Can't lose salvation - unless

[littlebird]

If you believe that you have already been saved and cannot be unsaved, are you capable of sin anymore ? Yes or no ?

 

[AugustTherese]

Regarding the LCMS view on what is anti-to-Christ, you have had this explained to you before. Yet you continue to bring it up to score polemical points.

This is what is publicly posted on the LCMS website:

As to the Antichrist we teach that the prophecies of the Holy Scriptures concerning the Antichrist, 2 Thess. 2:3-12; 1 John 2:18, have been fulfilled in the Pope of Rome and his dominion. All the features of the Antichrist as drawn in these prophecies, including the most abominable and horrible ones, for example, that the Antichrist “as God sitteth in the temple of God,” 2 Thess. 2:4; that he anathematizes the very heart of the Gospel of Christ, that is, the doctrine of the forgiveness of sins by grace alone, for Christ’s sake alone, through faith alone, without any merit or worthiness in man (Rom. 3:20-28; Gal. 2:16); that he recognizes only those as members of the Christian Church who bow to his authority; and that, like a deluge, he had inundated the whole Church with his antichristian doctrines till God revealed him through the Reformation — these very features are the outstanding characteristics of the Papacy. (Cf. Smalcald Articles, Triglot, p. 515, Paragraphs 39-41; p. 401, Paragraph 45; M. pp. 336, 258.) Hence we subscribe to the statement of our Confessions that the Pope is “the very Antichrist.” (Smalcald Articles, Triglot, p. 475, Paragraph 10; M., p. 308.)

By stating this:

"The LCMS does not teach, nor has it ever taught, that any individual Pope as a person, is to be identified with the Antichrist

Is this supposed to placate or appease the aforementioned diabolical statement? By dichotomozing the Pope from his office, are we to exonerate such filth as this: “that he anathematizes the very heart of the Gospel”? So, the Pope as a person did not “anathematize the very heart of the Gospel”, only the office of the Papacy did? Can a mere office anathematize anything?

that is, they may no longer apply someday

It did not “apply” for 1500 years, and it really does not apply at all.

 

[AugustTherese]

AugustTherese:

That obvious that you cannot point it out?

Fine. This is horrendously disrespectful:

If you don’t want to be linked with every other protesting denomination, then come home!

1. You are arbitrarily grouping all non-Roman, western Christians together.
2. You are neglecting the very different origins and theological roots of other communions.
3. You are effectively reducing all differences between Christians to: “the good ones kiss Papa’s ring, the others are all the same.”

No, I am not. Of course differences exist! But, I was demonstrating your one, common similarity, i.e. protesting the Church Christ founded. If that is disrespectful, all I can say is the truth hurts sometimes.

 

[steido01]

This is what is publicly posted on the LCMS website:

You wonder why I consider you disrespectful? This is a prime example. You’ve conveniently ignored how the LCMS actually interprets its doctrinal statements in order to score your polemical points. Take a look at the link directly below that, in which the Synod explains what that doctrinal statement means. If you do, you’ll see the link FROM WHICH I LITERALLY QUOTED.

Who would know more about what the LCMS actually teaches?

• Me, an actual, life-long, baptized and confirmed LCMS member in good standing, son of an LCMS pastor

OR

• You, some triumphalist Roman Catholic on the internet.

I will not dialogue with you again.

 

[AugustTherese]

You’ve conveniently ignored how the LCMS actually interprets its doctrinal statements in order to score your polemical points. Take a look at the link directly below that, in which the Synod explains what that doctrinal statement means. If you do, you’ll see the link FROM WHICH I LITERALLY QUOTED.

I did not ignore it; to me, those words simply attempt to pacify and exonerate the past mistake of stating what they claimed. For example: “We really didn’t mean what we wrote about the Pope being the actual Antichrist and that HE anathematized the Gospel, we only meant HIS OFFICE”. If the LCMS wanted to mean only the Papal “office”, and not the Pope himself, they would have clearly stated it that way in their doctrinal statement posted online. I honestly think what you provided is a feigned way of trying to be ecumenical while still holding your beliefs about the Pope. I think we both know what your founder had to say about the Pope and it would make what I posted seem trivial!

Hence we subscribe to the statement of our Confessions that the Pope is “the very Antichrist.” (Smalcald Articles, Triglot, p. 475, Paragraph 10; M., p. 308.)

Clear as day…

 

[Billy_Buescher]

Now we get into the interesting question of what happens after that. Could someone just go to church, say the prayer once and go back and live their regular life? Baptists would say that a truly saved person will be transformed by the Holy Spirit and go on to live a good Christian life, if they fall away it means they weren’t really saved to begin with. So while continued faithfulness is not a formal requirement it would seem it is. It’s paradoxical isn’t it.

So then a person that believe once save, can not really be sure, as they could be one of those, that were not saved in the beginning.

 

[steido01]

“Your” view means nothing. You are not the arbiter of what the LCMS believes. The LCMS is.

I could play your insipid game with a host of Roman Catholic doctrines and dogmas. But I won’t. Because it’s not my place to tell Roman Catholics what they believe.

Look, you can disagree with LCMS teaching. You cannot disagree with what you’ve unilaterally (and erroneously!) decided the LCMS believes and expect to be taken seriously. You are acting incredibly uncharitable.

 

[Mijoy2]

Sorry i asked
Peace Love and Rock and Roll.

Billy_Buescher - Yes, good point. I can see a OSAS doctrinal follower potentially asking him/herself if they are in fact one of those who were never saved to begin with every time they cave into some temptation.

 

[frettr00]

Yes, you can still sin after accepting Christ, though over time you sin less as you grow closer to God (hopefully).

 

[AugustTherese]

"The LCMS does not teach, nor has it ever taught, that any individual Pope as a person, is to be identified with the Antichrist

Hence we subscribe to the statement of our Confessions that the Pope is “the very Antichrist.” (Smalcald Articles, Triglot, p. 475, Paragraph 10; M., p. 308.)

With all due respect, this is not only a contradiction but also very seemingly, deliberately dishonest. You can call me uncharitable, disrespectful etc. all you want; I am merely quoting your own confessions.

Moderators, how do I block someone in this new interface?

If you do not want me to discourse with you, simply ask me and I will stop.

 

[TheLegend]

These sins do they take away salvation? If not, what then are we to do?
I recall o statement on a forum that; one, though they can sin, will just simply not sin if they are of the saved ones.

 

[PJM]

This exception is the Catholic who, although professes to Love Jesus; professes that Jesus did in fact die for the Catholic’s sins and professes Jesus Christ as the Catholics personal Lord and Savior, is excluded from the once saved always doctrine, because the Catholic believe’s that he/she may lose his/her salvation if his/her sin is grave enough in matter.

This seems to violate the protestant own doctrine. The doctrine applies to all sins except the sin of just ‘thinking’ one might have sinned gravely enough to have lost their salvation (without further repenting).

Doesn’t this exclusion violate their very doctrine?

Again, I am looking for an answer to this conundrum from the protestant perspective. The question came to me as I watched some Catholic/Protestant debates on justification. Nobody asked this one question. Which seemed the logical question to ask.

My dear friend in Christ,

The brief explanation is the reality that OSAS is a 16th century invention; not God’s Desire

HOW can one know this?

1st because ALL the faith practice inventions and innovations of the Reformation contradict a single Word: “TRUTH”: " That which is true or in accordance with fact or reality"

Truth can only be singular per defined issue

What ARE the Moral implications and effects of NOT having THE Truth?

Father John A. Hardon S.J., one of the 20th Centuries most esteemed Theologians, explains it clearly and precisely

Truth is [1] the condition for grace [2] it is the source of grace [3] it is the channel of grace [4] it is the Divinely Ordained requirement of grace.” End Quotes

BENEDICT XVI
“Their cannot be your truth and my truth or there would be no truth”

Ps.145 Verses 17 to 18 “
[17] The LORD is just in all his ways, and kind in all his doings. [18] The LORD is near to all who call upon him, to all who call upon him in truth.

It is precisely because the Protestants very often choose to hold their ideas of truth; and overlooking the reality of its singularity AND the FACT that the RCC has already for 1,500 years defined the relevant truths of Faith and Morals; instituted by; commanded by, and protected BY Jesus Christ AND the Holy Spirit.

Can this claim be supported?

YES
After 2,000 years the RCC still HAs just One true set of Faith beliefs

Protestants after 500 years have literally thousands of DIFFERING churches EACH of which is identified by its individually chosen set of Faith beliefs.

So here’s the question: which one is more likely to ACTAULY be Guided by the Holy Spirit"

 

[Cephas1]

Hello Redfan, I hope you are doing well. You mentioned that salvation is guaranteed for the believer. You claimed though that when Paul warns that anyone who is deceitful, immoral, adulterous and idolatrous, that this does not apply to believers. Yet, Paul is not writing though to non believers, but to believers, warning them that anyone who does such things shall not enter the Kingdom, and the sacrifice for sins no longer remains for them. (Ephesians 5:5,6, Hebrews 10:26, Galatians 5:19,20,21, 1 Corinthians 6:9:10), just as Peter warns, (2 Peter 2:19,21). Indeed, as Jesus Christ warns, faith alone does not justify us before Him, (Matthew 5:28, Luke 13:5, Matthew 7:21, John 5;29, Matthew 19:17). Peace to you always in the Most Precious Blood of Jesus Christ, our Good and Great God and Saviour

 

[RedFan]

Cephas1, you do understand that I was describing the headwind one encounters when sailing on the Bay of Fundies, right? This is their position, as best I can fathom it. Not mine. I suspect that your beliefs and mine are far more in line than either of us would share in common with Fundamentalists.

But I will take issue with one thing you have said:

as Jesus Christ warns, faith alone does not justify us before Him

The verses you cite indicate that there is more to salvation than faith. But they do not indicate that faith doesn’t justify. Faith does justify, particularly in the Pauline scheme. But more than justification is required. Sanctification is required as well. And that is a different process.

 

[Thingsnotseen]

I’m 51 and spent hundreds of hours ( seriously ) in 2017 on my Catholic journey and enter the church this Easter. My background is Pentecostal, Free Will Baptist and Southern Baptist.

You cannot put all Protestants in the same category which is one of many things that makes Protestantism confusing at times. Luther, Calvin and Zwingli could not agree on things during the reformation and the splintering began immediately.

You might be surprised that there a millions of protestants that don’t believe in “once saved always saved.” For example, Pentecostalism is the largest segment of Protestantism with about 280 million members with the Assemblies of God accounting for about 67 million of the 280 million. The vast majority of the 280 million Pentecostals likely do NOT believe in “once saved always saved.”

This is direct from the Assemblies of God website: “Therefore as Christians we must continually come to God sincerely asking His forgiveness.” Notice the word CONTINUALLY. Although I wasn’t an assemblies of God Pentecostal that asking forgiveness of sins regularly so as to not “lose my salvation” has been my belief since childhood.

Free Will Baptist is a segment of the Baptist side of Protestantism that also believes that salvation can be lost. However, Southern Baptist which accounts for about 15 million or so Baptists and is the largest segment in Baptist Protestantism.

You will likely be surprised to find a lot of COMMON ground with millions of Protestants on losing your salvation as they very likely point to the same scriptures as the Catholic Church points to.

As for the “once saved always saved” group which although large is not an across the board segment of Protestants, they are terrible about taking scripture out of context and tossing scripture around one verse at a time from throughout the New Testament. However, if you tell them that, they’ll likely quote more verses on why you are wrong. Remember, I was also a Southern Baptist BUT NEVER bought into “once saved always saved.”

Context, context, context is key.

Protestants love to quote: Ephesians 2:8,9 which says “8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God— 9 not because of works, lest any man should boast.” but they fail time after time to add verse 10 in there which says “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.”

The key focus with “once saved alway saved” is that it is a FREE GIFT that you did nothing for and once you accept it that there is nothing you can do to give it back and that the blood of Jesus covers you forever. What a lot of BELIEVE ONLY and ACCEPT ONLY Christians neglect to see is that both believe and accept are verbs and a verb is an ACTION word. In other words, one has to LIVE OUT THERE FAITH. However, be prepared if you challenge someone on “once saved always saved” by mentioning someone living in sin more than living their faith. The come back will often be “they were never saved to begin with.”

I hope that I said something that helps.

 

[Reuben_J]

Interesting. Thanks.

That is what I heard about the OSAS group. If you are saved you will not sin. If you sin, it means you were not saved in the first place.

You can act as being saved for all your life, being an examplary Christian, but should yoy sin by the time you are seventy years old, you were actually not saved in the first place, all those more than sixty years, even though you had live a virtuos Chirstian life.

It is quite a fallacy - you know you are saved but it is not a certainty becuase you could be not saved in the first place.

 

[Cephas1]

Hello Redfan, Paul though states that even if one has all faith, but does not love others, it is useless. (1 Corinthians 13). Paul, as does Peter and James and Jesus, refute faith alone as justification, “If you wish to enter into Life, then keep the commandments”, (Matthew 19:17, Matthew 5:28, Matthew 7:21, Galatians 5;19,20,21, James 2;24, Matthew 16;27, 2 Peter 2:19,21, Ephesians 5;5,6, Hebrews 10:26). Christ and His Church, teach that we must cooperate with grace, and repent of our sins, and confess our sins, and Love God and neighbor, and persist not in immorality and impurity without repenting, if we hope to be saved by the Once and Perfect Sacrifice of Jesus Christ! Peace to you always in the Most Precious Blood of Jesus Christ, our Good and Great God and Saviour.

 

[RedFan]

I agree with everything you said, except your statement that Paul might “refute faith alone as justification.”

As I understand him, Paul refutes faith alone as sufficient for salvation. He does not refute it as sufficient for justification (which Paul holds as is a necessary but not a sufficient condition of salvation).

 

[Cephas1]

Redfan, but can then James and Paul contradict each other? “It is by works and not by faith alone that man is justified”. (James 2;24), for how can one be justified by faith alone, and than not be justified for not acting on it? (Romans 2:6.9, Galatians 5;19,20,21, Matthew 7:21, 2 Peter 2:19,21). I hope you are well! Peace always in the Most Precious Blood of Jesus Christ, our Good and Great God and Saviour,

 

[FloridaAngler]

This may be “what you heard”, but it’s a lie. Nobody who affirms the Biblical doctrine of eternal security believes you don’t sin after you’re saved.