What will you do after the Rapture?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

ha, Methodists are definately not Calvinists, and neither are most Baptists (in fact the only Baptist "church" I can think of that is is Westboro Baptist "Church")

[Bono]

ha, Methodists are definately not Calvinists, and neither are most Baptists (in fact the only Baptist "church" I can think of that is is Westboro Baptist "Church")

Don't be an idiot. 2 out of 6 members of one of the SBC's high governing bodies are Calvinsits, adn Calvinism is a growing trend among baptist denominations. In fact, most analists expect that Cavinism vs. Arminisnism will be the next great battle among the SBC.

[Bono]

Bono I see you are bringing up more of that Calvinist T.U.L.I.P. garbage again.

The only modern day "preacher" I can think of who advocates that crap is Fred Phelps.

The Calvinist Church advocates it.

There is no "Calvinist Church". Presbyterianism supposedly contains it, but PCUSA is a very mainline denomination that doesn't talk about it at all.

There is still the PCA, and other smaller prebyterian denominations, not to mention a lot of Baptist Churches are Calvinist in terms of Soteriology.

[12th Doctor]

I actually have read Left Behind (only the 1st book), and believe me, it is not quality literature.  The dialogue is humorously bad, and every part of the plot is a very literally deus ex machina.    And I was really rooting for Nicholae Carpathia until their inexplicably turned him into a mass murderer at the end.

I'm generally pretty tolerant of all sorts of religious beliefs, but I simply cannot reconcile the central conceit of the book:  the bodies of true Christians disappear into heaven along with their souls.  Now, how does heaven work exactly when some people have bodies and other people don't?  I'm eager to believe in heaven, but not a heaven as metaphysically garbled as that.  (I know Catholics have a similar problem with the Assumption, but this is recent doctrine that I don't buy one bit either.)

What recent doctrine?  This has been doctrine since the beginings of the Church, it simply has not been dogmatically defined until comparitivly recently.  Also, Elijah was assumed directly into Heaven.  So there is nothing saying that it can't happen.  I simply don't believe in the Protestant version of the "End of Times".  No where in the Bible does it mention any of this "Rapture" crap where people will be assumed directly into Heaven.  In fact, Revelation directly contradicts that view, if that is what you are using as your basis.

1 Thessalonians 4

14For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.

15For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

16For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

17Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

18Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

So, are you asserting that no one will be in Heaven until this final Judgement?

[12th Doctor]

Bono I see you are bringing up more of that Calvinist T.U.L.I.P. garbage again.

The only modern day "preacher" I can think of who advocates that crap is Fred Phelps.

The Calvinist Church advocates it.

There is no "Calvinist Church". Presbyterianism supposedly contains it, but PCUSA is a very mainline denomination that doesn't talk about it at all.

Presbyterians, Methodists, Baptists, Seven Day Adventists, Christian Missionary Aliance (umm...) People, and other groups are all Calvinists.

Methodsits are Calvinists?
There has always been a great antagonism between Wesleyans and Calvinists, because Wesley was a great supporter of Arminism.

Wesley was largelyt inspired by Calvin.  Compare their writtings.  They are almost identical.

[??????????]

I actually have read Left Behind (only the 1st book), and believe me, it is not quality literature.  The dialogue is humorously bad, and every part of the plot is a very literally deus ex machina.    And I was really rooting for Nicholae Carpathia until their inexplicably turned him into a mass murderer at the end.

I'm generally pretty tolerant of all sorts of religious beliefs, but I simply cannot reconcile the central conceit of the book:  the bodies of true Christians disappear into heaven along with their souls.  Now, how does heaven work exactly when some people have bodies and other people don't?  I'm eager to believe in heaven, but not a heaven as metaphysically garbled as that.  (I know Catholics have a similar problem with the Assumption, but this is recent doctrine that I don't buy one bit either.)

What recent doctrine?  This has been doctrine since the beginings of the Church, it simply has not been dogmatically defined until comparitivly recently.  Also, Elijah was assumed directly into Heaven.  So there is nothing saying that it can't happen.  I simply don't believe in the Protestant version of the "End of Times".  No where in the Bible does it mention any of this "Rapture" crap where people will be assumed directly into Heaven.  In fact, Revelation directly contradicts that view, if that is what you are using as your basis.

1 Thessalonians 4

14For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.

15For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

16For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

17Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

18Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

So, are you asserting that no one will be in Heaven until this final Judgement?

Now that is a true statement.

[12th Doctor]

I actually have read Left Behind (only the 1st book), and believe me, it is not quality literature.  The dialogue is humorously bad, and every part of the plot is a very literally deus ex machina.    And I was really rooting for Nicholae Carpathia until their inexplicably turned him into a mass murderer at the end.

I'm generally pretty tolerant of all sorts of religious beliefs, but I simply cannot reconcile the central conceit of the book:  the bodies of true Christians disappear into heaven along with their souls.  Now, how does heaven work exactly when some people have bodies and other people don't?  I'm eager to believe in heaven, but not a heaven as metaphysically garbled as that.  (I know Catholics have a similar problem with the Assumption, but this is recent doctrine that I don't buy one bit either.)

What recent doctrine?  This has been doctrine since the beginings of the Church, it simply has not been dogmatically defined until comparitivly recently.  Also, Elijah was assumed directly into Heaven.  So there is nothing saying that it can't happen.  I simply don't believe in the Protestant version of the "End of Times".  No where in the Bible does it mention any of this "Rapture" crap where people will be assumed directly into Heaven.  In fact, Revelation directly contradicts that view, if that is what you are using as your basis.

1 Thessalonians 4

14For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.

15For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

16For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

17Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

18Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

So, are you asserting that no one will be in Heaven until this final Judgement?

Now that is a true statement.

Wait, so you believe in this?

[??????????]

I actually have read Left Behind (only the 1st book), and believe me, it is not quality literature.  The dialogue is humorously bad, and every part of the plot is a very literally deus ex machina.    And I was really rooting for Nicholae Carpathia until their inexplicably turned him into a mass murderer at the end.

I'm generally pretty tolerant of all sorts of religious beliefs, but I simply cannot reconcile the central conceit of the book:  the bodies of true Christians disappear into heaven along with their souls.  Now, how does heaven work exactly when some people have bodies and other people don't?  I'm eager to believe in heaven, but not a heaven as metaphysically garbled as that.  (I know Catholics have a similar problem with the Assumption, but this is recent doctrine that I don't buy one bit either.)

What recent doctrine?  This has been doctrine since the beginings of the Church, it simply has not been dogmatically defined until comparitivly recently.  Also, Elijah was assumed directly into Heaven.  So there is nothing saying that it can't happen.  I simply don't believe in the Protestant version of the "End of Times".  No where in the Bible does it mention any of this "Rapture" crap where people will be assumed directly into Heaven.  In fact, Revelation directly contradicts that view, if that is what you are using as your basis.

1 Thessalonians 4

14For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.

15For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

16For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

17Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

18Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

So, are you asserting that no one will be in Heaven until this final Judgement?

Now that is a true statement.

Wait, so you believe in this?

Yes, I believe in purgatory.

[12th Doctor]

I actually have read Left Behind (only the 1st book), and believe me, it is not quality literature.  The dialogue is humorously bad, and every part of the plot is a very literally deus ex machina.    And I was really rooting for Nicholae Carpathia until their inexplicably turned him into a mass murderer at the end.

I'm generally pretty tolerant of all sorts of religious beliefs, but I simply cannot reconcile the central conceit of the book:  the bodies of true Christians disappear into heaven along with their souls.  Now, how does heaven work exactly when some people have bodies and other people don't?  I'm eager to believe in heaven, but not a heaven as metaphysically garbled as that.  (I know Catholics have a similar problem with the Assumption, but this is recent doctrine that I don't buy one bit either.)

What recent doctrine?  This has been doctrine since the beginings of the Church, it simply has not been dogmatically defined until comparitivly recently.  Also, Elijah was assumed directly into Heaven.  So there is nothing saying that it can't happen.  I simply don't believe in the Protestant version of the "End of Times".  No where in the Bible does it mention any of this "Rapture" crap where people will be assumed directly into Heaven.  In fact, Revelation directly contradicts that view, if that is what you are using as your basis.

1 Thessalonians 4

14For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.

15For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

16For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

17Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

18Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

So, are you asserting that no one will be in Heaven until this final Judgement?

Now that is a true statement.

Wait, so you believe in this?

Yes, I believe in purgatory.

Oh, ha.  Yes, I understand that.  Not the angle I was going for, though.

[Bono]

Bono I see you are bringing up more of that Calvinist T.U.L.I.P. garbage again.

Yeah, basically.  If you want to come to me and arguee from Luther's perspective, I'll talk to you, though Lutherans don't seem to realize that many of the problems that Luther had with the Church were not doctrinal and the Catholic Church fixed those problems about 500 years ago.  If you want to come to me and arguee Calvin, though, I simply feel this over-whealming urge to be a mean and nasty as possible in my attemps to shut you down.

P.S.  I would acctually go so far as to say that Calvinism is anti-Christian.

Be careful who you call heretics. Remember what the Bible says about what your attitude should be towards heretics: disasociate from them! So, better throw out those Spurgeon sermons, all those hymns written by Calvinits(like Amazing Grace), all charitable work done by Calvinist Churches,, etc

[Bono]

2:14-26

14
What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him?

He proceeds to commend mercy. And as he had threatened that God would be a severe Judge to us, and at the same time very dreadful, except we be kind and merciful towards our neighbors, and as on the other hand hypocrites objected and said, that faith is sufficient to us, in which the salvation of men consists, he now condemns this vain boasting. The sum, then, of what is said is, that faith without love avails nothing, and that it is therefore wholly dead.

But here a question arises, Can faith be separated from love? It is indeed true that the exposition of this passage has produced that common distinction of the Sophists, between unformed and formed faith; but of such a thing James knew nothing, for it appears from the first words, that he speaks of false profession of faith: for he does not begin thus, "If any one has faith;" but, "If any says that he has faith;" by which he certainly intimates that hypocrites boast of the empty name of faith, which really does not belong to them.

That he calls it then faith, is a concession, ; for when we discuss a point, it does no harm, and it is sometimes expedient, to concede to an adversary what he demands, for as soon as the thing itself is known, what is conceded may be easily taken away from him. James then, as he was satisfied that it was a false pretext by which hypocrites covered themselves, was not disposed to raise a dispute about a word or an expression. Let us, however, remember that he does not speak according to the impression of his own mind when he mentions faith, but that on the contrary he disputes against those who made a false pretense as to faith, of which they were wholly destitute. So we we do not attain salvation by a frigid and bare knowledge of God, which all confess to be most true; for salvation comes to us by faith for this reason, because it joins us to God. And this comes not in any other way than by being united to the body of Christ, so that, living through his Spirit, we are also governed by him. There is no such thing as this in the dead image of faith. There is then no wonder that James denies that salvation is connected with it

You must be logged in to read this quote.

He says that faith is dead, being by itself, that is, when destitute of good works. So ti can be concluded that it is indeed no faith, for when dead, it does not properly retain the name. The Chatolics plead this expression and say, that some sort of faith is found by itself; but this frivolous caviling is easily refuted; for it is sufficiently evident that the Apostle reasons from what is impossible, as Paul calls an angel anathema, if he attempted to subvert the gospel. (Galatians 1:8.)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The proper meaning here is "Unless thy faith brings forth fruits, I deny that thou hast any faith."

But it may be asked, whether the outward uprightness of life is a sure evidence of faith? For James says, "I will shew thee my faith by my works." To this I reply, that the unbelieving sometimes excel in specious virtues, and lead an honorable life free from every crime; and hence works apparently excellent may exist apart from faith. Nor does James maintain that every one who seems good possesses faith. This only he means, that faith, without the evidence of good works, is vainly pretended, because fruit ever comes from the living root of a good tree.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We must understand the state of the question, for the dispute here is not respecting the cause of justification, but only what avails a profession of faith without works, and what opinion we are to form of it. Absurdly then do they act who strive to prove by this passage that man is justified by works, because James meant no such thing, for the proofs which he subjoins refer to this declaration, that no faith, or only a dead faith, is without works. No one will ever understand what is said, nor make a proper judgment of it, except when keeping in view the design of the writer.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Cathlic theologicians hold onto the word justified, and then they cry out victory, that justification is partly by works. But we ought to seek out a right interpretation according to the general drift of the whole passage. I have already said that James does not speak here of the cause of justification, or of the manner how men obtain righteousness, and this is plain to every one; but that his object was only to shew that good works are always connected with faith; and, therefore, since he declares that Abraham was justified by works, he is speaking of the proof he gave of his justification.

When, therefore, the Catholics set up James against Paul, they go astray through the ambiguous meaning of a term. When Paul says that we are justified by faith, he means no other thing than that by faith we are counted righteous before God. But James has quite another thing in view, even to shew that he who professes that he has faith, must prove the reality of his faith by his works. Doubtless James did not mean to teach us here the ground on which our hope of salvation ought to rest; and it is this alone that Paul dwells upon.1

That we may not then fall into that false reasoning which has deceived the Catholics, we must take notice of the two fold meaning, of the word justified. Paul means by it the gratuitous imputation of righteousness before the tribunal of God; and James, the manifestation of righteousness by the conduct, and that before men, as we may gather from the preceding words, "Shew to me thy faith," etc. In this sense we fully allow that man is justified by works, as when any one says that a man is enriched by the purchase of a large and valuable chest, because his riches, before hid, shut up in a chest, were thus made known. Plus, there is no other valid interpretation, because if James were writing with  the intent the Catholics atribute him, he would be effectively contradicting Romans 4.

If he is acctually saying what you say he is saying, then why doesn't he just say it that way?  Why does he not say "Good works always come from faith"?  Why does he continue to separate the two?  Now, one could say that true faith in Christ will comple one to good works in order to be Christ like.  But that is not the Protestant possition.  The Protestant possition is to have every individual concentrate on self salvation.  Good works are a reflection of Christ's love for community, something which is glossed over in Lutheran theology and directly refuted by Calvin, who both vastly down play the important of a faith community.

Because at the time it was such a self evident truth that justification rests in faith alone that he did not feel the need to write it that way, such as the framers never thought that "general welfare" could be made to mean the aberrations it has been made into meaning this days.
And besides, unless you believe the Bible can contradict itself and you just pick wichever side you want to be valid, that is the only way to interpret it at the light of Paul's writings.

[12th Doctor]

Bono I see you are bringing up more of that Calvinist T.U.L.I.P. garbage again.

Yeah, basically.  If you want to come to me and arguee from Luther's perspective, I'll talk to you, though Lutherans don't seem to realize that many of the problems that Luther had with the Church were not doctrinal and the Catholic Church fixed those problems about 500 years ago.  If you want to come to me and arguee Calvin, though, I simply feel this over-whealming urge to be a mean and nasty as possible in my attemps to shut you down.

P.S.  I would acctually go so far as to say that Calvinism is anti-Christian.

Be careful who you call heretics. Remember what the Bible says about what your attitude should be towards heretics: disasociate from them! So, better throw out those Spurgeon sermons, all those hymns written by Calvinits(like Amazing Grace), all charitable work done by Calvinist Churches,, etc

Okay, I'll better explain what I mean:

Some Calvinist attitudes would certainly seem to be anti-Christian.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Methodsits are Calvinists?
There has always been a great antagonism between Wesleyans and Calvinists, because Wesley was a great supporter of Arminism.

Wesley was largely inspired by Calvin.  Compare their writtings.  They are almost identical.

From the outside the differences bewteen Arminism and Calvinism seem exceedingly minor, but they exist.  The split between him and Whitefield was over this issue.

[Bono]

Bono I see you are bringing up more of that Calvinist T.U.L.I.P. garbage again.

The only modern day "preacher" I can think of who advocates that crap is Fred Phelps.

The Calvinist Church advocates it.

There is no "Calvinist Church". Presbyterianism supposedly contains it, but PCUSA is a very mainline denomination that doesn't talk about it at all.

Presbyterians, Methodists, Baptists, Seven Day Adventists, Christian Missionary Aliance (umm...) People, and other groups are all Calvinists.

Methodsits are Calvinists?
There has always been a great antagonism between Wesleyans and Calvinists, because Wesley was a great supporter of Arminism.

Wesley was largelyt inspired by Calvin.  Compare their writtings.  They are almost identical.

If you are refering to salvation by faith alone, yes, they are similar, but then again so is every protestant author.
Where they differ is on the topic of predestination, where Calvin and yes, Luther(though not Luteranism due to the modifications introduced by Melanchton), differ from what can be called mainstream protestant thought(of this days, once, Calvinism was maisntream protestant thought).

[12th Doctor]

Because at the time it was such a self evident truth that justification rests in faith alone that he did not feel the need to write it that way, such as the framers never thought that "general welfare" could be made to mean the aberrations it has been made into meaning this days.
And besides, unless you believe the Bible can contradict itself and you just pick wichever side you want to be valid, that is the only way to interpret it at the light of Paul's writings.

Alone  Alone

Excuse me my friend, but I think there is one thing that you should know about "Faith Alone" and that is that Sola Fida does not appear in the Bible.  For some reason, everyone knows about the famous passage "Man is saved (or justified) by faith alone", but no one seems to know that the word "alone" does nto appear in the original text.  It was an addition that was made later by Protestants because they thought that it should be there.  Unfurtunatly, wishing something to be true doesn't make it so.  

James, Paul and Jesus himself all agree on this point:

Gal 5:6

6
For in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love.

1 Cor 13:2

2
And if I have the gift of prophecy and comprehend all mysteries and all knowledge; if I have all faith so as to move mountains but do not have love, I am nothing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And how do we show our love for one another?  Through our good works.

Certainly, Christ never said that faith alone was good enough.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

John 14:15

"If you love me, you will keep my commandments."

Matthew 19:16-17

16
Now someone approached him and said, "Teacher, what good must I do to gain eternal life?"
17
He answered him, "Why do you ask me about the good? There is only One who is good. If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

See, "keep my commandments".  This means doing the works that Jesus commands us to do.  There is no understanding here that "Faith Alone" is the correct path.  

[12th Doctor]

I should also point out that "faith alone" is not original to Calvin or Luther.  It was accutally one of the earliest arguments in the Church.  There were those who believed that Christains should cloister themselves into small faith communities like the Assines did and concentrate on prayer and bare living.

This idea was defeated because the Church fathers believed that the Community was the bast place to expirience and share the love of Chirst, because it was through our good works that we truely showcase the love that Christ has for us.

[Bono]

Because at the time it was such a self evident truth that justification rests in faith alone that he did not feel the need to write it that way, such as the framers never thought that "general welfare" could be made to mean the aberrations it has been made into meaning this days.
And besides, unless you believe the Bible can contradict itself and you just pick wichever side you want to be valid, that is the only way to interpret it at the light of Paul's writings.

Alone  Alone

Excuse me my friend, but I think there is one thing that you should know about "Faith Alone" and that is that Sola Fida does not appear in the Bible.  For some reason, everyone knows about the famous passage "Man is saved (or justified) by faith alone", but no one seems to know that the word "alone" does nto appear in the original text.  It was an addition that was made later by Protestants because they thought that it should be there.  Unfurtunatly, wishing something to be true doesn't make it so. 

James, Paul and Jesus himself all agree on this point:

Gal 5:6

6
For in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love.

1 Cor 13:2

2
And if I have the gift of prophecy and comprehend all mysteries and all knowledge; if I have all faith so as to move mountains but do not have love, I am nothing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And how do we show our love for one another?  Through our good works.

Certainly, Christ never said that faith alone was good enough.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

John 14:15

"If you love me, you will keep my commandments."

Matthew 19:16-17

16
Now someone approached him and said, "Teacher, what good must I do to gain eternal life?"
17
He answered him, "Why do you ask me about the good? There is only One who is good. If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

See, "keep my commandments".  This means doing the works that Jesus commands us to do.  There is no understanding here that "Faith Alone" is the correct path. 

Ephesians 2

Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)

   6And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

   7That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.

   8For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

   9Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Romans 4

 1What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?

   2For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.

   3For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

   4Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.

   5But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

   6Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,

   7Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.

   8Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

and yes, thanks for pointing out that works can only be rightful in theri intent if they are done by the faithful.

[12th Doctor]

Because at the time it was such a self evident truth that justification rests in faith alone that he did not feel the need to write it that way, such as the framers never thought that "general welfare" could be made to mean the aberrations it has been made into meaning this days.
And besides, unless you believe the Bible can contradict itself and you just pick wichever side you want to be valid, that is the only way to interpret it at the light of Paul's writings.

Alone  Alone

Excuse me my friend, but I think there is one thing that you should know about "Faith Alone" and that is that Sola Fida does not appear in the Bible.  For some reason, everyone knows about the famous passage "Man is saved (or justified) by faith alone", but no one seems to know that the word "alone" does nto appear in the original text.  It was an addition that was made later by Protestants because they thought that it should be there.  Unfurtunatly, wishing something to be true doesn't make it so. 

James, Paul and Jesus himself all agree on this point:

Gal 5:6

6
For in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love.

1 Cor 13:2

2
And if I have the gift of prophecy and comprehend all mysteries and all knowledge; if I have all faith so as to move mountains but do not have love, I am nothing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And how do we show our love for one another?  Through our good works.

Certainly, Christ never said that faith alone was good enough.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

John 14:15

"If you love me, you will keep my commandments."

Matthew 19:16-17

16
Now someone approached him and said, "Teacher, what good must I do to gain eternal life?"
17
He answered him, "Why do you ask me about the good? There is only One who is good. If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

See, "keep my commandments".  This means doing the works that Jesus commands us to do.  There is no understanding here that "Faith Alone" is the correct path. 

Ephesians 2

Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)

   6And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

   7That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.

   8For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

   9Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Romans 4

 1What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?

   2For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.

   3For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

   4Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.

   5But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

   6Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,

   7Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.

   8Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

and yes, thanks for pointing out that works can only be rightful in theri intent if they are done by the faithful.

At this point, what you are saying needs to be understood in the context of what I have said, not the other way around. 

And where, exactly, do you get the notion thaty works are only good if done by the faithful?  The text doesn't say that, or even imply it.

[12th Doctor]

Since I have received no response, I will take the chance to say that the text acctually states the exact opposite from what you have said.  The text suggests that it is only through love that we find true faith.

[Gabu]

As an aside, I must commend those who can have so much disagreement over religious matters and still persist in believing that theirs is the correct version to the exclusion of everyone else's.

[Nation]

A great thread. Supersoulty, you've done a great job defending your position, kudos.

[12th Doctor]

A great thread. Supersoulty, you've done a great job defending your position, kudos.

Thank you.  Don't leave Bono out.  Though we disagree, I must credit him for his knowledge.

[Bugs]

I actually have read Left Behind (only the 1st book), and believe me, it is not quality literature.  The dialogue is humorously bad, and every part of the plot is a very literally deus ex machina.    And I was really rooting for Nicholae Carpathia until their inexplicably turned him into a mass murderer at the end.

I'm generally pretty tolerant of all sorts of religious beliefs, but I simply cannot reconcile the central conceit of the book:  the bodies of true Christians disappear into heaven along with their souls.  Now, how does heaven work exactly when some people have bodies and other people don't?  I'm eager to believe in heaven, but not a heaven as metaphysically garbled as that.  (I know Catholics have a similar problem with the Assumption, but this is recent doctrine that I don't buy one bit either.)

What recent doctrine?  This has been doctrine since the beginings of the Church, it simply has not been dogmatically defined until comparitivly recently.  Also, Elijah was assumed directly into Heaven.  So there is nothing saying that it can't happen.  I simply don't believe in the Protestant version of the "End of Times".  No where in the Bible does it mention any of this "Rapture" crap where people will be assumed directly into Heaven.  In fact, Revelation directly contradicts that view, if that is what you are using as your basis.

1 Thessalonians 4

14For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.

15For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

16For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

17Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

18Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

So, are you asserting that no one will be in Heaven until this final Judgement?

Now that is a true statement.

Wait, so you believe in this?

Yes, I believe in purgatory.

If Purgatory can be thought of as a place where the souls of dead folks go to wait for the judgement, which doesn't occur until after the second coming, then I might go along with it.  But it is only useful for describing it in terms we can understand through our mortal limitations.  When we die and experience it ourselves (both the saved and the condemned) we will experience it from outside the realms of physical space and time, and it won't be anything remotely like what we can imagine. 

[Bono]

Because at the time it was such a self evident truth that justification rests in faith alone that he did not feel the need to write it that way, such as the framers never thought that "general welfare" could be made to mean the aberrations it has been made into meaning this days.
And besides, unless you believe the Bible can contradict itself and you just pick wichever side you want to be valid, that is the only way to interpret it at the light of Paul's writings.

Alone  Alone

Excuse me my friend, but I think there is one thing that you should know about "Faith Alone" and that is that Sola Fida does not appear in the Bible.  For some reason, everyone knows about the famous passage "Man is saved (or justified) by faith alone", but no one seems to know that the word "alone" does nto appear in the original text.  It was an addition that was made later by Protestants because they thought that it should be there.  Unfurtunatly, wishing something to be true doesn't make it so. 

James, Paul and Jesus himself all agree on this point:

Gal 5:6

6
For in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love.

Ok, ok my friend. This passage ilustrates exactly my point. Good works are a sign of faith working, but not a means of justification.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

 And if I  have the gift of prophecy. He brings down to nothing the dignity of even this gift, which, nevertheless, he had preferred to all others. To know all mysteries, might seem to be added to the term prophecy, as an explanation, but as the term knowledge is immediately added, of which he had previously made mention by itself, (1 Corinthians 14:8,) it will deserve your consideration, whether the knowledge of mysteries may not be used here to mean wisdom. As for myself, while I would not venture to affirm that it is so, I am much inclined to that opinion.

That faith, of which he speaks, is special, as is evident from the clause that is immediately added -- so that I remove mountains. Hence the Sophists accomplish nothing, when they pervert this passage for the purpose of detracting from the excellence of faith. As, therefore, the term faith is (polu>shmon) used in a variety of senses, it is the part of the prudent reader to observe in what signification it is taken. Paul, however, as been already stated, is his own interpreter, by restricting faith, here, to miracles.
"It is what Chrysostom calls the "faith of miracles," and what we term a "special faith," because it does not apprehend a whole Christ, but simply his power in working miracles; and hence it may sometimes exist in a man without the Spirit of sanctification, as it did in Judas."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And how do we show our love for one another?  Through our good works.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It is exactly because the requirement of keeping the commandments can't be kept by huamsn, because as Paul states, "None is noghteous, no one", that faith alone can be the justification, since if they justification lied in works, every man would be hopelessly condemned.

[Bono]

A great thread. Supersoulty, you've done a great job defending your position, kudos.

Thank you.  Don't leave Bono out.  Though we disagree, I must credit him for his knowledge.

Thank you, though you yourself also deserve this compliment.

EDIT: And sorry i took so long to answer.