Must salvation include correct doctrine?

If I do! :eek: What kind of a scholar would I be if I didn’t have a copy of Dr. Raymond Brown’s commentary on John handy! :D

It would be a heresy if they believed that, but of course they do not. But since you are obviously not a scholar :D , and in all likelihood do not have a copy of Dr. Raymond Brown’s commentary on John handy, please find below a two paragraphs from that work.

 

Dear Sir,

You are a bit off here :eek: . I suggest that you read and study the Sixteen Documents of Vatican II. However, the Catholic Church does have many very serious problems, and I seriously doubt that there are very many well educated Catholics that do not know that. Nonetheless, these problems are not so severe as to exclude the Roman Catholic Church from the body of Christ.
CBTS

 

DHK,

For your information:

Documents of the Council of Trent
Session VII

Celebrated on the third day of March 1547, under Pope Paul III

Canons On Baptism

Canon 1: If anyone says that the baptism of John had the same effect as the baptism of Christ,[8] let him be anathema.

Canon 2: If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary for baptism[9] and thus twists into some metaphor the words of our Lord Jesus Christ:

Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost,[10] let him be anathema.

Canon 3: If anyone says that in the Roman Church, which is the mother and mistress of all churches, there is not the true doctrine concerning the sacrament of baptism,[11] let him be anathema.

Canon 4: If anyone says that the baptism which is given by heretics in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, with the intention of doing what the Church does, is not true baptism,[12] let him be anathema.

Canon 5: If anyone says that baptism is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation,[13] let him be anathema.

Canon 6: If anyone says that one baptized cannot, even if he wishes, lose grace, however much he may sin, unless he is unwilling to believe, let him be anathema.

Canon 7: If anyone says that those baptized are by baptism made debtors only to faith alone, but not to the observance of the whole law of Christ, let him be anathema.

Canon 8: If anyone says that those baptized are free from all the precepts of holy Church, whether written or unwritten, so that they are not bound to observe them unless they should wish to submit to them of their own accord, let him be anathema.

Canon 9: If anyone says that the remembrance of the baptism received is to be so impressed on men that they may understand that all the vows made after baptism are void in virtue of the promise already made in that baptism, as if by those vows they detracted from the faith which they professed and from the baptism itself, let him be anathema.

Canon 10: If anyone says that by the sole remembrance and the faith of the baptism received, all sins committed after baptism are either remitted or made venial, let him be anathema.

Canon 11: If anyone says that baptism, truly and rightly administered, must be repeated in the one converted to repentance after having denied the faith of Christ among the infidels, let him be anathema.

Canon 12: If anyone says that no one is to be baptized except at that age at which Christ was baptized, or when on the point of death, let him be anathema.

Canon 13: If anyone says that children, because they have not the act of believing, are not after having received baptism to be numbered among the faithful, and that for this reason are to be rebaptized when they have reached the years of discretion;[14] or that it is better that the baptism of such be omitted than that, while not believing by their own act, they should be baptized in the faith of the Church alone, let him be anathema.

Canon 14: If anyone says that those who have been thus baptized when children are, when they have grown up, to be questioned whether they will ratify what their sponsors promised in their name when they were baptized, and in case they answer in the negative, are to be left to their own will; neither are they to be compelled in the meantime to a Christian life by any penalty other than exclusion from the reception of the Eucharist and the other sacraments, until they repent, let him be anathema.

 

I had a very similar conversation to this topic with two people that had been born again in the Worldwide Church of God in the 1970's. The group expounded law based doctrines, and denied the Trinity amongst other things that are Heretical. Yet both of them said in spite of that, they were Born Again in the WCOG and were certainley saved there.

That is the testimony of many people that have come out of these types of groups, God knew them and He led them out of it.

People that accept Jesus as their Lord and Saviour in a SDA church most certainly are saved, the Holy Spirit leads them to that Salvation. God is more aware than we are of where a persons heart is, resultingly that could be why Christians are told not to judge others. Yet it always seems that people can find a "get out clause" to get rid of that particular scripture and give reasons as to why they are allowed to judge people!

 

I have to say I don't agree here. I believe there has to be a knowledge of sin/being a sinner for salvation to occur. This knowledge does involve intellect, as it calls on us to use our intelligence to realize that we are sinners. Without either knowledge or intellect, there can be no salvation, though they are not the primary components.

AVL1984

 

Erratum:

Should read 'about the Patriarchs of His chosen people...'

apologies.

addendum:

in national Israel we have the examples of the results of disobedience or obedience, of wrong theology and right theology.

We really don't have to look far, do we ?

 

It is indeed unfortunate that Fr Raymond Brown is no longer with us. I've tried to get ahold of everything he's written - good stuff!!

At least we still have Joseph Fitzmyer and J P Meier in his tradition.

 

"The Churches the Apostles Left Behind" by Fr Brown is very good as is his taped commentary on Acts

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

From the Documents of Vatican II. Chapter 2

Not only is the Catholic Church necessary for salvation, but so is baptism.
DHK

 

Do not be fooled by the modern catholic theologens. They are not as they appear. Their only purpose since vatican II has been to infiltrate the protestant churches and influence the return to the "holy mother church" Their commentaries have the taste of truth but have just enough poison to kill.

Salvation does not need doctrine, just the Holy Spirit. Joh 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. and if the Father draws -- Joh 6:37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

 

When reading materials written by Roman Catholics it helps to understand their terminology. When they use the expression "Catholic Church," they don't always mean the Roman Catholic Church, and they surely didn't mean that in the quote above. As for their teaching that Baptism is a requirement for salvation, that is a subject all in its self, and a very complicated one. The bottom line, however, is that anyone who is a true Catholic is a Christian. Any “Catholic” who is not a Christian, and there are plenty of them, is not really a Catholic. The exact same thing can be said of Baptists. Simply having a Catholic or Baptist heritage does not save anyone. We MUST be born again.

The real question of this thread, however, is whether or not doctrinal error in and of itself excludes one from the possibility of being saved. In my opinion, the Roman Catholic Church has some serious doctrinal problems, but not serious enough problems to justify excluding the true members of it from salvation.

 

Since this thread is discussing the place of doctrine in salvation, I asked about the following texts. Nobody responded.

Eph 4:13 UNTIL we all attain to the UNITY of the faith, and of the KNOWLEDGE OF THE SON OF GOD, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ.
14 As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of DOCTRINE, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming;

Could it be possible that, as long as we are united in WHO Jesus Christ is, "the knowoedge of th Son of God" -- then we should not let other doctrines divide us????

 

Marcia shhhhhhhh if the fundies down the hall hear that you been dancin and such in a Baptist community, they will put tha fire upon ya, bless God!!!
:D :D :D

 

All believers will never come to a unity of the faith (except in Heaven). It is an impossibility. I believe we must take these verses in a greater context. Paul was writing these verses to church at Ephesus. Timothy was the pastor, although we read in Acts 20:17, that the church had many pastors. He had called them together from Miletus. From this fact alone we may surmise that the church that was at Ephesus was a fairly large church.

The goal of every local church is to be in doctrinal unity. If you don't agree with the doctrine of the church, why would you even be a member? As the Word is taught the members grow together in doctrine or teaching. The purpose of the church (besides carrying out the great Commission) is teaching its own people.

"As a result we are no longer to be children.."
This is exactly what Paul was writing to the church at Corinth about. He rebukes them in 1Cor.3:1-4, that they are still carnal, like children, drinking milk, when they ought to be mature eating meat. They haven't grown up yet. The Corinthian church was the most carnal (or perhaps childish) church in the New Testament).
As we grow in Christ, being continuously taught by the Word in a good local church, we are less likely to be carried away be any doctrine or foolish teaching. We will be grounded in the teaching of the Word of God as we are taught the Word of God by the leaders in our church, and by our own motivation to study the Word of God.

In the local church we WILL be united not only on WHO Jesus is, but on almost all other doctrines as well. These verses apply to the local church, not all churches all over the world. They do not apply to all of Christendom. They are applicable to each and every local church as an entity of its own.

In the Book of Revelation, Christ wrote to 7 churches, each had 7 angels (or messengers as the word means), which I believe were their pastors. Each church was different and independent of the other, each having its own problems. For each one the goal was to be unified in doctrine and to mature together as they grew in grace. Christ rebuked them as was necessary.
DHK

 

I realize the importance of this issue. But I am taking my cue from the Bible - there are false gods and false Christs. I think it is pretty much a black and white issue as to whether a God or Jesus is the Biblical one or not. It is not that hard to see that the Mormon Jesus or the New Age God is not the Jesus and not the God of the Bible. Other areas of doctrine have shades of gray, but not this one.

 

Marcia shhhhhhhh if the fundies down the hall hear that you been dancin and such in a Baptist community, they will put tha fire upon ya, bless God!!!
:D :D :D </font>[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the chuckle!

 

When reading materials written by Roman Catholics it helps to understand their terminology. When they use the expression "Catholic Church," they don't always mean the Roman Catholic Church, and they surely didn't mean that in the quote above. </font>[/QUOTE]No offence, but you are wrong. Any time they use the word Catholic Church or the word Church, capitalized, they are referring to themselves--the Roman Catholic Church--in their Catechism, in the documents of Vatican II, etc. The goal of the Roman Catholic Church is to bring all religions underneath its umbrella. I, like many others, believe that eventually the pope may very likely be the false prophet spoken of in Revelation 13 (the second beast). At that time there will be one world-wide church. I for one am glad that I will not be there.
DHK

 

No, you have to read more carefully. Roman Catholics do recognize Baptists and other Protestants as Christians:

Vatican II

Decree on Ecumenism

Note: The term "separated brethren" refers to Protestants.

Unitatis Redintegratio

Introduction
Sect. 1
The restoration of unity among all Christians is one of the principal concerns of the Second Vatican Council. Christ the Lord founded one Church and one Church only. However, many Christian communions present themselves to men as the true inheritors of Jesus Christ; all indeed profess to be followers of the Lord but differ in mind and go their different ways, as if Christ Himself were divided.(1) Such division openly contradicts the will of Christ, scandalizes the world, and damages the holy cause of preaching the Gospel to every creature.
Chapter 1 -- Catholic Principles on Ecumenism
Sect. 3
Even in the beginnings of this one and only Church of God there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly condemned. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions made their appearance and quite large communities came to be separated from full communion with the Catholic Church -- for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame. The children who are born into these Communities and who grow up believing in Christ cannot be accused of the sin involved in the separation, and the Catholic Church embraces upon them as brothers, with respect and affection. For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect. . . . It remains true that all who have been justified by faith in Baptism are members of Christ's body, and have a right to be called Christian, and so are correctly accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church. . . . Our separated brethren, whether considered as individuals or as Communities and Churches, are not blessed with that unity which Jesus Christ wished to bestow on all those who through Him were born again into one body.
Sect. 4
Catholics, in their ecumenical work, must assuredly be concerned for their separated brethren, praying for them, keeping them informed about the Church, making the first approaches toward them. . . . Although the Catholic Church has been endowed with all divinely revealed truth and with all means of grace, yet its members fail to live by them with all the fervor that they should, so that the radiance of the Church's image is less clear in the eyes of our separated brethren and of the world at large, and the growth of God's kingdom is delayed. . . . Catholics must gladly acknowledge and esteem the truly Christian endowments from our common heritage which are to be found among our separated brethren. . . . Nor should we forget that anything wrought by the Grace Of The Holy Spirit in the hearts of our separated brethren can be a help to our own edification.
Chapter 2 -- The Practice of Ecumenism
Sect. 8
In certain special circumstances, such as the prescribed prayers "for unity," and during ecumenical gatherings, it is allowable, indeed desirable that Catholics should join in prayer with their separated brethren. . . . Yet worship in common . . . is not to be considered as a means to be used indiscriminately for the restoration of Christian unity.
Sect. 9
We must get to know the outlook of our separated brethren.
Chapter 3 -- Churches and Ecclesial Communities Separated From the Roman Apostolic See -- Separated Churches and Ecclesial Communities in the West
Sect. 13
Other divisions arose more than four centuries later in the West, stemming from the events which are usually referred to as "The Reformation." As a result, many Communions, national or confessional, were separated from the Roman See.
Sect. 19
However, since these Churches and ecclesial Communities, on account of their different origins, and different teachings in matters of doctrine on the spiritual life, vary considerably not only with us, but also among themselves, the task of describing them at all adequately is extremely difficult. . . . It must however be admitted that in these Churches and ecclesial Communities there exist important differences from the Catholic Church, not only of an historical, sociological, psychological and cultural character, but especially in the interpretation of revealed truth.
Sect. 20
Our thoughts turn first to those Christians who make open confession of Jesus Christ as God and Lord and as the sole Mediator between God and men, to the glory of the one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. We are aware indeed that there exist considerable divergences from the doctrine of the Catholic Church concerning Christ Himself, the Word of God made flesh, the work of redemption, and consequently, concerning the mystery and ministry of the Church, and the role of Mary in the plan of salvation. But we rejoice to see that our separated brethren look to Christ as the source and center of Church unity.
Sect. 21
A love and reverence of Sacred Scripture which might be described as devotion, leads our brethren to a constant meditative study of the sacred text. . . . But while the Christians who are separated from us hold the divine authority of the Sacred Books, they differ from ours-some in one way, some in another-regarding the relationship between Scripture and the Church. For, according to Catholic belief, the authentic teaching authority of the Church has a special place in the interpretation and preaching of the written word of God.
Sect. 22
Whenever the Sacrament of Baptism is duly administered as Our Lord instituted it, and is received with the right dispositions, a person is truly incorporated into the crucified and glorified Christ. . . . The ecclesial Communities which are separated from us lack the fullness of unity with us flowing from Baptism, and though we believe they have not retained the proper reality of the eucharistic mystery in its fullness, especially because of the absence of the sacrament of Orders.
Sect. 23
The daily Christian life of these brethren is nourished by their faith in Christ and strengthened by the grace of Baptism and by hearing the word of God. This shows itself in their private prayer, their meditation on the Bible, in their Christian family life, and in the worship of a community gathered together to praise God. Moreover, their form of worship sometimes displays notable features of the liturgy which they shared with us of old. Their faith in Christ bears fruit in praise and thanksgiving for the blessings received from the hands of God. Among them, too, is a strong sense of justice and a true charity toward their neighbor. This active faith has been responsible for many organizations for the relief of spiritual and material distress, the furtherance of the education of youth, the improvement of the social conditions of life, and the promotion of peace throughout the world.

 

This statement is contrary to fact. The fact is that the goal of the Roman Catholic Church is to bring the Protestant Churches back into perfect harmony with it. They have no goal whatsoever to bring "non-Christian religions" into harmony with it, but rather to convert them to Christianity. Note that the term "non-Christian religions" is never used in reference to Baptists or other Protestants.