Once Saved Always Saved?

[tqualey]

Hi, Paul C,

I think this is a good analogy about good trees becoming diseased. Sometimes a branch may have to be removed to stop the spread of the disease - and in human terms freely chosing to leave the occasions of sin is what is required of us if we are to live in God’s Grace.

God bless

Good trees can become diseased with sin and no longer produce good fruit.

Here is the passage in question:

20For if they, having escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of [our] Lord and savior Jesus Christ, again become entangled and overcome by them, their last condition is worse than their first.
21For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment handed down* to them.
22* What is expressed in the true proverb has happened to them, “The dog returns to its own vomit,” and “A bathed sow returns to wallowing in the mire.”

As you can see in verse 20, these people escaped the defilement of the world through the knowledge of Jesus Christ. In other words, their sins were forgiven in baptism and they entered the state of grace.

And just as obviously the second half of verse 20 says that they have fallen from grace by returning to sin. And now they are condemned more than if they hadn’t been baptised to begin with

 

[Sig]

Did Peter lose his salvation when he denied Jesus three times? Yes or no?

No, he didn’t, Lisa.

In fact, Jesus told Peter that He prayed to the Father that Peter’s faith would not completely fail.

That was a preview of Jesus role as High Priest and intercessor for His people. The Father ALWAYS answers the request of the Son. It’s amazing to me that anyone believes salvation can be lost. Simply amazing!

 

[Lisa44]

No, he didn’t, Lisa.

In fact, Jesus told Peter that He prayed to the Father that Peter’s faith would not completely fail.

That was a preview of Jesus role as High Priest and intercessor for His people. The Father ALWAYS answers the request of the Son. It’s amazing to me that anyone believes salvation can be lost. Simply amazing!

Thank you for answering the yes or no question!
I agree with you.

 

[fhansen]

So Mr. Hansen is laying the groundwork that leads to the conclusion that he believes all men, not just popes, but all men are infallible.

Thank you for that very interesting leading.

I don’t know where that conclusion came from. All men can be inspired, if the HS so chooses. All men aren’t inspired, or else they’d agree on the meaning of scripture.

 

[PRmerger]

Forgive me for not being clearer. Can you answer from Scripture his question concerning those he claims are exempt from Rom 3:23?

It’s right after the verse that says I have to “answer from Scripture” any theological questions.

 

[PRmerger]

And everytime I tell you that men are infallible, I prove that you are wrong in what you say when you attempt to tell me what I believe.

I’m quite certain that you believe that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John did not make any theological errors in faith and morals. Why? Because I keep asking to tell me where they did make any errors and you’ve not been able to provide a single instance.

That’s all I’m saying. Nothing more and nothing less.

Scripture is authoritative, inerrant, infallible, men are fallen and sinful, not inerrent, and not infallible.

Then you’ll have to point out one theological error that Matthew made.

I’m patient, and will continue to correct your understanding difficulties regarding my position on that.

Okey dokey!

Being patient is a cool virtue, and it will help you stay here on the CAFs for a long time ( which is a great place for you to be!)

 

[fhansen]

That was a yes or no question.

Mine wasn’t. But to answer yours, no, Peter never lost his salvation as far as we know. Now would you mind answering mine?

 

[PRmerger]

The request wasn’t for “suggestions,” but proof. Why should I put any stock into this fellow’s private interpretation?

Seems to me all you have to offer is the Church’s pronouncements about herself, and her claim that she is the only one who has the authority to understand and interpret scripture. That’s classic circular reasoning, IMO.

Actually, it’s not a circular argument, but what is described in Philosophy 101 courses as a SPIRAL argument.

"We are not basing the inspiration of the Bible on the Church’s infallibility and the Church’s infallibility on the word of an inspired Bible. That indeed would be a circular argument! What we have is really a spiral argument.

On the first level we argue to the reliability of the Bible insofar as it is history.

From that we conclude that an infallible Church was founded.

And then we take the word of that infallible Church that the Bible is inspired.

This is not a circular argument because the final conclusion (the Bible is inspired) is not simply a restatement of its initial finding (the Bible is historically reliable), and its initial finding (the Bible is historically reliable) is in no way based on the final conclusion (the Bible is inspired). What we have demonstrated is that without the existence of the Church, we could never know whether the Bible is inspired." source

 

[fhansen]

Thank you for answering the yes or no question!
I agree with you.

It amazes me that anyone could think a one-time expression of faith-even if we could know it was genuine- could save anyone on its own, rather than what they do with the rest of their lives. And, if God’s the one who ensures that some are saved, that they persevere-then the flip-side is that He ensures the rest are lost-a nauseating kind of god.

 

[PRmerger]

Did Peter lose his salvation when he denied Jesus three times? Yes or no?

We have no idea if he lost his salvation, Lisa! We are saved, essentially, when we die. And as we don’t know what would have happened if he had died an hour after denying Jesus, no one can answer this question.

 

[PRmerger]

Well, I wouldn’t want to completely misunderstand Scripture Paul, so I will have to conclude from the Catholic position that "those who are not baptized are not saved," consigns all of the OT saints to hell.

This actually is an uniformed position about Catholic teaching.

I don’t know if you’re aware that the Catholic Church reserves an entire feast day to a bunch (some say thousands) of souls who were never baptized. It’s called the Feast of the Holy Innocents. It is, coincidentally or not, observed this month!

 

[fhansen]

These verses are about false prophets (bad trees). Why else are they called a dog and a sow, “returning”? They are not God’s children, they are FALSE PROPHETS. The same people warned about in Matthew 7.

Aw, c’mon, dogs and sows aren’t so bad. Anyway all sinners start out as low-lifes, relatively speaking, and we’re all sinners to begin with, right? So the reason they would be “returning” is simply because they had once been saved from their previous life.

 

[TinaG]

It amazes me that anyone could think a one-time expression of faith-even if we could know it was genuine- could save anyone on its own, rather than what they do with the rest of their lives. And, if God’s the one who ensures that some are saved, that they persevere-then the flip-side is that He ensures the rest are lost-a nauseating kind of god.

Perhaps you can find some deity you approve of some day. Better to deal with the One Who Is There rather than with the One We Want.

Really, that is an oversimplification of the Reformed position. My position, anyway.

-Tina “A Nauseating Kind of God Myself, If I Went for It. Not That Anyone Asked Me if I was Interested in the Position.” G

 

[Lisa44]

What do you think might’ve happened to Peter if he kept on denying Jesus for the rest of his life?

Is this an imaginary Peter we are talking about? I don’t understand how to answer a question about something that never happened. Sorry.

 

[fhansen]

Perhaps you can find some deity you approve of some day. Better to deal with the One Who Is There rather than with the One We Want.

Really, that is an oversimplification of the Reformed position. My position, anyway.

-Tina “A Nauseating Kind of God Myself, If I Went for It. Not That Anyone Asked Me if I was Interested in the Position.” G

No, I already know the God I believe in-and He’s the Only One Who Is-there is no other. And He predestines no one to hell.

 

[fhansen]

Is this an imaginary Peter we are talking about? I don’t understand how to answer a question about something that never happened. Sorry.

OK then , Peter, himself, tells us what can happen in 2 Peter 2.

 

[TinaG]

No, I already know the God I believe in-and He’s the Only One Who Is-there is no other. And He predestines no one to hell.

I invite you to prove that He predestines no one to hell.

-Tina “Not That I Go Along with Reprobation Anyway Except as a Logical Deduction” G

 

[PRmerger]

Perhaps you can find some deity you approve of some day. Better to deal with the One Who Is There rather than with the One We Want.

Really, that is an oversimplification of the Reformed position. My position, anyway.

-Tina “A Nauseating Kind of God Myself, If I Went for It. Not That Anyone Asked Me if I was Interested in the Position.” G

Yay!

 

[TinaG]

Yay!

If that is a vote for my deification then I am worried about your theology.

-Tina “The Divine Miss Tina” G

 

[fhansen]

I invite you to prove that He predestines no one to hell.

-Tina “Not That I Go Along with Reprobation Anyway Except as a Logical Deduction” G

Well, OK, we certainly can’t prove anything by scripture alone, seeing as Protestants come down on both sides of this question. So, bearing in mind that the church is the pillar and foundation of truth, I’ll prove it by the Catechism, the testimony of the only entity granted authority to speak on these matters:

**1037 God predestines no one to go to hell;620 for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want “any to perish, but all to come to repentance”:621
**

That should settle it then.