I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand.

[Thing]

You didn’t answer my question, Thing.

Less a question. More.
You were wondering to yourself about an opinion, I don’t like to interrupt.

Please compile a big list of the protestants on this board and all their individual personal interpretations of a few Scripture verses, then pick the correct interpretations for those verses. Thanks.

The Holy Spirit directs also the interpretation of the writing he inspired - He does not allow the riff-raff to mess with His words, OK, hence Christ founded one Church and sent the Holy Spirit into it to guide it to all truth.

20 “No prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation”… This shows plainly that the scriptures are not to be expounded by any one’s private judgment or private spirit, because every part of the holy scriptures were written by men inspired by the Holy Ghost, and declared as such by the Church; therefore they are not to be interpreted but by the Spirit of God, which he hath left, and promised to remain with his Church to guide her in all truth to the end of the world. Some may tell us, that many of our divines interpret the scriptures: they may do so, but they do it always with a submission to the judgment of the Church, and not otherwise.

 

[mikeledes]

Sure, Hebrews 6 can be a difficult passage if you reject the truth of the invisible church. Our children have been partakers of the Holy Spirit growing up in a household of faith.

They partake of the Holy Spirit. Now if “partakers of the Holy Spirit”, was an isolated reference, then perhaps your interpretation could be correct. However, this is only one example of the description of this fallen away group:

4For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit,
5and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come,
6and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.

When place “partakers of the Holy Spirit” within the context of the other descriptives, it is clear this passage is referring to true Christians. The fact that this passage is talking about those who had repented in the past is emphasized by verse 6. The words “renew” and “again” clearly refers to the repetition and renovation of a prior act. So this passage is clearly about Christians. If this repentance was false, then why on earth would anyone want them to be renewed again to a false repentance?

You also have the following passages:

Ezekiel 18:24

24"But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity and does according to all the abominations that a wicked man does, will he live? All his righteous deeds which he has done will not be remembered for his treachery which he has committed and his sin which he has committed; for them he will die.

It is God Himself who describes this person as being righteous.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

You are describing the tares and goats in the visible church. God’s warning is to the entire visible church. Goats will manifest themselves by not remaining because that were never in-grafted into Christ in an eternal way. John 15 needs to be understood in the context of John 15, the entire book of John, and the entire Bible. You can see this same pattern with Israel. Who is the true Israelite according to the Scriptures?

Yes, John 15 must be interpreted within the context of the entire Bible, including passages like Hebrews 6. The branches in question cannot refer to false professor because no false professor can be united to Christ. A false professor can be a member of a congregation, but he can never be a member of the Body of Christ, a branch of the True Vine. The Vine in that passage refers to the person of Christ ( I AM the Vine), not to the Visible Church.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

Why do you continue to proclaim such a weak god? It seems you have a very low view of the work of God in redemption of sinful men. How big is your God?

Does the fall of Satan and the fall of Adam make God a weak God? Does the existence of sin in the world make God a weak God? When a true Christian choses to sin and even greivously backslide - and this possibility is recognized by the Westminster Confession - is he overpowering the Spirit within him? Is he stronger than God?

God exercises His sovereignty however He choses.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[Reformed]

Yes, John 15 must be interpreted within the context of the entire Bible, including passages like Hebrews 6. The branches in question cannot refer to false professor because no false professor can be united to Christ. A false professor can be a member of a congregation, but he can never be a member of the Body of Christ, a branch of the True Vine. The Vine in that passage refers to the person of Christ ( I AM the Vine), not to the Visible Church.

God Bless,
Michael

I thought you make no distinction of the invisible and visible church. I mentioned on an earlier post, I was listening to the Oregon Catholic station a few days ago. Catholic Answer radio also plays on that station (88.4 FM?). A priest with 100 catholic degrees was teaching on the Catechism. He stated that the problem was some Catholics were not converted; therefore the Catechism class did not help (paraphrase). If the Catholic Church teaches baptismal regeneration, how can a Catholic not be converted if he was baptized? Sounds like the uncoverted Roman Catholic is under Hebrews 6 to me. Also, Catholics have posted that the true vine is the Catholic Church and not Jesus Christ. Are all baptized members of the Catholic Church united to the true vine?

 

[Reformed]

Does the fall of Satan and the fall of Adam make God a weak God? Does the existence of sin in the world make God a weak God? When a true Christian choses to sin and even greivously backslide - and this possibility is recognized by the Westminster Confession - is he overpowering the Spirit within him? Is he stronger than God?

God exercises His sovereignty however He choses.

God Bless,
Michael

We are talking about the person and work of Christ in regards to His mission to redeem and rescue sinners. So, for whom did Christ die for? If you mention the Westminster Confession, maybe you should quote it to support your post?

 

[mikeledes]

I thought you make no distinction of the invisible and visible church. I mentioned on an earlier post, I was listening to the Oregon Catholic station a few days ago. Catholic Answer radio also plays on that station (88.4 FM?). A priest with 100 catholic degrees was teaching on the Catechism. He stated that the problem was some Catholics were not converted; therefore the Catechism class did not help (paraphrase). If the Catholic Church teaches baptismal regeneration, how can a Catholic not be converted if he was baptized? Sounds like the uncoverted Roman Catholic is under Hebrews 6 to me.

I believe that there can be false professors and I also believe that true professors can fall away. Regarding this Catholic priest, I would like to have an exact quote and some context. By “unconverted”, he probably means someone who has fallen from grace. Since Hebrews 6 refers to genuine Christians that have fallen from grace, then it can happen to a Catholic.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[Reformed]

I believe that there can be false professors and I also believe that true professors can fall away. Regarding this Catholic priest, I would like to have an exact quote and some context. By “unconverted”, he probably means someone who has fallen from grace. Since Hebrews 6 refers to genuine Christians that have fallen from grace, then it can happen to a Catholic.

God Bless,
Michael

Ohh absouletely not. I will post the radio station. He clearly stated that some Catholics are not conveted as meaning not born again. Look for the program where the Catholic Father who is teaching on the Cathechism. He had tons of Catholic degrees. How can one be an uncoverted Roman Catholic who partook in baptismal regeneration? I think I heard the teaching last Thursday (late afternoon or early evening). It was an entire program. I thought the Priest was quite arrogrant and really said nothing in regards to spiritual truth.

kbvm.com/

 

[mikeledes]

We are talking about the person and work of Christ in regards to His mission to redeem and rescue sinners. So, for whom did Christ die for? If you mention the Westminster Confession, maybe you should quote it to support your post?

Christ dies for all:

Hebrews 2:9

9But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone.

1 John 3:2

**2and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world. **

Since limited atonement is not taught by Four Point Calvinists and OSAS Protestants, it is beyong the purvue of this thread.

Regarding the Westminster Confession, here is the quote:

III. Nevertheless they may, through the temptations of Satan and of the world, the prevalancy of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of the means of their perseverance, fall into grievous sins; ad for a time continue therein: whereby they incur God’s displeasure, and grieve his Holy Spirit; come to be deprived of some measure of their graces and comforts; have their hearts hardened, and their consciences wounded; hurt and prevalancy others, and bring temporal judgments upon themselves.

Though Calvinists do not believe in loss of salvation, they do believe that a true Christian can “fall into grievous sins ; and for a time continue therein.” Now the Bible says:

1 Corinthians 10:13

**13No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that you will be able to endure it. **

So when a true Christian falls into grievous sin and continues therein, does this mean a failure on God’s part and that a person is stronger than the Holy Spirit? My point is that believing a person can fall away does not make God weak or less sovereign. Everything happens in accordance with His will.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[Reformed]

Christ dies for all:

Hebrews 2:9

9But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone.

1 John 3:2

2and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.

Since limited atonement is not taught by Four Point Calvinists and OSAS Protestants, it is beyong the purvue of this thread.

Regarding the Westminster Confession, here is the quote:

III. Nevertheless they may, through the temptations of Satan and of the world, the prevalancy of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of the means of their perseverance, fall into grievous sins; ad for a time continue therein: whereby they incur God’s displeasure, and grieve his Holy Spirit; come to be deprived of some measure of their graces and comforts; have their hearts hardened, and their consciences wounded; hurt and prevalancy others, and bring temporal judgments upon themselves.

Though Calvinists do not believe in loss of salvation, they do believe that a true Christian can “fall into grievous sins ; and for a time continue therein.” Now the Bible says:

1 Corinthians 10:13

13No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that you will be able to endure it.

So when a true Christian falls into grievous sin and continues therein, does this mean a failure on God’s part and that a person is stronger than the Holy Spirit? My point is that believing a person can fall away does not make God weak or less sovereign. Everything happens in accordance with His will.

God Bless,
Michael

Of course I do not believe in the Arminian perspective which is very similar to what you posted. If Christ died to rescue all peoples, why do most perish without Christ?

Consider 1 John 2:2, and please share your understanding of propitiation. Did Christ atone for all sins, or some sins?

 

[mikeledes]

Ohh absouletely not. I will post the radio station. He clearly stated that some Catholics are not conveted as meaning not born again. Look for the program where the Catholic Father who is teaching on the Cathechism. He had tons of Catholic degrees. How can one be an uncoverted Roman Catholic who partook in baptismal regeneration? I think I heard the teaching last Thursday (late afternoon or early evening). It was an entire program. I thought the Priest was quite arrogrant and really said nothing in regards to spiritual truth.

kbvm.com/

If he is* orthodox*, I highly doubt that he believes or taught that a person who is validly baptized has not been born again. If he taught what you said he taught, then he is not teaching Catholic doctrine. I’ve listened to Harold Campin of Family Radio, but I certainly wouldn’t use him as a source for orthodox Reformed teaching.

God bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

Of course I do not believe in the Arminian perspective which is very similar to what you posted. If Christ died to rescue all peoples, why do most perish without Christ?

Consider 1 John 2:2, and please share your understanding of propitiation. Did Christ atone for all sins, or some sins?

The atonement is sufficient for all. The following is a Catholic understanding of how the atonement is applied to individuals:

**This is not to say there is no sense in which limitation may be ascribed to the atonement. While the grace it provided is sufficient to pay for the sins of all men, this grace is not made efficacious (put into effect) in the case of everyone. One may say that although the sufficiency of the atonement is not limited, its efficiency is limited. This is something everyone who believes in hell must acknowledge because, if the atonement was made efficacious for everyone, then no one would end up in hell.

The difference between the atonement’s sufficiency and its efficiency accounts for Paul’s statement that God is “the Savior of all men, especially those who believe.” [22] God is the Savior of all men because he arranged a sacrifice sufficient for all men. He is the Savior of those who believe in a special and superior sense because these have the sacrifice made efficacious for them. According to Aquinas, “[Christ] is the propitiation for our sins, efficaciously for some, but sufficiently for all, because the price of his blood is sufficient for the salvation of all; but it has its effect only in the elect.” [23]**

Again, this thread is on perseverance of the saints/ OSAS, not limited atonement. There are Calvinists who do not believe in limited atonement (Four Point Calvinists).

God Bless,
Michael

 

[Reformed]

If he is* orthodox*, I highly doubt that he believes or taught that a person who is validly baptized has not been born again. If he taught what you said he taught, then he is not teaching Catholic doctrine. I’ve listened to Harold Campin of Family Radio, but I certainly wouldn’t use him as a source for orthodox Reformed teaching.

God bless,
Michael

LOL on good old Harold. Well, this radio sation also plays Catholic Answers program too. Is that station like TBN with a mixed bag of teaching?

 

[Reformed]

The atonement is sufficient for all. The following is a Catholic understanding of how the atonement is applied to individuals:

**This is not to say there is no sense in which limitation may be ascribed to the atonement. While the grace it provided is sufficient to pay for the sins of all men, this grace is not made efficacious (put into effect) in the case of everyone. One may say that although the sufficiency of the atonement is not limited, its efficiency is limited. This is something everyone who believes in hell must acknowledge because, if the atonement was made efficacious for everyone, then no one would end up in hell.

The difference between the atonement’s sufficiency and its efficiency accounts for Paul’s statement that God is “the Savior of all men, especially those who believe.” [22] God is the Savior of all men because he arranged a sacrifice sufficient for all men. He is the Savior of those who believe in a special and superior sense because these have the sacrifice made efficacious for them. According to Aquinas, “[Christ] is the propitiation for our sins, efficaciously for some, but sufficiently for all, because the price of his blood is sufficient for the salvation of all; but it has its effect only in the elect.” [23]**

Again, this thread is on perseverance of the saints/ OSAS, not limited atonement. There are Calvinists who do not believe in limited atonement (Four Point Calvinists).

God Bless,
Michael

What is a four point Calvinists but a biblical Arminian. You posted 1 John 2:2 and I just asked an honest question to your posting. Please answer my inquiry about propitiation and your understanding of it. Did Christ atone for all sins for all people? I agree that the work of Christ is sufficent and powerful enough to save all sinners and all fallen angels. However, it was not designed and applied to save all sinners and all fallen angels. What do you think about the Bible verse about elect angels?

 

[ryanoneil]

Interesting you should bring up 1 John 2:2. What about 1 John 2:3-6?

I’m still thinking about what it means to be a sheep and what following Jesus means.

Later in the Gospel of John, Jesus explains : “If you love me, you will keep my commandments. . . Whoever has my commandments and observes them is the one who loves me. And whoever loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and reveal myself to him.” (John 14:15, 21)

The way we may be sure that we know him is to keep his commandments. Whoever says, “I know him,” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But whoever keeps his word, the love of God is truly perfected in him. This is the way we may know that we are in union with him: whoever claims to abide in him ought to live (just) as he lived. (1 John 2:3-6)

We can stop keeping the commands of Jesus, and hence stop loving Jesus. At that point, are we still one of the flock of Jesus Christ?

 

[Reformed]

Please take a break on this issue and join me on the essential issue.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=272497

 

[ryanoneil]

Why stop proclaiming the gospel message here? There is more than one essential element to it.

Where else does our Lord explain what it means to be a sheep?

**Mat 25:31
“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit upon his glorious throne,
32
and all the nations will be assembled before him. And he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.
33
He will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
34
Then the king will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
35
For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me,
36
naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.’
37
Then the righteous will answer him and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink?
38
When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you?
39
When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?’
40
And the king will say to them in reply, ‘Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.’
41
Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
42
For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink,
43
a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.’
44
Then they will answer and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?’
45
He will answer them, ‘Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.’
46
And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.” **

At the Last Judgment, the true flock of Jesus Christ is revealed as those persons who have performed Christian works of love (through God’s grace, following the example of Christ, and by the power of the Holy Spirit).

Oddly, the righteous are surprised to hear of their salvation, as though they did not exactly presume to be assured of their own salvation! So too, there is another flock, the damned, who are equally surprised by their judgment of perdition for failing to perform works of charity.

By the Biblical logic of Matthew 25, our assurance of salvation seems to be directly related not to the loudness with which we claim to be followers of Jesus, but by the perseverance with which we perform Christian acts of charity.

Could this be part related to the sheep not being snatched from the Lord’s hand?

 

[moondweller]

Why stop proclaiming the gospel message here? There is more than one essential element to it.

Where else does our Lord explain what it means to be a sheep?

Mat 25:31
"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit upon his glorious throne,
32
and all the nations will be assembled before him. And he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.
33
He will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
34
Then the king will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
35
For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me,
36
naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.’
37
Then the righteous will answer him and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink?
38
When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you?
39
When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?’
40
And the king will say to them in reply, ‘Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.’
41
Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
42
For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink,
43
a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.’
44
Then they will answer and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?’
45
He will answer them, ‘Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.’
46
And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."

At the Last Judgment, the true flock of Jesus Christ is revealed as those persons who have performed Christian works of love (through God’s grace, following the example of Christ, and by the power of the Holy Spirit).

Oddly, the righteous are surprised to hear of their salvation, as though they did not exactly presume to be assured of their own salvation! So too, there is another flock, the damned, who are equally surprised by their judgment of perdition for failing to perform works of charity.

By the Biblical logic of Matthew 25, our assurance of salvation seems to be directly related not to the loudness with which we claim to be followers of Jesus, but by the perseverance with which we perform Christian acts of charity.

So then the Catholic position (gospel) is that salvation is, ultimately, based on works.
Thank you for your honesty.

You assert that this scene is the “Last Judgment.” But the passage states no such thing.

The question of the “sheep” is not “how?” but “when?” Not how did we become your sheep, but when did we (sheep) do those things unto You?

It is true the “sheep” performed those acts of kindness AS “sheep.” But it does not at all say that they became sheep BY performing those acts of kindness. Nor does the passage state that the “goats” became “goats” by not performing those acts of kindness.

The two groups are first of all separated by their identities: either “sheep” or “goats.”

Could this be part related to the sheep not being snatched from the Lord’s hand?

As you can see, none of the “sheep” are lost, none “perish.” Nowhere in the passage does it say that some who were once “sheep” turned into “goats.” But they are identified and separated as either one or the other. Not by their works but by what they are.

In that scene they’re not being judged as sheep or goats, but separated by such identities. Read the passage carefully, their destiny is based on their identity - not their works, or lack of.

BTW, who are those “brothers of Mine” Jesus is referring to in that passage? If you believe you are ultimately saved by your acts of kindness toward those brothers of His, then it would be most expedient for you to accurately identify them. Your salvation depends on it.

 

[Pax]

md,

Please…you really know better than to call Catholic teaching that of salvation by works.

Yours is an empty accusation that has been blown up over and over again.

 

[ryanoneil]

md,

Please…you really know better than to call Catholic teaching that of salvation by works.

Yours is an empty accusation that has been blown up over and over again.

I agree.