You know as well as I do – a former catholic – that your Church teaches not only a salvation of works, but one must work to keep that salvation.

Just by the use of the word “sacrament” your Church is telling us [along with other churches who have sacraments] that the rites being performed [or WORKED] are conveying Divine Grace upon the participant.

Not so? Well let me ask you this: If a soul never participated in “the sacraments” yet only was justified by faith [as you've said in your reply that catholic theology states a soul doesn't have to come to God by works and is justified by faith], WOULD THAT SOUL GO TO HEAVEN WHEN HE DIED AND BE IMMEDIATELY IN THE LORD’S PRESENCE FOR ALL ETERNITY?

Can a person be saved from sin by faith alone in the Lord Jesus Christ alone without ever participating in the sacraments? Not by what I remember in my catholic catechism.

What say you, Stan?

Acts 17:11: “Now these Jews [in Beroea] were more noble than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word in all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.”

Notice that this isn’t a command to “examine the Scriptures daily,” but a statement OF FACT. St. Luke is simply contrasting the receptive attitude of the Beroeans with the riotous attitude of the Thessalonians who refused to receive the Christian message (Acts 17:1-8). Again, the “Scriptures” referred to here are the OT. So if this passage proves sola scriptura, then it proves SOLA OT.

Finally, notice that the Beroeans accept both St. Paul’s oral proclamation of God’s word as well as the written Scriptures. The Beroeans are not Bible-only believers. They use the written word to confirm St. Paul’s oral word. The Beroeans are commended for being willing to see whether what Paul was saying about the OT’s Messianic prophecies was true, not for skeptically testing every claim they heard.

Ephesians 2:8–9: “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast.” I don’t feel threatened by it. Even if we assume that Paul is speaking of “good works” when he says we have not been saved by works, this in no way conflicts with Catholic theology.

Notice that the passage speaks of salvation in the past tense—”you have been saved.” In Greek this is the perfect tense, which denotes a past, completed action. We know from the Bible that salvation also has present and future aspects, so the kind of salvation Paul is discussing in Ephesians 2:8–9 is initial salvation. It is the kind which we received when we first came to God and were justified, not the kind of salvation we are now receiving (1 Pet. 1:8–9, Phil. 2:12) or the kind we one day will receive (Rom. 13:11, 1 Cor. 3:15, 5:5).

But the Catholic Church does not teach that we receive initial justification by good works. You do not have to do good works in order to come to God and be justified. The Council of Trent states: “And we are said to be justified by grace because nothing that precedes justification, whether faith or works, merits the grace of justification. For ‘if it is by grace, it is no longer by works; otherwise,’ as the apostle says, ‘grace is no more grace’ [Rom. 11:6]” (Decree on Justification 8).

So even if Paul were using “works” to mean “good works” in Ephesians 2:8–9, there is no conflict with Catholic theology. However, Paul probably does not mean “good works.” Normally when he says “works,” he means “works of the Law”—those done out of the Law of Moses. His point is to stress that we are saved by faith in Jesus Christ and not by obeying the Mosaic Law. Jews may not boast of having a privileged relationship with God because they keep the Mosaic Law and its requirement of circumcision (Rom. 2:6–11, 17–21, 25–29, 3:21–22, 27–30).

Paul discusses how Jew and Gentiles are united together in the body of Christ and mentions works in connection with boasting, before turning to the whole subject of circumcision and membership in Christ: “Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called the uncircumcision by what is called the circumcision . . . remember that you were at that time separated from Christ. . . . But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near in the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing in his flesh the Law of commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two . . . and might reconcile us both to God in one body. . . . So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God” (Eph. 2:11–19).

Paul is probably using “works” and “boasting” here as he does in Romans, of Jews boasting before Gentiles of having privilege with God due to their keeping the Mosaic Law. He says we are not saved in that manner, but by faith—meaning faith in Christ—so no one, either Jew or Gentile, can boast of having a more privileged position with God. We are all saved on the same basis—through faith in Christ and union in his body, the Church.

The apostle then turns our attention away from works of the Mosaic Law and toward the kind of works a Christian should be interested in—good works: “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them” (Eph. 2:10). The sense of what Paul is saying is: “God has raised up both of us—Jews and Gentiles—to sit in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, for we received initial salvation as a gift. We obtained it by faith in Christ (which itself is a gift from God), not by works of obedience to the Mosaic Law—so neither Jew or Gentile can boast over the other of having privilege with God. Instead, we Christians are the result of God’s work, for he created us anew in the body of Christ so that we might do good works—the kind of works we should be concerned about—for God intended ahead of time for us to do them” (paraphrase of Eph. 2:6–10).

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. It is evident to me that you are struggling with these verses.

You said,

Likely, because that’s not biblical. No where in the Bible does ever instruct us to “discuss Bible verses without anyone else’s thoughts but their own.” Even the Bereans when searching the Old Testament alone drew on a rich tradition of historical interpretation known as Talmud. Show me one single instance in the Bible of “discuss Bible verses without anyone else’s thoughts but their own.”

They drew on the Scriptures IF the traditions of men follow after the Scriptures and can be backed up by the Scriptures. The catholic church does not back their traditions with the Word of God. IF they did, then Mariology would not be a dogma and the mass and transubstantiation would not be the center of your religion.

(Act 17:11) These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

(Heb 4:12) For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

(2Ti 2:15) Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

(2Ti 2:16) But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

(2Ti 2:17) And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;

(2Ti 2:18 ) Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.

>”Catholics truly wrestle with these two verses.”

I don’t know why a Catholic would wrestle with those two verses. Catholics believe both verses 100%. They may not interpret them the same as you, but they do accept them fully.

I myself am very fond of Acts 17:11 as it makes the case, not for sola scriptura, but for sola Old Testament, just like 2Timothy 3:16-17 (Paul was instructing Timothy on the Old Testament.) The Bereans used the Old Testament alone to prove the Christian faith and all its doctrines. I can prove all the doctrines of the Catholic faith with the Old Testament alone, how about you and your doctrines?

>”I have yet to see a catholic open his Bible along with me and discuss Bible verses without anyone else’s thoughts but their own.”

Likely, because that’s not biblical. No where in the Bible does ever instruct us to “discuss Bible verses without anyone else’s thoughts but their own.” Even the Bereans when searching the Old Testament alone drew on a rich tradition of historical interpretation known as Talmud. Show me one single instance in the Bible of “discuss Bible verses without anyone else’s thoughts but their own.”

>”How can a catholic discern this if he does not study for himself?”

In addition to a brain, God gave Catholics “the pillar and ground of the Truth.” Do you know what the Bible says is the pillar and ground of the Truth? Hint: 1Timothy 3:15

>”So, dear catholic, your magisterium, sacred tradition and church fathers have misled you.”

Nope, because this can only be true if the Bible lies in 1Timothy 3:15. Of course we know that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God and does not contain any untruth.

>”They wrestle with these verses and conveniently state that papal infallibility allows the catholic church to revise the Scriptures to accommodate their beliefs.”

The Catholic Church has never revised scriptures to accomodate beliefs. Cite one instance of proof that claim is true.

>”God would be cruel to leave letters to His children which could only be interpreted by a few. Salvation is for all His children so why would He limit it to only a few who can interpret the Scriptures?”

None the less, the Bible does clearly state that one does need someone to help us interpret the scriptures.

So Philip ran to him, and heard [the Ethiopian] reading Isaiah the prophet, and asked, “Do you understand what you are reading?” And he said, “How can I, unless some one guides me?” And he invited Philip to come up and sit with him (Acts 8:30-31, RSV).

So, we find the Church (Phillip) taught the Ethiopian the true and proper interpretation of Isaiah (scripture). So, I guess you’d have to say that God is indeed cruel.

>”Use that brain that God has given you and search the Scriptures out for yourself!”

Actually, I read the Bible cover to cover all alone at night, without anyone’s assistance, and didn’t find any Catholic doctrine missing. Its all in the Bible.

God bless…

+Timothy

BTW, how do you interpret the prophecy of Malachi 1:11 regarding Christians (non-gentiles) offering daily sacrifices, including incense? Which Christian sect does Malachi 1:11 describe? Yours?