered as “Dirty rags” to God ? I doubt that. God can also save just by Grace alone.
Issaih 64:6
Issaih is old testament but is strictly adhered to , but James tends not to be which is New testament.
“But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.”
It is pretty explicit that Jesus is the only way, but it’s also explicit that those who didn’t have a chance to hear about Jesus in this life can hear about him in the intermediate stage.
1 Peter 3:18–19 — The New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
18 For Christ also suffered for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, in order to bring you to God. He was put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit, 19 in which also he went and made a proclamation to the spirits in prison,
6 For this is why the gospel was preached even to those who are dead, that though judged in the flesh the way people are, they might live in the spirit the way God does.
James says
“James , 2, 24 ,So you see, we are shown to be right with God by what we do, not by faith alone.”
I would add that this is kind of a James Vs Paul debate.
As James was the half brother of Jesus I guess I side with him. “James the just.”
And that’s another debate between Protestants amd Catholics,
Which include keeping the Sabbath.
99.9% of Christians don’t so they’re going to hell.
Jesus’s ministry only lasted three years. That’s hardly enough time to turn a bunch of dumb fishermen into doctors of theology with all the answers.
2 Likes
I don’t know if I agree with that but it made me laugh anyway.
Jesus wasn’t such a stickler about keeping the Sabbath. That was more of a Pharisee thing:
2 At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungred, and began to pluck the ears of corn and to eat.
2 But when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day.
3 But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him;
4 How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?
5 Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?
6 But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple.
7 But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.
8 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.
9 And when he was departed thence, he went into their synagogue:
10 And, behold, there was a man which had his hand withered. And they asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath days? that they might accuse him.
11 And he said unto them, What man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and lift it out?
12 How much then is a man better than a sheep? Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the sabbath days.
13 Then saith he to the man, Stretch forth thine hand. And he stretched it forth; and it was restored whole, like as the other.
14 Then the Pharisees went out, and held a council against him, how they might destroy him.
2 Likes
“There are Christians […]” FTFY
I find this attitude has little difference between papists and splitters 
This story asks us to re-evaluate what the Sabbath is really for. Nothing in this story tells us we don’t need to observe it at all. It’s literally one of the 10 Commands all Christians say are at the foundation of their faith. And nowhere in the Bible says we should celebrate a “Lord’s Day” on Sunday in place of the Sabbath.
1 Like
It suggests the 99.9% estimate of those bound for Hell for not observing the Sabbath properly is probably high.
Muslims hold the Sabbath is Friday, Jews and Seventh Day Adventists hold that Saturday is the Sabbath, and Christians hold Sunday as the Sabbath. I say let’s have a long weekend every week, as long as, like most American Christians, you believe that shopping, watching football, and drinking beer, is keeping the Lord’s Day holy.
I think sabbath is more for workers, or rather against employers who won’t let them take days off. In the old days they really didn’t respect that, demanding workers work 7 days a week, 12 hour shifts, and low pay. It was unions that made them stop that.