“Once Saved Always Saved” ...

[Ronald_E]

S_S,
I am curious. Would it be possible for you to post on this thread the statement that Mary is the Mother of God?
I am asking this for purely research reasons.

 

[mikeledes]

First of all if we simply read down to John 15:16 we find the following:

Here’s some good commentary I just found on John 15:1

*Here we have one of the chief words of the parable—branch. A vine needs branches: without branches it can do nothing, can bear no fruit. As important as it is to know about the Vine, and the Husbandman, it is to realize what the branch is. Before we listen to what Christ has to say about it, let us first of all take in what a branch is, and what it teaches us of our life in Christ. A branch is simply a bit of wood, brought forth by the vine for the one purpose of serving it in bearing its fruit. It is of the very same nature as the vine, and has one life and one spirit with it. Just think a moment of the lessons this suggests.

There is the lesson of entire consecration. The branch has but one object for which it exists, one purpose to which it is entirely given up. That is, to bear the fruit the vine wishes to bring forth. And so the believer has but one reason for his being a branch—but one reason for his existence on earth —that the heavenly Vine may through him bring forth His fruit. Happy the soul that knows this, that has consented to it, and that says, I have been redeemed and I live for one thing—as exclusively as the natural branch exists only to bring forth fruit, I too; as exclusively as the heavenly Vine exists to bring forth fruit, I too. As I have been planted by God into Christ, I have wholly given myself to bear the fruit the Vine desires to bring forth.

There is the lesson of perfect conformity. The branch is exactly like the vine in every aspect—the same nature, the same life, the same place, the same work. In all this they are inseparably one. And so the believer needs to know that he is partaker of the divine nature, and has the very nature and spirit of Christ in him, and that his one calling is to yield himself to a perfect conformity to Christ. The branch is a perfect likeness of the vine; the only difference is, the one is great and strong, and the source of strength, the other little and feeble, ever needing and receiving strength. Even so the believer is, and is to be, the perfect likeness of Christ.

There is the lesson of absolute dependence. The vine has its stores of life and sap and strength, not for itself, but for the branches. The branches are and have nothing but what the vine provides and imparts. The believer is called to, and it is his highest blessedness to enter upon, a life of entire and unceasing dependence upon Christ. Day and night, every moment, Christ is to work in him all he needs.

And then the lesson of undoubting confidence. The branch has no cure; the vine provides all; it has but to yield itself and receive. It is the sight of this truth that leads to the blessed rest of faith, the true secret of growth and strength: “I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me.”*

ccel.org/ccel/murray/true_vine.vi.html

(actually this link provides an entire commentary on John 15, which I think does an excellent job).

So to provide an exegetical answer, I think there is one of two explanations for verse one that seem to fit.

The first – unperfected faith. The second, those “corporately” grafted (baptized) into the church yet who never gain a foothold of faith. The latter explanation is analogous to the Jewish people. Chosen as a people in an objective sense, but not all predestined in a subjective sense.

You’re hypothesis matches the former theory (unperfected faith). Whether faith itself fails to endure or whether one falls back into a life of sin their faith is never perfected. However, I think confidence can be had under either matrix. In fact I think confidence, and even certainty is key to endurance. It binds us to the root of the vine in a firmer way. We know that we rely on the vine for all our nourishment. If the branch looks elsewhere it won’t find nourishment because there’s nothing else that the branch is bound to. When we fail to understand this we obstruct receiving the nourishment we need.

Hi Sola. I like to write - and I see you like to write too - so I have to chop up your posts as well and respond to each part separately. Regarding the “unperfected” faith argument, I’m not sure if you’re saying this unperfected faith means fruitless faith and if this faith is genuine and saves. Regarding the second argument - grafted into the church - that argument would work if the Vine was identified as the Church or the people of God. The problem with that is that Christ consistently says that He is the true vine.

John 15:1

1"I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser.

5"I am the vine, you are the branches;

So the branches have been grafted into Christ, not the church. And no false professor can be grafted into Christ. Moreover, if Christ meant “in a Christian congregation” - because that what mere membership in His “visible body” really is -when He says “in Me,” then it would absolutely make no sense:

**4"Abide in a Christian congregation, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in a Christian congregation.
5"I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in a Christian congregation and I in him, he bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing.
6"If anyone does not abide in a Christian congregation, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned. **

So if you abide in a Christian congregation, you’re safe? You won’t be thrown in the fire? I highly doubt that if you have not been united to Christ.

Regarding all the passages you referenced, they are not problematic to a Catholic. Some of them are about those who are elect for eternal glory. Let me be clear. When I say that someone can lose their salvation, I am not talking about those elect for glory. As I stated earlier, the number of those elect for glory is immutable, none can be added and none can be lost. All those who are elect for glory will freely come to Christ and persevere, all of this occurring under the influence of God’s grace. Moreover, predestination in Catholicism - whether you’re a Thomist or a Molinist - is not pure foreknowledge of man’s choices, which is basically what Arminianism teaches. Catholics have a stronger view of Divine Providence. However, where we differ from Calvinism is that the number of the just is not equal to the number of those elect for glory. This is the historic teaching of Christianity as evidenced by the writings of the Church Fathers, particularly Augustine, and upheld by Martin Luther himself. In fact, Calvinism’s perseverance of the saints makes it’s first appearance in the teachings of John Calvin.

So we don’t see a contradiction between John 15 and Romans 8 or John 6. Romans 8 applies to those elect for glory, but passages like John 15 and Hebrews 6 clearly indicate that not all of the just belong to this group. There is no objective way of infallibly knowing one is a member of those elect for glory. Hence the warnings in the Bible actually serve a purpose in Catholic theology, they are not vain. Warnings like:

Revelation 22:19

19and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.

Romans 11:20-21

**20Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith Do not be conceited, but fear;
21for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. **

1 Timothy 3:6

6and not a new convert, so that he will not become conceited and fall into the condemnation incurred by the devil.

1 Corinthiams 8:9-11

But beware lest somehow this liberty of yours become a stumbling block to those who are weak. 10 For if anyone sees you who have knowledge eating in an idol’s temple, will not the conscience of him who is weak be emboldened to eat those things offered to idols? 11 And because of your knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?

Luke 21:34

**34"Be on guard, so that your hearts will not be weighted down with dissipation and drunkenness and the worries of life, and that day will not come on you suddenly like a trap; **

In Calvinism, these warnings absolutely no purpose. If you know that you are of the elect and that you cannot lose your salvation, there is no reason to be concerned about being conceited and not being spared by God or suffering the same condemnation as the devil. There is no reason to be concerned about not being a stumbling block to a weaker brother and causing him to perish. And there is no possibilty of having one’s inheritance taken away. In other words, Calvinism makes God’s warnings vain. They serve absolutley no purpose because knowing that your salvation can never be lost undermines any purpose these warnings might have. It’s a lot of bark, but no bite.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[sola_scriptura]

Hi Sola. I like to write - and I see you like to write too - so I have to chop up your posts as well and respond to each part separately. Regarding the “unperfected” faith argument, I’m not sure if you’re saying this unperfected faith means fruitless faith and if this faith is genuine and saves. Regarding the second argument - grafted into the church - that argument would work if the Vine was identified as the Church or the people of God. The problem with that is that Christ consistently says that He is the true vine.

John 15:1

**1"I am **the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser.

**5"I am **the vine, you are the branches;

So the branches have been grafted into Christ, not the church. And no false professor can be grafted into Christ. Moreover, if Christ meant “in a Christian congregation” - because that what mere membership in His “visible body” really is -when He says “in Me,” then it would absolutely make no sense:

4"Abide in a Christian congregation, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in a Christian congregation.
5"I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in a Christian congregation and I in him, he bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing.
6"If anyone does not abide in a Christian congregation, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned.

So if you abide in a Christian congregation, you’re safe? You won’t be thrown in the fire? I highly doubt that if you have not been united to Christ.

Regarding all the passages you referenced, they are not problematic to a Catholic. Some of them are about those who are elect for eternal glory. Let me be clear. When I say that someone can lose their salvation, I am not talking about those elect for glory. As I stated earlier, the number of those elect for glory is immutable, none can be added and none can be lost. All those who are elect for glory will freely come to Christ and persevere, all of this occurring under the influence of God’s grace. Moreover, predestination in Catholicism - whether you’re a Thomist or a Molinist - is not pure foreknowledge of man’s choices, which is basically what Arminianism teaches. Catholics have a stronger view of Divine Providence. However, where we differ from Calvinism is that the number of the just is not equal to the number of those elect for glory. This is the historic teaching of Christianity as evidenced by the writings of the Church Fathers, particularly Augustine, and upheld by Martin Luther himself. In fact, Calvinism’s perseverance of the saints makes it’s first appearance in the teachings of John Calvin.

So we don’t see a contradiction between John 15 and Romans 8 or John 6. Romans 8 applies to those elect for glory, but passages like John 15 and Hebrews 6 clearly indicate that not all of the just belong to this group. There is no objective way of infallibly knowing one is a member of those elect for glory. Hence the warnings in the Bible actually serve a purpose in Catholic theology, they are not vain. Warnings like:

Revelation 22:19

19and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.

Romans 11:20-21

20Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith Do not be conceited, but fear;
21for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either.

1 Timothy 3:6

6and not a new convert, so that he will not become conceited and fall into the condemnation incurred by the devil.

1 Corinthiams 8:9-11

But beware lest somehow this liberty of yours become a stumbling block to those who are weak. 10 For if anyone sees you who have knowledge eating in an idol’s temple, will not the conscience of him who is weak be emboldened to eat those things offered to idols? 11 And because of your knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?

Luke 21:34

34"Be on guard, so that your hearts will not be weighted down with dissipation and drunkenness and the worries of life, and that day will not come on you suddenly like a trap;

In Calvinism, these warnings absolutely no purpose. If you know that you are of the elect and that you cannot lose your salvation, there is no reason to be concerned about being conceited and not being spared by God or suffering the same condemnation as the devil. There is no reason to be concerned about not being a stumbling block to a weaker brother and causing him to perish. And there is no possibilty of having one’s inheritance taken away. In other words, Calvinism makes God’s warnings vain. They serve absolutley no purpose because knowing that your salvation can never be lost undermines any purpose these warnings might have. It’s a lot of bark, but no bite.

God Bless,
Michael

The unperfected faith argument seems like the better explanation for John 15, which would align with your view. In other words these are people who actually had faith, had a deposit of the Holy Spirit, but fell away.

Perfected faith is described best by James. For example, Paul will say that Abraham was justified by his faith – but James will say it was his obedience (when He obeyed God’s command to kill Isaac) that perfected that faith. So yes we are justified by faith but it must both endure and be perfected by obedience.

However, imagine if the branch had an independent mind and didn’t think he needed to rely on the root for its nourishment. It didn’t receive the nourishment from the root because it thought it could nourish itself. All the while the branch is looking for this extrinsic source of nourishment that simply doesn’t exist. It cannot nourish itself because only the root collects water and minerals and transfers them up to its branches. In fact the branch doesn’t even have the capacity to receive nourishment from any other source. Even if it rains it cannot consume the rainwater, only the root can do this.

By failing to utterly and completely rely on the root the branch withers.

IMO the reformed system preaches this sort of utter reliance on divine providence better than any other. Not only do I not see any reason why John 15, assuming it is referring to a real faith that withers, should dilute our confidence in our own perseverance, but I firmly believe the doctrine of perseverance actually gives us the confidence we need to endure.

Confidence and reliance are intertwined. If we lack confidence that the root will sustain us then we are more likely to seek nourishment elsewhere. Whether we seek self-nourishment or nourishment through another source, our lack of confidence in the root will obstruct our reliance on it.

So the question isn’t whether some with faith can fail; but rather why do they fail? They fail because in the first instance they never really had confidence in the root. They thought the root might let them down and not perform its natural function.

They believed in God and Christ, had the Spirit in their hearts, but never really let go completely of their notion that God might cut them off. They perhaps wound up falling back into sin or stopped looking to the root altogether. Since they felt that because of this they were cut off – they never return. Why would they return if they only have an expectation of judgment and condemnation?

 

[minkymurph]

I would like to say, that I have read many theological arguments on this forum. Clever theological arguments do no convert anyone. People convert when they believe what they hear is truth.

Protestants and Catholics disagree, that is a fact. Do we feel the need to convert each other to our way of thinking? God is drawing all mankind and he does not draw an individual on the basis of clever human arguement. He draws them on the basis of truth. If OSAS is truth, then it is from God. If it is not absolute truth, it is not from God. We all have certain theological opinions. Those opinions are not necessarily divine truth.

I belive in pre-destination. The Church teaches it, Mary was pre-destined. I believe God in his foreknowledge knows how it ‘works.’ We as humans do not. Suffice to say, God always had an eternal plan for mankind and individuals. I would not attempt to say anything more in that regard as if I did, it would be guesswork. I am working out my own salvation with fear and trembling. Let’s recognize what is a theological opinion and what is absolute truth.

 

[mikeledes]

The unperfected faith argument seems like the better explanation for John 15, which would align with your view. In other words these are people who actually had faith, had a deposit of the Holy Spirit, but fell away.

Perfected faith is described best by James. For example, Paul will say that Abraham was justified by his faith – but James will say it was his obedience (when He obeyed God’s command to kill Isaac) that perfected that faith. So yes we are justified by faith but it must both endure and be perfected by obedience.

However, imagine if the branch had an independent mind and didn’t think he needed to rely on the root for its nourishment. It didn’t receive the nourishment from the root because it thought it could nourish itself. All the while the branch is looking for this extrinsic source of nourishment that simply doesn’t exist. It cannot nourish itself because only the root collects water and minerals and transfers them up to its branches. In fact the branch doesn’t even have the capacity to receive nourishment from any other source. Even if it rains it cannot consume the rainwater, only the root can do this.

By failing to utterly and completely rely on the root the branch withers.

IMO the reformed system preaches this sort of utter reliance on divine providence better than any other. Not only do I not see any reason why John 15, assuming it is referring to a real faith that withers, should dilute our confidence in our own perseverance, but I firmly believe the doctrine of perseverance actually gives us the confidence we need to endure.

Confidence and reliance are intertwined. If we lack confidence that the root will sustain us then we are more likely to seek nourishment elsewhere. Whether we seek self-nourishment or nourishment through another source, our lack of confidence in the root will obstruct our reliance on it.

So the question isn’t whether some with faith can fail; but rather why do they fail? They fail because in the first instance they never really had confidence in the root. They thought the root might let them down and not perform its natural function.

They believed in God and Christ, had the Spirit in their hearts, but never really let go completely of their notion that God might cut them off. They perhaps wound up falling back into sin or stopped looking to the root altogether. Since they felt that because of this they were cut off – they never return. Why would they return if they only have an expectation of judgment and condemnation?

Hi Sola! Sorry I took so long to respond. I’m involved in a simlar discussion in another thread. So here’s my question. If real faith can wither with finality, can that withered faith save? Doesn’t perseverance of the saints contradict the notion of a “withered” faith?

God Bless,
Michael

 

[sola_scriptura]

Hi Sola! Sorry I took so long to respond. I’m involved in a simlar discussion in another thread. So here’s my question. If real faith can wither with finality, can that withered faith save? Doesn’t perseverance of the saints contradict the notion of a “withered” faith?

God Bless,
Michael

Not at all – it withers because some people lack confidence. If we lack confidence then it’s not a perfected faith, it’s incomplete.

It represents a lack of confidence that the root will sustain us.

When Moses responded to God’s calling by asking God to allow his brother to speak in his stead before the Hebrew people. This angered God; but not because of Moses’ lack of confidence in his own speaking ability – but rather because He failed to rely on God to make him an effective speaker. He didn’t have complete faith that the root would nourish the branch with everything it needed to perform its function and bring forth fruit (to put it in a John 15 context). We see this same thing when Peter walked on water. When the wind blew he lost confidence that the root, Christ, would sustain him; and because of that he fell.

In other words if we think God will let us fall then we will fall. If we think this then our faith isn’t a complete one, but rather it can tossed by the wind. This was the confidence of Paul.

 

[distracted]

I would like to say, that I have read many theological arguments on this forum. Clever theological arguments do no convert anyone.

if clever theological arguments contain truth… then yes, they do convert… They convert one who loves truth…

There is something in the Bible (Thessalonians??) that says something about how those who do not love truth… are (something the effect of)going to be burnt with fire…

People convert when they believe what they hear is truth.

True… but some people hear a lot of truth and don’t accept it… Why? They may think they have too much to lose (in becoming Cathollic)… People convert and refuse to convert for various reasons, the truth not always being one of them…

I belive in pre-destination. The Church teaches it, Mary was pre-destined.

i could buy it that Mary was predestined but no one else… unless God decided to do so… He can do whatever he wants… but no one is, for example, destined to Hell from the day of his conception…

Let’s recognize what is a theological opinion and what is absolute truth.

a person can “know” something but not be able to prove it to another… (in which case, it is no mere opinion any longer)… this happesn a lot with me on the forums… i know something to be true - and never doubt… but i cannot always prove it to obstinate people… and sometimes all i do in attempting to prove it seems a waste of time…

experience really is the best teacher. One really has to be Catholic in order to understand Catholicism (fully)…

 

[minkymurph]

if clever theological arguments contain truth… then yes, they do convert… They convert one who loves truth…

There is something in the Bible (Thessalonians??) that says something about how those who do not love truth… are (something the effect of)going to be burnt with fire… True… but some people hear a lot of truth and don’t accept it… Why? They may think they have too much to lose (in becoming Cathollic)… People convert and refuse to convert for various reasons, the truth not always being one of them. i could buy it that Mary was predestined but no one else… unless God decided to do so… He can do whatever he wants… but no one is, for example, destined to Hell from the day of his conception.

a person can “know” something but not be able to prove it to another… (in which case, it is no mere opinion any longer)… this happesn a lot with me on the forums… i know something to be true - and never doubt… but i cannot always prove it to obstinate people… and sometimes all i do in attempting to prove it seems a waste of time.

experience really is the best teacher. One really has to be Catholic in order to understand Catholicism (fully).

.

You’ve kind of taken what I was saying onto a much higher plain. I really should have quoted the post that I was responding to. To explain further, Peter states in his second letter, 'we must recognize that the interpretation of scriptural prophecy is never a matter for the individual. For no prophecy ever came from human initiative. When people spoke for God it was the Holy Spirit that moved them In an earlier post I stated that Calvin and Luther disagreed therefore, which one of them if either where moved by the Holy Spirit?

OSAS to me, and this is a personal opinion, I understand not everyone else would see it that way, is verging on a claim to know in advance how the final judgement is to be decided which I do not believe God has revealed that as yet, to any human. We will not know the outcome of the final judgement until it happens.I was eluding to was the idea that there are theological opinions and their are infallible teachings and it is only infallible teachings that we are compelled to believe. I was attempting to explain, perhaps badly, that there is a distinction between theological opinions that are percieved by human reason and human reason alone and those that divinely revealed truth. Theological opinions can contain various degrees of truth however if they are subject to human error, which they are unless they are infallible. They may contain various degrees of truth and therefore have a certain capacity to covert lovers of truth but if they are fallible, they will always be inadequate. Only divinely revealed truth can be considered to be infallible and I yes agree with you that these truths carry the power of conversion and lovers of truth recognize them. I would be of the opinion that OSAS may have a degree of truth in it but is a fallible theological opinion and as such, we are not compelled to believe it in order to gain salvation. It is only infallible truth we are compelled to believe. Does that make sense or am I still explaining what I mean very badly?

I think John the Bapist may have been pre-destined but out side Mary and John the Baptist I have no idea. I believe God has a purpose for all individuals but that is not the same thing as pre-destination. I don’t believe anyone is pre-destined for Hell as that would mean God conferred an immortal soul on them that was incapbable of loving him. If that was the case, where is the justice in condemning them for it and God is not unjust.

I agree. Just because you can’t prove something doesn’t make it false and what can be ‘proven’ is not necessarily truth either. You are wasting your time trying to prove it as it requires God given faith. What God asked us to do what state our belief and live by it, not ‘prove’ it. A person you could ‘prove’ it to may be just as easily convinced by someone else who can put together a better arguement. A knowledge of divine truth comes from the Holy Spirit that dwells within us, not from cleverly constructed arguements.

2nd Peter 1:16 'When we told you about the power and the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, we were not slavishly repeating cleverly invented myths; … we seen his majesty with our own eyes

I agree. You cannot ‘learn’ Catholicism from a book. It can only be understood when entered into.

 

[ellammcg]

.
OSAS to me, and this is a personal opinion, I understand not everyone else would see it that way, is verging on a claim to know in advance how the final judgement is to be decided which I do not believe God has revealed that as yet, to any human. We will not know the outcome of the final judgement until it happens.

In my church there is no “verging” about it. If you claim Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior and trust in him alone- they will tell you that you are 100% certain to go to heaven, no matter what happens to you in the distant future, such as falling away, going apostate, etc. (and I don’t mean within 24 hours ). If you do go AWOL from God, however, most OSAS believers will say that you were never saved in the first place.

 

[distracted]

Protestants always seem to skip over this point you make:

Peter states in his second letter, '*we must recognize that the interpretation of scriptural prophecy is never a matter for the individual. For no prophecy ever came from human initiative. * thanks for reminding them of this scirpture…

When people spoke for God it was the Holy Spirit that moved them

In an earlier post I stated that Calvin and Luther disagreed therefore, which one of them if either where moved by the Holy Spirit?

probably neither (?)…

OSAS to me, and this is a personal opinion,

in the protestant mind is based on something other than Scirpture… like human tradition… but its not the Catholic tradition so it is OK

there is a distinction between theological opinions that are percieved by human reason and human reason alone and those that divinely revealed truth. Theological opinions can contain various degrees of truth however if they are subject to human error, which they are unless they are infallible. They may contain various degrees of truth and therefore have a certain capacity to covert lovers of truth but if they are fallible, they will always be inadequate. Only divinely revealed truth can be considered to be infallible and I yes agree with you that these truths carry the power of conversion and lovers of truth recognize them.

i like the way you explain this… i think even we Catholics forget this distinction. Fro one, we don’t always know what is speculation and what is to be believed as infallible teaching of thd Church… i, for one, have never studied the infallible documents written by popes… I’ve read fragments thereof, but not whole documents…

I would be of the opinion that OSAS may have a degree of truth in it but is a fallible theological opinion and as such, we are not compelled to believe it in order to gain salvation.

the only grain of truth it has is explained by this word:

Purgatory. If it weren’t for Purgatory… and the only place we would end up after deth was Hell or Heaaven… hardly anyone would go to Heaven… hardly anyone would be saved… osas is true in the sense that once you accept Christ, it is unlikely you will ever turn your back on him 100% for good and always… but that is NOT to say it is impossible - or even entirely unlikely - that it could happen…

A knowledge of divine truth comes from the Holy Spirit that dwells within us, not from cleverly constructed arguements.

so true… and i would like to say that there are things that increase the Holy Spirit in a person and things that take away… (sin)One thing that increases the Holy Spirit is the rosary. Other things are the Mass, confession… spending time with Jesus in the Blessed Sacramnet

(you may know this but others may not).

I agree. You cannot ‘learn’ Catholicism from a book. It can only be understood when entered into.

:harp: :heaven:

 

[minkymurph]

In my church there is no “verging” about it. If you claim Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior and trust in him alone- they will tell you that you are 100% certain to go to heaven, no matter what happens to you in the distant future, such as falling away, going apostate, etc. (and I don’t mean within 24 hours ). If you do go AWOL from God, however, most OSAS believers will say that you were never saved in the first place.

This is exactly why I said that OSAS is a fallible teaching. If people where, ‘never really saved in the first place,’ how can you know anyone is ‘really’ saved? The best you could do is that believe you are one of those individuals who are ‘really’ saved but you can’t say in relation to anyone else. That could cause individual into a false sense of security; believing that nothing will happen to them in life to cause them to loose faith and they will never stray into errors of faith or if they do, they will automatically be forgiven. They could also develop a complacency regarding Christ’s sacrifice.

If their is a possibility that a theological opinion could cause a person to stray into error regarding their faith, it cannot be considered infallible as if divinely revealed truth could lead to errors of faith, the Holy Spirit is fallible.

 

[distracted]

In my church there is no “verging” about it. If you claim Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior and trust in him alone- they will tell you that you are 100% certain to go to heaven, no matter what happens to you in the distant future, such as falling away, going apostate, etc. (and I don’t mean within 24 hours ). If you do go AWOL from God, however, most OSAS believers will say that you were never saved in the first place.

i cannot begin to relay the meaning of all my past experiences to you concerning where i have been spiritually… what all i have learned (and un-learned & re-learned…) but you are wrong… and i say this not only based on the teachings of the Church (whch can be trusted) but on these extensive experiences as well… which probably are more reliable (if only to me… personally) than even the Church teachings… If you had ever walked a half mile in my shoes… you would understand why i believe in Purgatory (etc, etc.)… Since you can’t do that… a good way to begin understanding things spiritual is… the rosary…

 

[ellammcg]

but you are wrong…

I never said those were my beliefs, only the beliefs of my church. I stopped believing in OSAS a while ago when I realized that belief means placing the words of Paul in higher esteem than the words of Jesus as written in the gospel letters. Also, that I would have to not read the Bible at it’s seemingly obvious face value every time something about salvation is written, that I would instead have to read some Protestant/Baptist commentary so that I would know the “right” way to think.

 

[distracted]

I never said those were my beliefs, only the beliefs of my church. I stopped believing in OSAS a while ago when I realized that belief means placing the words of Paul in higher esteem than the words of Jesus as written in the gospel letters. Also, that I would have to not read the Bible at it’s seemingly obvious face value every time something about salvation is written, that I would instead have to read some Protestant/Baptist commentary so that I would know the “right” way to think.

i am not sure Paul contradicts Jesus… Got any examples??

also… are you saying that to believe in OSAS you have to not beleive in the Bible? If so, i totally agree… I don’t know how anyone can read the NT and come up anything remotely like osas… blows me away…

 

[distracted]

S_S,
I am curious. Would it be possible for you to post on this thread the statement that Mary is the Mother of God?
I am asking this for purely research reasons.

Who?

Mary is the mother of God because she is mother of Christ and He is God… she cared for him all her life… so she mothered him…

She is also OUR mother… given to us through John at the foot of the cross.

Mary is the New Ark of the Covenant…

i believe related scripture is in Rev 12 and elsewhere… (Chronicles)

 

[RobHom]

… I stopped believing in OSAS a while ago when I realized that belief means placing the words of Paul in higher esteem than the words of Jesus as written in the gospel letters. Also, that I would have to not read the Bible at it’s seemingly obvious face value every time something about salvation is written, that I would instead have to read some Protestant/Baptist commentary so that I would know the “right” way to think.

You have no idea how happy it makes me to read what you posted!! There is hope out there!!! I say that because it seems to me that far to many people have tendency to nit-pick the scriptures and actually place the words of an Apostle over the very Word of God Himself!!

 

[distracted]

You have no idea how happy it makes me to read what you posted!! There is hope out there!!! I say that because it seems to me that far to many people have tendency to nit-pick the scriptures and actually place the words of an Apostle over the very Word of God Himself!!

i thoght the words of an Apostle were the Word of God…

 

[ellammcg]

i am not sure Paul contradicts Jesus… Got any examples??

Oh, I’m not saying Paul contradicts Jesus. I love the Pauline letters, they have been a blessing and a guide to me. I’m just saying Jesus repeatedly mentions things like: if you deny me before men, I will deny you before God the Father, if you don’t feed the hungry, clothe the naked, etc. you will be thrown into the everlasting fire. (2 ex-Matt 10:33, 25:41-46) That sort of thing. I think Paul should be interpreted in light of the OT and the Gospels, not the other way around. As is common in many fundamentalist/Baptist churches, we only say the first half of Romans 8:1, never the last half. “There is no no condemnation to them in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” (We always skip the purple part.) I think Paul refers to a life of holiness and obedience as a condition of eternal life (after, of course, one has accepted Jesus Christ as Lord-otherwise it would be impossible).

 

[RobHom]

i thoght the words of an Apostle were the Word of God…

Inasmuch as that is true as they taught that which was imparted to them by God…the problem is that some people have taken the notion to take snippets of Paul’s preaching out of context and have tried to use those snippets to justify their particular choice of theology. There is a particular phrase in Paul’s letters that those people use as their justification to believe that one only has to “believe” and nothing else to attain salvation.

In that context, those people disavow anything to the contrary, in effect placing the taken “out of context” snippet from Paul, above the very Word of God, that being Christ and his direct instructions to us.

 

[distracted]

. As is common in many fundamentalist/Baptist churches, we only say the first half of Romans 8:1, never the last half. “There is no no condemnation to them in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” (We always skip the purple part.) I think Paul refers to a life of holiness and obedience as a condition of eternal life (after, of course, one has accepted Jesus Christ as Lord-otherwise it would be impossible).

are you still baptist? Porque??

if i can be honest… i think there many scriptures that are, as you say, skipped over…

do you know the Bible well?? have you read the whole NT?