Assurance of Salvation (Part II)

[pocohombre]

I think you are confusing God’s foreknowedge with foredecision. God already knows what we will choose, but He allows us to choose it. He desires that all are saved, and come to the knowledge of the Truth, but not all come to Him so that they can be saved.

 

[paul_c]

No, the word was predestination used here by Catholics and Augustine. Scripture uses the term also, along with “elect”. I do agree that foreknowledge is used in the same chapter.

It is indeed Catholic teaching that some are predestined for heaven. It is also Catholic teaching that no one is predestined for hell.

Thanks, but I still think discernment/judgement can be used in determining the spiritual status of ourselves, others and congregations. The spirit discerns all things. This does not abrogate the sovereignty and perfect judgement of God. He does give us the criteria.

You can certainly judge whether an action is sinful but how can you ever think that you have the insight to judge a human soul? Why would you even want such an awesome responsibility?

Is there a difference between a destination and how and with what we arrive with ? I don’t believe Paul ever questions his final destination or his salvation (that he has “attained”). Salvation is not a “prize”. The prize is to finish the race, to finish what we were called to do AFTER our initial calling/salvation. It’s like saved for what ? To do the good works we were predestined to do, to finish his apostleship. Do we not know of those that have not finished the race of their calling ? How many priests, bishops, pastors, leaders etc (in all our congregations/denominations) etc. have been defrocked ? Did these folk lose their salvation ? For sure they lost their ministry . This is what Paul is talking about. Each of us has a calling in Christ Jesus. Perfection and maturity in that calling is the goal, in that I agree with you, that we are not to be complacent but push forward, with the light we have at present (hold on to what we have).

People make mistakes, it is true, but how can anyone understand their relationship with God. Our insight is so limited.

You know, Paul probably didn’t spend a lot of time dwelling on whether he was going to heaven or hell. He was too busy worrying about saving others to worry about himself. When he does bring it up in his epistles, its usually as an example of not judging others or himself (except at the end, when he is about to be beheaded and he tells Timothy he knows his life is over and he feels he’s run to win the prize.)

I ask you to reflect on a simple fact. Who is it that is always asking " have you been saved?" You never hear this question from a Catholic. Why is that? Because this question is not about love, which is doing things without expecting anything in return. “Have you been saved?” to me comes off as someone trying to convince themselves that they are indeed saved when there is that plaguing question in their minds about whether it is in fact true. And it is never resolved, because the keep asking the question and telling anyone that will listen that they too have been saved. I’m saying this so that you’ll listen to what the spirit is telling you because I want you to actually BE saved and that doesn’t happen with a one time event.

 

[mackbrislawn]

OldProf;

38 For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 8:38-39 ESV, full context is all about God’s everlasting love in Romans 8:31-39.)

That is another example. Nothing “in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord” means that even we, who of course are created, and created with our own free will, but even that will not “be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.” That is a fantastic revelation! Nothing will separate us (the Elect, the Sheep) from the Love of God!

“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son…” God loved the world, which includes the unsaved as well as the saved. This means the verses above do not refer exclusively to the Elect, but to the non-Elect as well. Therefore it also can be said, nothing will separate the reprobate sinners from God’s love, either. Hence to say these verses refer only to the Elect is incorrect and do not have the meaning imputed to them, and do not support assurance of salvation. Even after we sin we are still loved by God, even sin does not separate us from His love. But, if we do not repent of our sin, it will separate us from Heaven.

What the above quoted verses do mean is that we can have absolute trust in our Heavenly Father, as contrasted to the whimsical, untrustworthy pagan gods.

 

[guanophore]

No, the word was predestination used here by Catholics and Augustine. Scripture uses the term also, along with "elect". I do agree that foreknowledge is used in the same chapter.

Yes, but it is not used in the sense of replacing the will of man to choose his own destiny. We are not puppets, but made in His image and likeness.

Thanks, but I still think discernment/judgement can be used in determining the spiritual status of ourselves, others and congregations.

No arguement there. We are required to exercise this kind of discernment.

The spirit discerns all things. This does not abrogate the sovereignty and perfect judgement of God. He does give us the criteria.

Indeed!

Is there a difference between a destination and how and with what we arrive with ?

I would postulate that, without certain “what’s” we may not arrive at the destination at all.

I don’t believe Paul ever questions his final destination or his salvation (that he has “attained”).

He refers to what he has attained thus far, but never does he assume that he has “arrived” in this life.

Salvation is not a “prize”. The prize is to finish the race, to finish what we were called to do AFTER our initial calling/salvation.

This is what you have been taught to believe, but it is not scriptural.

It’s like saved for what ? To do the good works we were predestined to do, to finish his apostleship. Do we not know of those that have not finished the race of their calling ? How many priests, bishops, pastors, leaders etc (in all our congregations/denominations) etc. have been defrocked ? Did these folk lose their salvation ? For sure they lost their ministry . This is what Paul is talking about.

The good works we are called to fulfill are not separated from the grace that saves us. If one puts one’s hand to the plough, then looks back, one is not worthy of the kingdom.

Each of us has a calling in Christ Jesus. Perfection and maturity in that calling is the goal, in that I agree with you, that we are not to be complacent but push forward, with the light we have at present (hold on to what we have).

Yes, we are in agreement on this point. Throughout this life we run the race, fight the good fight, and work out our salvation. We do not know until the last day if we have persevered to the end.

Rev 2:7
To everyone who conquers, I will give permission to eat from the tree of life that is in the paradise of God.

Does it seem that those who do not conquer will eat of that tree?

Rev 2:10-11
Be faithful until death, and I will give you the crown of life. 11 Let anyone who has an ear listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches. Whoever conquers will not be harmed by the second death.

Does it seem that those who are not faithful until death will get the crown of life?

Matt 10:33
33 but whoever denies me before others, I also will deny before my Father in heaven.

 

[pocohombre]

]Poco…that is what the account from Paul says. Are you doubting what the Paul wrote? nd it is a revelation to him.
Ah…seems you are rationalizing, Poco…the verse/passage is clear…to get assurance that his gospel Paul is bringing to the Gentiles is the same as the Apostles.

Yes and no .You have not given the full story. You have not combined with the same story being told in Acts . Ask yourself, why after fourteen years ? Why not the first time they met ? I said he submitted to Peter and why . Yes he laid his gospel to the gentiles down for "inspection’’, and I told you why. Was it because Peter was head apostle and Paul being needed his blessing and assurance after 14 years ? If so why?

Paul does not say that, in his account.

Many think acts 15 is the same story .He does say it in Galatians .He speaks of false brethren,bring bondage to the gospel.

And what you are saying is contrary to the result…

No, it is the result. Problem solved by the consensus and witness from the Jeusalem “pillars”.The false brethren had no support and were silenced ,so that Paul could continue his ministry unhindered by the judaizers/circumcisers.

Where do you see this “endorsement in the light of the detractors.”?

As you stated, Paul’s message was perceived to be “graced,” “effectual” just as Peters was to the Jews. Is endorsement the wrong word ? Do you deny there were detractors before this ruling on Paul’s method with gentiles( not circumcising them) ?

Then why did the revelation to Paul say to go to Jerusalem and see the Apostles? What purpose was it for?

Been stated twice now, but thank you, for it does require the question,hence the answer.

It also shows one thing…obedience and humility and submission to authority.

no it shows much more as I have stated.

So what about this one…it shows a humble leader in Peter who could accept correction of a moral failing on his part. Do you see Paul saying anything further after he corrects Peter?

No ,but it was the third time the issue came up for Peter (this was after the Jerusalem council,after His dream)

How would you apply this passage today, in your situation? [/SIGN

Again, I believe that Christ is the Messiah, came in the flesh. I have listened. Faith comes by hearing, by the word of God, and by the foolishness of preaching should men be saved. I have listened to the evangelist, to the pastor, to the teacher, the Body, the church. I have also listened to the Teacher, as St.Augustine and other earlier Fathers refer to Christ, the Trinity. That is how I apply that scripture today ,to myself. Is there a better application ?
[/quote]

 

[pocohombre]

Yes, but it is not used in the sense of replacing the will of man to choose his own destiny. We are not puppets, but made in His image and likeness

 

[OldProf]

Are you posting from heaven OldProf? i ask this cause you seem to imply that you have perservered.

and St.Paul continues from verse 6 to say “without offense…”

fbl9, no, not posting from heaven!! That would be great though! However, 2 Cor 13:5 says, “Examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Or do you not realize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you fail to meet the test!”

The New Testament gives us abundant guidance on how we can examine ourselves.

I originally posted the following on 4 APR 12, #72, pg 5 (forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=658668&page=5)

---

According to Paul, we need to examine ourselves (2 Cor 13:5). Am I a true Christian who can be assured of eternal life? From the Bible, I can see the following evidences regarding a person who says, “I am a Christian.”

Evidence List 1:

A. VISIBLE MORALITY
B. INTELLECTUAL KNOWLEDGE
C. RELIGIOUS INVOLVEMENT
D. ACTIVE MINISTRY
E. CONVICTION OF SIN
F. ASSURANCE
G. TIME OF DECISION

Evidence List 2:

A. LOVE FOR GOD
B. REPENTANCE FROM SIN
C. GENUINE HUMILITY
D. DEVOTION TO GOD’S GLORY
E. CONTINUAL PRAYER
F. SELFLESS LOVE
G. SEPARATION FROM THE WORLD
H. SPIRITUAL GROWTH
I. OBEDIENT LIVING

If list 1 is true, but not list 2, then I cannot tell if that person is a professing Christian, or if they are Christian, but such a babe in Christ that they haven’t matured to list 2.

If list 2 is true, then list 1 will also be true. List 2 “fruits” will persevere in the Christian.

I don’t have any trust in my own “good works” that fall under the category of Eph 2:10. God prepared me for those, and it is not my doing my part or my cooperating with God as I work out my salvation. Christians do good works - not to secure salvation, but because of their salvation. “Professing Christians” can leave the faith because they were never known by Jesus (Matt 7:21-23) nor ever one of His sheep (1 John 2:19). They were not born of God (John 1:13) or born again (John 3:3) or a new creation (2 Cor 5:17).

I believe the Bible clearly teaches that a Christian can have an assurance of his/her salvation. Will Jesus, the Good Shepherd (John 9:35-10:30), lose any sheep? No. Will God who began a good work in us (Php 1:6) quit on us? No, He will complete it. Will someone, chosen by God, ever actually be lost (John 6:37-40)? No. Can we have peace with God (Rom 5:1) through our Christian faith? Yes. Seems like the Christian can have an assurance of their salvation (1 John 5:13 - a wonderful letter written to address that very issue - the themes in 1 John are happiness, holiness, and security).

A Christian has the Son and has eternal life (John 5:24 and 1 John 5:12). It does seem that this teaches we have “eternal life,” and not just “the possibility of eternal life if you can avoid committing a mortal sin and die in a state of grace.”

Having “mortal sin” hanging over our heads robs us of our peace with God and of any assurance of salvation. If you review the verses above, with proper context, then how can we not have an assurance that we have salvation, that we have eternal life?

Secure in Christ, OldProf​

So, we know Christians sin and Christians repent. My recommendation is take 1 John as a checklist. Read 1 John and I predict the Christian will say over and over, “I agree”, “I agree”, “I agree” - and when they get to 1 John 5:13 they should also say, “I agree, I can have an assurance of my salvation based on what I believe.” Is that possible for the Roman Catholic who thinks the Bible teaches that someone can be born again, a sheep, one of the elect, and yet can be allowed by the Savior to make a critical free-will error to reject Savior? The view looks at John 6:37-40 is more clear.

Isn’t Jesus the author and perfecter/finisher of our faith? (Hebrews 12:2 )

Regards, OldProf

 

[fbl9]

fbl9, no, not posting from heaven!! That would be great though! However, 2 Cor 13:5 says, “Examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Or do you not realize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you fail to meet the test!”

The New Testament gives us abundant guidance on how we can examine ourselves.

I originally posted the following on 4 APR 12, #72, pg 5 (forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=658668&page=5)

---

According to Paul, we need to examine ourselves (2 Cor 13:5). Am I a true Christian who can be assured of eternal life? From the Bible, I can see the following evidences regarding a person who says, “I am a Christian.”

Evidence List 1:

A. VISIBLE MORALITY
B. INTELLECTUAL KNOWLEDGE
C. RELIGIOUS INVOLVEMENT
D. ACTIVE MINISTRY
E. CONVICTION OF SIN
F. ASSURANCE
G. TIME OF DECISION

Evidence List 2:

A. LOVE FOR GOD
B. REPENTANCE FROM SIN
C. GENUINE HUMILITY
D. DEVOTION TO GOD’S GLORY
E. CONTINUAL PRAYER
F. SELFLESS LOVE
G. SEPARATION FROM THE WORLD
H. SPIRITUAL GROWTH
I. OBEDIENT LIVING

If list 1 is true, but not list 2, then I cannot tell if that person is a professing Christian, or if they are Christian, but such a babe in Christ that they haven’t matured to list 2.

If list 2 is true, then list 1 will also be true. List 2 “fruits” will persevere in the Christian.

I don’t have any trust in my own “good works” that fall under the category of Eph 2:10. God prepared me for those, and it is not my doing my part or my cooperating with God as I work out my salvation. Christians do good works - not to secure salvation, but because of their salvation. “Professing Christians” can leave the faith because they were never known by Jesus (Matt 7:21-23) nor ever one of His sheep (1 John 2:19). They were not born of God (John 1:13) or born again (John 3:3) or a new creation (2 Cor 5:17).

I believe the Bible clearly teaches that a Christian can have an assurance of his/her salvation. Will Jesus, the Good Shepherd (John 9:35-10:30), lose any sheep? No. Will God who began a good work in us (Php 1:6) quit on us? No, He will complete it. Will someone, chosen by God, ever actually be lost (John 6:37-40)? No. Can we have peace with God (Rom 5:1) through our Christian faith? Yes. Seems like the Christian can have an assurance of their salvation (1 John 5:13 - a wonderful letter written to address that very issue - the themes in 1 John are happiness, holiness, and security).

A Christian has the Son and has eternal life (John 5:24 and 1 John 5:12). It does seem that this teaches we have “eternal life,” and not just “the possibility of eternal life if you can avoid committing a mortal sin and die in a state of grace.”

**Having “mortal sin” hanging over our heads robs us of our peace with God and of any assurance of salvation. If you review the verses above, with proper context, then how can we not have an assurance that we have salvation, that we have eternal life? **Secure in Christ, OldProf​

So, we know Christians sin and Christians repent. My recommendation is take 1 John as a checklist. Read 1 John and I predict the Christian will say over and over, “I agree”, “I agree”, “I agree” - and when they get to 1 John 5:13 they should also say, “I agree, I can have an assurance of my salvation based on what I believe.” Is that possible for the Roman Catholic who thinks the Bible teaches that someone can be born again, a sheep, one of the elect, and yet can be allowed by the Savior to make a critical free-will error to reject Savior? The view looks at John 6:37-40 is more clear.

Isn’t Jesus the author and perfecter/finisher of our faith? (Hebrews 12:2 )

Regards, OldProf

Well at least you got the bolded part correct Why would mortal sin rob us of God’s peace? Is it because mortal sin puts us at ementy with God?

 

[paul_c]

fbl9, no, not posting from heaven!! That would be great though! However, 2 Cor 13:5 says, “Examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Or do you not realize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you fail to meet the test!”

The New Testament gives us abundant guidance on how we can examine ourselves.

I originally posted the following on 4 APR 12, #72, pg 5 (forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=658668&page=5)

---

According to Paul, we need to examine ourselves (2 Cor 13:5). Am I a true Christian who can be assured of eternal life? From the Bible, I can see the following evidences regarding a person who says, “I am a Christian.”

Evidence List 1:

A. VISIBLE MORALITY
B. INTELLECTUAL KNOWLEDGE
C. RELIGIOUS INVOLVEMENT
D. ACTIVE MINISTRY
E. CONVICTION OF SIN
F. ASSURANCE
G. TIME OF DECISION

Evidence List 2:

A. LOVE FOR GOD
B. REPENTANCE FROM SIN
C. GENUINE HUMILITY
D. DEVOTION TO GOD’S GLORY
E. CONTINUAL PRAYER
F. SELFLESS LOVE
G. SEPARATION FROM THE WORLD
H. SPIRITUAL GROWTH
I. OBEDIENT LIVING

If list 1 is true, but not list 2, then I cannot tell if that person is a professing Christian, or if they are Christian, but such a babe in Christ that they haven’t matured to list 2.

If list 2 is true, then list 1 will also be true. List 2 “fruits” will persevere in the Christian.

Old Prof, I have pointed out to you in the past that neither list is specific to Christians. I would think you would alter your list to at least make mention of Jesus and His Church.

I don’t have any trust in my own “good works” that fall under the category of Eph 2:10. God prepared me for those, and it is not my doing my part or my cooperating with God as I work out my salvation. Christians do good works - not to secure salvation, but because of their salvation.

So if they don’t do good works, we can just assume that they haven’t been saved? So be a straightforward extension, if you fail to persevere in good works, then you are reprobate, since the saved do good works. Is that right?

“Professing Christians” can leave the faith because they were never known by Jesus (Matt 7:21-23) nor ever one of His sheep (1 John 2:19). They were not born of God (John 1:13) or born again (John 3:3) or a new creation (2 Cor 5:17).

Despite believing that they were saved, right? So if this is the case, how can you know you are saved and not just deluding yourself?

I believe the Bible clearly teaches that a Christian can have an assurance of his/her salvation. Will Jesus, the Good Shepherd (John 9:35-10:30), lose any sheep? No. Will God who began a good work in us (Php 1:6) quit on us? No, He will complete it. Will someone, chosen by God, ever actually be lost (John 6:37-40)? No. Can we have peace with God (Rom 5:1) through our Christian faith? Yes. Seems like the Christian can have an assurance of their salvation (1 John 5:13 - a wonderful letter written to address that very issue - the themes in 1 John are happiness, holiness, and security).

you are unfortunately reading only part of the gospel message. Its like this. The gospel message is " God will save you if you cooperate with the graces he freely gives you" You pass over everything after IF, like there is no responsibility on us. Yes most of every letter from the apostles is focused on how to live the Christian life. Explain why this is the case if we didn’t have a choice on whether to do it.

A Christian has the Son and has eternal life (John 5:24 and 1 John 5:12). It does seem that this teaches we have “eternal life,” and not just “the possibility of eternal life if you can avoid committing a mortal sin and die in a state of grace.”

Having “mortal sin” hanging over our heads robs us of our peace with God and of any assurance of salvation. If you review the verses above, with proper context, then how can we not have an assurance that we have salvation, that we have eternal life?

Secure in Christ, OldProf

If you were worried about doing God’s will, you frankly wouldn’t be worried about mortal sin hanging over your head. Love others and leave the judgment to God.​

So, we know Christians sin and Christians repent. My recommendation is take 1 John as a checklist. Read 1 John and I predict the Christian will say over and over, “I agree”, “I agree”, “I agree” - and when they get to 1 John 5:13 they should also say, “I agree, I can have an assurance of my salvation based on what I believe.” Is that possible for the Roman Catholic who thinks the Bible teaches that someone can be born again, a sheep, one of the elect, and yet can be allowed by the Savior to make a critical free-will error to reject Savior? The view looks at John 6:37-40 is more clear.

Isn’t Jesus the author and perfecter/finisher of our faith? (Hebrews 12:2 );

Sins are not mistakes or errors. To commit a sin, you must freely and knowingly do something you know to be against God’s will for you. And yes, God loves us enough to let us have true free will and to make choices that really matter. We are men,made in the image and likeness of God, not puppets

 

[pocohombre]

The good works we are called to fulfill are not separated from the grace that saves us

Yes and no. Of course all gracious blessings are from God. I would add that there is a definite distinction between, justification, sanctification and glorification. They are distinct phases

If one puts one’s hand to the plough, then looks back, one is not worthy of the kingdom

Again, is this person reaaly saved ? Is that like the rich young ruler, who obeyed all since his youth, but he “looked back/at” his riches and could go no further. His seed never brought him to life in Christ. He was not born again. He was nutured in the church (temple), and knew all about the traditions and ordinances of the one true faith. Barhmitzva’d, circumcised, but no cigar. Not effectual rites.

 

[brb3]

Guanophore…U say God knows our future, before we get chance to exercise our free will,… next week or next year.
If that be true, Jesus can absolutely promise the Father that he will deliver all those the Father gave him. Jesus can talk of Salvation Assurance, but we can’t ?

And, even if we resolved to use only the scripture on SA that doesn’t quote Christ, …since it is all inspired of HS, it’s just as emphatic/certain as what Christ Foreknew and Taught.

Nevertheless, foreknowledge of our futures, would seem to rule out free will, at least as humans define/view it. I can understand where Calvin hit the wall …when he tried to understand the mystery of God’s foreknowledge, Omniscience.

 

[paul_c]

Guanophore…U say God knows our future, before we get chance to exercise our free will,… next week or next year.
If that be true, Jesus can absolutely promise the Father that he will deliver all those the Father gave him. Jesus can talk of Salvation Assurance, but we can’t ?

And, even if we resolved to use only the scripture on SA that doesn’t quote Christ, …since it is all inspired of HS, it’s just as emphatic/certain as what Christ Foreknew and Taught.

Nevertheless, foreknowledge of our futures, would seem to rule out free will, at least as humans define/view it. I can understand where Calvin hit the wall …when he tried to understand the mystery of God’s foreknowledge, Omniscience.

No foreknowledge does not rule out free will. For instance, if I was playing one on one basketball against Lebron James, you could pretty accurately predict the outcome without having any effect on what actually happens. This is how it is with God. He knows exactly what WILL happen but the actions and decisions are still really free.

 

[pocohombre]

The Church is what brings the truth about salvation to us and it is the Church that administers the life saving sacraments that Jesus initiated. You can’t find new life without the church. Even you as a Protestant, are dependent on the Catholic Church for your knowledge of Christ, however obscured, because that Bible you cling to is a product of that Church.

The church is the pillar of truth, agreed. Life saving sacraments is telling for now we are saved by that work ? Not all churches consider their sacraments “life saving”, nor do they all have seven…As far as who gave us the bible, yes it was early city congregations that first nurtured them. But it is divisive to say it was the Roman Catholic church that gave the Book to us .The Pope was right at the Vatican Council to be more ecumenical and say it was God that gave us the Bible.

There have been many threads to this effect but its a really hard to maek the argument that when you leave the CAtholic church for another faith, you are still part of it. That is the argument that every Protestant tries to make but think about it. If you were in a club and quit to create your own competing club, aren’t you implicitly saying that you don’t accept the original club?

Is that how you feel about those outside of Roman fielty ? We are not part of the universal Body, the church ? Isn’t that contrary to CC teaching ?

Its only divisive to those that desire autonomy to make their own decisions.

The early churches were self governing but united by the apostles, and the Word, and the Vicar of Christ, the Holy Spirit. Protestants believe that no Christian can be autonomous from them.

Virtually everyone is beholden to some church leader. Patriarchs and bishops act as their own popes once they leave the church.

That is right, much like at the beginning (before there was an effectual pope and no true pilgrim had to leave ). Thanks for recognizing we do believe in church authority /heirarchy, everything you do except for head bishop and different understanding of nature of “priests”.

 

[pocohombre]

It is indeed Catholic teaching that some are predestined for heaven. It is also Catholic teaching that no one is predestined for hell.

Still somewhat inconsistent.

You can certainly judge whether an action is sinful but how can you ever think that you have the insight to judge a human soul?

So there is a disconnect between what a person says or does and what he is on the inside ? So one does not speak out of the abundance of their heart ? So we can not know them by their fruits ?

You know, Paul probably didn’t spend a lot of time dwelling on whether he was going to heaven or hell. He was too busy worrying about saving others to worry about himself. When he does bring it up in his epistles, its usually as an example of not judging others or himself (except at the end, when he is about to be beheaded and he tells Timothy he knows his life is over and he feels he’s run to win the prize.)

The prize was not “salvation” or heaven. Paul knew to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord . Quite simple for him. No mention of “condition” or remaining in grace ,free from mortal sin.See thread #321.

I ask you to reflect on a simple fact. Who is it that is always asking " have you been saved?" You never hear this question from a Catholic. Why is that?

I think it is quite simple . Protestants are more evangelical, emphasizing Christ and His new birth. Catholics are more parochial, less universal, emphasizing their Church. Catholic salvation is more institutional, in that it is achieved thru rites and sacraments, as you said, being a part of the club. So Protestants says having Christ,being born again, puts you in the Church, His body . I feel Catholics say the Body, the Church puts you in Christ…David says a wise man saves souls, hence the main thing is the main thing, is one born again. And this is love, that if you see a soul headed for destruction you help him. A protestant says to the imperiled soul, “You need Jesus”. A Catholic says , “You need the Catholic Church”

cause this question is not about love,

Isn’t it ? Hopefully the question is asked in love, in a genuine concern for the other person .Of course all good things can be done wrongly , not in love unfortunately.

which is doing things without expecting anything in return.

Good. I have heard that even the best evangelist squelches the spirit when he goes beyond saying, " Meet Jesus.", and starts saying, " Come and be part of my church/denomination".

“have you been saved?” to me comes off as someone trying to convince themselves that they are indeed saved when there is that plaguing question in their minds about whether it is in fact true. And it is never resolved, because the keep asking the question and telling anyone that will listen that they too have been saved. I’m saying this so that you’ll listen to what the spirit is telling you because I want you to actually BE saved and that doesn’t happen with a one time event.

Understand . Humans have made many mistakes when trying to share. We have hypocrites, self righteous, some doing it as a work and not a labor of love. Indeed a dull, twanging bell. But glory be to God, for wisdom does cry out from the rooftops. There are occasions when it is done right and the occasion is providential… I understand your definition of saved ( being continual). Perhaps the person should be more specific and ask if the person is born again, gone from death to life. In that we are more in agreement. That is a one time event, for which we both hope all would pas thru.

 

[paul_c]

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul c View Post

It is not divisive to say that the Holy Spirit inspired the Catholic Church to create the bible, it is an historical fact. As for the sacraments, of course they are saving. They are the instruments of God’s grace. Why do you think that Jesus initiated the Eucharist? Why did he commission the apostles to baptize all the nations in Matthew 28?

Quote:
There have been many threads to this effect but its a really hard to make the argument that when you leave the CAtholic church for another faith, you are still part of it. That is the argument that every Protestant tries to make but think about it. If you were in a club and quit to create your own competing club, aren’t you implicitly saying that you don’t accept the original club?

Do you feel you are a part of the Catholic Church, which means you are in communion with the Pope?

Quote:

Its only divisive to those that desire autonomy to make their own decisions

Quote:
Virtually everyone is beholden to some church leader. Patriarchs and bishops act as their own popes once they leave the church.

the point is that you have chosen a different leader than that annointed by Jesus.

 

[pablope]

[SIGN]

Yes…he meets Peter twice…first alone for about 15 days. Again, your timeline is skewed.

Let me ask you…Poco…which is more absurd…that Paul present his gospel to the Gentiles prior to going on his first missionary journey and prior to being ordained and sent?

Or after his first missionary journey, after he had gone and preached to the Gentiles, he goes to present his gospel for assurance that it is not in vain?

Paul presented his gospel, in response to a revalation form God…to get assurance it is from God…and it is a sign of submission and obedience to authority.

Many think acts 15 is the same story .He does say it in Galatians .He speaks of false brethren,bring bondage to the gospel.No, it is the result. Problem solved by the consensus and witness from the Jeusalem “pillars”.The false brethren had no support and were silenced ,so that Paul could continue his ministry unhindered by the judaizers/circumcisers.

Wrong…Poco…see my timeline above. You have been presented wrong information.

As you stated, Paul’s message was perceived to be “graced,” “effectual” just as Peters was to the Jews. Is endorsement the wrong word ? Do you deny there were detractors before this ruling on Paul’s method with gentiles( not circumcising them) ?

Poco…how could there be detractors when Paul has not even gone on his first mission to the Gentiles?

Again, I believe that Christ is the Messiah, came in the flesh. I have listened. Faith comes by hearing, by the word of God, and by the foolishness of preaching should men be saved. I have listened to the evangelist, to the pastor, to the teacher, the Body, the church. I have also listened to the Teacher, as St.Augustine and other earlier Fathers refer to Christ, the Trinity. That is how I apply that scripture today ,to myself. Is there a better application ?

I have to go…will reply to this later…meanwhile…give it more thought.

 

[brb3]

Old Prof …

1. 
   
   As a former Protestant, we used to always fall back on the verse “and the Spirit will guide you unto all truth” …
   
   yet one Protestant’s truth is another’s fiction. This always bothered me. Does it bother you ? How do you explain the Protestant truth conundrum ?
   
   So, we finally decided our areas of disagreement must constitute the non-essential matters. But, we couldn’t agree on much of anything. Was water baptism essential, did we even need to attend church on regular basis, was divorce & remarriage ok, birth control, abortion, etc …? We couldn’t even come to a consensus on what the Holy Spirit was, or role He played. Some even believed the HS was only a 1st century phenomenon…leading to demonstrations of tongues, to get the church off to a roaring start.
   
   But, we all had salvation assurance !!! That much we ALL agreed on.

 

[paul_c]

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul c View Post
It is indeed Catholic teaching that some are predestined for heaven. It is also Catholic teaching that no one is predestined for hell.

Nothing inconsistent about it. Mary was destined to be the mother of our Lord for all eternity. She was singly blessed. That doesn’t mean that other people who weren’t the mother of God can’t get to heaven.

Quote:
You can certainly judge whether an action is sinful but how can you ever think that you have the insight to judge a human soul?

You don’t know their intentions, you don’t know their situation, and most of all you don’t know what they will become. If you judged St. Augustine by his youth, you might never have suspected he would become a great saint. Same with St. Francis of Assisi.

Q

uote:
You know, Paul probably didn’t spend a lot of time dwelling on whether he was going to heaven or hell. He was too busy worrying about saving others to worry about himself. When he does bring it up in his epistles, its usually as an example of not judging others or himself (except at the end, when he is about to be beheaded and he tells Timothy he knows his life is over and he feels he’s run to win the prize.)

I admit to being a bit lose in my statement and you are absolutely right, the prize was being with Jesus.

 

[paul_c]

Quote:
I ask you to reflect on a simple fact. Who is it that is always asking " have you been saved?" You never hear this question from a Catholic. Why is that?

Well, we’re teaching each other about our biases here.
I viewed the constant Protestant refrain of “I’ve been saved” as some kind of pathetic self -convincing effort. You are saying you just put yourself in the hands of Jesus. So be it. That’s not a bad place to start. But don’t leave out the rest. Its a covenant agreement. When you are saved, you must live life as a Christian and persevere in love. And don’t take for granted that the sacraments are a visual instrument of God’s grace. And remember also, that the church has been teaching the way to true sanctification and holiness for 2000 years. It is very, very deep and very, very spiritual. Turning away from such advice is a mistake.

Quote:
cause this question is not about love,

very true. I appreciate it that you are telling me that I can rest easy in the comfort of the Lord, whose yoke is easy and who loves all perfectly. But please also recognize that I am looking out for your interests when I remind you not to be complacent and to continue to live a life of love, even if you think you are already assured of heaven.

Quote:
which is doing things without expecting anything in return.

Not always. Depends on the percieved motivation. We are all called to help each other find the way to heaven. If its done in that spirit, then the response can be gratitude. I feel that way about people that have helped me on my journey. If its done to get the tithes, well that’s another thing all together.

Q

uote:
“have you been saved?” to me comes off as someone trying to convince themselves that they are indeed saved when there is that plaguing question in their minds about whether it is in fact true. And it is never resolved, because the keep asking the question and telling anyone that will listen that they too have been saved. I’m saying this so that you’ll listen to what the spirit is telling you because I want you to actually BE saved and that doesn’t happen with a one time event.

Well, this whole concept of being saved is very foreign to Catholic thinking. Its more like an every day thing for us and the focus really is on helping others and doing our best to love Jesus rather than thinking about our personal salvation. Now granted, we recognize that we are reborn in baptism. That we do have in common (although I don’t know what your mechanism is for rebirth in your particular denomination). There just is so much more to following Christ than that though. To be a true Christian, you must take up your cross and follow him and you must love as He loved.

 

[mackbrislawn]

pocohombre;10380658

Still somewhat inconsistent.

Perhaps, depending on how you view predestination or not, double or single. Some may actually be predestined for heaven, but that does not mean the rest are condemned to hell. The rest may be saved and go to heaven as well, they simply aren’t predestined beforehand.

So there is a disconnect between what a person says or does and what he is on the inside ?

Not necessarily, but it means we aren’t supposed to be the one that judges whether that person will go to hell or not. We can judge, however, whether we should associate with that person or not, or follow his example. Or warn him he is on the wrong road.

So we can not know them by their fruits ?

We know by their fruits whether they are speaking truly or not, of God or not, and hence whether we should follow them. From my viewpoint, the fruits of the Reformation have been discord, division, uncertainty, relativism, liberal modernism in which even scripture is questioned as being from God. Fruits of the Pandora’s box opened by the Reformers.

That’s why even though the Reformation has many attractions, by its ultimate fruits we now know that these attractions are a siren song.