Once Saved Always Saved?

[Lisa44]

Yes, one can indeed lose salvation.

Have you not come across Rom 11…

17 If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, 18 do not consider yourself to be superior to those other branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you. 19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I could be grafted in.” 20 Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but tremble. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either.

22 Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but **kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off. **

What do you think being cut off mean? What do you think “provided that you continue in his kindness” means?

Does that not mean that one has to persevere in being clean to remain grafted in?

They are cut off for “unbelief”. Romans 11:20 states the branches were “broken off by unbelief”. … “Even they, if they do not remain in unbelief, will be grafted in…” (23)

The branches grafted in are done so by grace 11:5-6 “In the same way then, there is also at the present time a remnant chosen by grace. Now if by grace, then it is not by works, otherwise grace ceases to be grace.”

 

[Lisa44]

You don’t know if he lost his salvation? Really? That is the same thing as saying you don’t know if he* is* saved. If you doubt whether Peter is saved… then…?

finish the question you asked.

I don’t know if he lost his salvation when he denied Christ 3 times.

Maybe he did, and if he had been struck dead after the 3rd time, he would have been in hell.

Maybe he didn’t and if he had been struck dead 1 minute after he repented, he would have gone to purgatory.

I dunno. And neither do you.

You took half of my quote and copied it. Don’t take me out of context please.
If you don’t know if Peter lost his salvation when he denied Jesus three times, then that means you don’t know if he is saved.
You are the first Catholic I have met who doubts the salvation of St. Peter.

If you don’t know if he kept his salvation then you cannot know if he is saved.

 

[Sig]

They are cut off for “unbelief”. Romans 11:20 states the branches were “broken off by unbelief”. … “Even they, if they do not remain in unbelief, will be grafted in…” (23)

The branches grafted in are done so by grace 11:5-6 “In the same way then, there is also at the present time a remnant chosen by grace. Now if by grace, then it is not by works, otherwise grace ceases to be grace.”

Actually, I posted that Lisa, and yes, right in the beginning of the chapter Paul says that God has not cast off His people.

The subject of the passage is not about the church, per se, but about Israel. True to form the context is ignored by the Catholic.

 

[Lisa44]

What can happen to who? Who are the people he is talking about in 2 Peter 2?

Those who know Christ but have fallen away anyway.

It says that they *knew *the path, and turned away from it. It never says they believed. These are the false prophets who are practicing immorality.

There is nothing in this chapter to indicate that these false prophets were “saved”. Only that they knew the path but chose instead to follow Balaam.

Knowledge of Jesus is not what saves us. It is belief in him. I know many people who know of Jesus and Christianity but they don’t believe its true. Hence, they are not saved.

 

[Lisa44]

Actually, I posted that Lisa, and yes, right in the beginning of the chapter Paul says that God has not cast off His people.

The subject of the passage is not about the church, per se, but about Israel. True to form the context is ignored by the Catholic.

Yes, thank you. I am in agreement with you.

 

[fhansen]

They are cut off for “unbelief”. Romans 11:20 states the branches were “broken off by unbelief”. … “Even they, if they do not remain in unbelief, will be grafted in…” (23)

The branches grafted in are done so by grace 11:5-6 “In the same way then, there is also at the present time a remnant chosen by grace. Now if by grace, then it is not by works, otherwise grace ceases to be grace.”

Maybe I’m missing something here. Verses 20 & 21 make the point that those who stand by faith can still be cut off, no???

 

[Lisa44]

Only because this thread is moving so fast.

So let’s take them in reverse order. How do we know Peter fell from grace when he denied Jesus? Well, we are not his judges, to be sure. But the fact that it was reported in the gospel accounts that Peter, realizing what he had done, wept bitterly, it is probably safe to say that Peter recognized his sin. and was repentent. And while a person’s confession would never be made public because of the seal of confession, it is rather obvious that he confessed, otherwise it is unlikely that we would know he denied the Lord.

So, are you still unsure if St. Peter is saved?
You are saying that weeping equals repentance and confession.
And that repentance and confession equal salvation.

The question was did St. Peter LOOSE his salvation when he denied Jesus three times?
The assertion that he lost his salvation cannot be proven by your own admission. Therefore you also cannot know if St. Peter is saved. And therefore you are following the teachings of a man whom you do not even know if he is in heaven or hell?

So what makes you think that St. Peter lost his salvation? Because you assume that if a believer sins that he looses his salvation. But this has not been adequately demonstrated. In fact, Sig has demonstrated the opposite.

Matthew 7 does not prove your thesis, nor does 2 Peter 2. Nor does Romans 11. Nor does Heb 10:26.

 

[Lisa44]

Maybe I’m missing something here. Verses 20 & 21 make the point that those who stand by faith can still be cut off, no???

No. It’s not speaking to loosing faith once had. It is speaking to the unbelief which cuts off the branch from the tree and root. If in kindness we are given faith from God by grace, then we can’t brag. And we could just as easily be cut off by God from the tree. (ie: no grace from God to have faith).

 

[fhansen]

No. It’s not speaking to loosing faith once had. It is speaking to the unbelief which cuts off the branch from the tree and root. If in kindness we are given faith from God by grace, then we can’t brag. And we could just as easily be cut off by God from the tree. (ie: no grace from God to have faith).

OK??..but in that case then it would seem to be saying that those graced by faith to be saved can nonetheless lose the grace of faith to be saved.

 

[Lisa44]

OK??..but in that case it would seem to be saying that those graced by faith to be saved can nonetheless lose the grace of faith to be saved.

Yes we are saved by God so we cannot brag.

No, we will not be cut off the tree if we have faith.

The branches that were cut off were cut off for unbelief. And it is saying that we were grafted onto the tree (gentiles) through faith. Now if you do not have faith, then of course you would be cut off.

 

[Sig]

Maybe I’m missing something here. Verses 20 & 21 make the point that those who stand by faith can still be cut off, no???

C’mon. Let’s ignore the world, and the context of the passage just as you are doing, and zero in on v20 and 21, which is what you are doing.

Where is there anything in that verse that references "STANDING BY FAITH?"

 

[fhansen]

C’mon. Let’s ignore the world, and the context of the passage just as you are doing, and zero in on v20 and 21, which is what you are doing.

Where is there anything in that verse that references "STANDING BY FAITH?"

Well, gee, sig, I don’t know-maybe here?:

**20 Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but tremble. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either.
**

 

[Sig]

OK??..but in that case then it would seem to be saying that those graced by faith to be saved can nonetheless lose the grace of faith to be saved.

You are admitting your confusion. You don’t know what it’s saying because what it clearly says clearly contradicts what you clearly believe.

 

[fhansen]

Yes we are saved by God so we cannot brag.

OK, I don’t know anyone who brags about their faith. Except, to be honest, maybe a few Protestants I know who seem very self-congratulatory about their faith as contrasted to others they believe lack it.

No, we will not be cut off the tree if we have faith.

Except that’s what you say, not the Word.

 

[fhansen]

You are admitting your confusion. You don’t know what it’s saying because what it clearly says clearly contradicts what you clearly believe.

You are admitting your confusion. You don’t know what it’s saying because what it clearly says clearly contradicts what you clearly believe. Clearly.

 

[Sig]

Well, gee, sig, I don’t know-maybe here?:

20 Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but tremble. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either.

YES! THOSE WHO ARE “IN THE BRANCH.” But that is not said of those who were cut off. THEY DIDN’T STAND IN FAITH, EVER.

The elect will never be cut off because God has promised they won’t be. Those who have been justified, will never be cut off, because those He justified [in eternity past], He also glorified [in eternity past] (Rom 8). This is what theologians refer to as the idea of “already/not yet.”

It is akin to the Catholic’s “I was saved in the past, I am being saved in the present, I hope to be saved in the future,” with the exception that the biblical statement is infinitely more definite then the Catholic statement, “I hope so.”
.
Therefore, it is impossible for a justified, saved person to lose salvation

Anyone who doesn’t continue in the kindness of God proves, by their failure to persevere, that they do not stand by faith (cf Jn 15), but by something else, maybe law, maybe works which is law, whatever it is they stand by that’s not faith.

 

[Sig]

You are admitting your confusion. You don’t know what it’s saying because what it clearly says clearly contradicts what you clearly believe. Clearly.

You are the one saying the passage “seems” to be saying something.

On the other hand, I’m not. I’m definitely telling you what it says.

 

[Lisa44]

OK, I don’t know anyone who brags about their faith. Except, to be honest, maybe a few Protestants I know who seem very self-congratulatory about their faith as contrasted to others they believe lack it.

Except that’s what you say, not the Word.

Fhansen, why were the branches cut off?

It’s not what I say, I didn’t write the bible.

Rom 11:17 Now if some of the branches were broken off, and you, though a wild olive branch, were grafted in among them, and have come to share in the rich root of the cultivated olive tree, do not brag that you are better than those branches. But if you do brag - you do not sustain the root but the root sustains you.

I do not speak of bragging, that is what the verse speaks of. Do you understand what the “root” is and why no one can brag?

 

[Sig]

"Lisa44:

No, we will not be cut off the tree if we have faith.

Except that’s what you say, not the Word.

That’s funny…

Where does the word say that one who has faith will be cut off? Do tell?

 

[paul_c]

So, are you still unsure if St. Peter is saved?

Lisa, there was never a question of whether St. Peter is in heaven. He is a canonized saint. The question YOU asked was did he lose his salvation. That is a totally different thing, because you can fall from grace through sin and regain it through he sacrament of reconciliation.

You are saying that weeping equals repentance and confession.

No, I said that his bitter weeping showed he was sorry for his sin (which is the definition of repentence). The weeping had nothing to do with confession. Although there is not direct record of his confession (nor would there be because of the seal of the confessional), the fact that he was reconciled to Jesus is shown in John 21.

And that repentance and confession equal salvation.

No, not exactly. contrition, repentence, confession to a priest and penance, will put you back in the state of grace.

The question was did St. Peter LOOSE his salvation when he denied Jesus three times?

Yes

The assertion that he lost his salvation cannot be proven by your own admission.

I said while we are not his judge, we can surmise by his own actions that he thought he fell from grace.

Therefore you also cannot know if St. Peter is saved.

Of course we know that St. Peter is saved. He died and is now a canonized Saint.

And therefore you are following the teachings of a man whom you do not even know if he is in heaven or hell?

This is foolishness. He is in heaven.

So what makes you think that St. Peter lost his salvation? Because you assume that if a believer sins that he looses his salvation.

St. Peter himself teaches this. Read 2Peter 2.

But this has not been adequately demonstrated. In fact, Sig has demonstrated the opposite.

Sig has asserted the opposite. He has done nothing to prove his point.

Matthew 7 does not prove your thesis, nor does 2 Peter 2. Nor does Romans 11. Nor does Heb 10:26.

Asserting something doesn’t make it true. And I already showed you quite clearly that thee readings can be interpreted as giving the opposite views depending on the tradition you use to interptet them. So the question is really, which tradition is more credible: the one that is 2000 years old and began with the apostles, or the one defined by John Calvin 500 years ago.