Faith Alone

[sandusky]

What is a mystery to me is that, if a person is OSAS, what is the point of reminder? God will bring that person to completion, so why stress over the little details like holiness?

You need to read what Peter says, and read my post over, and over, and over, as you seem to miss the entire point.

 

[guanophore]

You need to read what Peter says, and read my post over, and over, and over, as you seem to miss the entire point.

Here is the point that I get from Peter’s reminder:

2 Peter 2:19-21
20 For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overpowered, the last state has become worse for them than the first. 21 For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment delivered to them."

One cannot escape the defilements of the world except by the blood of Christ. The knowledge spoken of here is not head knowledge, but relational knowledge. Head knowledge cannot save one from defilement, as even the demons know Him in that way.

The Apostle makes it clear that these persons who escaped through Christ became again entagled and overpowered. They knew the way of righteousness, but turned back from it. He has just spent a chapter and a half describing these people. It is not a description of the saved, either. Now, perhaps you will tell me that these people were never saved, but I think it is hard to dispense of this text in such a way. One’s last state cannot be worse than the first unless that first state was changed (by baptism, for instance).

 

[Randy_Carson]

I’ll keep this very simple for you, Randy.

The doctrine of eternal security is not concerned with whether or not one can know he is among the elect, but states simply that the elect cannot lose salvation.

Hope this helps :tiphat:

Well, duh. Thanks for stating the obvious. That WAS really helpful but not really my point.

As for the elect not losing their salvation, let me guess…the elect have no free will, right?

But humor me one more time…which verse specifically states that the elect cannot lose their salvation?

You can’t understand.

The one God justifies, He also glorifies.

Hope this helps :tiphat:

Um…no.

Hebrews 6:4-6
4It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, 6if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because**(“http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=65&chapter=6&version=31&context=chapter#fen-NIV-30035b”)]to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace.

I’m curious…who has been enlightened? The elect? Who has “tasted the heavenly gift”? The justified? Who has “shared in the Holy Spirit”? The predestined?

Yet, Scripture says “if they fall away” – obviously indicating that such is possible.

Hope this helps. :tiphat:

BTW, I’ve read a lot of your posts in this thread, and I note a distinct flavor of arrogance and sarcasm in the tone of your writing. I guess you are right about one thing…a tree IS known by its fruit.

Perhaps spending too much time in this forum is leading you into sin? I’m not sure that many of us are being convinced by your “arguments”, so it seems tough to justify your uncharitable remarks as “speaking the truth in love.” Maybe this has simply gotten “personal” with you?

 

[sandusky]

Randy Carson:

Well, duh. Thanks for stating the obvious. That WAS really helpful but not really my point.

That’s sarcastic, isn’t it, Randy?
Randy Carson:

But humor me one more time…which verse specifically states that the elect cannot lose their salvation?

I think it will be more helpful to just use your own church teaching on predestination.

As a Catholic, you are required to believe that:God, by His eternal resolve of will, has predetermined certain men to eternal blessedness (De fide)

And that,

God, by an eternal resolve of His will, predestines certain men, on account of their foreseen sins, to eternal rejection (De fide).Tucked between those two groups, is a third group that is predestined to grace. Those, make the choice either to receive, or to reject the Gospel offer, and, based upon their behavior, they run the risk of losing their justification.

In truth, those predestined to grace are, by default, a part of those who will be eternally rejected, as the number of those predestined to eternal blessedness is fixed by the fact that included in their predestination is the gift of final perseverance—none of the other groups is given that gift.

Therefore, those predestined to eternal blessedness cannot lose their justification, or salvation, if you will.

Do you have any problem with fact that in Catholic predestination the elect to eternal blessedness cannot, according to church teaching, lose their salvation?

If not, then you must also have no problem with those predestined to election in the biblical model.

No significant difference exists between the two.

In each case, a sovereign God, with the ability to save every single human being, chooses not to do so.

Rather, He chooses to save an elect number of human beings according to His own will, and not on the basis of any foreseen merit in the creature (cf Titus 3:5).

Therefore, free will has nothing to do in either case, as your church states, the initial grace is not merited, and neither is the gift of perseverance.

It’s all up to God, and Him only.

 

[sodak]

Fortunately, we Catholics do not take our spiritual directions from Protestants. You do NOT tell us what we have to believe.

 

[sandusky]

sodak:

Fortunately, we Catholics do not take our spiritual directions from Protestants. You do NOT tell us what we have to believe.

I’m not telling what you must believe De fide, Dr. Ott is.

Here is what Tan books, says about Dr. Ott’s book:Recognized as the greatest summary of Catholic dogma ever put between two covers. A one-volume encyclopedia of Catholic doctrines. Tells exactly what the Church teaches on any particular topic. Tells when the pronouncement was made and gives the sources from Scripture, Church Councils, Papal statements and the Fathers and Doctors of the Church. Essential for priests, seminarians, parents and teachers. Easily one of our most important books.

 

[Pax]

Where does the scripture say that believers can apostatize?

QUOTE]

Randy Carson cited Hebrews 6:1-8 which is the obvious passage to address your question. The only thing we need to do is establish that these people are believers. All commentaries indicate that the letter is written to Hebrew converts. Let’s see if the book itself clues us in on whether or not these are believers and therefore “justified.”

We know the author is talking to and teaching Christian believers because of the verses that precede the subject verses. For example:

Heb 2: 1. “ THEREFORE WE must pay the closer attention to what we have heard, lest we drift away from it. For if the message declared by angels was valid and every transgression or disobedience received a just retribution, how shall we escape if **we **neglect such a great salvation? It was declared at first by the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard him, while God also bore witness by signs and wonders and “

The author over and over uses the word “we” and continues to do so in the letter. While there are many things to quote in Hebrews, we can get to the heart of the matter by focusing on some things in Chapter five that clearly establish that the author is addressing believing Christians. Hebrews 5:12-14 says, “For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need some one to teach you again the first principles of God’s word. You need milk, not solid food; for every one who lives on milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a child. But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their faculties trained by practice to distinguish good from evil.”

Now please notice that the author tells those receiving his letter that by now they ought to be teachers, but that they are immature. He does not say that they are non-believers. Instead, the criticism of immaturity is explained by the fact that they are “unskilled in the word of righteousness.” They still need practice to distinguish good from evil, even though they should already be passed that. It is then that chapter six begins and the author warns these same people of apostasy. Right after the warning the author returns to exhorting them saying, “And we desire each one of you to show the same earnestness in realizing the full assurance of hope** until the end**, so that you may not be sluggish, but imitators of those who through faith and patience inherit the promises.”[Hebrews 6:11-12]

Nothing could be more clear than Hebrews 6 on the issue under discussion. There is another verse that I find quite interesting in this regard as well. In what is popularly known as the “Little Apocalypse” in Matthew 24, Jesus says the following:

Matthew 24:21-22
“For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be. And if those days had not been shortened, no human being would be saved; but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened.”

If no one that is justified can ever be lost for any reason than Jesus would never have made this kind of remark. Jesus clearly says that even the elect would be lost if the days of tribulation were not shortened during the latter days before the final judgment. This is contrary to OSAS which teaches that no one that believes could ever possibly fall away. The fact is that during trials and troubles people sometimes do fall away, and this fact is supported by what Jesus says in the parable of the sower.

There simply is no reason to believe that someone cannot be justified and then fall away. Even the definition of apostasy denies your view. Check this out:

Apostasy
(apo, from, and stasis, station, standing, or position).

The word itself in its etymological sense, signifies the desertion of a post, the giving up of a state of life; he who voluntarily embraces a definite state of life cannot leave it, therefore, without becoming an apostate.

The following is from Merriam Webster:

apostasy
Main Entry: apos·ta·sy
Pronunciation: \ə-ˈpäs-tə-sē\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural apos·ta·sies
Etymology: Middle English apostasie, from Late Latin apostasia, from Greek, literally, revolt, from aphistasthai to revolt, from apo- + histasthai to stand — more at stand
Date: 14th century
1 : renunciation of a religious faith
2 : abandonment of a previous loyalty : defection

You simply cannot revolt against and defect from that which you did not believe.

I hope this helps.

 

[BamaRider]

!st reading from the Daily Mass of May 16. James 2:14-24

Sorry if already posted, I did not go back through all the posts.

*What good is it, my brothers and sisters,
if someone says he has faith but does not have works?
Can that faith save him?
If a brother or sister has nothing to wear
and has no food for the day,
and one of you says to them,
“Go in peace, keep warm, and eat well,”
but you do not give them the necessities of the body,
what good is it?
So also faith of itself,
if it does not have works, is dead.

Indeed someone might say,
“You have faith and I have works.”
Demonstrate your faith to me without works,
and I will demonstrate my faith to you from my works.
You believe that God is one.
You do well.
Even the demons believe that and tremble.
Do you want proof, you ignoramus, that faith without works is useless?
Was not Abraham our father justified by works
when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar?
You see that faith was active along with his works,
and faith was completed by the works.
Thus the Scripture was fulfilled that says,
Abraham believed God,
and it was credited to him as righteousness,
and he was called the friend of God.
See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.
For just as a body without a spirit is dead,
so also faith without works is dead.*

Pretty much seals the deal for me, on why the Catholic Church teaches that faith must be accompanied by good works.

 

[Sean_Boyle]

I’m not interested in a free-for-all while trying to answer your questions.

What are you afraid of???

If you have truth, then you should be secure in your knowledge.

 

[sandusky]

guanophore:

Here is the point that I get from Peter’s reminder:

One cannot escape the defilements of the world except by the blood of Christ. The knowledge spoken of here is not head knowledge, but relational knowledge. Head knowledge cannot save one from defilement, as even the demons know Him in that way.

I don’t think that’s true, and, relational knowledge is different from relationship.

Those addressed in the letter are said to have received a faith of the same kind as ours (2 Pet 1:1) ours being that faith of the apostles—a faith which specifically cannot fail, as Christ is both the author and finisher of that faith (Heb 12:2), as well as the High Priest who is able to save His people completely because He always lives to intercede for their faith (Heb 7:25)—they can neither fail, nor lose their faith.

guanophore:

The Apostle makes it clear that these persons who escaped through Christ became again entagled and overpowered. They knew the way of righteousness, but turned back from it. He has just spent a chapter and a half describing these people. It is not a description of the saved, either. Now, perhaps you will tell me that these people were never saved, but I think it is hard to dispense of this text in such a way. One’s last state cannot be worse than the first unless that first state was changed (by baptism, for instance).

The kind of faith that was lost is spoken of the in the sower and seed parable, and, if lost, was not a true, saving faith, nor was that person justified, as those God justifies, He also glorifies.

Furthermore, Peter is not speaking of the same people in chapter 1, and 2, but two different types of people—those with a like faith as the apostles, and those who are false teachers (2:1).

I submit that everything about a false teacher is false, including the confession of faith they had once professed.

The evidence for that is found here:**2 Peter 2:22

It has happened to them according to the true proverb, “A dog returns to its own vomit,” and, “A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire.”**IOW, they were never transformed into saints by the Spirit’s regeneration, but had remained dogs, and sows, who, on their own, cleaned themselves up a bit and for a while; nevertheless, there was no real God-wrought change; had there been they would never have fallen away.

 

[sandusky]

Pax:

You simply cannot revolt against and defect from that which you did not believe.

The issue of loss that I’m concerned with is not faith; faith can be lost as the sower and seed parable illustrates, but was the person who lost the faith justified?

I must answer “no” they were not justified, because those He justified, He also glorified (Rom 8:30).

Pax:

Randy Carson cited Hebrews 6:1-8 which is the obvious passage to address your question. The only thing we need to do is establish that these people are believers. All commentaries indicate that the letter is written to Hebrew converts. Let’s see if the book itself clues us in on whether or not these are believers and therefore “justified.”

The presentation of what’s happening in Heb 6 is involved, and lengthy, and I don’t have one prepared for this forum’s format; therefore, here is a link to an outline, and presentation of Hebrews 6 that states everything I believe the passage to being saying.

Voice your disagreements after you’ve read it.

 

[guanophore]

I don’t think that’s true, and, relational knowledge is different from relationship.

Those addressed in the letter are said to have received a faith of the same kind as ours (2 Pet 1:1) ours being that faith of the apostles—a faith which specifically cannot fail, as Christ is both the author and finisher of that faith (Heb 12:2), as well as the High Priest who is able to save His people completely because He always lives to intercede for their faith (Heb 7:25)—they can neither fail, nor lose their faith.

When I am speaking of relational knowledge, I mean only knowledge that can come from being in relationship. One can only accept the defilements of the world by the blood of Christ, and one only benefits by the shed blood of Christ by getting into relationship with Him by faith. The Apostles nowhere teach that faith cannot fail. In fact, they teach in many places the exact opposite. Faith is a characteristic of human beings, and therefore, is fallible. Peter further describes this faith a few verses later:

2 Peter 1:10-11
10 Therefore, brethren, be the more zealous to confirm your call and election, for if you do this you will never fall; 11 so there will be richly provided for you an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

God is ready, willing, and able to preserve those in faith who are zealous to confirm their call. Those that fail to do so will be lost.

Those who fail to zealously confirm their call and election can, an do, fall from grace.

The kind of faith that was lost is spoken of the in the sower and seed parable, and, if lost, was not a true, saving faith, nor was that person justified, as those God justifies, He also glorifies.

In fact, scripture makes no distinction that you do about “true, saving faith” and 'other" (unsaving faith). This is an artificial insertion into the text, as is the artificial translation of the past tense reference to “those whom He justified, He also glorified” into the present tense.

Furthermore, Peter is not speaking of the same people in chapter 1, and 2, but two different types of people—those with a like faith as the apostles, and those who are false teachers (2:1).

I agree he is speaking of two types of people, but they both originated in the same faith. Some departed from that faith.

2 Peter 2:14-15
Accursed children! 15 Forsaking the right way they have gone astray"

People do not become children of God until they are adopted. Accursed children are those who were adopted, then spurned the grace that bought them. One cannot “forsake” a way that one has not embraced.

I submit that everything about a false teacher is false, including the confession of faith they had once professed.

The evidence for that is found here:2 Peter 2:22

It has happened to them according to the true proverb, “A dog returns to its own vomit,” and, “A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire.”IOW, they were never transformed into saints by the Spirit’s regeneration, but had remained dogs, and sows, who, on their own, cleaned themselves up a bit and for a while; nevertheless, there was no real God-wrought change; had there been they would never have fallen away.

Perhaps this is true, but it is true for all of us. We are all dogs in the vomit, sows in th emire, until we come to Christ. Some who are washed and regenerated forget that they were cleansed from their sins, and go back to them.

2 Peter 1:8-9
9 For whoever lacks these things is blind and shortsighted and has forgotten that he was cleansed from his old sins.

It does not mean he was never cleansed or regenerated. It means that the seed was sown, sprouted, and was choked out.

 

[guanophore]

The issue of loss that I’m concerned with is not faith; faith can be lost as the sower and seed parable illustrates, but was the person who lost the faith justified?

I must answer “no” they were not justified, because those He justified, He also glorified (Rom 8:30).

Scripture makes it clear that these persons were washed, cleansed, regenerated. This cannot happen without justification. You have to say “no” because you must support your alteration of Rom 8:20 from the past tense into the present. Whereas, Paul is speaking here of the saints who have gone on before us in the faith. He makes it clear that a mature Christian attitude is one that does not consider oneself to have already “arrived”:

“Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect; but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own. 13 Brethren, I do not consider that I have made it my own; but one thing I do, forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, 14 I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. 15** Let those of us who are mature be thus minded**; and if in anything you are otherwise minded, God will reveal that also to you. 16 Only let us hold true to what we have attained.” Phil 3:12-16

This is why we consider OSAS to be an immature understanding of Salvation.

The presentation of what’s happening in Heb 6 is involved, and lengthy…

I look forward!

 

[sandusky]

guanophore:

When I am speaking of relational knowledge, I mean only knowledge that can come from being in relationship. One can only accept the defilements of the world by the blood of Christ, and one only benefits by the shed blood of Christ by getting into relationship with Him by faith.

Even the non-elect benefit from Christ’s atonement; that’s something you should have studied in seminary.

guanophore:

The Apostles nowhere teach that faith cannot fail.

Faith can fail (Lk 8); the question is whether or not the one whose faith failed was justified.

guanophore:

Faith is a characteristic of human beings, and therefore, is fallible.

Scripture defines faith as a gift.

guanophore:

Peter further describes this faith a few verses later:

2 Peter 1:10-11
10 Therefore, brethren, be the more zealous to confirm your call and election, for if you do this you will never fall; 11 so there will be richly provided for you an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

You need to prove that the Catholic’s favorite buzz words, fall, stumble, shipwreck, entanglement with the world, etc., mean a loss of salvation; I believe that all of you unconsciously jump to that conclusion because of your commitment to libertarian free will theology.

guanophore:

God is ready, willing, and able to preserve those in faith who are zealous to confirm their call. Those that fail to do so will be lost.

Again, the works theology comes through (though you’ll continue to deny that yours is a works theology); your beliefs have nothing to do with what God has done, and everything to do with you must do.

guanophore:

Those who fail to zealously confirm their call and election can, an do, fall from grace.

You make my point here, guanophore—you presume that fall from grace, or stumble, as the passage states, means a loss of salvation.

guanophore:

In fact, scripture makes no distinction that you do about “true, saving faith” and 'other" (unsaving faith).

Yes it does, read the sower and the seed again.

guanophore:

I agree he is speaking of two types of people, but they both originated in the same faith. Some departed from that faith.

2 Peter 2:14-15
Accursed children! 15 Forsaking the right way they have gone astray"

As one reads Peter’s description of the false teachers, the word believer does not come to mind, but unregenerate, unjustified, reprobate, children of wrath (Eph 2:3).

They are the ones of whom Paul says to the Corinthians, “such were some of you,” but you were washed by the blood of Christ; obviously, the false teachers Peter is describing were not washed.

guanophore:

Perhaps this is true, but it is true for all of us. We are all dogs in the vomit, sows in th emire, until we come to Christ.

Well, there’s your problem; listen to what you’re being taught!

You and yours may be a dogs in the vomit, and sows in the mire, but I’m not; neither is any other justified, regenerate believer; my old nature is dead, old things have passed away, and new things have come (2 Cor 5:17); I’m being transformed daily into the image of the Lord (2 Cor 3:18).

Those false teachers Peter was talking about, their old man was alive and kicking because they had never been regenerated by the Spirit, and justified by God; that’s why they went back to what they truly were—not justified!

guanophore:

Some who are washed and regenerated forget that they were cleansed from their sins, and go back to them.

Once again, salvation is not about perfection, but mercy and grace. And the grace of God is sufficient to save one apart from anything else.

guanophore:

2 Peter 1:8-9
9 For whoever lacks these things is blind and shortsighted and has forgotten that he was cleansed from his old sins.

It does not mean he was never cleansed or regenerated. It means that the seed was sown,

Again, you prove my earlier point by your presumption that the verse above translates into, ”he lost his salvation.”

guanophore:

I look forward!

ISTM that you didn’t read my post carefully; here’s the link that I provided.

 

[Randy_Carson]

That’s sarcastic, isn’t it, Randy?

I appreciate the fact that you recognize the sarcasm in my response. This leads me to think that you may be able to recognize it in your own responses, as well. Thus, there is hope that you might be able to tone it down in the future.

I think it will be more helpful to just use your own church teaching on predestination.

As a Catholic, you are required to believe that:God, by His eternal resolve of will, has predetermined certain men to eternal blessedness (De fide)
And that,

God, by an eternal resolve of His will, predestines certain men, on account of their foreseen sins, to eternal rejection (De fide).

“Although a Catholic may agree with unconditional election, he may not affirm “double-predestination,” a doctrine Calvinists often infer from it. This teaching claims that in addition to electing some people to salvation God also sends others to damnation.”

catholic.com/thisrock/1993/9309fea1.asp

 

[sandusky]

“Although a Catholic may agree with unconditional election, he may not affirm “double-predestination,” a doctrine Calvinists often infer from it. This teaching claims that in addition to electing some people to salvation God also sends others to damnation.”

Thanks for that.

You haven’t answered the question I posed to you, and I don’t if that’s a deliberate avoidance on your part, or perhaps an oversight?

Here again is what I asked:**Do you have any problem with fact that in Catholic predestination the elect to eternal blessedness cannot, according to church teaching, lose their salvation?

If not, then you must also have no problem with those predestined to election in the biblical model.

No significant difference exists between the two.

In each case, a sovereign God, with the ability to save every single human being, chooses not to do so.

Rather, He chooses to save an elect number of human beings according to His own will, and not on the basis of any foreseen merit in the creature (cf Titus 3:5).Do you have a problem with the Catholic doctrine that those elect to eternal blessedness can never lose their salvation?**

 

[Pax]

Sandusky,

I read the link on Hebrews 6. There are so many problems with it that it would take a longer article of my own to refute it. At least the author admits that it is his own interpretation. I think the scriptures in Hebrews are very plain. Please note that the author of the article did not address my reasoning but merely presented his own. A refutation of my position requires that my arguments be properly addressed.

I see the biggest problem with the article as eisegesis. The author doesn’t even address the definition of apostasy which is one of the simple keys to the passage. The whole thing is fraught with problems.

 

[sandusky]

Randy Carson:

Hebrews 6:4-6

Yet, Scripture says “if they fall away” – obviously indicating that such is possible.

Thanks for your opinion, Randy.

However, you’re doing nothing but making an assertion.

I can do that too. Here goes. No it doesn’t.

BTW, I’m still waiting for an answer to the question put to you in response to your question to me concerning the elect losing their salvation. (See my post #244).

 

[Randy_Carson]

Thanks for your opinion, Randy.

However, you’re doing nothing but making an assertion.

I can do that too. Here goes. No it doesn’t.

BTW, I’m still waiting for an answer to the question put to you in response to your question to me concerning the elect losing their salvation.

“No it doesn’t”? What purpose does “if” serve then?

I understand your desire to hear a response. I plan to do some reading along these lines to refresh my thinking. I’ve got Jimmy Akin’s The Salvation Controversy coming off the shelf tonight.

Just to make sure I don’t misunderstand you…your position is that the elect are going to heaven and there is not a darn thing they can do to stop it, correct?

 

[sandusky]

“No it doesn’t”? What purpose does “if” serve then?

“If” is a conditional.

You haven’t established that those under discussion have been justified by God, that they are the elect, that falling away in that context means a loss of salvation, that they are even saved for that matter.

Make your case.
Randy Carson:

Just to make sure I don’t misunderstand you…your position is that the elect are going to heaven and there is not a darn thing they can do to stop it, correct?

Correct.