Once Saved--Always Saved

[c0achmcguirk]

MaggieOH:

Romans 9 does not do as you claim. What you do is impose your interpretation upon the Scripture to fit neatly into your system. Yet when Protestants do that you take away from the real meaning of St. Paul’s writings.

Then please exegete Romans 9 for us, showing me where I am wrong. It is one thing to assert, quite another to demonstrate.

God never forces us to do anything. We have free will.

God never forces us to do anything against our will. We willingly choose our sin…but God’s will supercedes our own. Now, would you actually answer my questions I raised in the post instead of just saying I’m wrong?

The system that you have created and claim to be Christianity is nothing but a sham, it is tinsel. straight out tinsel with little in the way of glitter and nothing of the real stuff to support it.

Maggie, we both disagree, so why do you spend so much time coming up with elaborate ways to say I’m a lying deceiver and so little time interacting with my posts? Show me where I’m wrong if you’re willing to reason with me. Otherwise, let other people answer my questions. This is becoming a theme with us.

God bless,
c0ach

 

[Church_Militant]

I would say that your opinion of Romans 9 is off because you fail to consider it in the context of all other scripture. It cannot stand alone and I feel sure that you know that.

BTW you seem to have missed my last post above that you missed before.

Yeah I’m passionate about my faith…especially when someone alleges a false gospel like that. There’s no way you were a devout Catholic or you’d know better. I still say that you should get your money back on all those books and tapes that you’ve been reading and listening to ABOUT the Catholic Church and perhaps invest in a copy of the CCC and Surprised By Truth.

I spent 34 years among non-Catholics and they lied to me about the Church, or else they were misguided by others…point is that in checking into it all I discovered that the Catholic Church IS right and has the fulness of the Gospel.

Lemme challenge you to get and complete all the studies in the Catholic Home Study Service series ( I have…) and see if you still can hold your opinions with a clear conscience. BTW it’s all FREE of charge. Get it here: amm.org/chss/chss.htm

What say you?
Pax vobiscum,

 

[HilaryJ]

TPJCatholic:

Challenge:

Some Christians hold to the so-called doctrine of “Once saved, always saved–eternal security.” Many of the Christians who believe that doctrine also tend to attack the Roman Catholic faith for what they think are traditions of men. Yet, Catholics **do **accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior, which is the only foundation to being saved once and for all according to that doctrine.

So…

If accepting Jesus as Lord and Savior is the only requirement, then what difference (in their eyes) does it make if we believe other teachings (the sacraments, Marian theology, Papal theology, etc.)?

Furthermore, since according to the “Once Saved, always saved” doctrine we cannot ever lose our salvation no matter what we do–then why would believers in OSAS care if people are Catholic? After all, if all it takes is accepting Jesus, and nothing at all can separate us from God once we have done that–then it really does not matter what we choose to follow–correct?

I do believe that once we are saved we are always saved. Jesus said that he holds us in his hand which is in the Fathers hand. He said that nothing can remove us from this. This does not mean that what we do after salvation is not important, after all God says more about what is done after salvation (works) than how to be saved.

 

[oudave]

MaggieOH:

Although I have given a response in part to this post, a portion of what is written above is objectionable from the point of view that here is another person who believes in worshipping the Bible as if it is God.

The confusion stems from such statements as "God tells us…"

Wrong, it is the prophet Isaiah that tells us these things. It is the prophet who is interpreting the current events and who proclaims that it is God who is behind what is happening. It is a religious interpretation of the events. However, GOD DID NOT TELL US, for to make that statement is Bible idolatry.

Maggie

Hi Maggie
The books in the Bible are not each mans inturpretation of the events that took place, the are the INSPIRED word of God. They are God’s word to us written thru men.
Dave

 

[c0achmcguirk]

MaggieOH:

Take for example the interpretation that is given on this thread to the events that are reported in the Book of Isaiah. The poster stated: how about in Isaiah where God makes the Assyrians attack Israel. When I saw that statement I nearly choked from the whole idea that God made the Assyrians attack Israel.

Hello Maggie, how are things down under?

I appreciate your interacting with Isaiah 10. Thanks for stepping up to the plate.

What is wrong here is that there seems to be a lack of understanding of what Scripture means by prophecy. Scriptural prophecy is not about events that are in the distant future, rather it is an interpretation of the signs of the times.

Do you have a source for this? So you’re saying the prophesies about Jesus were just “religious interpretations of the signs of the times” and not actual prophesies about what would happen in the future? Who teaches this?

1. The Jews of the time believed that God sent punishments for their sins in the form of other nations invading them.

I wonder why they would believe that? Oh yeah, the prophets and Scripture.

1. The prophet Isaiah was a reader of the signs of the times. The words of the prophet are his religious interpretation of those signs.

So God didn’t write the Bible, then…but Isaiah wrote Isaiah and so on and so forth?

The Assyrian army had already plundered other nearby nations, ant that meant that Isaiah could see that if the people did not repent of their evil deeds then they too would be invaded.

Maggie, I’m alarmed that you are attacking Scripture and it’s origin to get around what the Scripture is saying. You’re telling me that God didn’t actually say what was in Isaiah 10, but Isaiah interpreted it by himself and put it in there. Why even use Scripture if it’s just opinions of the authors?

The Assyrians were not made to invade Israel at all. That is an interpretation that is reading into the Scripture something that is not there.

Then why does God say in Isaiah 10:6:

I send him (the Assyrian) against a godless nation,
I dispatch him against a people who anger me,
to seize loot and snatch plunder,
and to trample them down like mud in the streets.

Was Isaiah lying and putting words into God’s mouth? Was God lying and tricking us into thinking that he was sending the Assyrians?

The Assyrian king Sennacharib was not forced by God to go and invade Israel. He boasted in the following way:

“By the strength of my own arm I have done this
and by my own intelligence for understanding is mine.” (Is 10:13)

Yup, this is already addressed in Isaiah 10:7, where God explains that even though the Assyrians are going to war against Israel at His bidding, they have no clue that they are tools of God. The passage you quoted was what the king said of his will–that doesn’t mean the king is right.

But this is not what he (the Assyrian) intends,
this is not what he has in mind;
his purpose is to destroy,
to put an end to many nations.
–Isaiah 10:7

**Did God write Isaiah 10:7? Is this passage inspired?

And what is is Isaiah 10:15 saying? Who is the axe and who is the one who swings it?**

God bless,
c0ach

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Questions for Coach:

-I saw you have a donation going for Pastor White, You do know that he pastors his own store in Phoenix? You dont seem to agree on much in terms of beliefs.

Now, is your canon infallible? Nope–and neither is mine.
…
Now herein lies the rub. A Roman Catholic has absolutely no problem accepting that the Pope is infallible when speaking on matters of faith and morals, yet when asked to show how they know this infallibly they respond with silence.

If you say that the Protestant must have an infallible list of books in order to say that the Bible is infallible, you’d better be prepared to provide an infallible list of Popes in order to say that the Pope is infallible.

-Coach

What are you saying here? Are you a bible only Christian? How could you say that about your Bible?

I believe in Limited Atonement because it is irrational to think that Christ died for the sins of everyone-if that were the case wouldn’t everyone go to Heaven?

-Coach

How can you say that unless you believe you are one of the few chosen?

• As a computer engineer it seems odd that you are protestant. How do you rationalize the division among yourselves. No structure or order, every man for himself. What about these Motherboard, central processing unit, memory, power supply etc. Hey I dont know much about computers, but the few terms I know would not work in a protestant environment.

-Why do you not quote Matt, Mark or Luke when deciding what to believe?

 

[Church_Militant]

HilaryJ:

I do believe that once we are saved we are always saved. Jesus said that he holds us in his hand which is in the Fathers hand. He said that nothing can remove us from this. This does not mean that what we do after salvation is not important, after all God says more about what is done after salvation (works) than how to be saved.

Yeah, you believe that because that’s the standard Baptist teaching from the pulpits in spite of the TRUCKLOAD of Biblical evidence to the contrary. So…it appears that Baptists believe that their preachers are the final authority on what they believe whether it is scriptural or not.
http://pages.prodigy.net/indianahawkeye/newpage04/14.gif

 

[c0achmcguirk]

Church Militant:

Hey Coach! You never answered this post of mine…did you miss it?

Must have, sorry. Have a lot of people gunnin’ for me lately, so its hard to keep up.

IF you ever really WERE a practicing Catholic then you sure as vitam aeternam wouldn’t be saying such foolish drivel. You sound like someone who has never been in a Catholic Church for Mass or read anything that was written BY real Catholics. Where’d you get all this junk? Jack Chick?

This is uncalled for bro. I was a practicing Catholic for 20 years of my life. The last three was spent as an apologist for Rome. I annoyed my fundie friends with Matthew 16:18 and John 6. You don’t know me and to keep calling my character into question is to say you don’t have an answer for my questions.

I’ve read more from “real” Catholics than most Catholics have themselves, granted, that isn’t hard. (I’ll admit most evangelicals know very little about their faith, too).

Someone asked for what an OSAS person would say to the question of why one shouldn’t be a Catholic. I gave a brief answer and I’m willing to defend it sometime in the future.

As for the passages you bring up that mention “good works”… I’m baffled as to why you think they debunk my statement. What Protestant doesn’t say good works are important? Certainly not I. This is straw man argumentation.

However, it is one thing to say that we are justified by faith + good works done in a state of grace (I know Catholics say God gives the grace to do the good works), and another thing to say we are justified by faith alone (true faith would be accompanied by good works).

God bless,
c0ach

 

[Church_Militant]

c0achmcguirk:

Must have, sorry. Have a lot of people gunnin’ for me lately, so its hard to keep up.

This is uncalled for bro. I was a practicing Catholic for 20 years of my life. The last three was spent as an apologist for Rome. I annoyed my fundie friends with Matthew 16:18 and John 6. You don’t know me and to keep calling my character into question is to say you don’t have an answer for my questions.

I’ve read more from “real” Catholics than most Catholics have themselves, granted, that isn’t hard. (I’ll admit most evangelicals know very little about their faith, too).

Someone asked for what an OSAS person would say to the question of why one shouldn’t be a Catholic. I gave a brief answer and I’m willing to defend it sometime in the future.

As for the passages you bring up that mention “good works”… I’m baffled as to why you think they debunk my statement. What Protestant doesn’t say good works are important? Certainly not I. This is straw man argumentation.

However, it is one thing to say that we are justified by faith + good works done in a state of grace (I know Catholics say God gives the grace to do the good works), and another thing to say we are justified by faith alone (true faith would be accompanied by good works).

God bless,
c0ach

We don’t believe the new doctrines of Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide.
Well, you sure missed the boat somewhere , becaus eyour allegations are ludicrously outside of what we really belioeve. We don’r respond with silence…we just wait for it to be on topic. Which this is not… I’ll catch you on that thread about the false Gospel.

 

[c0achmcguirk]

MaggieOH:

here is another person who believes in worshipping the Bible as if it is God.

Idolotry is a pretty serious charge, Maggie. What proof can you give that I worship the Bible?

The confusion stems from such statements as “God tells us…GOD DID NOT TELL US, for to make that statement is Bible idolatry.”

If this means I worship the Bible as if it were God, what would you say to Jesus who says to the Sadducees:

Jesus replied, “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. But about the resurrection of the dead–have you not read what God said to you, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’?..”
–Matthew 22:29-32

Jesus believed God said what was in the Scriptures (he’s quoting from Exodus 3:6 by the way). Was Jesus worshipping the Bible as if it were God?

And what are we to do with what Peter tells us:

And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
–2 Peter 1:19-21

Is Peter engaging in Bible idolotry too? He is saying that the Bible is men speaking from God, not of their own interpretation.

God bless,
c0ach

 

[c0achmcguirk]

Hi Maggie
The books in the Bible are not each mans inturpretation of the events that took place, the are the INSPIRED word of God. They are God’s word to us written thru men.
Dave

Thanks oudave! You’ve given me hope for Catholic scholarship.

 

[c0achmcguirk]

Catholic Dude:

I saw you have a donation going for Pastor White, You do know that he pastors his own store in Phoenix? You dont seem to agree on much in terms of beliefs.

I’m confused here…yes, there is an aomin bookstore…and yes, he’s a pastor and an elder at the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church… but where do I disagree with him and why is it relevant? Is this another of the many attacks on Dr. White’s character and not his actual arguments?

What are you saying here? Are you a bible only Christian? How could you say that about your Bible?

Depends on what you mean by Bible-only. I adhere to sola Scriptura. I love and affirm the Athanasian Creed, Nicene Creed, the Westminster Confession of Faith, and the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith. While these creeds and confessions are not inspired, I allow for traditions, just not traditions that contradict Scripture.

I apologize though, I don’t have time to debate the infallible canon, Protestant disagreements and Limited atonement right now. I’d like to point you to a debate with another Catholic covering the very article you are quoting from:

My first response
My Second Response

Thanks for your civil attitude, hope to see you around,
c0ach

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Coach

Those links are the same stuff that I and people at CA read all the time. Its nothing new. You literally admit to having no authority whatsoever. When someone says “infallible” that means you have to take that person as someone with authority. You miss the boat on this, you are trying to have the speaker prove that somthing is a fact/truth in order for it to be infallible.

I fallibly believe the canon is correct, but I will allow for the slight possibility that it could contain error.

You are lost by definition. You have no authority and are second guessing yourself. You leave this escape hatch for no reason other that your insecure position.

How would the Christian in 1545 have an infallible canon?

Here is another example of you missing the boat. The Church was defending her position no making up new stuff. My example of this is “gay weddings” in the US. The idea of this constituting a wedding was so far from their wildest dreams of what the Founders of the US would face that they didnt think twice. However this issue was challenged later in history. It took the Christian right to stand up and defend ourselves and pass a ban on “gay marriage” in all 11 states that had the people vote.

And the so called apocrypha was at the very least supposed to be placed in the index of the Bible as Luther wanted it. What do we see now they are turned into toilet paper. Thrown into the trash. Gone from history in the protestant world.

 

[TPJCatholic]

If we cannot ever lose our salvation, doesn’t the negate free will?

 

[MaggieOH]

Idolotry is a pretty serious charge, Maggie. What proof can you give that I worship the Bible?

c0ach

If you insist upon saying that “God says” for something written by St. Paul the Apostle, who was divinely inspired but still human, then I say you worship the Bible.

If you repeat the slanderous comments by anti-Catholics and claim that Catholics worship statues then you better provide proper proof too.

The Scripture that you provide continues to be worthless because it never addresses the issue. It only clouds the issues that are appropriate to the topic.

Maggie

 

[MaggieOH]

Catholic Dude:

Coach

Those links are the same stuff that I and people at CA read all the time. Its nothing new. You literally admit to having no authority whatsoever. When someone says “infallible” that means you have to take that person as someone with authority. You miss the boat on this, you are trying to have the speaker prove that somthing is a fact/truth in order for it to be infallible.

You are lost by definition. You have no authority and are second guessing yourself. You leave this escape hatch for no reason other that your insecure position.

Here is another example of you missing the boat. The Church was defending her position no making up new stuff. My example of this is “gay weddings” in the US. The idea of this constituting a wedding was so far from their wildest dreams of what the Founders of the US would face that they didnt think twice. However this issue was challenged later in history. It took the Christian right to stand up and defend ourselves and pass a ban on “gay marriage” in all 11 states that had the people vote.

And the so called apocrypha was at the very least supposed to be placed in the index of the Bible as Luther wanted it. What do we see now they are turned into toilet paper. Thrown into the trash. Gone from history in the protestant world.

Good points, but there is a very good reason that Evangelicals do not want their congregations to read the full Bible. The missing books contain information that makes a mockery out of what they preach. In order to convince their congregations that they must not read these books they make up phoney criteria such as the books never claimed to be inspired. Yet they forget that the authors of the Books of the Kings never claimed that their work was inspired, and the authors of the Penteteuch did not claim that their works were inspired, neither did the authors of the Psalms. The other criteria that is a joke is that Jesus and the Apostles never quoted from these books. That is also bunk because Jesus did in fact refer to the abomination being set up in the Temple. That story is to be found in the Books of the Maccabees, and also St. Paul referred to the story of the mother and her seven sons being tortured because of their beliefs. Also St. Paul made an indirect reference to both Wisdom and Sirach when he wrote:

“from these you can learn the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith in Jesus Christ.” 2 Timothy 3:14-17

You see two of the books that have been removed from the Protestant Bible meet very strongly the criteria that Paul has given in this letter. Those Books of Scripture are Wisdom and Sirach. These books also contradict Once Saved Always Saved and so these preachers do not want people to know that they are being led astray by a false gospel.

Maggie

 

[MaggieOH]

c0achmcguirk:

I’m confused here…yes, there is an aomin bookstore…and yes, he’s a pastor and an elder at the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church… but where do I disagree with him and why is it relevant? Is this another of the many attacks on Dr. White’s character and not his actual arguments?
c0ach

I can understand the confusion for if one believes anything written by James White then I have no doubt that such a person would remain confused.

James White does not have much in the way of a decent argument. He claims to win debates that he clearly does not win, and that is due to the sense of arrogance that is possessed.

When Pastor White does some serious study then perhaps he should be taken seriously. Until then, his work has little or nothing of value within it.

 

[c0achmcguirk]

Catholic Dude:

Coach

Those links are the same stuff that I and people at CA read all the time. Its nothing new.

Sorry, can’t add another topic to the list. Maybe some other day.

God bless,
c0ach

 

[c0achmcguirk]

MaggieOH:

If you insist upon saying that “God says” for something written by St. Paul the Apostle, who was divinely inspired but still human, then I say you worship the Bible.

Maggie, you didn’t respond to the Scripture that completely contradicts you. Reiteration != refutation.

I’ll repost these, please answer the questions:

If this means I worship the Bible as if it were God, what would you say to Jesus who says to the Sadducees:

Jesus replied, “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. But about the resurrection of the dead–have you not read what God said to you, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’?..”
–Matthew 22:29-32

Jesus believed God said what was written in the Scriptures (he’s quoting from Exodus 3:6 by the way). Was Jesus worshipping the Bible as if it were God?

And what are we to do with what Peter tells us:

And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
–2 Peter 1:19-21

Is Peter engaging in Bible idolotry too? He is saying that the Bible is men speaking from God, not of their own interpretation.

The Scripture that you provide continues to be worthless because it never addresses the issue.

I’m really at a loss here. Oudave, can you help your fellow Catholic understand Scripture and its origins? If Maggie rejects these passages as “worthless” then I don’t know what else can be done.

God bless,
c0ach

 

[c0achmcguirk]

MaggieOH:

Good points, but there is a very good reason that Evangelicals do not want their congregations to read the full Bible.

There are several good reasons actually. But if I posted my reasons here something tells me they’d be ignored.

God bless,
c0ach