|
|
Post by Cepha on Aug 11, 2008 17:26:33 GMT -5
I there one quote that says that Jesus said He was the only way to Heaven?
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Aug 11, 2008 17:30:41 GMT -5
Put it like this, when asked for proof if Peter ever called himself "Pope", I could point it out.
One verse.
That's what I'm looking for here.
A common Christian belief that Jesus is the only way...is it a "Biblical" belief?
Or, is it conjecfure based on "round about" ways of combining scriptures to justifiy this belief?
You know?
|
|
|
|
Post by knuckle on Aug 11, 2008 17:42:04 GMT -5
Eph 2:4 But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,
Eph 2:5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, by (grace ye are saved;)
Eph 2:6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:
Eph 2:7 That in the ages to come he might show the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.
|
|
|
|
Post by cradlecathlic27 on Aug 17, 2008 16:42:33 GMT -5
why dont you test him then, if you think that. We dont ban unless you break the rules, cant you see, this is a mostly protestant board. We are obviously not scared of difference of opinion. lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Aug 17, 2008 20:19:20 GMT -5
why dont you test him then, if you think that. We dont ban unless you break the rules, cant you see, this is a mostly protestant board. We are obviously not scared of difference of opinion. lol She's not willing to debate a belief. She spent more time on insulting than she did on actually challenging me to an actual debate. Why? Because on a forum with rules, she (or a "he" in disguise) can't leave a question unanswered like one can in an open forum. |
|
|
|
Post by doxology on Jul 8, 2009 21:56:29 GMT -5
Knuckle already gave the most explicit biblical evidence for the necessity of Christ for salvation, however I would just like to add the statment that if people in different religions can be saved, or if people could be saved without the sacrifice of Christ, then his sacrifice was in vain since it was uneccessary and superfluous.
The fact is no one could be saved without Christ or before Christ, not even the Jewish people ... the church has historically taught that the just (I prefer saying the elect before Christ) had to wait for Christs death on the cross for the merits of is crucifixion to be applied to their souls so that they can enter into heaven.
The place where they were said to wait has been called Abrahams bosom, and the Limbus Patrium (limbo of the fathers).
Indeed when we say in the creed that Christ descended into hell, we do not mean the hell of the damned, but rather the limbo of the fathers, which is described as an upper layer of hell, this is where Christ went to apply his merits to them and bring them into heaven.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jul 9, 2009 9:43:30 GMT -5
Knuckle already gave the most explicit biblical evidence for the necessity of Christ for salvation, however I would just like to add the statment that if people in different religions can be saved, or if people could be saved without the sacrifice of Christ, then his sacrifice was in vain since it was uneccessary and superfluous. Thought about that, but then you get into the whole "exceptions" thing. Like wasn't Elijah saved before Christ? (2 Kings 2:11 ) Not only that, during the Transfiguration, where did Moses and Elijah come from if they weren't saved? There is Biblical evidence that some were saved before Jesus made His sacrifice. There is also Romans 2 that states that non-Believers can be justified (saved) to God "if" they live God's Law which is written in everyman's hearts. The only one who can make "exceptions" is God since He is the ultimate Judge. "Except" for Elijah?  Purgatory? |
|
|
|
Post by doxology on Jul 9, 2009 9:58:51 GMT -5
Yeah when people read about Enoch or Elijah in scripture it causes alot of confusion, because they think these people were saved, rather they were taken up and preserved from death because God has a future intention for them, they are not in heaven, they are being preserved, thus why they never died.
Indeed traditional tought is that they shall be the two witnesses mentioned in the book of revelations.
Moses I would think was in the limbus patrium awaiting the death of Christ on the cross for his salvation, its not like God couldnt temporarily warp him out of their for his transfiguration.
Romans 2:14 is talking about how when the gentile Christians do not observe the mosaic law, nevertheless due by nature out of love of God things contained in the law, they are a law unto themselves, this is not talking about nonChristians, remember St. Paul was the apostle to the gentiles, this is a defense of gentiles not observing the dietary laws and such.
No the Limbus patrium/bosom of Abraham is not purgatory, it was merely a waiting place usually described as being attached to hell, they could not even go to purgatory on account of the original sin which was upon all their souls, thus they needed Christ to come apply his merits won on the cross to their souls.
Also thanks for the welcome in the other thread.
Pax
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jul 9, 2009 10:06:18 GMT -5
Yeah when people read about Enoch or Elijah in scripture it causes alot of confusion, because they think these people were saved, rather they were taken up and preserved from death because God has a future intention for them, they are not in heaven, they are being preserved, thus why they never died. Pax But in Kings, it says that Elijah went to Heaven, right? 2 Kings 2:11 11 And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, which parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven. |
|
|
|
Post by doxology on Jul 9, 2009 10:24:38 GMT -5
I would imagine that means the sky i.e the heavens.
Further scripture does not contradict itself, for in John chapter 3 it is said "And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the son of man which is in heaven."
So if no man had ascended into heaven we know heaven when talking about Elijah could not mean the literal paradise that is heaven, rather it means anything above the ground ... the sky ect.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jul 9, 2009 10:49:28 GMT -5
I would imagine that means the sky i.e the heavens. That crossed my mind, but it didn't say "heavens". Also, why couldn't it be just what it says? "Heaven"? It says "heaven". What would lead you to believe that it's not heaven? Scripture contradicts itself to those who cannot understand it as written for it's meaning hasn't been revealed by The Holy Spirit to them. For me, when scripture seems to contradict itself, instead of me reinventing the definitions of the words as written or denying a word exactly as written, I just accept that I don't know what it means (if I don't). I don't try to "have to" know every single thing written in scripture. Sometimes, I just leave it as a mystery instead of risking misunderstanding it or creating my own interpretation. Here we have two scriptures where one says that a man went to heaven (literally) and where Jesus says no man went to heaven. 2 Kings 2:11 As they were going along and talking, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire and horses of fire which separated the two of them. And Elijah went up by a whirlwind to heaven. John 3:13"No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man." Taken "in" context, in Kings, Elijah was seen no more. In order for one to believe that it wasn't heaven (despite that being what The Scripture clearly states), then one must offer up a solid explaination as to where it was if it wasn't heaven for it to be a valid and definite alternative understanding. Taken "in" context, in John, Jesus said that no one "ascended" into heaven. Elijah didn't "ascend" into heaven, but was carried up into heaven. Right? Both can be truthful and both can be believed without contradicting each other. One says a man was carried up into heaven while the other says that no man has gone up into heaven. Taking the scripture as written, Jesus doesn't say "no man was carried up into heaven in a chariot". Taking that scripture as written, one could only reasonably deduce that Jesus meant no man of his own doing went up to heaven (meaning, ascended on his own physically). So, to you, those those two scriptures might contradict each other, but to me, it's clear...one says that a man was carried to heaven, the other says no man rose to heaven.  |
|
|
|
Post by doxology on Jul 9, 2009 11:05:43 GMT -5
Its just if people could go to heaven ... then Christs death on the cross was unnecessary, he himself says no one gos to the father but through him, it would be riddiculous for him to come and die on the cross if people could be saved without that.
:{ sighs
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jul 9, 2009 11:10:50 GMT -5
Its just if people could go to heaven ... then Christs death on the cross was unnecessary, he himself says no one gos to the father but through him, it would be riddiculous for him to come and die on the cross if people could be saved without that. :{ sighs 3 points: 1. Why was Christ's death unnecessary for the rest of mankind if God chose to take Elijah to heaven for His own reasons? That is placing man's limits on God. God can do whatever He wants to do whether we understand it or not. 2. While Jesus says no one goes to The Father but through Him, He never said no one goes to Heaven but through Him, and...another note; before anybody even comes to Jesus Himself, they have already been called by God to go "to" Him. 3. Ridiculous? I couldn't ponder that hard when I think of what God has in store for us. Question: What makes you think that God cannot make His own "exceptions" to the rules that He established? Is there anything in The Bible that says that God cannot do so? |
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on Jul 9, 2009 23:11:10 GMT -5
Its just if people could go to heaven ... then Christs death on the cross was unnecessary, he himself says no one gos to the father but through him, it would be riddiculous for him to come and die on the cross if people could be saved without that. :{ sighs Actually, no where in Scriptures does it say that no one went to heaven prior to Christ' death. Yes, John chapter 3 said "And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the son of man which is in heaven." But Elijah and Enoch in the Old Testament was assumed into heaven (the common accepted belief among the Early Church Fathers). Christ' was saying that no one have gone up to heaven in his or her own power, but only the Son of Man has the power to come down and ascend into heaven in his own divine power. Elijah and Enoch was taken into Heaven by God's power, but they had no power in themselves to ascend into Heaven. Second, who says God can not save anyone outside the accepted rules, proposed by Sacred Scriptures? While we are bound by Christ' Holy Sacraments, God is not bound by his Holy Sacraments and can save whosoever He pleases. God is a Graceful and Merciful God, and He can make exceptions if he so pleases. doxology, let's not say God cannot do something where Scriptures is silent about the issue. We must not set limits to God doxology. In IC.XC, Ramon P.S, By the way, welcome to the forum! I hope you enjoy your stay! |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jul 10, 2009 15:24:46 GMT -5
Second, who says God can not save anyone outside the accepted rules, proposed by Sacred Scriptures? While we are bound by Christ' Holy Sacraments, God is not bound by his Holy Sacraments and can save whosoever He pleases. God is a Graceful and Merciful God, and He can make exceptions if he so pleases. doxology, let's not say God cannot do something where Scriptures is silent about the issue. We must not set limits to God doxology. In IC.XC, Ramon P.S, By the way, welcome to the forum! I hope you enjoy your stay! Yep...reminds me of this line: John 21: 25 Jesus did many other things as well.
If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.God rocks!  |
|
|
|
Post by doxology on Jul 10, 2009 18:30:25 GMT -5
Ok we are gonna have to start talking about the nature of God ... always a dangerous subject, however it is a necessary one ... and my assertion about the nature of God which I am going to use to defend the idea that no one outside of Christ is saved is that God is perfect.
Being perfect he posessess all his atributes perfectly .... this includes another of his attributes, namely that God is just, and thus he is perfectly just.
Being perfectly just he cannot ignore sin ... it must be paid for ... but in the Old testament man could not pay for his sins, seeing as how the old testament being revealed in the new teaches us that "no one does good, no not even one" - Romans 3:12 ... indeed one might counter that they recieved forgiveness by use of scapegoating, animal sacrifices ect ... but since tradition clearly teaches that the "just" before Christ awaited his death on the cross in the bosom of Abraham (Limbus patrium) ... we must conclude that scapegoating was also a symbol of things to come, indeed sacrificing a sheep or dove ect, did not remit sin but it was a sign that such and such sins would be remited for that person in the sacrifice of Christ on the cross.
Further even if you could argue that it did infact remit sin, there is one sin that could never be remitted without the sacrament of baptism, namely the original sin, coupled with the original guilt ... that holy augustinian doctrine of latin rite Catholicism.
So you see the reason no one was saved before Christ, and no one is saved outside of him, is because only by winning for us his grace on the cross could a just God be appeased, and thus grant us the grace firstly given in baptism to make us just and holy in his sight for the sake of his son.
As an aside to the main argument, Ramon was somewhat disturbed that I said "God cannot", when I speak of God being unable to do something I would like to clarify that this is not an inability as in lack of power, but rather an inability of nature, just as God cannot lie because he is the truth, so can God not forgive without reparation because he is just.
Also thanks for the welcome.
Pax
|
|
|
|
Post by teresahrc on Jul 12, 2009 14:48:10 GMT -5
doxology,
God is not bound by the constraints of time, geography or human reason.
People (including Elijah) most certainly could have gone to heaven, esp. if that's what the Bible says happened!
It doesn't mean he went to heaven "apart" from Christ's sacrifice. Elijah went to heaven only BECAUSE of Christ's sacrifice, even if it had not yet occurred in human history.
8And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
9If any man have an ear, let him hear.
Rev. 13
Anyone that is in heaven now or will be in heaven is there because of the Lamb that was "slain from the foundation of the world". Even if someone never heard the gospel or didn't understand who Jesus is, they are not in heaven apart from Christ, they are there only THROUGH Christ.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jul 13, 2009 8:41:18 GMT -5
Ok we are gonna have to start talking about the nature of God ... always a dangerous subject, however it is a necessary one ... and my assertion about the nature of God which I am going to use to defend the idea that no one outside of Christ is saved is that God is perfect. Being perfect he posessess all his atributes perfectly .... this includes another of his attributes, namely that God is just, and thus he is perfectly just. Being perfectly just he cannot ignore sin ... it must be paid for ... but in the Old testament man could not pay for his sins, seeing as how the old testament being revealed in the new teaches us that "no one does good, no not even one" - Romans 3:12 ... indeed one might counter that they recieved forgiveness by use of scapegoating, animal sacrifices ect ... but since tradition clearly teaches that the "just" before Christ awaited his death on the cross in the bosom of Abraham (Limbus patrium) ... we must conclude that scapegoating was also a symbol of things to come, indeed sacrificing a sheep or dove ect, did not remit sin but it was a sign that such and such sins would be remited for that person in the sacrifice of Christ on the cross. Further even if you could argue that it did infact remit sin, there is one sin that could never be remitted without the sacrament of baptism, namely the original sin, coupled with the original guilt ... that holy augustinian doctrine of latin rite Catholicism. So you see the reason no one was saved before Christ, and no one is saved outside of him, is because only by winning for us his grace on the cross could a just God be appeased, and thus grant us the grace firstly given in baptism to make us just and holy in his sight for the sake of his son. As an aside to the main argument, Ramon was somewhat disturbed that I said "God cannot", when I speak of God being unable to do something I would like to clarify that this is not an inability as in lack of power, but rather an inability of nature, just as God cannot lie because he is the truth, so can God not forgive without reparation because he is just. Also thanks for the welcome. Pax Dox, You are surely a poet! That was beautifully written. ;D Me? I would NEVER put the word "cannot" after God's name.  |
|
|
|
Post by teresahrc on Jul 20, 2009 10:33:27 GMT -5
Actually, Cepha, there is one verse in the BIble I know of that puts "limits" on God.
16Men swear by someone greater than themselves, and the oath confirms what is said and puts an end to all argument. 17Because God wanted to make the unchanging nature of his purpose very clear to the heirs of what was promised, he confirmed it with an oath. 18God did this so that, by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled to take hold of the hope offered to us may be greatly encouraged. 19We have this hope as an anchor for the soul, firm and secure. It enters the inner sanctuary behind the curtain, 20where Jesus, who went before us, has entered on our behalf. He has become a high priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek. (Hebrews 6)
What do you think about that Cepha?
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jul 21, 2009 11:55:29 GMT -5
Actually, Cepha, there is one verse in the BIble I know of that puts "limits" on God. 16Men swear by someone greater than themselves, and the oath confirms what is said and puts an end to all argument. 17Because God wanted to make the unchanging nature of his purpose very clear to the heirs of what was promised, he confirmed it with an oath. 18God did this so that, by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled to take hold of the hope offered to us may be greatly encouraged. 19We have this hope as an anchor for the soul, firm and secure. It enters the inner sanctuary behind the curtain, 20where Jesus, who went before us, has entered on our behalf. He has become a high priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek. (Hebrews 6)What do you think about that Cepha? Nothing is impossible for God! He chooses "not" to lie! It's His choice, but what you quoted is what a "man" said about God! I don't follow "man's" laws! LOL1 |
|
