“Once Saved Always Saved” or “OSAS” #4 AND “Personal Interpretation of the Bible”.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jimmy_B
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Jimmy_B

Guest
“Once Saved Always Saved” or “OSAS” is an errant belief that many Protestant Christians hold to and there are many different “Protestant” definitions of what “OSAS” actually means.

Which leads us to the second errant Protestant belief, which allows for the “Personal Interpretation of the Bible”.

These two beliefs came from man’s ego and and his own intellect and not from God. They are both anti-biblical and anti-Christian, they are nonsensical and they do not work in the real world. They are both a contradiction.

Many more beliefs that are false have arose from these first two false beliefs (OSAS and Personal interpretation) and they have cause much division and many, million individual cases, where people actually belong to the “religion of their own intellect and ego” and not to any Church that Jesus Christ founded and that God intended for all men.

I am a Roman Catholic, so obviously I disagree with these two fabricated, man-made errors; “OSAS” and “Personal Interpretation of the Bible”.

What are your thoughts?
 
Agree. My neighbor is head of his own Church and we got into this discussion re. faith over works.

He insisted that you can have faith and will be saved without works. I said that just doesn’t make sense. Also no sacraments in his church even though they were instituted by Christ and are in the Bible which was compiled by the Catholic Church.

And it is 2010 so I don’t know how he can think his is the true church which he recently founded. There are 30,000 denominations all true of course.
 
aicirt said:
Agree. My neighbor is head of his own Church and we got into this discussion re. faith over works.

He insisted that you can have faith and will be saved without works. I said that just doesn’t make sense. Also no sacraments in his church even though they were instituted by Christ and are in the Bible which was compiled by the Catholic Church.

And it is 2010 so I don’t know how he can think his is the true church which he recently founded. There are 30,000 denominations all true of course.
Click to expand...
 
Jimmy_B said:
“Once Saved Always Saved” or “OSAS” is an errant belief that many Protestant Christians hold to and there are many different “Protestant” definitions of what “OSAS” actually means.

Which leads us to the second errant Protestant belief, which allows for the “Personal Interpretation of the Bible”.

These two beliefs came from man’s ego and and his own intellect and not from God. They are both anti-biblical and anti-Christian, they are nonsensical and they do not work in the real world. They are both a contradiction.

Many more beliefs that are false have arose from these first two false beliefs (OSAS and Personal interpretation) and they have cause much division and many, million individual cases, where people actually belong to the “religion of their own intellect and ego” and not to any Church that Jesus Christ founded and that God intended for all men.

I am a Roman Catholic, so obviously I disagree with these two fabricated, man-made errors; “OSAS” and “Personal Interpretation of the Bible”.

What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...
Well for those who believe such doctrines as OSAS,Sola Scriptura,Faith Alone,etc it is normal not to not accept anything else. As a Catholic one cannot blame them or hold that against them,especially if they have been raised in a particular church,which teaches the doctrine. Just as we hold to our convictions as Catholics,they hold to their own convictions and we must respect their views and beliefs.As I grow older I have learned not to worry so much about what Protestants believe or do not believe. I focus on my faith and Jesus and let Him deal with the rest of Christianity.
 
Jimmy_B said:
I am a Roman Catholic, so obviously I disagree with these two fabricated, man-made errors; “OSAS” and “Personal Interpretation of the Bible”.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts on the subject WHO CARES:yawn:
Click to expand...
 
theoldman said:
My thoughts on the subject WHO CARES:yawn:
Click to expand...
As in the other thread on OSAS, I have asked you for Scriptural references on your position that OSAS is Biblical, are you going to provide them or just dodge the requests? Making statements without evidence goes to the spirit of this thread on personal interpretations. Support your position.
 
=Nicea325;6843766]Well for those who believe such doctrines as OSAS,Sola Scriptura,Faith Alone,etc it is normal not to not accept anything else.
Click to expand...
Not sure if its normal, but it is not virtually normal. Sola Scriptura, by definition (at least Lutheran) does not in any way exclude “anything else”. And sola fide does not exclude the importance of love and charity, or hope.
As a Catholic one cannot blame them or hold that against them,especially if they have been raised in a particular church,which teaches the doctrine. Just as we hold to our convictions as Catholics,they hold to their own convictions and we must respect their views and beliefs.As I grow older I have learned not to worry so much about what Protestants believe or do not believe. I focus on my faith and Jesus and let Him deal with the rest of Christianity.
Click to expand...
This, I believe, is a laudable position, though you in a positive sense seem willing to share your faith, too.

Jon
 
wmscott said:
As in the other thread on OSAS, I have asked you for Scriptural references on your position that OSAS is Biblical, are you going to provide them or just dodge the requests? Making statements without evidence goes to the spirit of this thread on personal interpretations. Support your position.
Click to expand...
Support for my position comes from a book titlle "Salvation is Forever’ by robert g. gromacki published by regular baptist press

read it , it Biblicly address all catholic objections to OSAS
 
JonNC said:
Not sure if its normal, but it is not virtually normal. Sola Scriptura, by definition (at least Lutheran) does not in any way exclude “anything else”. And sola fide does not exclude the importance of love and charity, or hope.

This, I believe, is a laudable position, though you in a positive sense seem willing to share your faith, too.

Jon
Click to expand...
Thank you JonNC,always a pleasure hearing from you.

God Bless you and your loved ones
 
theoldman said:
Support for my position comes from a book titlle "Salvation is Forever’ by robert g. gromacki published by regular baptist press

read it , it Biblicly address all catholic objections to OSAS
Click to expand...
And any way you could state your position instead of making us all go buy this book?

Or are you the author and trying to push up sales:D
 
theoldman said:
Support for my position comes from a book titlle "Salvation is Forever’ by robert g. gromacki published by regular baptist press

read it , it Biblicly address all catholic objections to OSAS
Click to expand...
Cool…your support comes from man. My support comes from the Bible…written by God.

No offense…but I would trust God over some guy named Gromacki
 
I think there is a Biblical case to be made for either OSAS or “Perseverence of the Saints”, as I used to believe in it myself. I think one thing that really challenged me a lot when I held this belief was coming to the realization that,what I can tell and as I was confronted by this claim on a website, no one between the time from between the end of the NT until 1500 do we see any Christian whom can be cited that held this belief. There are plenty who can be cited who believed the contrary. Then I think, if one is looking objectively, they will have noticed all those other passages in Scripture which indicate (or at least would seem to indicate depending on your point of view; e.e. if you believe in “OSAS”), that a believer can forfeit their salvation.

Re: personal interpretation: someone correct me if I’m wrong but we can interpret the Bible for ourselves so long as we don’t come up w/ a different interpretation than one which has already been defined by the Church (for example St. Mathew 16:18), we don’t go against Sacred Tradition, and we don’t go against what is termed “the unanimous consent of the Fathers.” Now, don’t get me wrong, I realize that Tradition is used to help come to the correct interpretations and that one must have a certain amount of learning in order to correctly interpret the Scriptures as St. Peter mentioned in one of his Epistles, but still I think if the Church hasn’t defined something we can give our speculations; and that is what they are whether they be right or wrong.

I’m reading St. Augustine’s “On Christian Doctrine” right now where he laws down some guidelines for those who undertake to interpret Scripture. I suppose it could be argued that this is not for the layman, but to that I would say please show where in Canon Law this says so.

P.S. Please don’t get me wrong… I am not advocating Sola Scriptura as I believe the CC teaches that it is a false doctrine and I agree w/ whatever the CC teaches formally on faith and morals.
Peace!
 
LionHeart777 said:
I think there is a Biblical case to be made for either OSAS or “Perseverence of the Saints”, as I used to believe in it myself. I think one thing that really challenged me a lot when I held this belief was coming to the realization that,what I can tell and as I was confronted by this claim on a website, no one between the time from between the end of the NT until 1500 do we see any Christian whom can be cited that held this belief. There are plenty who can be cited who believed the contrary. Then I think, if one is looking objectively, they will have noticed all those other passages in Scripture which indicate (or at least would seem to indicate depending on your point of view; e.e. if you believe in “OSAS”), that a believer can forfeit their salvation.

Re: personal interpretation: someone correct me if I’m wrong but we can interpret the Bible for ourselves so long as we don’t come up w/ a different interpretation than one which has already been defined by the Church (for example St. Mathew 16:18), we don’t go against Sacred Tradition, and we don’t go against what is termed “the unanimous consent of the Fathers.” Now, don’t get me wrong, I realize that Tradition is used to help come to the correct interpretations and that one must have a certain amount of learning in order to correctly interpret the Scriptures as St. Peter mentioned in one of his Epistles, but still I think if the Church hasn’t defined something we can give our speculations; and that is what they are whether they be right or wrong.

I’m reading St. Augustine’s “On Christian Doctrine” right now where he laws down some guidelines for those who undertake to interpret Scripture. I suppose it could be argued that this is not for the layman, but to that I would say please show where in Canon Law this says so.

P.S. Please don’t get me wrong… I am not advocating Sola Scriptura as I believe the CC teaches that it is a false doctrine and I agree w/ whatever the CC teaches formally on faith and morals.
Peace!
Click to expand...
You are correct. We can read scripture as long as what we understand does not contradict what has been revealed, we can believe it. Now if it has not been defined, we need to remember that we could be wrong.
 
MariaG said:
You are correct. We can read scripture as long as what we understand does not contradict what has been revealed, we can believe it. Now if it has not been defined, we need to remember that we could be wrong.
Click to expand...
Well you could be wrong but me…?😃

Thanks for the reaffirmation.
 
theoldman said:
My thoughts on the subject WHO CARES:yawn:
Click to expand...
I do.

But to address the OP’s issues…

If OSAS is true, there would be no such thing as Apostasy.

Personal interpretation of Scripture is possible in the sense that there is more than one way to “feel” or experience Scripture. However, methinks in the common definition, “personal interpretation” means that everyone’s interpretation is equally valid, which of course is nonsense.
 
Newbie2 said:
I do.

But to address the OP’s issues…

If OSAS is true, there would be no such thing as Apostasy.

Personal interpretation of Scripture is possible in the sense that there is more than one way to “feel” or experience Scripture. However, methinks in the common definition, “personal interpretation” means that everyone’s interpretation is equally valid, which of course is nonsense.
Click to expand...
I guess a lot hinges on what is meant by “personal interpretation.” I was just taking at as someone being able to interpret the Bible for themselves; which for us Catholics I believe is only permissable where the Church gives us room to speculate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top