@CanisC54063@KatjaThePapist ...in Christ and grants salvation to those individuals (the "elect"). Now faith leads to salvation, and this perspective still adheres to the scriptures you provided. It also adheres to all the scripture that quite directly states "if you have faith, then you will be saved".
@CanisC54063@KatjaThePapist Calvin fell into the fallacy that God knowing everything past, present, and future necessitates that He first chose who receives salvation (the "elect"), and faith stems from that. But those quotes do not directly support that. Consider: God knows who will freely accept faith...
@CanisC54063@KatjaThePapist Well, you believe you don't need anything for salvation, rather God for some reason has only selected a few from the very beginning to be saved, despite Scripture clearly showing He wishes for the salvation of all. Yet even then, "faith and works" still holds true.
@CanisC54063@KatjaThePapist Even with reversing things so salvation precedes faith, the logical conclusion of your argument just ends up being that someone who does not do good works (and therefore does not have faith) was never saved to begin with.
@CanisC54063@KatjaThePapist Oh, you're a Calvanist. Regardless, the contrapositive of your first sentence is that if there is no faith, there was no salvation. Given that James tells us there is no faith without works, that means by logical deduction there is no salvation without works either.
@CanisC54063@KatjaThePapist Do you believe faith is necessary for salvation? Depending on your answer, by logical deduction, either faith and works are both necessary for salvation, or faith with works is sufficient but not necessary for salvation.
@darlingstrawbie In the Eucharust, the substance of the bread is turned into the body of Jesus, and the wine into His blood. The appearance and chemical properties do not change*, but their essence does.
*except for some Eucharistic miracles where blood and muscle tissue is found on the bread
@darlingstrawbie and we can change accidents without changing substance (painting a room of a house). However, we generally cannot change the substance without changing the accidents. God, however, does just that through the miracle of the Eucharust.
@RevRoryMcClure@HeisFiwa The *word* "transubstantiation" was defined into doctrine in the late 11th century, but the only thing it added was the whole substance/accidents terminology to explain why the appearance doesn't change. It was otherwise the belief of the church for its entire history.
@A_Frayed_Mind@blbrrymlk_@ryanfinalboy Ah, okay. Fortunately, that is also not what the church teaches. Humans are imperfect and may fail to remember all their venial sins, but we can still be saved by repenting for those sins which we do remember and doing our best to avoid sin. Our God is extraordinary and merciful.
@A_Frayed_Mind@blbrrymlk_@ryanfinalboy Humans who raised us in the faith are not perfect, but the Gospel is. I imagine you are a Protestant who believes in prima or sola scriptura; why, then, would you reject infallible scripture in favor of your own tradition? "Unless you repent, you will all likewise perish."
@A_Frayed_Mind@blbrrymlk_@ryanfinalboy As shown in the Word of the Lord, belief alone is not faith, nor can belief without repentance get you into heaven. Belief is necessary but not sufficient, which does not align with your claims.
@A_Frayed_Mind@blbrrymlk_@ryanfinalboy I recommend reading Matthew 7:21-29, Luke 13:1-9, Acts 3:17-21, 2 Corinthians 7:9-13, and James 2:14-26. I pray that through His Word, the Lord guides you to truth: faith (shown through works) and repentance are both necessary to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
@DannyMartinezVO @tufpraise Let me get this straight: we pay 20% extra right now for a tip, and you honestly believe making the business pay it instead suddenly requires a 200-400% increase in prices? It's obvious that can't be true, it would be a max 20% increase, but also you then wouldn't pay any tip.
It can be both true that a racist slur at a public event causes distress and harm with those on the receiving elaborating their upset, while simultaneously acknowledging the person saying the slur has an involuntary, diagnosed and well understood condition( corpolalia) that is recognised in law by the Disability Act, with those having the condition fully protected by it, rather than being outed by a Twitter mob as a "racist in truth letting their true feelings out".
Some people need to watch "John's not mad".
@IanHarr68398161@BadSportsRefs I agree that's how it should be. Unfortunately, the rules do not make that distinction, the requirements for a completed pass are the same in all cases.