A
Amamori
Guest
…Ah, I see.
Sorry, I misinterpreted the quote, partly because its context was removed and partly because I neglected to notice the qualifiers at the beginning.
- Status
Sorry, I misinterpreted the quote, partly because its context was removed and partly because I neglected to notice the qualifiers at the beginning.
po18guy
Well-known member
Catholics go 100% with the glorious Apostle Paul on this:
Romans 11:18-23
Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. Thou wilt say then: The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.
Well: because of unbelief they were broken off. But thou standest by faith: be not highminded, but fear. For if God hath not spared the natural branches, fear lest perhaps he also spare not thee. See then the goodness and the severity of God: towards them indeed that are fallen, the severity; but towards thee, the goodness of God, if thou abide in goodness, otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.
2 Peter 1:10-11
Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)
Wherefore, brethren, labour the more, that by good works you may make sure your calling and election. For doing these things, you shall not sin at any time. For so an entrance shall be ministered to you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
Must one be a theologian to be saved?
O
OldProf
Guest
fhansen, good to hear from you again. Can’t agree, however, with an idea of scriptural uncertainty on AoS. My view is that Scripture is pretty clear on the matter. That is why I’ve written what I have about 1 John and the summary statement:
I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life. 1 John 5:13 ESV Biblegateway
Is 1 John a letter to Christians? Yes! Consider:
1 John
2:1 My little children, I am writing these things to you
2:7 Beloved, I am writing you no new commandment
2:18 Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming
2:19-21 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us. But you have been anointed by the Holy One, and you all have knowledge. I write to you, not because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and because no lie is of the truth.
It is a letter to Christians about true and false Christianity and that true Christians can be sure that they have eternal life.
I’ve also emphasized the clarity of Scripture on “eternal life” (or “everlasting life”) which would be a very poor choice of words if someone had it, then lost it, then had it again, then lost it again … etc. And the clarity of Scripture on Jesus’ sheep - He is the Good Shepherd and His sheep “shall never perish.”
Question: Is ANYONE, that is, any RC apologist, going to deal with John 9 thru John 10:30? And how this fits with John 6:35-40, 44, 65??
fhansen, perhaps you have a specific Scripture you would like me to review and explain in the context of my views on eternal security and AoS. I’m willing.
Regards, OldProf
po18guy
Well-known member
We are not saved by a single bible verse. Or ten. Of fifty. Or all of them. We are saved by persevering to the end in faith, combined with the fruits of that faith - works of charity - just as Jesus, the only Son of God, tells us. Mercy, still, gets us through the gates of heaven, no matter what.
Question: As you see it, is a Catholic, Anglican or Lutheran condemned by persevering in faith, while offering works of charity as the fruits of their faith?
Put another way: Must we have faith in AoS to be saved?
F
fhansen
Guest
Yes, but I and others have listed them more than once on this very thread. Doesn’t seem to go anywhere, however.
po18guy
Well-known member
As far as I know, there are only laymen and women here. You should submit your question to “Ask an Apologist” or call into Catholic Answers Live.
Your answers may be found here. What the Church teaches is what I believe. Period. The Church being the pillar and ground of the truth - if you believe Paul. But, you have rejected that Church, so what foundation can we find for your beliefs? They are personal opinions of what the bible might mean, which are rejected by various fellow protestants! What of them? Do you infallibly declare them to be in error?
Catholics follow Jesus’ exact words and strive to persevere to the end. We believe and are baptized. We follow Paul’s words exactly: to run the race, and to remain in God’s goodness, lest we be cut off.
If you want to believe that you can have infallible knowledge of God’s saving grace, all the while rejecting that the successor of Peter can have even extremely limited infallibility, I just cannot help you.
That is why Trent said “let him be anathema” - he supposes to know the mind of God, and denies God’s ability to save or condemn whom He will.
A
adrift
Guest
I wouldn’t classify myself with being an apologist as I am not learned enough. I will however address your proof text. Put John 9 thru John 10:30 into context. Jesus has healed a man of blindness. The Pharisees Are rather miffed that Jesus has cured him. They say Jesus cannot be of God since He breaks Sabbath. They say that the man was not blind. They ask his parents who affirm that he was blind. They ask his parents how can he now see. The parents being afraid tell them to ask their son. Why were they afraid? Because the Pharisees have told the people that they would throw out anyone that acknowledged Jesus as the Messiah. They ask Jesus if they meant them when He talked of those being blind. Jesus then tells them what John calls a figure of speech that He is the Good Shepherd. He is the door that leads to salvation. The Pharisees do not hear Him. Only those who do here Him belong to Him. Hear Him of course means doing Jesus’ will. The things that Jesus says are important are being baptized, eating and drinking His Body and Blood. There is more For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me, naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.
The parable was addressing the Pharisees lack of faith not that you could not loose salvation.
As for John 6, from the beginning where the loaves and fish are multiplied we see the gift of the Eucharist. You pick out the lines that seem to support what you are doing. But it is just stringing scripture together to form a theme that is out of context. There is much in that verse that would lend to the idea that is was symbolic until
The Jews therefore strove one with another, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat? 53 Jesus therefore said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, ye have not life in yourselves. 54 He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life: and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
Upon this many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
Clearly they understood Jesus’ words. The only way you can get another meaning is to take it out of context.
L
lulu88
Guest
**Hello Prof, As a Former Lutheran and now a Catholic of many years now, I must say, we never professed assured salvation, or the Once saved always saved doctrine, as Jesus warns us IF we dont abide and follow his commandments. Grace saves us, however its also an action on our part. We must continue to remain steadfast with faith and good deeds which include church, commandment keeping that are all part of this so called true faith in Christ and what he has asked of his followers and passed down to us.
I really never understood the Eternal Security Doctrine as it is just not biblical and or scriptural , and Im stating this as a former Protestant. The whole NT is about the consequences for believers if they DO NOT abide in Faith. Faith includes Gods commandments as he tells us to follow as they are not grevious per Jesus.
LULU**
L
lulu88
Guest
Prof, By the way,
**True Christians are Assured of Eternal life, if , if and more if we abide in the requirements of this so called faith, you must define true faith to understand and absorb what is required on our parts.
The whole NT is filled with consequences IF WE DO NOT abide. You cannot cherry pic a few verses to interpret the OSAS doctrine, as it suggest one with faith must do nothing but believe, once again you must define true faith and what it requires on our part as Christians. I**
LULU
**True Christians are Assured of Eternal life, if , if and more if we abide in the requirements of this so called faith, you must define true faith to understand and absorb what is required on our parts.
The whole NT is filled with consequences IF WE DO NOT abide. You cannot cherry pic a few verses to interpret the OSAS doctrine, as it suggest one with faith must do nothing but believe, once again you must define true faith and what it requires on our part as Christians. I**
LULU
O
OldProf
Guest
po18guy, let me address your comments (sorry I haven’t been online of late, but I blame it on the Olympics!):
No, hope is not presumption, that’s just a false conclusion you jumped to. I too look forward to the blessed hope of Christ’s return (Titus 2:13) and to a future glorified body (1 Cor 15:51-53). The context of Romans 8, which is very much a favorite text of those who believe in AoS and ES, tells Christians of our standing with God (no condemnation v. 8:1), our hope for future glory which is a result of our salvation (8:25), God’s plan for our good (8:28), and that nothing in all creation can separate us from God’s love (8:38-39), which means, of course, that we are eternally secure and can have assurance of our salvation.
The hope in Roman’s 8:24 is a “sure hope.” For this context, it is like you are driving late thru the night and you are tired, but you have a “hope” that the sun will soon rise and give you reprieve from the surrounding darkness of the lonely drive. That the sun WILL rise is a sure hope that you look forward to. Heaven and the future glorified body is the sure hope Christian’s look forward to.
Here is your problem. Pink’s book “Eternal Security” is online (Wikipedia has a link) and you can read it for free. When you do, you will see the emotional response you gave above is completely without foundation. The simple fact is that a strong biblical case CAN BE MADE for ES and AoS (Eternal Security and Assurance of Salvation do go hand in hand). In fact, when you study Augustine, and read his arguments against Pelagius, you will see directly how this famed Doctor of the Church (the Protestants often refer to him as the first real systematic theologian) had to deal with some of the same Scriptures I have been using here in the previous pages. Issues of freewill and election and predestination and justification are all a part of the proper exegesis of the Scriptures.
Do I agree with anything you said above? Yes, your last sentence. I hope your desire for truth and discernment is the same as mine.
More responses to other posts to come…
Regards, OldProf
O
OldProf
Guest
I thank-you for the above link; I did not have it. I bought the Catechism in 1996 and then, in my discussions with a Roman Catholic Professor and former Dean of Theology, I bought all the writings of the Council of Trent, Vatican I, and Vatican II. And I bought a supplementary to the Catechism that had all the writings referred to in the 1994 Catechism. He and I discussed primarily the RCC doctrine of salvation, so I have most of these works highlighted with those references. We did some in-depth studies on the doctrine of justification and election.
Just FYI.
Regards, OldProf
po18guy
Well-known member
Which is worse: to jump to a false conclusion, which is easily correctible, or to arrive at one after a lifetime of study, which is not?
You are the one in contention here. Your novel doctrine is posing the challenge, so the burden of proof is on you. Although you are certainly convinced, the vast majority of the World’s Christians disagree, and always have - from scripture alone.
In all charity, I must point out that you are projecting again. Must I read Arthur Pink to be saved?
Again, Arthur Pink does not save me. Christ does. Christ commands me to persevere to the end, and to remain in Him, and to produce good fruit. I try to do so with a sure hope, while receiving the graces that flow via the Sacraments that Christ instituted. The difference between us? You reject the Sacraments, through which God’s grace flows.
So, do you believe, along with Augustine, in the primacy of the Bishop of Rome, Christ’s true presence in the Holy Eucharist, the seven Sacraments and the perpetual virginity of Mary?
To this layman who jumps to false conclusions, you appear to be cherry-picking.
M
mackbrislawn
Guest
po18guy
Well-known member
Obvious cases against infallible AoS from a quick gloss of only 1 Timothy 3&4:
1 Timothy 3:1-5
King James Version (KJV)
This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)
Why is Paul eliminating any of this bad behavior, since that Bishop has the “assurance of salvation” by his baptism, profession of faith, and the laying on of hands? Could it be that maybe, just maybe, salvation is an on-going process?
1 Timothy 3:6-7
King James Version (KJV)
Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.
But, didn’t his baptism, profession of faith and the laying on of hands assure his salvation? I don’t see Saint Paul having faith in the infallible AoS here…
1 Timothy 4:16
King James Version (KJV)
Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.
But, I thought that Timothy was already saved, being baptized and having made his profession of faith. What gives? He was not yet saved? How about those who were already Christians in his Church? Sounds like they were “running a race”
Scripture is jam-packed with references that one can lose their salvation. Truly, as Jerome said, “To ignore scripture is to ignore Christ” And, I am not even into Romans 11 or John 15 or the many others that tell us to persevere in faith.
It is an insurmountable dichotomy to allege that one has the assurance of salvation in an infallible manner, all the while alleging that those who ultimately are not saved “never were saved” What makes the OSAS/AoS believer superior to those who fall away? Frankly, it strikes me as elitist.
If God’s grace is irresistible, so also is His condemnation.
1 Timothy 3:1-5
King James Version (KJV)
This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)
Why is Paul eliminating any of this bad behavior, since that Bishop has the “assurance of salvation” by his baptism, profession of faith, and the laying on of hands? Could it be that maybe, just maybe, salvation is an on-going process?
1 Timothy 3:6-7
King James Version (KJV)
Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.
But, didn’t his baptism, profession of faith and the laying on of hands assure his salvation? I don’t see Saint Paul having faith in the infallible AoS here…
1 Timothy 4:16
King James Version (KJV)
Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.
But, I thought that Timothy was already saved, being baptized and having made his profession of faith. What gives? He was not yet saved? How about those who were already Christians in his Church? Sounds like they were “running a race”
Scripture is jam-packed with references that one can lose their salvation. Truly, as Jerome said, “To ignore scripture is to ignore Christ” And, I am not even into Romans 11 or John 15 or the many others that tell us to persevere in faith.
It is an insurmountable dichotomy to allege that one has the assurance of salvation in an infallible manner, all the while alleging that those who ultimately are not saved “never were saved” What makes the OSAS/AoS believer superior to those who fall away? Frankly, it strikes me as elitist.
If God’s grace is irresistible, so also is His condemnation.
J
Jerry-Jet
Guest
As long as Jesus says that He is the true vine and that we are the branches(which means we HAVE to be saved) and that we can still be cut off and thrown into the fire and burned then OSAS will forever be a complete LIE!
J
jcrichton
Guest
…that’s much toooo harsh… it’s not a lie… it’s like that old song said: “a rose garden!”
Maran atha!
Angel
S
stevekehl
Guest
There seems to be some confusion between salvation and Christian living. When a person is saved they are saved at that moment. If a crack whore gets saved she is saved at that moment, even though she may use drugs and turn tricks for a while while she learns about the Christian life. If someone is truly saved they will begin the process of learning how a Christian can pleas God and start applying those lessons to life. like Paul says we have to start with milk and progress to meat. I’m not saying a person can’t leave the faith and lose their salvation, but there is a “learning curve” that is different for everyone.
J
Jerry-Jet
Guest
No OSAS believer ever faces the living branches of the vine that is Jesus–the living branches that ARE SAVED and can still be thrown into the fire!
Was Jesus telling the truth or a lie?
Could those living saved branches that were united to Him be thrown into the fire or not?
Who’s right–the OSAS crowd or Jesus!!!
Was Jesus telling the truth or a lie?
Could those living saved branches that were united to Him be thrown into the fire or not?
Who’s right–the OSAS crowd or Jesus!!!
J
jcrichton
Guest
…I don’t think that is being disputed… what I understand from the “once saved” is that there’s nothing they cannot do and never lose Salvation.
Every sinner has the opportunity to gain Salvation; and I concur with you that different people have different levels of cognizant Christian understanding and living… the difference between a sinner taking time to enter the fold and the sinner being always Saved is that that sinner can always return (as the dog to its vomit and the swine to the muck) to sin inspite of Christ’s Salvific Intercession–rejecting, in effect, God’s Salvation…
…the secret also lies in the fact that “Christians” do sometimes forget that we are all sinners… that there’s not even one (outside of God) who is good!
…the once saved rely not on their growth as Christians (putting away the old self and emulating Christ) but on Biblical assurance of Eternal Salvation (passages in Scriptures that speak on the Eternal Salvation granted to us IN CHRIST); they reject any Scriptures that warns that we must not only know about Christ and claim Him as our Savior but that we must Be in Christ ("…if you Love Me you must Obey My Commandments…").
…the prostitute in your example might backslide/fall/refall but will always have Christ’s Promise of Salvation and if she returns to Christ the Hope of Eternally existing with God… a self-promoted “always saved” person may turn a calloused mind and heart to Christ’s warning that “without Me you are nothing,” and “abide in Me so that I may Abide in you.”
Maran atha!
Angel
J
jcrichton
Guest
…that’s exactly their problem! They rely on their own understanding/interpretation of Scriptures rather than on God Himself!
Jesus says “without Me, you are nothing,” or “not all who call Me Lord will enter into the Kingdom of Heaven!” …they counter with ‘it says so in Scriptures… we are eternally saved!’ :banghead::banghead::banghead:
Maran atha!
Angel
- Status