Evidence for Once Saved Always Saved?

[Arthropod]

If a person accepts Christ and then dies, they would go to Heaven. If they accept him, later reject him, and then die, they go to Hell.

To ask if a person is “saved in the first place” is irrelevant. “Saved” doesn’t become past tense until you die. Up until then, our lives are a constant process of staying in good stand with God until our death, and then if we have passed the test, we are THEN saved.

You have picked apart my wording, but you haven’t answered the question: If they later fall away, did they genuinely accept Christ in the first place? That is the question.

 

[aidanbradypop]

You have picked apart my wording, but you haven’t answered the question: If they later fall away, did they genuinely accept Christ in the first place? That is the question.

Sure they did. Have you sinned since you were “saved” or been perfect?

 

[PRmerger]

But the question is, was someone who appears to accept Christ as his savior, and later rejects him really saved in the first place?

Well, everyone who accepts Jesus as their Lord and Savior “appears” to be a Christian. That includes you and me.

But we won’t know if we will reject Him in the future.

If we do, and don’t repent, God will not force Himself upon us.

That’s why our salvation is never guaranteed. God is too much of a gentleman to force Himself upon someone who rejects Him.

And as far as “appearance” goes, faux Christian looks exactly like a true Christian, does he not?

 

[PRmerger]

Are you of the opinion that its impossible to truly believe and sin at some points in one’s faith journey?

Do you believe that St. Peter, who sinned grievously against our Lord during His last days, was not a Believer during Jesus’ first 3 years of ministry?

I did not say that.

Excellent.

So St. Peter was a Believer who rejected Christ.
So was Judas.

One repented. The other did not.

One is a saint. The other, well, we can hope in the mercy of God for his soul.

 

[dshix]

You have picked apart my wording, but you haven’t answered the question: If they later fall away, did they genuinely accept Christ in the first place? That is the question.

Heh, I didn’t pick apart any wording, I just answered you where you were.

If a person later falls away, of COURSE they genuinely accepted Christ in the first place. The point is that they rejected Him later, losing their grace.

OSAS has zero foundation.

 

[Arthropod]

No, this is incorrect.

A saint is anyone who is in heaven.

Knowledge of whether they passed through purgatory first is beyond our pay grade.

Thus, it’s entirely possible that St. Dismas went through purgatory first. In fact, as Jesus said that today he would be in paradise with Jesus, and we know that Jesus did not enter paradise “today”, it appears that St. Dismas went somewhere else until Jesus opened the gates of heaven and returned in triumph.

1: It might be beyong our pay grade, but isn’t the pope supposed to be infallible on such matters?
2:

Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus, To all the saints in Christ Jesus at Philippi, together with the overseers and deacons

 

[PRmerger]

And anyway, the bible said it, not I:

No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him.

No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God.

Amen! These are very Catholic verses that proclaim the faith of the Apostles given to the Church. No one who sins and doesn’t repent will be saved. Amen!

 

[dshix]

1: It might be beyong our pay grade, but isn’t the pope supposed to be infallible on such matters?
2:

What are you talking about? The pope is infallible on issues of faith and morals, he isn’t omniscient.

 

[PRmerger]

1: It might be beyong our pay grade, but isn’t the pope supposed to be infallible on such matters?:

I think, like your misapprehension on other Catholic doctrines, you are confusing infallibility with omniscience.

The pope, in his office as the vicar of Christ, can speak infallibly, but he is not omniscient.

 

[dshix]

I think, like your misapprehension on other Catholic doctrines, you are confusing infallibility with omniscience.

The pope, in his office as the vicar of Christ, can speak infallibly, but he is not omniscient.

beat ya.

 

[PRmerger]

1: It might be beyong our pay grade, but isn’t the pope supposed to be infallible on such matters?
2:

Is there something from the Magisterium that you have read that proclaims knowledge of whether someone first passed through purgatory?

Please cite your sources, Arthropod. Thanks.

 

[PRmerger]

beat ya.

whatshouldwecallme.tumblr.com/post/37166621277/when-someone-says-they-dont-like-christmas-music

 

[Arthropod]

Sure they did. Have you sinned since you were “saved” or been perfect?

I am not talking about the presence of sin. I am talking about the continuation of a life of sin, or the lack of repentance.

 

[Arthropod]

I think, like your misapprehension on other Catholic doctrines, you are confusing infallibility with omniscience.

The pope, in his office as the vicar of Christ, can speak infallibly, but he is not omniscient.

But surely infallibility means he can make something up, declare it, and it is then true? Isn’t he supposed to be prevented by the holy spirit from saying it if what he has made up is not true?

 

[Arthropod]

Is there something from the Magisterium that you have read that proclaims knowledge of whether someone first passed through purgatory?

Please cite your sources, Arthropod. Thanks.

Its called infallibility.

 

[Arthropod]

Amen! These are very Catholic verses that proclaim the faith of the Apostles given to the Church. No one who sins and doesn’t repent will be saved. Amen!

You say that as if it contradicts sola fide.

 

[dshix]

But surely infallibility means he can make something up, declare it, and it is then true? Isn’t he supposed to be prevented by the holy spirit from saying it if what he has made up is not true?

Heh, I don’t know where you got that idea.

It’s the other way around. All morals and articles of faith already exist; all the Holy Spirit does is prevents the Pope from teaching anything that is false on matters of faith and morals. He CANNOT teach anything false. If he tries… something happens to prevent him.

 

[PRmerger]

I am not talking about the presence of sin. I am talking about the continuation of a life of sin, or the lack of repentance.

Then this is very Catholic of you to say, Arthropod!

Anyone who sins and has not repented will not be saved. :sad_yes:

 

[PRmerger]

But surely infallibility means he can make something up, declare it, and it is then true? Isn’t he supposed to be prevented by the holy spirit from saying it if what he has made up is not true?

Do you believe that Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter and Paul were capable of making something up, declaring it to be true, and it is then true?

If not, why do you believe that these men could not do this?

If so, then how do you know that what is in the gospels/epistles are not made up?

 

[PRmerger]

Its called infallibility.

Ah… you have fallen into the very common error of misunderstanding the Catholic teaching of infallibility.

It is not, as you appear to believe, omniscience.

It is nothing more and nothing less than what you believe men such as Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul and Peter were capable of: proclaiming a truth of God without error, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

So unless you want to proclaim here on this rather public forum that you believe that these men weren’t infallible, and that what they wrote has some error in it, then you do believe in the charism of infallibility, as the Catholic Church understands it, Arthropod.