Once Saved, Always Saved

[guanophore]

Thanks Guan, I was not my intention to rehash any previous material. And no I’m not making it up as I go. But yours and Carlan’s responses prompted me think that if infused righteousness did not cover the sinner (imputation) but actually made them righteous. Was that righteousness then inherent to the believer?

I guess I am just having trouble with this jump you are making. If God implants righteousness in a human by the merits of Christ, so that it is no longer that person who lives, but Christ, who lives in Him, how does the Source of that grace become man’s, instead of God’s?

Because when our righteousness is “through the core” to me it implies inherency that we now become righteous.

Yes. We are made into the persons He created us to be. We were not created with sin. He cleanses us from all sin. His plan for us is that we may be made Holy, body, mind, and Spirit, so that as whole persons, we can enter heaven (where nothing unclean can dwell) and live with Him forever. We have died, and our lives are hidden with Christ in God.

Whereas credited to us (imputed) it is never our righteousness in the first place buy we are relying on Christ to our benefit. So when we are standing before the Father He sees Christ’s righteousness and not ours.

Well, the righteousness is never ours to begin with in either case.

if the people in Rev 7:14 are now truly righteous whose righteousness is it that God sees?

What do you mean “if they are truly righteous?” Do you honestly deny the scriptures that say “nothing unclean will enter heaven”? The people have been MADE righteous by the grace of God. Do you honestly imagine that such a thing is possible apart from grace?

If imputed righteousness was before Jesus’ death and infusion was after why didn’t Paul differentiate between the two? In fact he never does and continues to perpetuate imputation. He also never even uses a word that means infusion.

You are misunderstanding the meaning of imputation, jer. It means to credit an account. It is not just “doctoring the books”. He actually puts a positive balance into us. He is not just saying there is a credit when it does not, in fact, exist.

God’s grace transforms us by His Spirit dwelling in our hearts through faith.

When He says that we BECOME THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD do you think He just means “we are declared to be righteous”?

 

[guanophore]

Yes, I think they have. But I think you spelled it out pretty well. What I understand from you is that Catholics believe our sins are only partially bound to Christ’s sacrifice. In other words, you do not believe that all the sins, past and future, of a believer are imputed to Christ at His crucifixion.

THis is a false statement. Christ’s sacrifice paid for ALL sins, for all of mankind, for all time.

You appear to be saying that once you are cleansed by baptism, you must pay for any sins you commit there after.

No.

And in order to be able to do that and possibly obtain righteousness, you claim that God has infused you with the Holy Spirit. And in order to enter heaven you must achieve your own righteousness with the help of the Holy Spirit that has been infused into your soul.

No. We become the righteousnes of God in Christ. It is not our righteousness, but His. We no longer live, but Christ lives in us. We have died,a nd our lives are hidden with Christ in God.

Am I right?

No.

 

[elvisman]

Yes, I think they have. But I think you spelled it out pretty well. What I understand from you is that Catholics believe our sins are only partially bound to Christ’s sacrifice. In other words, you do not believe that all the sins, past and future, of a believer are imputed to Christ at His crucifixion. You appear to be saying that once you are cleansed by baptism, you must pay for any sins you commit there after. And in order to be able to do that and possibly obtain righteousness, you claim that God has infused you with the Holy Spirit. And in order to enter heaven you must achieve your own righteousness with the help of the Holy Spirit that has been infused into your soul.

Am I right?

Wrong. Before you take my words and twist them as you have - understand that all of your beliefs are derived from the same Catholics Church that Jesus established in the 1st century. It was later that men twisted and perverted these teachings during and after the Protestant Revolt - and the Scriptural aberrations and false doctrines ensued. When I read your misrepresentations of what I wrote - it is easy to see how Protestant forefathers were able to do the same with the teachings of Christ and his Church.

That being said - ALL of our sins, past, present and future have been PAID for (τετελεσται). However, we must repent every time we sin or we are not forgiven. This idea that we can do whatever we want after we are initially “saved” is a Protestant blunder of epic proportions.
I never said that we must pay for our sins after baptism - I don’t even know where you got that from.

It is only by the perfect sacrifice of Christ that we can even hope to attain salvation. However, the CONTEXT of the Scriptures show that we MUST be MADE righteous before entering heaven, as nothing unclean can enter it

Jesus tells us in Matt. 5:48 to "be perfect as your Father in heaven is perfect". You might look at this command as a promise. We WILL be perfect before entering heaven after a final purgation for most of us and we must strive for perfection by being imitators of God (Eph. 5:1, 1 Thess 2:14).
It is NOT our own righteousness that we attain but the righteousness of Christ by the grace of God infused in us by the perfect sacrifice of Christ.

As I have stated, ad nauseam - our filth cannot enter heaven, no matter how much it is covered. God cannot be fooled - not even by “snow-covered” dunghills . . .

 

[elvisman]

Let me start out first by saying that I do not fully accept Calvinism particularly with respect to predestination and the perseverance of the saints. That being said, I think there is a misunderstanding as to exactly what Reformed theology teaches with respect to salvation. While it is taught that Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us, this does not mean that nothing changes within us. The misunderstanding seems to come about by comparing the Reformed view of justification with the Catholic view. Reformed teaching distinguishes between different parts of salvation of which justification is only a part. Salvation involves regeneration, justification, sanctification and glorification.

**I guess it is sometimes misrepresented. However – this is due to the fact that there are so many different belief systems within Protestantism – even those who identify themselves as “Reformed”. For example – I have debated some on this board who believe that you cannot lose your salvation, no matter what you do. Others debate almost the same position - a few caveats. Others, still, reject this notion. Some believe that all of our sins are forgiven, past, present and future – while others agree more with the Catholic position that they have been PAID for, not forgiven without repentance.
**

However perfect righteousness is not achieved in this life. This will only occur after death through glorification.

**I couldn’t agree more.
**

This is where the imputed righteousness of Christ becomes important. Our remaining sin nature means our works can never reach the perfection required by God. We need Christ’s righteousness to make them acceptable in God’s sight.

Again – this is where we need the infusion of the Holy Spirit, not simply the imputation of Christ’s righteousness. We can’t do anything holy, righteous or truly charitable without the help of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Brian_Culliton]

Wrong. Before you take my words and twist them as you have - understand that all of your beliefs are derived from the same Catholics Church that Jesus established in the 1st century. It was later that men twisted and perverted these teachings during and after the Protestant Revolt - and the Scriptural aberrations and false doctrines ensued. When I read your misrepresentations of what I wrote - it is easy to see how Protestant forefathers were able to do the same with the teachings of Christ and his Church.

That being said - ALL of our sins, past, present and future have been PAID for (τετελεσται). However, we must repent every time we sin or we are not forgiven. This idea that we can do whatever we want after we are initially “saved” is a Protestant blunder of epic proportions.
I never said that we must pay for our sins after baptism - I don’t even know where you got that from.

It is only by the perfect sacrifice of Christ that we can even hope to attain salvation. However, the CONTEXT of the Scriptures show that we MUST be MADE righteous before entering heaven, as nothing unclean can enter it

Jesus tells us in Matt. 5:48 to "be perfect as your Father in heaven is perfect". You might look at this command as a promise. We WILL be perfect before entering heaven after a final purgation for most of us and we must strive for perfection by being imitators of God (Eph. 5:1, 1 Thess 2:14).
It is NOT our own righteousness that we attain but the righteousness of Christ by the grace of God infused in us by the perfect sacrifice of Christ.

As I have stated, ad nauseam - our filth cannot enter heaven, no matter how much it is covered. God cannot be fooled - not even by “snow-covered” dunghills . . .

I am not twisting your words; I am merely trying to understand your belief.

If a believer abides in Christ who is righteous and pure, and sin and righteousness are mutually exclusive, how can that believer be anything but pure? You say you have the Holy Spirit poured into you, but you also say you must be “made pure” as though you are not pure now. If you say nothing unclean can enter heaven (and I agree), why do you imply that righteousness abides with unrighteousness? Your theology is inconsistent.

I know nothing of this idea that we can do whatever we want after we are “initially saved,” whatever that means. If people think that way then they do not know what it means to be saved.

The parable of the sower is a great illustration of those who receive the word and the various outcomes. Those that bear fruit abide in the vine and no longer know sin, even though they possess corrupt sinful bodies. If we abide in Christ we do so out of love and nothing can separate us from that love; he who abides in Christ is presently (as opposed to sometime in the future) free from sin. One could not abide in Christ and bear fruit if it were not so.

Salvation begins with faith and ends with love, and love abides forever. A tree must mature before it bears fruit and it will be known by its fruit.

 

[elvisman]

I am not twisting your words; I am merely trying to understand your belief.

If a believer abides in Christ who is righteous and pure, and sin and righteousness are mutually exclusive, how can that believer be anything but pure? You say you have the Holy Spirit poured into you, but you also say you must be “made pure” as though you are not pure now. If you say nothing unclean can enter heaven (and I agree), why do you imply that righteousness abides with unrighteousness? Your theology is inconsistent.
Absolutely not. We can be made righteous, then, because we fall into sin, that state is now damaged. We must repent EVERY time we fall into sin. Although we belong to Christ – we will struggle with sin until we are made perfect and are in heaven. I haven’t met the perfect person yet – have you? Are you saying that you are as pure as you need to be to enter heaven right now?
If so – that is pretty arrogant.

---

Rom. 11:22, Heb. 10:26-27, 2 Pet. 2:20-22, 2 Pet. 3:17, Rev. 3:5, Rev. 22:19 ALL speak to the believer who has a true, experiential knowledge (Epignosei) of Christ and falls into sin.
This is what the idea that salvation is a one-time, slam-dunk event is such a perversion of the Gospel.

Brian_Culliton:
I know nothing of this idea that we can do whatever we want after we are “initially saved,” whatever that means. If people think that way then they do not know what it means to be saved.
According to YOUR definition. I know MANY Protestants who would disagree with you – including Luther himself in his letter to Philip Melanchton in 1521:

---

"If you are a preacher of Grace, then preach a true, not a fictitious grace; if grace is true, you must bear a true and not a fictitious sin. God does not save people who are only fictitious sinners. Be a sinner and sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly. For he is victorious over sin, death, and the world. As long as we are here we have to sin.

The parable of the sower is a great illustration of those who receive the word and the various outcomes. Those that bear fruit abide in the vine and no longer know sin, even though they possess corrupt sinful bodies. If we abide in Christ we do so out of love and nothing can separate us from that love; he who abides in Christ is presently (as opposed to sometime in the future) free from sin. One could not abide in Christ and bear fruit if it were not so.

Salvation begins with faith and ends with love, and love abides forever. A tree must mature before it bears fruit and it will be known by its fruit.

The parable of the sower is more about those who belong to Christ’s Church and less to do with “no longer knowing sin”. Your interpretation shows a shocking level of arrogance and spiritual pride.

 

[jericho777]

Every single verse I presented shows that God’s grace is infused in us to make ud righteous - perfect.
We HAVE to be righteous - PERFECT before entering heaven. Since Rev. 21:27 tells us that* nothing* unclean can enter heaven and Christ himself tells us to be perfect - as our father in heaven is perfect - HOW can we get into heaven? By the grace of God making us righteous before we enter.

This is why the Cathlic church has never taught that we enter heaven covered in Christ’s righteousness. We teach that he actually makes us perfect before we can even enter heaven. For some - this requires a purgation of the temporal effects of sin - but that is for another thread. HIS righteouseness, *yes *- but INFUSED, rather than simply declared.

I feel that some Catholics on this thread have confused this point.

Hey Elvis, you didn’t answer my question so let’s start over. I see the verses demonstrating the presence of the Holy Spirit in the believer. I do not however see them speaking directly to the subject of righteousness. There is no question the role of grace in making us righteous.

I have two questions if you would be so kind as to respond.

1Why does Paul only speak of righteousness being imputed to the believer even after the death of Christ?

2When we stand before God does He regard our new righteous as sufficient to be in His presence or do we still need the righteousness of Christ?

 

[jericho777]

I guess I am just having trouble with this jump you are making. If God implants righteousness in a human by the merits of Christ, so that it is no longer that person who lives, but Christ, who lives in Him, how does the Source of that grace become man’s, instead of God’s?

Yes. We are made into the persons He created us to be. We were not created with sin. He cleanses us from all sin. His plan for us is that we may be made Holy, body, mind, and Spirit, so that as whole persons, we can enter heaven (where nothing unclean can dwell) and live with Him forever. We have died, and our lives are hidden with Christ in God.

Well, the righteousness is never ours to begin with in either case.

What do you mean “if they are truly righteous?” Do you honestly deny the scriptures that say “nothing unclean will enter heaven”? The people have been MADE righteous by the grace of God. Do you honestly imagine that such a thing is possible apart from grace?

You are misunderstanding the meaning of imputation, jer. It means to credit an account. It is not just “doctoring the books”. He actually puts a positive balance into us. He is not just saying there is a credit when it does not, in fact, exist.

God’s grace transforms us by His Spirit dwelling in our hearts through faith.

When He says that we BECOME THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD do you think He just means “we are declared to be righteous”?

Hi Guan, I’m confused as to what you believe. You say “We are made into the persons He created us to be. We were not created with sin. He cleanses us from all sin. His plan for us is that we may be made Holy, body, mind, and Spirit, so that as whole persons, we can enter heaven (where nothing unclean can dwell) and live with Him forever. We have died, and our lives are hidden with Christ in God.”

Does that make them now inherently righteous? Meaning no more need for the righteousness of Christ because we are autonomously righteous. Or do we still have the need for Christ’s righteousness?

I do not believe there is a “doctoring of the books” either. It truly is Christ’s righteousness alone for all eternity credited to us.

 

[fbl9]

Hi Guan, I’m confused as to what you believe. You say “We are made into the persons He created us to be. We were not created with sin. He cleanses us from all sin. His plan for us is that we may be made Holy, body, mind, and Spirit, so that as whole persons, we can enter heaven (where nothing unclean can dwell) and live with Him forever. We have died, and our lives are hidden with Christ in God.”

Does that make them now inherently righteous? Meaning no more need for the righteousness of Christ because we are autonomously righteous. Or do we still have the need for Christ’s righteousness?

I do not believe there is a “doctoring of the books” either. It truly is Christ’s righteousness alone for all eternity credited to us.

Who’s rightousness is it? Christ Jesus’s
One can not become rightous outside of Jesus, so yes we always need His rightousness.

 

[elvisman]

Hey Elvis, you didn’t answer my question so let’s start over. I see the verses demonstrating the presence of the Holy Spirit in the believer. I do not however see them speaking directly to the subject of righteousness. There is no question the role of grace in making us righteous.

I have two questions if you would be so kind as to respond.

1Why does Paul only speak of righteousness being imputed to the believer even after the death of Christ?
**If you cherry-pick the writings of Paul, you will come to ****many ****different and contradicting statements. This is precisely why Peter warns that the unstable and ignorant tend to twist his writings as they do all Scripture (2 Pet. 3:16). I’m not calling *****you ***ignorant and unstable because you have learned these things from someone else.

**Protestants have created more false doctrines based on the writings of Paul than any other NT writer. In his letters, Pauls writes to many different audiences and addresses different issues with each group. His individual letters do not encompass all of Christian doctrine, but all of them collectively paint a more precise picture. **

It is** clear**** that Paul didn’t believe in a simply imputation of Christ’s righteousness on the believer. He indicates that although it may begin there, it is an infusion of God’s grace - with our cooperation* (Sunergos)******* (Mark 16:20, Rom. 8:28, 1 Cor. 3:9).

2When we stand before God does He regard our new righteous as sufficient to be in His presence or do we still need the righteousness of Christ?

We need to be FILLED with the righteousness of Christ – not simply covered by it. For some, this may happen at death and others may need a final purgation (Matt. 5:25-26, Matt. 12:32, Matt. 18:32-35, Luke 12:58-59, 1 Cor. 3:12-15).

 

[onenow1]

Non-denominational Protestant here. I’ve been open to listening to the Catholic point of view, reading, listening to Catholic Answers Live for about four years now. I feel I am on the verge of conversion, but I seem to have one thing that I’d really like to have cleared up before going forward.

Here’s my question. I’ve heard a couple of references to the fact that Protestants believe that once saved, always saved and that that is contradictory to Catholic belief. Protestants believe that our sins are covered; Catholics believe, as I understand it, that nothing unholy or sinful will be able to stand in God’s presence, that we must continually work towards holiness.

Could someone give me a bare bones bullet list of what Catholics believe on this issue? I am asking for something this simple because I seem to get lost in my research, wading through tons of apologetics against seemingly centuries old arguments, none of which I am familiar with. A simple bullet list of what is truth would give me something to hold on to and refer back to as I study this issue.

With much gratitude!

Hi, Gracegray, welcome !

Jesus vs Calvin

Calvin: Once your saved thats it you made it.

Jesus: Rev. 3: 5, He who conquers shall be clad thus in white garments, and I will not blot his name out of the book of life; I will confess his name before my Father and before his angels.

Read what Jesus has to say to all 7 churches seems to me they had salvation but Jesus does say you can be blotted out.

God Bless

 

[guanophore]

If a believer abides in Christ who is righteous and pure, and sin and righteousness are mutually exclusive, how can that believer be anything but pure? You say you have the Holy Spirit poured into you, but you also say you must be “made pure” as though you are not pure now. If you say nothing unclean can enter heaven (and I agree), why do you imply that righteousness abides with unrighteousness? Your theology is inconsistent.

His theology is completely consistent, Brian. What lacks consistency here that your soteriology differs from what the Apostles believed and taught.

righteousness absolutely abides with unrighteous so long as we are in these bodies of flesh. If you don’t get it, I recommend a meditation on Rom. 7.

Human beings, once saved have two natures, just as Jesus had a divine nature and a human nature. We have a new nature, born of the Spirit, that constantly strives against our fallen human nature, that tends toward sin. Throughout this life our bodies,hearts, and minds are the battleground of warfare.

I know nothing of this idea that we can do whatever we want after we are “initially saved,” whatever that means. If people think that way then they do not know what it means to be saved.

I agree, and I am glad you have not fallen for that BS,

The parable of the sower is a great illustration of those who receive the word and the various outcomes. Those that bear fruit abide in the vine and** no longer know sin**, even though they possess corrupt sinful bodies.

No, Brian. It doesnt say that. It says they bear much fruit.

If we abide in Christ we do so out of love and nothing can separate us from that love; he who abides in Christ is presently (as opposed to sometime in the future) free from sin. One could not abide in Christ and bear fruit if it were not so.

Yes, I agree. But it is also true that he who says he is without sin is a liar.

 

[guanophore]

According to YOUR definition. I know MANY Protestants who would disagree with you – including Luther himself in his letter to Philip Melanchton in 1521:

---

"If you are a preacher of Grace, then preach a true, not a fictitious grace; if grace is true, you must bear a true and not a fictitious sin. God does not save people who are only fictitious sinners. Be a sinner and sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly. For he is victorious over sin, death, and the world. As long as we are here we have to sin.

You have summarized well two of Luther’s heresies. One was encouraging believers to “sin boldly”, which is a direct contradiction of the Apostle’s teaching that we should not sin more in order to experience more grace.

The other is that, as long as we are here “we have to sin”. This is an utter falsehood that has run rampant through Protestant communities. Jesus enables us by grace to walk before Him without sin. We are no longer slaves to sin, and we now have a choice. We can choose not to sin.

 

[elvisman]

You have summarized well two of Luther’s heresies. One was encouraging believers to “sin boldly”, which is a direct contradiction of the Apostle’s teaching that we should not sin more in order to experience more grace.

The other is that, as long as we are here “we have to sin”. This is an utter falsehood that has run rampant through Protestant communities. Jesus enables us by grace to walk before Him without sin. We are no longer slaves to sin, and we now have a choice. We can choose not to sin.

 

[guanophore]

I see the verses demonstrating the presence of the Holy Spirit in the believer.

Well, is the HS really “in” the believer, or is he only “declared” to be present, but not actually present?

I do not however see them speaking directly to the subject of righteousness. There is no question the role of grace in making us righteous.

Apparently there is, as you are still denying the Apostolic Teaching on the pouring out onto the believer the grace that makes him holy.

I have two questions if you would be so kind as to respond.

1Why does Paul only speak of righteousness being imputed to the believer even after the death of Christ?

He doesn’t only speak of that. You may be making the mistake that is common among bible christians which is to attempt to extrapolate a doctrine from a handful of bible verses. If you are doing this, then you need to exclude all the other verses that suggest otherwise.

I will ask you a question also. Why does Paul write that those who are left at the rapture that they will be “changed, in the twinkling of an eye.” Why do they need to be changed, if they are already perfect?

1 Cor 15:51-52
51 Listen, I will tell you a mystery! We will not all die, but we will all be changed, 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet.

2When we stand before God does He regard our new righteous as sufficient to be in His presence or do we still need the righteousness of Christ?

There is no separation between the two, jer. Our new rigtheousness IS the righteousness of Christ. We have died, and our lives are hidden with Christ in God. It is no longer we who live, but Christ, who lives in us. You are creating a dichotomy where none exists.

No one is claiming that anyone can become righteous without Christ, or that the righteousness that He instills in us comes from ourselves.

 

[Brian_Culliton]

Absolutely not. We can be made righteous, then, because we fall into sin, that state is now damaged. We must repent EVERY time we fall into sin. Although we belong to Christ – we will struggle with sin until we are made perfect and are in heaven. I haven’t met the perfect person yet – have you? Are you saying that you are as pure as you need to be to enter heaven right now?
If so – that is pretty arrogant.

I am saying that Christ is pure and He has taken my sin to the cross. I abide in Christ and am purified by His blood. It is not something I hope to attain like you do; it is something that was given to me by God as a free gift - Romans 5:15-18. If I were to die I would enter heaven because Christ has made it so. I am a citizen of heaven and I find it odd that you find that arrogant? It is what the apostles taught.

Rom. 11:22, Heb. 10:26-27, 2 Pet. 2:20-22, 2 Pet. 3:17, Rev. 3:5, Rev. 22:19 ALL speak to the believer who has a true, experiential knowledge (Epignosei) of Christ and falls into sin.
This is what the idea that salvation is a one-time, slam-dunk event is such a perversion of the Gospel.

What other thing was capable of covering our sins than His righteousness? It was an exchange, my sins for His righteousness. Our human nature, which is wicked and ungodly, is not able to attain to life like you doctrine suggests.

According to YOUR definition. I know MANY Protestants who would disagree with you – including Luther himself in his letter to Philip Melanchton in 1521:

"If you are a preacher of Grace, then preach a true, not a fictitious grace; if grace is true, you must bear a true and not a fictitious sin. God does not save people who are only fictitious sinners. Be a sinner and sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly. For he is victorious over sin, death, and the world. As long as we are here we have to sin.

Sorry to ruin your fun, but that means nothing to me.

The parable of the sower is more about those who belong to Christ’s Church and less to do with “no longer knowing sin”. Your interpretation shows a shocking level of arrogance and spiritual pride.

What I said about the parable of the sower is absolutely true. You say you are a Christian yet contend that the blood of Christ has not purified you. Nevertheless, you claim that the Holy Spirit has been infused in you. That is very confusing.

“Knowing that not with corruptible things, as silver and gold, you were redeemed from your fruitless mode of life delivered to you by your fathers; but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb blameless and without spot; foreknown indeed before the foundation of the world, but manifested in the last of the times for you, who through him do believe in God who raised him from the dead, and gave him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God.

Having purified past tense] your souls in obedience to the truth, to unfeigned love of the brethren, love one another from the heart earnestly, having been begotten again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by means of the word of God that lives and abides.” (1 Pet. 1:18-23)

 

[guanophore]

I am saying that Christ is pure and He has taken my sin to the cross.  I abide in Christ and am purified by His blood.   It is not something I hope to attain like you do; it is something that was given to me by God as a free gift - Romans 5:15-18.

You are wrong, Brian. What you have presented here is Catholic teaching. Catholics are the ones from whom this spiritual truth has come.

However, we also accept the Apostolic Teaching that when we sin, we are not “in Him” and not pure. Sin is not pure. When we sin, we reject the free gift of God, and fall from grace. Gifts can be left by the side of the road.

  If I were to die I would enter heaven because Christ has made it so.  I am a citizen of heaven and I find it odd that you find that arrogant?  It is what the apostles taught.

Yes, this arrogance is called the sin of presumption. While we all agree we enter heaven because Christ makes it so, we also receive the Apostolic Teaching that we are not to judge ourselves:

1 Cor 4:3-5
I do not even judge myself. 4 I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby acquitted. It is the Lord who judges me. 5 Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive commendation from God.

As the Apostles taught, we humbly accept that there may be ungodly things hidden in our darkness.

We also recognize that we have not already attained:

Phil 3:13-16
13 Beloved, I do not consider that I have made it my own; but this one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, 14 I press on toward the goal for the prize of the heavenly call of God in Christ Jesus. 15 Let those of us then who are mature be of the same mind; and if you think differently about anything, this too God will reveal to you. 16 Only let us hold fast to what we have attained.

The Apostles taught that our salvation is not completed until the end of this life, and as long as we walk the earth, it is possible to be cut off from our heavenly inheritance.

What other thing was capable of covering our sins than His righteousness?

Brian, you are setting up strawmen again. No Catholic here is saying that we can be righteous apart from Him.

 It was an exchange, my sins for His righteousness.  Our human nature, which is wicked and ungodly, is not able to attain to life like you doctrine suggests.

This is one of the most grievious heresies of the Reformation.

Human nature is NOT wicked and ungodly. God made man in His own image and likeness, and declared him “good”. Human nature was NOT created to be in sin, but to fellowship with Him forever. Though wounded by sin, our nature has not lost the essence of His creation. If human nature were wicked and ungodly, Brian, then Jesus would not have been able to take His to heaven, would He? Are we not in agreement that nothing unclean can enter heaven? You can’t have it both ways.

Human nature most certainly can attain eternal life, and all who persevere will certainly do so.

  Sorry to ruin your fun, but that means nothing to me.

It is curious that you don’t seem to have any interest in your religious forebears.

    You say you are a Christian yet contend that the blood of Christ has not purified you.  Nevertheless, you claim that the Holy Spirit has been infused in you.  That is very confusing.

More accurate to say it is a mystery. There are some aspects of salvation that we have already attained, some that we are “working out” and some that are yet to come.

1 Peter 1:8-9
8 Although you have not seen him, you love him; and even though you do not see him now, you believe in him and rejoice with an indescribable and glorious joy, 9** for you are receiving the outcome of your faith, the salvation of your souls.**

Having purified past tense] your souls in obedience to the truth, to unfeigned love of the brethren, love one another from the heart earnestly, having been begotten again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by means of the word of God that lives and abides.” (1 Pet. 1:18-23)

Yes. The Apostles taught that we are completely purified in baptism. When we are born again from above by Spirit and water, we are begotton of incorruptible seed.

 

[Carlan]

What other thing was capable of covering our sins than His righteousness? It was an exchange, my sins for His righteousness. Our human nature, which is wicked and ungodly, is not able to attain to life like you doctrine suggests.

WE Catholics view Justification differently than Protestants.
First we agree, Jesus bled for our sins on the cross only once and when we accept that redemption as individuals, which He did for all God’s children, we are saved.

Some Protestants view Justification, as I understand it, as having our righteousness imputed or credited by the covering over of all our sin past, present and future with Christ’s saving Blood …“Once and for all”.
We Catholic view it differently, not stopping there, we must be Baptized by the Trinity formula which cleanses the soul completely of all sin and *infuses the soul with Sanctifying Grace *which gives us the power in Christ to continue to grow in the Holiness of God.
We do not believe that we live our life in Christ with our souls of sin simply covered over with a beautiful Mantle. All sin in the soul must be removed to live in relationship with God forever.
As Catholics we believe ,*if we persevere to the end *,living our life in Christ we will live forever in union with all in heaven.
We believe living a Christian life in Christ is a life long process through the sacramental gifts of God. Peace, Carlan

 

[jdarc]

Once Saved, Always Saved

This is a stupid thread :
If Judas an “Apostle” could loose His Salvation

So can YOU!!

 

[elvisman]

I am saying that Christ is pure and He has taken my sin to the cross. I abide in Christ and am purified by His blood. It is not something I hope to attain like you do; it is something that was given to me by God as a free gift - Romans 5:15-18. If I were to die I would enter heaven because Christ has made it so. I am a citizen of heaven and I find it odd that you find that arrogant? It is what the apostles taught.

This is not what the Apostles taught. They taught that we need to repent for our sins. They taught that need to be wary of falling backwards into a life of sin and losing what we had in Christ. They taught that after knowing Christ fully and experientially - we STILL need to work out our salvation with fear and trembling.
Doesn’t sound like OSAS to me, friend.

What other thing was capable of covering our sins than His righteousness? It was an exchange, my sins for His righteousness. Our human nature, which is wicked and ungodly, is not able to attain to life like you doctrine suggests.

HIS** righteousness MAKES us righteous – not of our own righteousness but HIS.
It doesn’t “cover” our sins. That would make God an idiot who is fooled by our disguising our sin. Remember – NOTHING unclean can enter heaven (Rev. 21:27).
**

Sorry to ruin your fun, but that means nothing to me.

Of course it doesn’t. You’re a Protestant so you don’t have to agree with other Protestants to remain in your particular flavor of Protestantism.
**Nevertheless – that kind of thought remains within Protestantism – utter chaos.

The thousands of different flavors and false doctrines ALL have to be correct for Protestantism to justify itself. After all – if Sola Scriptura is right – and we ALL have the right to interpret it in our own way - -and the Holy Spirit guides EACH of us to interpret it – then YOU have to accept that Luther and everybody else you disagree with is right.

That is the legacy of the constant splintering that is Protestantism.**