"Once Saved Always Saved" Christians: what reasons do you have for even trying so hard to avoid sin?

[Sherry_G]

I do not know any Catholics who only do good works so they can get to heaven! The Catholics I know are concerned with being pleasing to God and in union with our Lord Jesus Christ and His teachings. We follow the Beatitudes to strive to be perfect as Our hevenly Father is perfect, just as Jesus taught us. Good works flow naturally from our faithfulness to Christ’s teachings.

 

[aicirt]

Thanks for the reference to James regarding doing good works.

I’m trying to get this straight. Protestants believe that faith alone gets one into heaven and doing works (living the faith) isn’t necessary? My neighbor insists I’m not adhereing to the Bible and I keep saying it doesn’t make sense that one believing in Christ wouldn’t do good works otherwise he is not living the faith. We just keep going around and around to the point that I’m wondering if I’m not understanding him correctly.

 

[Contarini]

Thanks for the reference to James regarding doing good works.

I’m trying to get this straight. Protestants believe that faith alone gets one into heaven and doing works (living the faith) isn’t necessary? My neighbor insists I’m not adhereing to the Bible and I keep saying it doesn’t make sense that one believing in Christ wouldn’t do good works otherwise he is not living the faith. We just keep going around and around to the point that I’m wondering if I’m not understanding him correctly.

Protestants believe a lot of different things. The majority of Protestants believe in some version of “faith alone.” The Wesleyan version which I was taught is not really that different from Catholicism. The Reformed version insists that true believers will do good works. Lutherans also believe this, and furthermore believe that if you don’t do good works you will probably eventually lose faith and go to hell, but they are uncomfortable with saying that good works are “necessary.” Many Baptists believe in a particularly extreme form of “faith alone,” and that’s what this thread is mostly about. However, even these folks will often say that a person who doesn’t do good works doesn’t have “real faith.” There are those who genuinely believe that you can lead a completely sinful life and still go to heaven because you were once “saved.” They are definitely a minority of all Protestants, but their views have a lot of popularity in the U.S., unfortunately. Even these folks, however, would say that you should do good works out of love for God and neighbor and that you will “lose your reward” if you don’t.

Edwin

 

[aicirt]

Protestants believe a lot of different things. The majority of Protestants believe in some version of “faith alone.” The Wesleyan version which I was taught is not really that different from Catholicism. The Reformed version insists that true believers will do good works. Lutherans also believe this, and furthermore believe that if you don’t do good works you will probably eventually lose faith and go to hell, but they are uncomfortable with saying that good works are “necessary.” Many Baptists believe in a particularly extreme form of “faith alone,” and that’s what this thread is mostly about. However, even these folks will often say that a person who doesn’t do good works doesn’t have “real faith.” There are those who genuinely believe that you can lead a completely sinful life and still go to heaven because you were once “saved.” They are definitely a minority of all Protestants, but their views have a lot of popularity in the U.S., unfortunately. Even these folks, however, would say that you should do good works out of love for God and neighbor and that you will “lose your reward” if you don’t.

Edwin

Thank you Edwin. Find it difficult to believe anyone would think they’ll get in heaven with sin on their soul.

 

[wisdomseeker]

Sounds like my brother. He believes you just have to believe and your all ready to go. (I asked him, “so you can be a selfish miser and not do any thing for your neighbor and still get to Heaven?” “Yep” was his answer. Sigh) I did point out that Judas also initially believed.

That is when we should ask, what do they believe?

they dont believe in Baptism; they dont believe in Eucharistia; they dont believe in the Church; they dont believe in the Holy Mother of God; they dont believe in the Priesthood; they dont believe in Apostolic succession; they dont believe int the authority of St Peter; they dont believe… what do they belive? that is my question.

 

[JackVk]

That is when we should ask, what do they believe?

they dont believe in Baptism; they dont believe in Eucharistia; they dont believe in the Church; they dont believe in the Holy Mother of God; they dont believe in the Priesthood; they dont believe in Apostolic succession; they dont believe int the authority of St Peter; they dont believe… what do they belive? that is my question.

They believe that the Bible is to be edited to the way they like it. They don’t care that God wrote everything in the Bible, so they just made a few changes so they didn’t have to abide by everything God said, just the way they want God to say it.

 

[wisdomseeker]

They believe that the Bible is to be edited to the way they like it. They don’t care that God wrote everything in the Bible, so they just made a few changes so they didn’t have to abide by everything God said, just the way they want God to say it.

yes. they call themselves believers just like they call themselves Christians, yet they dont seem to believe much of what Jesus taught.

yet, some believe that they have the HS. how can that be?

can the HS be involved in such disobedience to God?

 

[Brywan]

Perhaps they agree with St. Francis Xavier:

Or, if you do not know the ancient language of your Church:

Edwin

Thank you Edwin! I was once a very strong Calvinist–OSAS–and this kind of question still makes me think that sometimes Catholics don’t always “get it.” Why would I avoid sin? How about this: because I love Jesus and actually enjoy being in His presence rather than being alienated from Him…

 

[FidesSpesCarita]

Thank you Edwin! I was once a very strong Calvinist–OSAS–and this kind of question still makes me think that sometimes Catholics don’t always “get it.” Why would I avoid sin? How about this: because I love Jesus and actually enjoy being in His presence rather than being alienated from Him…

Well, having grown up baptist I was taught (whether it was doctrinally correct or not) that we were saved once we accepted Christ and were baptized. All other sins in the future would be covered over (read Luthers dunghill analogy) and we would still be A ok. It never computed for me.

I see the “Because you are all Good and deserving of all my love” attitude much more often in the Catholic Church. Sadly, I have seen a great many people who put stock in their “Catholicity” to save them than people who felt that being lutheran or baptist saved them (not counting the Sola fide folks for this part).

FSC

 

[Darron_Steele]

I hate the term “Once Saved Always Saved” and prefer the designation “Perseverance of the saints” or something like that.

It looks like a substantial portion of the people on this thread posted mainly to criticize, but it looks like a few want to actually know the answer to the query.

The reason I try to avoid sin in my life: the decision to become a Christian means a commitment to live according to the teachings and will of Jesus Christ.

When I made the decision to become a Christian, I made that commitment: to live according to the teachings and will of Jesus Christ. As a Christian, that is how I must live.

About these pretenders you hear about who claim that “eternal security” or “once saved always saved” or whatever frees them from obligations to serve Jesus Christ: they are not Christians. A person who is a Christian has committed to living as a follower of Jesus Christ.

 

[Joshnyams]

Repentance is a continuous process so is being saved. Temptations are always there in our lives but we should always ask God for forgiveness. No one should say that he never sins. for me, i always pray so as God guides me to avoid sinning.

 

[Miguel_Sastre]

My question is…

What reasons do you have for evening avoiding sin? Is it harder for you to resist sin, since certain sins do not deprive one of Holy Communion like they do in the Catholic Church?

It amazes me that primary objection to once-saved-always-saved is that it takes away the stick, as if a true believer could only desire not to sin if he or she were motivated primarily by fear. Of course, fear is no longer the primary motivator for the one who loves Jesus (cf 1 John 4:18). One thing that prevents Christians from sinning is the shear desire not to. The motivation is intrinsic (love for Christ) rather than extrinsic (fear of loosing salvation).

Of course there are warnings given to believers that hold loss of salvation out as a real, and just hypothetical possibility (Hebrews 6 comes to mind). It doesn’t follow, however, that a believer WILL lose his/her salvation. To give an analogy, in heaven no one sins. (I take it that everyone here would agree with that.) But is this because no one CAN sin or because no one WILL sin? It seems to me that if we are free, then we can choose to sin, even if we’re in heaven. If that’s the case, and if there is no sin in heaven, then it must mean that we WILL not sin. From this I would infer that we will always choose good rather than evil once we see Him face to face.

My own view is that the warning passages are the very means by which God ensures that his elect will not fall away. As warnings, they are efficacious in accomplishing what God intended them to accomplish. For the elect, they will be heeded. For the reprobate they will be ignored.

What this implies is that no one this side of eternity can know absolutely who the elect are. So rather than conclude that we can loose our salvation (not much of a “salvation” if can be lost now, is it?), I’d rather conclude that we can’t be sure of the identity of the elect. If we see an apparent “believer” sinning egregiously, we would probably be just as justified in assuming that, based on the “fruit,” we see, that this person may not be the right kind of “tree.” IOW, rather than conclude that this person was saved and then lost his/her salvation, it seems to me that we can conclude that they were probably never a believer in the first place.

 

[SonCatcher]

It amazes me that primary objection to once-saved-always-saved is that it takes away the stick, as if a true believer could only desire not to sin if he or she were motivated primarily by fear. Of course, fear is no longer the primary motivator for the one who loves Jesus (cf 1 John 4:18). One thing that prevents Christians from sinning is the shear desire not to. The motivation is intrinsic (love for Christ) rather than extrinsic (fear of loosing salvation).

That is not the primary objection at all. The problem with OSAS is that we humans still possess a fallen nature which gives us the propensity to sin and reject God.

Take a look at the state of marriage. Nearly everyone who marries believes they will remain married until one of the couple dies. Yet, we know that a large portion of marriages end up broken. This happens as much among couples married in the Church (here, I include non-Catholic Christians) as it does in the World. The reason we see so many failures in marriage is that every married couple consists of two persons who each have a fallen nature. We are incapable of fulfilling our vows perfectly for the rest of our lives. If the couple is to survive, they must reconcile their differences frequently.

The same is true in our relationship with Christ. Though He is faithful always (2 Tim 2:13), we will always struggle in this life. There will be times when we fail. We cannot avoid that. Our failures damage our relationship with Jesus and may even destroy it.

Of course there are warnings given to believers that hold loss of salvation out as a real, and just hypothetical possibility (Hebrews 6 comes to mind). It doesn’t follow, however, that a believer WILL lose his/her salvation.

How not?

To give an analogy, in heaven no one sins. (I take it that everyone here would agree with that.) But is this because no one CAN sin or because no one WILL sin? It seems to me that if we are free, then we can choose to sin, even if we’re in heaven. If that’s the case, and if there is no sin in heaven, then it must mean that we WILL not sin. From this I would infer that we will always choose good rather than evil once we see Him face to face.

Irrelevant. The discussion is not about residents of Heaven but fallen humans on Earth.

My own view is that the warning passages are the very means by which God ensures that his elect will not fall away. As warnings, they are efficacious in accomplishing what God intended them to accomplish. For the elect, they will be heeded. For the reprobate they will be ignored.

It appears you are arguing that it is impossible for the “elect” to sin. Please explain.

What this implies is that no one this side of eternity can know absolutely who the elect are. So rather than conclude that we can loose our salvation …, I’d rather conclude that we can’t be sure of the identity of the elect.

Similarly, the Catholic Church does not claim to know who is saved except for those few named Saints.

(not much of a “salvation” if can be lost now, is it?)

Please re-read the section where I discuss out fallen nature. The problem is not the efficacy of salvation but our own inability to remain faithful perpetually.

If we see an apparent “believer” sinning egregiously, we would probably be just as justified in assuming that, based on the “fruit,” we see, that this person may not be the right kind of “tree.” IOW, rather than conclude that this person was saved and then lost his/her salvation, it seems to me that we can conclude that they were probably never a believer in the first place.

That would be quite uncharitable. In Matthew 18:15, Jesus tells us to correct such a person so he can be won over.

You assume such a person would have to be evangelized and re-converted. The Bible makes no such conclusion.

 

[PeaceSerenity]

Random Thought for People to consider:

I once heard someone say (a priest, I think…not sure though) that no one was deprived of Heaven unless they didn’t want to go to Heaven. Hell is separation from God, and if we do that in our day to day lives, then that is what we are choosing that for our eternal life. If we chose the secular world over God on a daily basis, then God will honor our choice and not force us to be with him in Heaven, even though he doesn’t want to leave us.

 

[Publisher]

In my understanding and discussions with Calvinists who believe in the “Security of the Believer” aka “Eternal Security”…if a person is truly “saved” then they become a new creature and WILL NOT WILLFULLY COMMIT SIN…BUT if they do they have an Advocate with the Father…“If we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” The phrase “cleanse us from sin” in the Amplified Bible I believe is rendered “continue to cleanse us from our sins”…an ongoing process.

A Christian wouldn’t hold a gun to someone’s head and kill them…or visit a prostitute as they have a “new nature” and have taken on “divine nature”. They would be extremely contrite and immediately confess and repent as they were convicted by the Holy Spirit who continues to cleanse them from sin…thus they are “eternally secure”…not because of what they have done…but because of the work of Christ within them.

I think many of those Christians that believe in eternal security really misunderstand the whole belief…it is bound up with “election” and “predestination” and the soverignty of God.

Those believers who claim to be eternal secure no matter what they do fall into the same catagory, at least in my opinion of those Catholics who believe as long as they wear a scapular they are “safe” and will be given a chance to confess NO MATTER WHAT THEY DO as long as they wear the scapular as they have Mary’s promise that as long as they wear the item "“Whosoever dies wearing this (brown) scapular shall not suffer eternal fire.” Is it true that as long as a brown scapular is worn the wearer is safe from “eternal fire”? Is simply wearing a brown piece of cloth or leather sufficient to protect one no matter what one does? There are those Catholics who believe that…do they not?

Or those Catholics who have claimed they can do whatever they wish on Saturday night as long as they have confession by Sunday morning…all are misunderstood beliefs and traditions each of the respected beliefs systems have. “Easy believism” is not a Protestant issue…or a Catholic issue…but a human fault…not found in any one tradition exclusively.

 

[cecilia97]

Cecilia,

I agree with everything you say. I don’t think that the “why do it if you don’t have to in order to get to heaven” attitude is more prevalent among Catholics than among Protestants. And I agree that Catholics’ beliefs about heaven (and hell) are less inadequate than those of most Protestants (of course all our ideas are inadequate). **But I persistently run across posts on Internet forums in which Catholics puzzle over why Protestants bother doing good works. **This may be in part because Catholics notice their evangelical Protestant neighbors/friends being obsessed with just how you “get to heaven.” But it seems to me that some Catholics do indeed have the attitude that good works are how you “get to heaven” and are only important for that reason.

Edwin

Ahhh…this makes it a little more clear. If I asked someone that question on an internet forum, it would be purely rhetorical, on order to make a point…not because I REALLY wondered why one would “bother” doing good works without promise of a reward.