I am a Protestant who wants an honest answer

[Lance]

I am a convert from Methodist. I was well on my way to hell before my conversion. Not because I was Methodist, but because I was a bad Methodist and a bad person. Being Protestant or Catholic has nothing to do with whether you go to heaven or hell. It is you belief in and following the teaching of Christ to the best of you ability that determines that. IMHO be Catholic makes it easier do follow Christ but there will be Catholics in hell just as there will be Protestants in heaven. Since I don’t know what is in your heart I have no way of knowing if you are going to heaven. I pray that you do.

 

[bengal_fan]

Lance:

… there will be Catholics in hell just as there will be Protestants in heaven.

actually, there won’t be catholics in hell. there will be people who claimed to be members of the catholic church, who were baptised, confirmed, took communion, etc on earth, but because they never allowed Christ and the teachings of His church to penetrate their hearts they were never truly catholics. as for protestants, they might have been a member of a protestant church on earth but in heaven they will be a member of the catholic church.

 

[Lance]

bengal_fan:

actually, there won’t be catholics in hell. there will be people who claimed to be members of the catholic church, who were baptised, confirmed, took communion, etc on earth, but because they never allowed Christ and the teachings of His church to penetrate their hearts they were never truly catholics. as for protestants, they might have been a member of a protestant church on earth but in heaven they will be a member of the catholic church.

OK, but I think my meaning was clear.

 

[bengal_fan]

Lance:

OK, but I think my meaning was clear.

i agree, you were clear, but there are some on this thread who would say you weren’t and i was trying to make a point to them. your post was well said

 

[Lance]

bengal_fan:

i agree, you were clear, but there are some on this thread who would say you weren’t and i was trying to make a point to them. your post was well said

Good point. See you can agree with a Packer fan, even though you thought not.

 

[ContraFool]

I certainly don’t know for certain what will happen to you in the end, but I think there is a strong chance of you going to heaven, especially if you received a proper Christian baptism by water. And eveif you didn’t, there is still a chance for you by blood or desire. Also, I know that if I were to die this moment, I would go to Heaven, probably after a stay in Purgatory, because I don’t at this moment have any mortal sins on my soul. However, I do not yet know what I my do in the future. I hope that I will die in God’s friendship, but only He knows that for sure at this time.

 

[RBushlow]

Ozzie:

This is a TOTAL distortion of the Biblical message regarding salvation. . . . .
A true believer, according to God’s Word and Christ’s historical sacrifice on our behalf, can know without a doubt that he/she is forever saved.

Not true! Paul knows that we must continually keep ourselves in submission to God lest we be lost when he says:
1 Cor 9
27 But I keep my body under, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.

And he admonishes believers to persevere throughout our lives as in Romans:
Rom 2:5 God will give to each according to what he has done. To those who by perseverence in doing good seek glory, honor, and immortality, he will give eternal live.

This is not in the least ambiguous. It just goes against the erroneous teachings on which you base your false belief.

May the peace of Christ, the love of God the Father and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you always.

 

[Corpus_Cristi]

I’ve read the posts in this discussion and since all the other Catholics here have provided the scripture, tradition, and magesterial teaching, I’m just going to say what they all said:
One cannot know if he is saved at the end until they get to the end. We aren’t God, and we aren’t omnipresent, neither are we OMNIESCENT, which is the word some people should have used in the place of omnipresent, (one up on you in English grammar, Ozzie )

God gives us sanctifying grace on Earth through the sacraments, and we accept them. Why do babies receive baptism when they don’t accept it on faith? Wait a minute, they do! They just don’t do it WHEN THEY’RE BABIES, they do when they’ve reached the age of reason AND when they’re confirmed! That’s why Christ gave us the sacrament of baptism. It’s received as a sacrament at birth, and at that point, the grace is there. Well, it takes a few years before they actually realize the grace is there. That’s why it’s there for them to accept when they do realize, and if they do accept it, then they have then FULLY received the grace of baptism. We also receive sanctifying grace through the other sacraments: Confirmation, Eucharist, Reconciliation, Anointing of the Sick, Holy Orders, and Matrimony.

When life is over, we receive the personal judgement. That is to find out if we passed. It’s like getting your grades that you ended up with at the end of your senior year in high school. That’s when you find out if you passed. The second judgement, that is the final one, when we’re all gathered together and we see each other, those who have passed, and we receive the fullness of what we have been given partially by God, is like the graduation ceremony, when you truly HAVE graduated, in the sense that you’re free from not graduating. You see, until you’ve found out if you passed senior year or not, you don’t know whether or not you’re going to graduate, therefore, you don’t have assurance. Anything can happen. You can slip very narrowly, and it happens a lot of times because people don’t think it can happen. That’s when it does. You should always hold to God. If you don’t, then you may as well slip away and not “pass”, and then “graduate”. I hope this helps.

 

[mark_a]

Lance:

… but there will be Catholics in hell just as there will be Protestants in heaven.

Who was it that said “the road to hell (or the floor of hell) is paved with bishops’ skulls”? All I remember is he was Catholic.

 

[Corpus_Cristi]

YES, the use of the word graces are permissable, because grace, defined by Ozzie, is UNMERITED FAVOR. Since UNMERITED FAVOR can be put in a plural form to say UNMERITED FAVORS, then grace, can be put in a plural form to say GRACES).

A little English lesson for you: The word IS is a LINKING VERB. It works as the EQUAL SIGNS (=) work in Math class. For example:

I am a scientist
I = a scientist

I am tired
I = tired

Now, for the example above, one may argue, "Hey, one cannot say that he EQUALS tired, but look at THIS, and tell me that.

I am not tired
I (am not)= tired

I expect someone to act stupid and use improper English, so I’ll let you know that you can’t say “I am not equals tired”, but you must put this linking verb in the PRESENT PROGRESSIVE and say, “I am not EQUALLING tired.”

Try this one:

“The computer IS there.”
“The computer = there.”

Now, this is probably easy to be tried to be refuted, but there is a case for it, and it’s legitimate.
A computer is matter, because it’s something that we use, something that’s tangible. I optically, physically, and sometimes, I audibly sense the computer, therefore, I know it’s there. When I say that “The computer is there”, I’m saying that matter, a material object, is occupying space in a specific place. If someone were to refute this, then they’d say be saying “the computer is not there”, which would be saying, there isn’t anything there, or there is something else there that isn’t the computer, like maybe, a dog. Even if I was imagining this computer, it would still be showing equality. The computer is still occupying a place in my train of mental thought, and in my imagination. It is matter taking up a place somewhere “figuratively”, so it is in existence in a place, which means that is equals the place that it’s in. If it didn’t, then nothing would be there, or something would be there in the place of it that wasn’t the computer, like maybe, lunch.

Now, you may be asking “What is the point of this lesson in the English language?”

The point is that when one defines “grace” as “divine, unmerited favor”, one can see the following sentence:

"Grace IS divine, unmerited favor.

If one can pluralize “divine, unmerited favor” to be “divine, unmerited favors”, then one can pluralize “grace” to be “graces”.

You may be asking the question “if grace can be changed to graces because it’s definition can be pluralized, then why isn’t ‘tired’, or ‘there’, pluralized?”

That is a good question. That is because both “grace” and “divine, unmerited favor” are both nouns. They are of the same parts of speech so if I pluralize one, and then use a linking verb to show how one equals the other, then I MUST pluralize the other. It just so happens that “tired” and “there” in these cases are adjectives. These are not the same parts of speech as nouns, therefore, they are not pluralized when joined to a noun by a linking verb. If they were, then it would not be proper English.

This, Ozzie, is the reason why you are wrong about the word grace not being able to be put in a plural form, both theologically, and grammatically.

 

[BayCityRickL]

JesusFreak16: You know that God is the Judge and no man can or should judge you.

The Catholic Church exists as it has continually from the time of Jesus to lead people to Jesus. And, the Catholic Church believes it has and teaches the “fullness” of truth about Jesus.

Many modern non-Catholic churches exist because they reject the teaching of the Catholic Church. In a practical way, many or most non-Catholics do not even understand what the Catholic Church teaches.

A fair number of non-Catholics “convert” to the Catholic Church because they eventually find no fault with it, even though they were taught many negative things about the Catholic Church. Not only do they find the beauty of faith in the teaching and tradition of the Catholic Church, but they feel betrayed by their former churches.

You must follow your own conscience, but that, too, should be a well-informed conscience. In my case, I have been a Catholic since I was baptized as an infant. I have searched outside the Catholic Church simply out of curiousity for what other Christian Churches are teaching. There are beautiful and thoughtful teachings out there. I like to listen to Pastor Charles Stanley, for example. He always gives a well-organized and thoughtful sermon on his preaching topic.

But, in the end, I have never found a reason to leave the Catholic Church. And, I thank the Holy Spirit for leading me in which I consider to be the right path. Blessed be His holy name.

 

[mark_a]

bengal_fan:

i agree, you were clear, but there are some on this thread who would say you weren’t and i was trying to make a point to them. your post was well said

I am glad to see your post because on another thread it seemed as if you’d had enough of some of our un-charitable attitudes.

Glad we didn’t scare you off. Besides us Steeler fans need someone to kick around.

 

[GrzeszDeL]

mark a:

Who was it that said “the road to hell (or the floor of hell) is paved with bishops’ skulls”? All I remember is he was Catholic.

You are thinking of St. John Chrysostom (and it was “floor of Hell”).

 

[porthos11]

Ozzie:

if you had a very wealthy uncle and he put you in his will making you the legal “heir” of his entire estate. In a very real sense you now possess all that he has. Though the experiential reality has not yet occurred, nevertheless, the legal aspect of it has. Your “hope” to physically possess his estate is not based on an uncertainty, but the certainty of a legal document.

But in that case, I woudn’t be hoping anymore, now would I? I’d just be waiting. Oh,well, I could HOPE my uncle would die soon.

Ahhh, but you say, my uncle could change his mind. Yes, this is certainly true when you’re dealing with men, but we’re dealing with God, not men

Nope. Even if my uncle woudn’t change his mind, I certainly can choose to reject that inheritance. Just because Uncle left me his stuff doesn’t mean I cannot choose to reject it (although that would be crazy, but so is choosing sin). Point is, it’s not God we’re talking about who can change. It’s us, the recipients.

The Apostle John alludes to it this way: “Beloved, NOW we are the children of God, and it has not appeared AS YET what we shall be. WE KNOW that, when He appears, we shall be like Him, because we shall see Him just as He is. And everyone who has this hope fixed on Him, purifies himself, just as He is pure” (1 Jn. 3:2).

Standard Fundamentalist citation. Now YOU’RE the one talking about stuff out of context. 1 John is a treatise against the Gnostic heresy (read any bible scholarship material for proof. Even my Protestant study Bible says so). That’s why John emphasizes KNOW. The Gnostic heresy (aside from considering all matter evil) denied that salvation came only from a special “knowledge” of Christ not given to others. John is refuting this by saying that NOW, with the knowledge of the Apostles, not any “cosmic” knowledge do are we children of God. And they were to hope (uncertain) for his coming (as to when)—in other words, be ready. For hope doesn’t cover only whether something will happen or not, but also when and where. The whole 1 John speaks of the TRUE knowledge of Christ, which is living out the commandments of God (works?) not some strange revelation as the Gnostics claim (Gk. gnosis=knowledge).

The passage you reference (Rom. 8:24) is saying the same thing. You must read it in context with verse 23 where Paul states that we are eagerly waiting for our adoption as sons - defining this to mean "the redemption of our bodies.

Don’t skip the last phrase of v24. “for hope that is seen is not hope.” I still postulate that your assertion of hope being 100% certain is wrong. Hope that is seen is not hope, you don’t get any clear than that. It can’t be hope of there was no measure of uncertainty involved. Now your argument is not entirely unreasonable, that 8:24ff refers to the freedom of the body. They do hope, not because they don’t know whether they will be saved. They hope because they don’t know when the freedom will come.

Now I am a Catholic. Am I saved? You bet your behind I am. What do I hope for? That I will persevere in my pilgrimage to heaven (which is a certainty)–that I will not wilfully choose to reject God. That’s my hope. I am indeed assured that I will be saved. But I need to work out my salvation with a “humble frame of mind” as you see it. I must persevere.

Now as for you. If you don’t work out your salvation in fear and trembling, therefore disobeying the Apostle Paul, what do you think is at stake for you? If you decide to murder someone or have an affair (don’t tell me you can’t, you still have free will) then what? What does it mean for you when Paul warns of being cut off? What does Hebrews warn of when it mentions the fires than burn up those who turn back to sin after having received the knowledge of the truth?

 

[Philthy]

Ozzie:

Ok, PHILTHY, I’ve got some time, I will answer each of your questions based on Titus 3:4-7: Much better **OZZIE! **I knew my little nudge would get you going :yup:

Q.1. One is saved through Christ alone (through personal faith in Him). Again, is the salvation spoken of instantaneous, complete and permanent at the point of regeneration? The verse doesn’t make this clear.

A. To the contrary, the passage makes it very clear: "But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared, He saved us… The fact that it’s past tense means it’s completed and permanent. NO, past tense refers to when the event happened, not qualitative aspects of the event. For that we will have to look at the entire context of Scripture. Jesus Himself makes it very clear in Jn. 5:24 that those who believe in Him “do not come into judgment but have passed out of death into life.” Yes, but this “Him” is not in reference to Jesus at all, but to God the Father. You’ve substituted. But you’re right, they have “passed” - but will they remain if they don’t “keep the faith”? Paul is writing to believers, and when he says, “He saved us…” he means believers. All Scripture verse must be interpreted not only in their immediate context, but within the context of the whole of Scripture. Absolutely.

Q. 2. Does Scripture anywhere talk about our behavior(works) playing any role in our salvation after regeneration? Again, why is so much of the Pauline letters directed at Christian conduct? James chapter 2 seems to point to this also.

A. No, Scripture nowhere talks about the role of behavioral works in the process of one’s salvation - if that’s what you’re asking. Really? You can’t even think of one? How about Phil 2:12 “…work out your salvation with fear and trembling.”
James 2:17 …faith of itself, if it does not have works, is dead. 2:22 …faith was completed by the works. Yes, there is much written on the conduct of the saved, but this is based on the fact that they are saved, not trying to become saved.

Q. I agree almost 100%! You must, however, recall the times when Christ saved children through the faith of their parents

A. I know of no such instance.

Q. 3. (And also the centurions servant). This would seem to argue in favor of the faith of the believers being able to save those not yet capable of believing - no?

A. No! Absolutely not. The Centurion’s servant was healed, not saved. The Centurion’s did not ask Jesus to save his servant’s soul apart from personal belief, but that He would heal his servant from physical affliction. And He did. I think I agree with you on these - I read this to my kids tonight and the translation of Christ’s words to the father of the girl (Jairus) was "…only believe and she will be saved to you", "healed" NIV, “saved” NAB not necessarily eternal salvation. You see, I can be objective! See next post…

Phil

 

[Philthy]

OZZIE
PHILTHY

---

Q. 4. And Christ himself did say," unless you are born…of water and the holy Spirit you have no life in you" Here the action of the holy Spirit and the “water” are treated separately - how do we make sense of this?

A. Jesus answers this Himself: "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit (Jn. 3:6). .They’re two different births. In other words, Jesus defines being born of “water” not as water baptism (baptism is not even mentioned in this passage), but born physically. Not at all. He talks of born of flesh, and born of water in separate passages, there is no reason to connect them. One must be born physically and then born again spiritually. This passage says NOTHING about water baptism. Read it again, especially vss. 5-6.Once you start that sentence with “One” you don’t need to say “born physically” again. All people are “born physically”. And that’s the topic, “a person”, from verse 4 . Simply saying “One must be born again spiritually” means exactly the same thing without the reduncancy you’ve created with your interpretation of “born of water”. Im not saying I’m right, but your logic is flawed.

 

[Philthy]

OZZIE
PHILTHY
Q. 5. Absolutely - and if we all died (involuntarily) at that point in time we would be in heaven for sure. The question, though, is what if, after being regenerated and richly blessed with the gifts of the holy Spirit, we don’t die and choose to ignore them? Are we still saved? Again, is there anything in the bible that tells us to remain and persevere in God’s grace otherwise we lose it?

A. Your hypothetical logic is based on the erroneous RC doctrine of “initial justification.” I’ve learned to ignore such statements when they are not backed up with fact! There’s no such teaching in the Bible. No facts! All true believers HAVE BEEN JUSTIFIED (Titus 3:7; Rom. 5:1-2). A true believer is MADE RIGHTEOUS in Christ, he receives the abundance of grace (not “graces”), the GIFT of righteousness, and will reign in life through Jesus Christ (Rom. 5:17,19, see also 2 Cor. 5:21). RC’ism utterly fails to understand the power of God to save the sinner who puts his trust in the Person and work of His beloved Son (Rom. 1:16). I don’t think so - Catholics say “cooperate with Grace through the free will he gave you in obedient service”. And they recognize the ability to do so is itself a gift from God! I think you think that Catholics think that works alone will get them salvation - which is absurd.

No, there is nothing in the Bible that tells one who is saved to remain and persevere in God’s grace - otherwise he loses it. I’ll simply insert **an earlier post **that dealt nicely with this - it‘s not my own:

"St. Paul did not believe that he had already secured everlasting life in heaven. He does not talk as one that is “saved” and therefore guaranteed salvation.

1 Cor 9:24 "Do you not know that in a race all the runners compete, but only one receives the prize? So run that you may obtain it. 25 Every athlete exercises self-control in all things. They do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. 26 Well, I do not run aimlessly, I do not box as one beating the air; 27 but I pommel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified."
What would Paul be disqualified from? What is the prize?

Phil 2:12 “Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; 13 for God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.”
What is there to fear if your salvation is already secure?

 

[Philthy]

Last one I promise…

---

---

Rom 11:22 “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.”
What would they possibly be cut off from?

Matthew’s Gospel tell us that we must persevere to the end to be saved.
Matt 24:13 “But he who endures to the end will be saved.”

None of us, Catholic or Protestant should presume upon God’s mercy, (“Not then the kindness and severity of God”). We are all subject to sin and any one of us are capable of being disqualified, that is unless we endure to the end, working out our salvation with fear and trembling. There is no fear or trembling if we say, “I know for sure that I am going to heaven when I die!”. Many of us that falsely believe that we are secure will certainly be surprised in the end.

1 Cor 10:11 “Now these things happened to them as a warning, but they were written down for our instruction, upon whom the end of the ages has come. 12 Therefore let any one who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall.”

We should take heed. And that doesn’t mean I’m judging you at all. And it doesn’t mean I live in a morbid fear that makes me not appreciate God’s love and mercy and the life I have in Christ. It’s an honest assessment of human nature and the imperfections of my faith in Christ. Let’s face it - who can claim they’re “completely alive in Christ” yet find time to dribble all this stuff back and forth while the poor need food and the homeless shelter?

Thanks again for your thoughtful responses.

 

[StSteverino]

JesusFreak16:

I am Protestant. How many of you already “know” that I will not be going to heaven, even though you are not omni-present and you cannot see my heart?

Praise God! You sound Catholic!

It is a grave sin in the Catholic faith to presume ones’ final salvation, to despair of ones’ salvation, to judge anothers heart, or to write anyone, absolutely anyone off.

I hope Osama Bin Laden goes to heaven. I do not wish or presume damnation for anyone. I fear many will go to hell and I start out by having a healthy concern for my own soul. I pray you go to heaven and I hope you will pray for me as well, protestant or not. If Catholics have judged your heart, woe unto them. They should correct their conscience and repent!

As Catholics, while we have confidence in our Redeemer, we have a proper caution about ourselves. We know as Paul said, its the one who finishes the race that recieves the prize.

We do not run hither, thither and yon telling everyone how ‘saved’ we are and we do not write anyone off. We hope in an expansive mercy but seek to enter through the narrow gate.

If any Catholic has told they know you are not going to heaven, they are not in agreement with the Church. The Final Church, the ELECT, include some who are outside of it at present, some who are in it who do not realize they are in it and Massa Damnata includes some of the Redeemed whose names will be struck by Our Lord from the book of life.

Catholics know no one has heaven in the bank and no one, absolutely no one is to be written off; Gods will is that all come to know him.

You are probably referring to the teaching ‘No Salvation Outside the Church’.

There is a very broad and argumentitive diversity among even very Orthodox Catholics as to how that is understood.

However, dear friend, if you are begining to sense that The Catholic Church is indeed the Church established by Christ on the shoulders of Peter and that it is the Treasure House of His True Flesh the Most Holy Eucharist, you have an absolute moral obligation to join Her, because once you possess such knowledge or have good reason to suspect it is true, you are bound to enter into her and remain.

When I, as a confirmed Catholic, went into a little bible chapel and was baptized and ‘accepted Christ as my personal saviour’, rejecting His Church and agreeing that it was the whore of babylon from 17th Rev, I was damning my soul.

I have much to answer for.

That said, I would be very surprised if I do not meet many Bible Chapel Christians in Heaven, assuming I get to heaven, and I expect to see Corrie Ten Boon, Billy Graham and Dietrich Bonhoeffer.

But I am a player not The Referee. Reach out for that which is before and strive for the High Calling. Run to win the race and remember not all runners finish.

We as Catholics, like the publican in Lukes Gospel, beat our breasts and say, mea culpa, kyrie eleison, agnus dei quit tollis peccata mundi, miserere nobis, or in plain english, have mercy on me a sinner.

You, dear lady, seem to feel judged by Catholics or Catholicism.

I have been on both sides and I can say the reason I came back to the Church was at least prepared for me by the growing realization, as I confronted my own imperfections, how Protestant teaching had, not out of malice or wickedness intended, encouraged an unmerited pride and confidence in my spirituality.

Christ preached from Peters’ boat, so that is the boat for me. Still, I love Fannie Crosby Hymns and hearing how Jesus saves the down trodden at the Salvation Army and Pacific Gardens, as do most good Catholics.

I can not say for sure I will be saved, but I trust Christ, Hope in God and hope for you to go to heaven as well.

If I get to heaven before you I will pray for you, as I do now.

Please pray for me as well, both now and if you see The Lord before I do.

Yours in Respect and Joyful expectation,

Steve

 

[Pax]

Ozzie,

I am repeating, here, something I have posted on two other threads. Please try to refute the my understanding of the following quotes from scripture. So far no one else has.

Love and faith are necessary works. (Bare with me and you will see why this is true; it’s taken directly from scripture.)

The belief that we are saved by faith alone and that it is not necessary to love God in order to be saved is contrary to both scripture and common sense.

We are told in 1Cor 8:3 that “…anyone that loves God is known by him.” If you are not known by God then you are not saved. This is given even greater emphasis in 1 Cor 16:22 where Paul tells us, “Let anyone be accursed who has no love for the Lord.” In James 1:12 we are told that “…the crown of life is promised to those who love him [the Lord].” This same statement is repeated in James 2:5.

And the apostle, John, defines for us what love of God is when he says in 1Jn 5:3 “For the love of God is this, that we obey his commandments.” And Jesus, Himself, says in John 15:10 that “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.” Obviously, if we do not abide in God’s love we are not saved.

In John’s vision in the book of Revelation, Jesus warns members of the church at Ephesus that they might be destroyed if they do not repent and return to the love they once had. This is very clear in Rev 2:4-5 where Jesus says, “But I have this against you, that you have abandoned the love you had at first. Remember then from what you have fallen, repent and do the** works ** you did at first. If not, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place, unless you repent.” Then again just before addressing the transgressions of the church at Thyatira, Jesus says in Rev 2:19 that, "I know your works, your love and faith and service and patient endurance, and that your latter works exceed the first.” These verses are significant in two ways. They show the necessity of love in the plan of salvation, and they show that both love and faith are referred to as works.

This linkage is also made by Paul in Galatians 5:6 where we read, “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love."

Paul also makes this point in 1 Thessalonians 1-4

"PAUL, SILVANUS, and Timothy, To the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace to you and peace. We give thanks to God always for you all, constantly mentioning you in our prayers, remembering before our God and Father your **work of faith and labor of love ** and steadfastness of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ. For we know, brethren beloved by God, that he has chosen you; "