Ephesians 2:8-9

[Philthy]

I think the refromed view of perseverance of the saints can be perfectly harmonised with this verse; does not verse 23 make it plain; “I never knew you” Note that The Lord expressly states he never knew these people, not that he once did and they fell away, not that they were once true sheep who left the fold, but rather he never knew these people, they were never true believers.

If you are intellectually honest, you’ll realize that the statement “I never knew you” actually makes no sense at all - God is omniscient and knows everyone and everything. That statement, therefore, is not literal in the sense that you are twisting it. It is far more likely to be a figure of speech to represent the distance that exists between God and those that are not judged worthy to inherit eternal life.
In a similar manner you have predicated your entire “harmonization” on Christ’s claim that he will lose “none of what the Father has given” him. Who knows - exactly - what he means by that? Is he referring to the elect - the apostles - all the saved? No one knows because it’s ambiguous and it’s foolish to predicate an entire theology on such a flimsy basis. And why, exactly, would we want to base theology on ambiguous verses when there are plenty of clear verses dealing with direct warning to the “saved” aka “brothers”? This is most especially evident when one looks at the perfectly clear language that Paul uses in reference to losing one’s salvation in his letter to the 1Corinthians, Galatians and Ephesians…
Let’s start with 1Corinthians 6:

Can it be that there is not one among you wise enough to be able to settle a case between brothers? 6But rather brother goes to court against brother, and that before unbelievers?

Please note: Paul is addressing this warning to the saved believers (brothers) whom he distinguishes from “unbelievers”. No metaphors or ambiguity here who the audience is.

7Now indeed [then] it is, in any case, a failure on your part that you have lawsuits against one another. Why not rather put up with injustice? Why not rather let yourselves be cheated?**(“http://www.usccb.org/bible/1corinthians/6#54006007-b”) 8Instead, you inflict injustice and cheat, and this to brothers.

Please note that he states flatly that they are being unjust when he says they “inflict injustice”. Again, no metaphors or ambiguity

Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived…

Pretty straight forward: he states that they are being unjust and then informs that the unjust will not inherit the Kingdom of God…
Now the question, if your version of the perseverance of saints were true, is why would he warn them? If they are saints and all saints persevere, then there is no need to warn them of failing to inherit the Kingdom. But he does and the reason is clear: choices matter into eternity and Paul wants to help them choose wisely by warning them. Making bad choices (ie sin) can lead to not inheriting the kingdom of God (ie Heaven) - that is the clear message.
He delivers the same “choices matter unto eternity” message to the Ephesians. Allow me to walk you through it: Ephesians 5

For freedom* Christ set us free; so stand firm and do not submit again to the yoke of slavery.

Please note that these are saved Christians that Paul is addressing. They are new Christians who received a heretical teaching from some Jewish converts: that teaching was that Christians need to be circumcised.

It is I, Paul, who am telling you that if you have yourselves circumcised, Christ will be of no benefit to you.

Christ of no benefit? How can Paul say that about saved Christians? The primary benefit of Christ is salvation - his name is Jesus after all! But Paul says that circumcision cuts off more than you think - it cuts you off from Christ and therefore from salvation itself. This does not harmonize with your “perseverence of the saints” nor with OSAS.

Paul’s not done either…not even close…

 

[Philthy]

3Once again I declare to every man who has himself circumcised that he is bound to observe the entire law.* 4You are separated from Christ, you who are trying to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

Separated from Christ and fallen from grace - It doesn’t get any worse than that,does it?!. There is no salvation under such circumstances. And I can’t help what point out what “fallen from” grace implies. Do you know what it means?
I can tell you what it means - I think it means that they were once in a state of grace (ie saved) and that the action of "trying to be justified by law (ie circumcision) caused them to fall from the state. And we know this to be the case from the things Paul says earlier in this very later to the same folks. Eph 3 O stupid* Galatians! I want to learn only this from you did you receive the Spirit from works of the law, or from faith in what you heard?
They have received the Spirit…and more…

“but now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn back again to the weak and destitute elemental powers? Do you want to be slaves to them all over again?”
Wasn’t it you who put so much emphasis on the " I never knew you" verse? :yup:
Well these folks were “known by God”. And Paul is writing all these warning to them - so please don’t go down the “they were never really saved” path.
And to return to the fallen from grace term, fallen is very bad in eschatological discussions - that’s what Adam and Eve did - they “fell” - it was so bad it is known as “The Fall”. It’s no accident that Paul uses the term “fallen” from grace. It is a return to the state Adam and Eve created - separation from God. I can assure you that if you are “separated from Christ” you are not saved and you are not going to Heaven. It is perfectly clear.
They were saved and they fell from that state because of their attempt to become justified by law.

No sheep metaphors. No ambiguous “those whom the Father gives me” type claims with unclear application. No tenuous extrapolations of what it means when the Omniscient says, “I never knew you”. No, here we just get straight shooting from Paul. Saved people can lose their salvation, fall from grace and not inherit the kingdom of God. It’s not at all unclear from these letters, and there is much more Scripture that is equally and definitively opposed to OSAS. Those who have ears to hear should listen.

Blessings…

 

[ahs]

“19 You will say, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” 20 That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast only through faith. So do not become proud, but stand in awe. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. 22 Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off. 23 And even the others, if they do not persist in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again.” (Rom 11:19-23)

What did Scripture say there? Once we are grafted in, can we never be cut off? Does verse 22 say we can never be cut off, or that we CAN be cut off unless we DO something? And what about the ones that had been cut off, which were initially attached? Does it say they were never “truly” attached, or that they had been “cut off” AND can be RE-attached…grafted in AGAIN (v.23)? Rom 11:19-23 makes no sense with a “once saved always saved” belief.

A friend of mine sent me a John MacArthur article on “The Vine and the Branches” (trying to use this passage to teach OSAS?!?!) once and asked me for my thoughts. This was my reply:
daves-ahumbleservant.blogspot.com/2013/11/the-vine-and-branches-once-saved-always.html

 

[Good_Fella]

Can one who is a non-believer do good works?

Protestants believe that non-believers can do good works, but of only moral and not of salvific value; since their deeds aren’t done in union with Christ through faith. In Catholicism there is a distinction between works of moral and salvific value, but it isn’t based on such a narrow understanding of faith as it is in Protestantism. For the Protestant faith is fiduciary, constituting of a legal relationship rather than a familial one between God and man. A fiduciary relationship is one in which one party places their faith and confidence in another party, and the relationship is established once the other party accepts the other’s faith and confidence. Mere respect for another’s trust and confidence, however, is insufficient to establish a fiduciary relationship. But once this relationship has been created, the fiduciary is legally obligated to take custody and care of the beneficiary’s assets.

Hence, the performance of good works outside of faith in Christ has no salvific value. Unless a person consciously places his faith and confidence in the Lord, His merits won’t apply to him in his good deeds, notwithstanding whether they do in fact accord with the moral principles of the Gospel. A man like Ghandi, who admired Jesus for what he morally stood for and emulated him in many ways, couldn’t be saved unless he consciously professed his faith in the divinity of Jesus and accepted him as his personal Lord and Saviour. Remember, in Protestantism, God doesn’t take human merit into account in order to establish a fiduciary relationship with man. In order for this relationship to be established, the beneficiary of divine favour must place his wholehearted faith and confidence in the merits of Christ to have his guilt removed and his sins forgiven by the fiduciary and therefore be saved, even though his own merits aren’t taken into account in the entire scope of justification.

Thus what we have here is a distorted legal relationship in which justice is one-sided in the relationship between two parties. Yet the Catholic truth is that our relationship with God the Father isn’t a legal one, but rather a familial one. Justice lies insofar as we are indebted to God for having transgressed against His laws. But nonetheless our heavenly Father is willing to reward us in His compassion and mercy for the good we have done provided we are sorry through His grace, which is sufficiently available to everyone who has a well-formed conscience, for having done something grave that ultimately offends His goodness and righteousness. After all, we are God’s children. A fiduciary relationship doesn’t necessarily have to extend to family members in jurisprudence.

PAX
:heaven:

 

[Lincoln7]

Philthy,

Is there a way we can focus together on a passage at all, or two? I am happy to respond to your points, however I am well aware that if I post now, (with what will undoubtedly be a very long post), the reply you will generate will be equally as long… I’m sure you’re catching my drift here - I don’t have enough time to dedicate to CAF as I once did!

I’m happy to respond if you wish, but it will be my last post for a long time if so.

With kind regards

Lincs

 

[Asiyreh]

I think it’s a nice idea to rely on a degree of faith in order that we might enter the kingdom. Certainly none of us could be tested and pass, if it were not for the Good Grace attributed for our faith.

And in this way we are literally saved by faith. Without it there wouldn’t even be any point in attending the Judgement.

However there’s a few things to be said about this passage. Firstly we know Luther like to popularise the idea of by Faith ALONE you have been saved. A concept not in the original scriptures but alive and well in mainly evangelical protestantism. I just responded to a comment recently on another forum which stated that to believe anything but Faith Alone - is from the Devil!

Ironic considering the actual truth of the matter.

The best verse to deal with such accusations I would probably pick something like Depart from Me I never knew you. This for people preaching in the name of Christ.

Course that one is often twisted and turned as well to fit the popular evangelical paradigm.

Another great analorgy by Jesus himself was the narrow path. We are balanced on one side by faith. One the other - Carrying our cross everyday, going forward to bring the good news to all the kingdom. Confessing our sins. Partaking in the communion. Being the good samaritan and forgiving others so the Lord may forgive us.

This idea of not saved by “works.” We’ve got some of the writing of the Essences, if memory serves - the word they use for “works,” was used to describe the Old testament Jewish sacrificial ceremonies.
It’s the same one being used in the Pauline passage. Not saved by “Works.”

St. Peter tells us that even in their days people were abusing the writings of Paul to fit their lazy thinking. I wonder what Peter meant? Having taken some time to study Paul I can say that he is a very complicated theologian and his ideas should not be made to fit some mould but be examined in context and appreciated for the diverse and intricate revelation they unveil.

 

[Good_Fella]

Can one who is a non-believer do good works?

Well, he can freely place his faith and confidence in Jesus, if that isn’t a meritorious act on his part (at least supernaturally) in cooperation with divine grace worthy of justification. When Paul says that we have been justified through faith by grace (grace precedes faith) and not by any works of ours, he is referring to natural human merit outside the sphere of divine grace. In Catholicism we have this significant distinction between natural and supernatural merit. Thank God we have the Church to be our final Rule of Faith!

But in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him.
***Acts 10, 35 ***

PAX
:heaven:

 

[Cathoholic]

Lincoln7.

You said:

I think it perfectly reasonable to conclude that one who is truly in Christ will never be lost. “And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day.” - John 6:39 ESV.

The problem with that Lincoln7, is the verse doesn’t say what you concluded.

You have to read that into the verse.

I think it perfectly reasonable to conclude that one who is truly in Christ will never be lost.

Yet here is what the verse does NOT say . . .

“And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all who is truly in Christ, but raise it up on the last day.” - NOT John 6:39 ESV.

If you think people who are born again or “in Christ” make up “the Elect” I want you to show me one verse that says that.

I don’t want:

“I think it perfectly reasonable to conclude that”.

Because I think given the other verses in Scripture, it is perfectly UNreasonable to conclude that.

I agree that all the Elect are “Born again”, but I do NOT agree that all the born again are “of the Elect” because Sacred Scripture doesn’t allow me (or you) to conclude this.

2nd PETER 2:20a (NIV) 20 If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ

St. Peter is about to tell us about people who have escaped the corruption of the world!

But HOW?

How did they escape the corruption of the world? Did they just live in a cave somewhere?

No!

They escaped the corruption of the world by KNOWING Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior, the same way anyone else escapes the corruption of the world .

“Knowing someone” in Scripture is a very intimate term. It often signifies an intimate relationship. These guys had an intimate relationship with Jesus.

So some individuals that knew Jesus as Lord as “Lord and Savior” do what?

Fortunately we don’t have to wonder as Scripture tells us.

2nd PETER 2:20a (NIV) 20 If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and overcome . . .

Now what?

These saved people are overcome by getting entangled in the corruption of the world!

Notice incidentally that saved individuals can be overcome by getting entangled in the corruption of the world!

Are these guys going to Heaven anyway? After all they really KNEW Jesus as “Lord and Savior.” Scripture says so!

Are they going to Heaven anyway? No!

2nd PETER 2:20-21 (NIV) 20 If they have escaped the corruption of the world by **knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ ** and are again entangled in it and overcome, they are worse off at the end then they were at the beginning. 21 It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, then to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them.

Notice vs. 20 tells us they knew Jesus as “Lord and Savior.”

Notice they are “entangled” then what? Saved anyway!? NO! They are OVERCOME!

Are they merely “backsliding”? No!

And the Holy Spirit through St. Peter then says that they would have been better off if they had never known Jesus!

Why?

Because “to whom much is given, much is required” as Luke 12:48 teaches.

• Does this sound like someone who never knew Jesus in the first place? No. The verses explicitly say they did know Jesus and knew Him as Lord and Savior!
• Does this sound like someone who is merely backsliding? No!
• Does this sound like someone who is saved anyway (someone who is better off not knowing Jesus in the first place)? No!

2nd PETER 2:22 22 Of them the proverbs are true: “A dog returns to its vomit,” and, “A sow that is washed goes back to her wallowing in the mud.”

They KNEW Jesus as Lord and Savior (they were born-again) but they were never of the elect!

They did not have final perseverance. They were willing grave sinners with willful impenitent hearts.

The “dog” (who knew Jesus as Lord and Savior) went back to the vomit.
The “pig” (who knew Jesus as Lord and Savior) went back to the mud!

These guys who KNEW Jesus as “Lord and Savior” were not of the Elect.

This is why savED in Ephesians 2:8-9 (and other reasons) does not mean what you think it means.

 

[Cathoholic]

Gmanlq. You said:

I propose that Satan himself smiled when the OSAS idea spread.

I think your assertion is insightful.

It is my opinion; Satan is the author of the OSAS tradition a very long time ago.

GENESIS 3:4 4 “You will not surely die,” the serpent said to the woman.

The Pharisees thought the same thing for different reasons as we see in John’s Gospel.

In Ephesians 3 (which coincidentally enough, comes right after Ephesians 2 as in Ephesians 2:8-9), the Holy Spirit tells us God uses the Church (among other things) to teach even the heavenly angels (“principalities and powers")!

EPHESIANS 3:8-11 8 To me, though I am the very least of all the saints, this grace was given, to preach to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, 9 and to make all men see what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things; 10 that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places.

The Church has never taught Once Saved Always Saved.

The Church DOES teach God already knows who is in Heaven in all of eternity because God is OUT of the realm of the creation of time. These people in Heaven from God’s vantage point, make up “the Elect”.

The Elect is from God’s perspective.

OSAS is an alien doctrine.

OSAS is a tradition of men that makes void the Commandments of God.

Ephesians 2:8-9 does not teach OSAS, nor does any other verse in Scripture, nor does the authoritative Church. A Church that: “whatever you bind on earth will be bound in Heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in Heaven” (Matthew 16:19 and Matthew 18:18).

That is tremendous authority and Jesus would never give such authority, unless He planned on protecting that magnitude of authority (and He has).

That is WHY St. Paul can call the Church, the “pillar and foundation” of the truth (1st Timothy 3:15).

I guarantee you, if St. Paul would have said: “The Bible is the pillar and foundation of the truth”, we would be hearing no end from the Bible-ONLY Christians as to how that verse really asserts sola Scriptura.

The Bible Christians that deny the Church’s authority are frequently just as quick to assert their own (non-existent) authority (although they do not put it that way).

It has been said that private interpretation of God’s revelation apart from an authoritative Church, “is the mask of humility covering the face of pride”.

 

[ericc]

JonathonofOhio,

I think the refromed view of perseverance of the saints can be perfectly harmonised with this verse; does not verse 23 make it plain; “I never knew you” Note that The Lord expressly states he never knew these people, not that he once did and they fell away, not that they were once true sheep who left the fold, but rather he never knew these people, they were never true believers.

Jesus, definitely knew Judas and vice versa. Satan went into Judas before he betrayed Jesus. There is nothing in the Bible to suggest that Judas did not know who Jesus is. Judas heard the Lord loud and clear for 3 years before chosing to betray him.

Peter certainly knew who Jesus is. He certainly sinned when he denied Jesus 3 times. He lied. It is a stretch to say once knowing Jesus, you will not sin again mortally. History has plenty of such people. You are saved provided you repent and obtain forgiveness till your due date. Jesus may have been your best pal upon your conversion. Unless you are sin-proof after that conversion, you will certainly sin, again and again. And if you think you can get away with it post conversion without continuous repentance and obtaining forgiveness before your time is up, you may be too dirty to enter heaven. As you know, nothing unclean can enter heaven. Don’t count on sneaking into heaven via Luther’s snow covered dung mechanism. I heard they are quite thorough in making sure heaven is spotless. No camouflage can cut it. And smell of dung certainly is a giveaway.

 

[Good_Fella]

I agree that all the Elect are “Born again”, but I do NOT agree that all the born again are “of the Elect” because Sacred Scripture doesn’t allow me (or you) to conclude this.

Historically in Catholic teaching there are two types or usages of predestination: to grace and to glory. When Paul speaks of God as having “predestined us in love to be his sons” (Eph. 1:3-12), and when Peter says that “we have been chosen and destined by God the Father … to be obedient to Jesus Christ” (1 Pet 1:1-2), the apostles are referring to predestination to grace. Paul refers to predestination to glory where we read “predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son” (Rom 8:28-30; cf. 1 Cor. 15:49; 1 Jn. 3:3). Thus the born again are of the elect, but for now they are certainly predestined to grace. But this does not necessarily mean that they have been predestined to glory. Predestination to grace is something they can lose (cf. 2 Cor. 6:1), unlike predestination to glory (cf. Rom 9:21). Naturally in Protestantism there is no difference between predestination to grace and predestination to glory. It is presupposed that when a person is said to have been predestined to grace in Scripture, he is predestined to glory by that grace.

However, I find it hard to believe that every member of the communities which Peter and Paul addressed persevered in faith to the end. Paul warned the Corinthians of the possibility of believing in vain (cf.1 Cor. 15:1-2); he even feared that the thoughts of many members of this community might lead them away from devotion to Christ (cf. 2 Cor.11: 2-3); in dismay he asked how so many members of the Galatian community could have reverted back to their habitually sinful lifestyle and allow themselves to be ruled by dark passions (cf.Gal 4:9). If Paul had believed as many Protestants do today that they mustn’t have had true faith to begin with, he wouldn’t have made such an emotional appeal for the sake of their souls. It was for their sake that he had exhorted them to stand fast and not submit again to the slavery of sin (cf.Gal 5:1). Indeed, Paul expressed much regret in his letter to Timothy that some people had wandered away from a sincere faith, a pure heart, and a good conscience (cf. 1 Tim 1:5-6). Despite their genuine faith and sincere heart at the outset, they still happened to fall away. And the apostle feared and expected that many other sincere members would, too ( cf.1 Tim 4:1). In Rev 3:5, Jesus warns that he may have to blot some names out of the book of life. These are the names of those who are presently justified in their election to grace. But if their names are not found in this book on judgement day, they will discover that they weren’t predestined to glory through their own fault.

2nd PETER 2:22 22 Of them the proverbs are true: “A dog returns to its vomit,” and, “A sow that is washed goes back to her wallowing in the mud.”

They KNEW Jesus as Lord and Savior (they were born-again) but they were never of the elect!

They did not have final perseverance. They were willing grave sinners with willful impenitent hearts.

The “dog” (who knew Jesus as Lord and Savior) went back to the vomit.
The “pig” (who knew Jesus as Lord and Savior) went back to the mud!

These guys who KNEW Jesus as “Lord and Savior” were not of the Elect.

This is why savED in Ephesians 2:8-9 (and other reasons) does not mean what you think it means.

The problem is that many Protestants mistakenly understand predestination to mean that God determines what people will do. So what God determines is irrevocable. But the word predestination is taken from the Greek word prooridzo which means to know or declare in advance by God’s foreknowledge. God simply knows who will be saved by being the one who creates them in time without having to look into the future and extrinsically receive personal information from each and every one of them. Thus when God decrees that some people are predestined to glory, He grants them extra graces to assist them in reaching their eternal goal, for God already knows without having to receive any extrinsic information which graces each and every one needs to attain eternal glory, by being the one who creates them and knows all about them as His creative work. And certainly what God knows does not determine what they do. God still respects their free will, so the graces they receive do not irresistibly determine how they will act. But God knows which graces they will be able to freely respond to. In a harmonious balance there is God as the First Cause and the human being as a free agent whose personal autonomy God respects. Meanwhile, since God desires, according to His antecedent will, that every one be saved, He gives sufficient grace to all people so that they should not be damned. But since God knows who will freely reject his ordinary graces simply by creating them, He chooses not to give them those extraordinary or efficacious graces that would have insured their salvation. Thus those who are damned are declared such by God’s consequent will through their own free will.

PAX
:heaven:

 

[Cathoholic]

Good Fella. You said:

The problem is that many Protestants mistakenly understand predestination to mean that God determines what people will do.

Good point. I agree they do draw that mistaken conclusion.

That’s why I said . . . .

They were willing grave sinners with willful impenitent hearts . . . .

. . . . to preempt that conclusion.

 

[Philthy]

Philthy,

Is there a way we can focus together on a passage at all, or two? I am happy to respond to your points, however I am well aware that if I post now, (with what will undoubtedly be a very long post), the reply you will generate will be equally as long… I’m sure you’re catching my drift here - I don’t have enough time to dedicate to CAF as I once did! I’m happy to respond if you wish, but it will be my last post for a long time if so. With kind regards
Lincs

Hi Linc -
There is no need to trouble yourself with lengthy posts. Here is a summary of my points. Read it all the way through and then simply agree or disagree that these statements/conclusions are actual facts by saying, “I agree” or “I disagree” at the bottom. This will lighten your load considerably and allow us to focus on any areas of disagreement effectively. Here is my assessment of the facts from the portions of Galatians and 1Corinthians I quoted:

Fact 1: Paul wrote his letters to saved Christians.

---

We know this because he testified to the fact that they had the gospel preached to them, had faith in that preaching, and had received the holy Spirit (cf Gal 3). Furthermore, he referred to them as “brothers” and specifically distinguished them from “unbelievers”.

Fact 2: Paul addressed issues of behavior some of those Christians were engaging in.

---

We know this because he identifies the behaviors clearly and attributes them to some of the “brothers” (cf 1Cor 6:8; Gal 5:5)

---

Fact 3: Paul believed their participation in said behaviors jeopardized inheritance in the kingdom of God, caused a fall from grace, and rendered Christ’s saving atonement of no benefit to them.

---

We know this because he specifically addresses the behaviors with the corresponding consequence in 1Cor 6:9, Gal 5:21, and Eph 5:5.

Fact 4: The 3 terms above all refer to salvation

Inheritance in the KOG is only for the saved; being in a state of grace and being saved are identical; salvation is the benefit of Christ.

Conclusion:
Paul believed that salvation is not a permanent state during our mortal lives and that saved Christians could jeopardize their salvation through sinful acts.

**Applications: **
OSAS is entirely untenable since it rejects the possibility of losing ones salvation.
Perseverance of the Saints cannot be a universal doctrine of salvation applied to all the saved. It either applies to none of them or only to a subset of the saved not addressed by Paul in these letters.

Fact 1: Paul wrote his letters to saved Christians.

Fact 2: Paul addressed issues of behavior some of those Christians were engaging in.

Fact 3: Paul believed their participation in said behaviors jeopardized inheritance in the kingdom of God, caused a fall from grace, and rendered Christ’s saving atonement of no benefit to them.

Fact 4: The 3 terms above all refer to salvation

Once you’ve agreed or denied the above 4 statements we can easily discuss without lengthy posting on your part…I’ll do all the heavy lifting.****

---

**blessings -
**

 

[Good_Fella]

I think it perfectly reasonable to conclude that one who is truly in Christ will never be lost. “And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day.” - John 6:39

To see if John is to be understood as you think he is, we must examine other passages of his in the same gospel and in his letters.

• “I am the true vine, and my Father is the vine grower. He removes every branch in me that bears no fruit. Every branch that bears fruit he prunes[a] to make it bear more fruit. You have already been cleansed by the word that I have spoken to you. Abide in me as I abide in you. Just as the branch cannot bear fruit by itself unless it abides in the vine, neither can you unless you abide in me. I am the vine, you are the branches. Those who abide in me and I in them bear much fruit, because apart from me you can do nothing. Whoever does not abide in me is thrown away like a branch and withers; such branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned. If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask for whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. My Father is glorified by this, that you bear much fruit and become[c] my disciples. As the Father has loved me, so I have loved you; abide in my love. If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and abide in his love.** I have said these things to you so that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be complete***."
  John 15, 1-11

By saying that he is the true vine, Jesus means that it is imperative that we be united with him in spirit to be able to succeed in our spiritual endeavours in a way pleasing to God. In the Greek, the word true is the adjective alethine which means “dependable, genuine and real”. So in order for our thoughts, words, and deeds to be genuinely pleasing to God, they must be rooted in the one who claims to be “the truth, the way, and the life” (Jn 14:6). Only by walking in the light, can we hope to have our sins cleansed by his blood (1 Jn 1:7). And we depend on Jesus and his grace to live as he lived (1 Jn 2:6) and be righteous as he is righteous (1 Jn 3:6-7).

In the metaphor of the true vine and the branches, Jesus is addressing not only his apostles, but all his disciples who have come to believe in him. He speaks of them as those who have already been made clean. The word clean in the Greek is katharoi, which is the same word for “prune”. Thus our Lord has those in mind in whom the pruning process has already begun. He is drawing no distinction between Judas and the other eleven apostles or between those who had never truly believed in the first place and those who have always truly believed from the start. And this shall be made evident as we go along.

When Jesus says, “Abide in me as I have abided in you,” he is exhorting all his disciples to “remain” (meno) in him as he has “remained” in them. Our Lord is stressing perseverance from an eschatological viewpoint. His exhortation would have been superfluous if he viewed salvation as a one-time event rather than a life-long process. There would have been no reason for Jesus to strongly encourage even his apostles to persevere in faith if there absolutely were no chance that they could be lost as Judas eventually was by his own free will. All of our Lord’s disciples must remain united with him in order to be saved and not cut off from the vine to be cast into the fire. John certainly perceived our relationship with Christ as one involving our cooperation with divine grace, notably the actual grace of perseverance. And not unlike Jesus, he drew no distinction between sheep and wolves inside the pen when he exhorted the faithful. He assumed that all the baptized Christians whom he addressed were abiding in Christ more or less, and so he urged all of them to remain united with Christ and to bear more fruit so that they should be saved. “And now, little children, abide in him, so that when he is revealed we may have confidence and not be put to shame before him at his coming”(1 Jn 2:28). Salvation consists in continuously looking to Jesus and bearing fruit by the help of his grace until our lives come to an end. What is the whole point of this metaphor if we as branches on the vine are still being pruned although our salvation is a thing instrumentally applied in the past?

I’m afraid our salvation heavily depends on how well we freely respond to divine grace (v.11). By turning our focus away from Jesus and spurning his helping grace, we do in fact wither as branches, and the more we wither the less hope we have of being saved. Much depends on our cooperation with divine grace to remain united with Christ. And if our souls should happen to wither - the loss of sanctification can also be a process by our own doing as we regress back to sinfulness - beyond the hope of redemption, upon death when grace is no longer dispensed, then like a completely rotten branch it shall be cut off and burned in the eternal fire. Jesus and his apostle John are both urgently stressing the need for us to persevere in faith. They emphatically urge all disciples to continue to abide in God’s love by persevering in faith and grace. Salvation is not a once-and-for-all conversion experience with immutable consequences for the future as it is presented to be in Calvin’s heretical notion of “the perseverance of the saints”.

PAX
:heaven:

 

[Philthy]

Awesome post Good Fella!

I wanted to comment on this particular underlined section…

I’m afraid our salvation heavily depends on how well we freely respond to divine grace (v.11). By turning our focus away from Jesus and spurning his helping grace, we do in fact wither as branches, andthe more we wither the less hope we have of being saved. Much depends on our cooperation with divine grace to remain united with Christ. And if our souls should happen to wither - the loss of sanctification can also be a process by our own doing as we regress back to sinfulness - beyond the hope of redemption, upon death when grace is no longer dispensed, then like a completely rotten branch it shall be cut off and burned in the eternal fire. Jesus and his apostle John are both urgently stressing the need for us to persevere in faith. They emphatically urge all disciples to continue to abide in God’s love by persevering in faith and grace. Salvation is not a once-and-for-all conversion experience with immutable consequences for the future as it is presented to be in Calvin’s heretical notion of “the perseverance of the saints”.

PAX
:heaven:

I am basically in perfect agreement with you in everything you say. I might, especially in the context of an ecumenical discussion, leave out the word “heavily” as it is unnecessarily provocative and counter productive as it opens the door to distractions about who has done the “heavy” lifting regarding salvation - us or Christ? From our earthly perspective our participation seems “heavy” but that is certainly not the case in an eternal perspective. Anyhow, I know you recognize it and such nuances are largely irrelevant except that I’ve seen them waste time in discussions that ultimately could be fruitful…
What I really wanted to say, however, in the context of the OP and “how” we communicate with non-Catholics regarding this particular verse we have to be very careful with the term “saved”. I have found that it is much better to use the simple term “Heaven” when referring to our final salvation. You have to remember to keep things really simple sometimes. So I might reword the underlined phrase to say…the more the saved whither during their earthly life, the less hope they have of going to Heaven when they die…
The juxtaposition of these two concepts immediately goes to the heart of the matter:
Being saved is great and a necessary first step, but going to Heaven is the true fullness of what Christ accomplished for us. The understanding of that concept must be firmly at the center of the discussion from the onset.

Again, great post!

 

[Good_Fella]

Awesome post Good Fella!

I wanted to comment on this particular underlined section…

I am basically in perfect agreement with you in everything you say. I might, especially in the context of an ecumenical discussion, leave out the word “heavily” as it is unnecessarily provocative and counter productive as it opens the door to distractions about who has done the “heavy” lifting regarding salvation - us or Christ? From our earthly perspective our participation seems “heavy” but that is certainly not the case in an eternal perspective. Anyhow, I know you recognize it and such nuances are largely irrelevant except that I’ve seen them waste time in discussions that ultimately could be fruitful…
What I really wanted to say, however, in the context of the OP and “how” we communicate with non-Catholics regarding this particular verse we have to be very careful with the term “saved”. I have found that it is much better to use the simple term “Heaven” when referring to our final salvation. You have to remember to keep things really simple sometimes. So I might reword the underlined phrase to say…the more the saved whither during their earthly life, the less hope they have of going to Heaven when they die…
The juxtaposition of these two concepts immediately goes to the heart of the matter:
Being saved is great and a necessary first step, but going to Heaven is the true fullness of what Christ accomplished for us. The understanding of that concept must be firmly at the center of the discussion from the onset.

Again, great post!

I appreciate the advice and your pointing this out, which I shall keep in mind in the future. Words do have the power to create wrong impressions. At second glance, the word heavily is a bit too heavy. True, it is Christ who saves us, not we who must save ourselves (Not that I was implying this. The phrase “being saved” is passive and means preserving by the grace of God what Christ has delivered us from: eternal damnation.) So actively our responsibility is not to lose our heavenly reward which the Lord has gained for us as a gift from God by his death on the cross. Does this sound better? ‘The more we wither the less hope we have of receiving our eternal reward.’ (Still passive.) Thanks for your kind words and for your great previous post which was well thought out and organized.

PAX
:heaven:

 

[Philthy]

Fact 1: Paul wrote his letters to saved Christians.

Fact 2: Paul addressed issues of behavior some of those Christians were engaging in.

Fact 3: Paul believed their participation in said behaviors jeopardized inheritance in the kingdom of God, caused a fall from grace, and rendered Christ’s saving atonement of no benefit to them.

Fact 4: The 3 terms above all refer to salvation

Conclusion:
Paul believed that salvation is not a permanent state during our mortal lives and that saved Christians could jeopardize their salvation through sinful acts.

**Applications: **
OSAS is entirely untenable since it rejects the possibility of losing ones salvation.
Perseverance of the Saints cannot be a universal doctrine of salvation applied to all the saved. It either applies to none of them or only to a subset of the saved not addressed by Paul in these letters.

Unfortunately, despite claims to the contrary, when the clear facts of the NT are presented in such a manner the dialogue usually ends as it appears to have done here…

Blessings!

 

[Lincoln7]

Philthy,

I have stopped posting due to time constraints, as I indicate in my last post. It is very hard to find time to respond to around 4 or 5 other posters who’ve totaled a fair few thousand words… I am not simply in denial and refusing to listen. The thread has become so broad, and the chapters and verses so many I just don’t have time.

I’m perfectly comfortable with the reformed faith and any sincere seeker who wishes to see a scholarly defense of it will find plenty, be it Calvin’s institutes, the works of John Owen, the people over at ligonier, the scriptures themselves, or many other places.

I wish you kind regards and thank you for our earlier discussion, it would be good to dialogue again some time on a more specific thread than trying to discuss every verse we can collectively raise on the topic of perseverance. Again, regards.

Lincs

 

[mab23]

How do we dispute the argument of OSAS when someone raises the verse Ephesians 2:8-9:

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

you say amen and tell them to read verse 10

" For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do."

and point out that “works” in Eph 2:9 has to do with works of the law and not “Good works” which is done by Christ working in us

 

[Philthy]

Philthy,

I have stopped posting due to time constraints, as I indicate in my last post. It is very hard to find time to respond to around 4 or 5 other posters who’ve totaled a fair few thousand words… I am not simply in denial and refusing to listen. The thread has become so broad, and the chapters and verses so many I just don’t have time.

I’m perfectly comfortable with the reformed faith and any sincere seeker who wishes to see a scholarly defense of it will find plenty, be it Calvin’s institutes, the works of John Owen, the people over at ligonier, the scriptures themselves, or many other places.

I wish you kind regards and thank you for our earlier discussion, it would be good to dialogue again some time on a more specific thread than trying to discuss every verse we can collectively raise on the topic of perseverance. Again, regards.

Lincs

I understand perfectly. When you have the time to “dialogue again…on a more specific thread…” I recommend you start it with your response to my last post to you including any specificity you wish to establish. Unfortunately, until then you join a very long list of folks I’ve interacted with who end the dialogue at precisely this point.

Blessings -