P
peary
Guest
I would love to join all of you in discussion, but I wouldn’t even know where to begin to even understand what all the arguing going on in here is all about! Of course, I could be invited. 
- Status
M
mikeledes
Guest
Yes, those who are *predestined to glory *will never experience eternal condemnation. Now, you brought up the issue of typology (Mary and the Ark of the Covenant). Obviously, types do not have to exactly correspond to that which they foreshadow. The bronze serpent is a type of Christ, and yet it was never alive and Christ was not a serpent. However, comparing John 15:6 with typology is comparing apples with oranges. If “cast into the fire” is a metaphor or similie, then we should allow Christ to define His own terms.
“Fire” in the Bible is used as an agent of purification/ refining or as an agent of destruction. How it’s used depends on context. The problem with your interpretation is that Jesus does not merely use the word “fire.” He uses the phrase “cast into the fire.” Just as the phrase “in me” and its variants (i.e. in him, in the Son, in Christ), has one specific meaning, the phrase “cast into the fire” and its variants also have one specific meaning. In other words, the words “cast/thrown into” gives context and meaning to “fire.” Since you have raised the issue of consistency, let’s look at how Jesus consistently uses this phrase and what it means:
Luke 3:9, 17 (compare with Matthew 7:19)
**9"Indeed the axe is already laid at the root of the trees; so (N)every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire." **
**17"His winnowing fork is in His hand to thoroughly clear His threshing floor, and to gather the wheat into His barn; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire." **
Matthew 13:42
42and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Matthew 13:49
**50and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. **
Matthew 18:8-9
"If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than to have two hands or two feet and be cast into the eternal fire.
9"If your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out and throw it from you It is better for you to enter life with one eye, than to have two eyes and be cast into the fiery hell
Revelation 20:10
10And the devil who deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are also; and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.
John 15:6
**6"If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned. **
The Greek word translated thrown/cast in all of the above verses is “ballo.” bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/grk.cgi?number=906&version=kjv
So what you want us to believe is that in every other instance where Jesus uses the phrase “thrown into the fire” or its variants - whether speaking metaphorically, in similie, literally, etc. - it means eternal damnation, but “thrown in the fire” in John 15:6 is the one exception in which Jesus does not mean eternal damnation? There is not a single instance in the Gospels where Jesus uses the phrase “thrown in the fire” to indicate anything other than eternal damnation. After hearing Jesus throughout His preaching ministry use “thrown into the fire” as a reference to hell, the apostles would have understood this as a reference to hell as well.
Catholics are not the only ones that see “thrown into the fire” as a reference to eternal damnation. Many Calvinists - members of this forum, scholars/ theologians ,including **John Calvin ** and **Matthew Henry ** and Calvinist apologists like James White and John MacArthur of gracetoyou- understand “thrown into the fire” as a reference to eternal damnation, hence the existence of the alternative Calvinist interpretation of John 15. Why the equivocation?
Calvinists are really between a rock and a hard place. For if they deny that these “branches” were never saved, then they contradict the very words of Christ and the established meaning of “in me.” If they say they are saved, then they contradict the consistent use of “thrown in the fire” by Jesus as a reference to eternal damnation, a fact recognized by a number of Calvinist scholars, theologians, apologists, etc. (Calvin, Henry, White, etc.). Apparently, Calvinists are willing to call black “white” when a verse contradicts their own theology. The fact that we can be cut off from Christ is supported by other passages in the Bible:
Romans 11:21-22
**21for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either.
22Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off. **
Galatians 5:2-4
2Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you.
3And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law.
4You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.
To be continued…
God Bless,
Michael
M
mikeledes
Guest
For the Catholic, this is all true for those who have been predestined to glory. Like I’ve already stated, the number of the predestined to glory is immutably fixed. However, the issue here is that we believe that there are those who were predestined to grace, but not to glory and that there are Scriptures that demonstrate that (John 15:6, Romans 11:20-22, 1 Corinthians 9:26-27,Galatians 5:1-4, 1 Timothy 3:6, Hebrews 6:4-6, 12:25, Revelation 22:19, etc.).
Now you cited a verse that talks about a believer never coming into judgement:
**24"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life. **
In the Bible and the Greek, the word “judgement” or 'krisis" is used in different senses. In the above case, it is used as the equivalent of “condemnation” or “condemned.” That’s why the verse is translated the following way in the following translations:
24Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. (KJV)
24"I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life. (NIV).
So anyone who is in Christ will never experience condemnation. If a vine dies, the branches die with it. Christ is eternal and all those who are attached to Christ the true Vine and remain (meno) attached to Him will never perish. Outside of Christ there is only condemnation. Hence, anyone who is cut off/ severed from Christ and fall from grace will only spiritually dry up (i.e. die) and their end will be the eternal fire.
John 15:6
6"If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned.
And whose the “they” that gathers those that did not abide and died (withered) as a result of being cut off from the True Vine, the source of life, and throw them into the fire? His apostles would have known because Christ made it clear in His preaching ministry who the “they” that gather and cast into the fire were:
Matthew 13:40 (Compare with Matthew 13:41-42)
**49"So it will be at the end of the age; the angels will come forth and take out the wicked from among the righteous,
50and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. **
Jesus could not be any clearer. He talks about a “they” gathering the cut off “branches” and “throwing them in the fire”, which corresponds exactly to His earlier descriptions of eternal damnation and the role of his angels. I can see why many Calvinists see “thrown into the fire” as a reference to eternal damnation.
To be continued…
God Bless,
Michael
M
mikeledes
Guest
I’m glad that you do!
The permanency of a perfect passive participle depends on context. That is not a Catholic or Protestant thing. That is a rule of Greek grammar. The following definition of a PPP comes from an ETERNAL SECURITY website:
**ACTION COMPLETED at a SPECIFIC POINT of TIME in PAST with results CONTINUING into the PRESENT. In certain contexts the results are PERMANENT. **
There are examples in the Bible in which a PPP has permanent results and other examples where the results are not permanent.
In the first instance, the instance in which you accept what the PPP indicates, the verb used to describe the action is different from the verb upon which the doctrine is built.
The argument for the “first instance” is based on more than the PPP. I will not go into that because that is not the topic of this thread, but anyone can read the links I provided. In the “second instance”, I don’t believe the PPP has permanent results because other passages in Scripture contradict that. Like I stated, the permanency of a PPP depends on context and I believe the general context of Scripture demonstrates that it is not permanent in certain cases.
Using your statement:**ONE:
ACTION COMPLETED:
Mary has been highly favored.**
at a SPECIFIC POINT of TIME in PAST:
No specific point of time is mentioned in the text.
with results CONTINUING into the PRESENT:
She is “being” (continuously) highly favored (or “graced”), with no diminishing, ever, of that favor.
TWO:
ACTION COMPLETED:
The elect have been saved
at a SPECIFIC POINT of TIME in PAST:
The specific point of time is,
“before the foundation of the world,” (Eph 1:4)
with results CONTINUING into the PRESENT:
The elect are “being” (continuously) saved,
with no diminishing, ever, of that salvation.
You earlier stated:
There is a point in time when a person is saved and at that moment they are placed in Christ. Otherwise, all of the elect would be born saved and we know that is not the case. There is a moment in time when that person passes from death into life, from being ungodly to being righteous. That moment in Ephesians is not described as having occurred before the foundation of the world, but as something that occurs in time:
Ephesian 2:8
8For by grace you have been saved through faith;
Which means that “saved” (sesosmenoi) is specifically referring to the intial experience of salvation (i.e. passing from death into life). So the specific point of time is during the person’s lifetime, not “before the foundation of the world.” And we also have verses that say:
Romans 13:11
11Do this, knowing the time, that it is already the hour for you to awaken from sleep; for now salvation is nearer to us than when we believed.
Matthew 10:22
22"You will be hated by all because of My name, but it is the one who has endured to the end who will be saved.
These verses refer to the future dimension of salvation. So one does not completely experience all of the dimensions of salvation the moment a person is saved. The use of the PPP in Ephesians 2:8 simply indicates that the persons in question experienced salvation at a certain point in their past - in their life - and that these effects are still present. The use of the PPP does not gurantee that this will be permanent. As I stated, permanency depends on context and the context of Scripture (John 15:6, Romans 11:21-23, Revelation 22:19, etc.)contradicts the notion that salvation is permanent in all individual Christians.
To be continued…
God bless,
Michael
M
mikeledes
Guest
As I stated, a PPP’s permanency depends on context. That is a rule of Greek grammar. We don’t believe the PPP is permanent in Ephesians 2:8 because other passages indicate that it’s not. But I find interesting that Calvinists attempt to redefine “in me” or “thrown in the fire” in John 15 in a way that contradicts the consistent usage of those phrases by Christ and the rest of Scripture. One group clearly recognizes that “in me” refers to a genuinely saved person while another group recognizes that “thrown in the fire” refers to eternal damnation. Combine the two and you end up with the Catholic position. Since that is impossible for a Calvinist, you end up with a lot of equivocation and attempts to redefine what is clearly “black” as “white” in order to fit their theological framework.
A text out of context is a pretext. I would like to see that passage in its context and not be given a disjointed list of Saint Ignatius of Loyola’s quotes. There are many passages in Scripture that appear to say that Jesus is a creature of God and inferior to God (i.e Arians & JW’s) and there are passages that seem to indicate that there is only one person in God (i.e. modalism & oneness Pentecostals). Fortunately, the Council of Nicaea formally defined the Trinity using language and distinctions not explictly found in Scripture (i.e. “person”, “substance”, etc.), thus the Church calrified those passages that appeared “white” but were really “black.”
To be continued…
God bless,
Michael
F
fbl9
Guest
…St Ignatious’s quote being applied to infallibly defined doctrine can’t work.because the doctrine has been defined as without error.what is, without error , fully true…as for the second part since i still fall on ocassion there is no point in asking for forgiveness,because since i sin, i am not one of the elect so i should be as Judas and hang myself. this is called the sin of despair.the only sin that can’t be forgiven is the rejection of God’s grace unto death.
S
sandusky
Guest
Earlier than that, Christ defines terms as well—sheep:John 10:1-30
1 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter by the door into the fold of the sheep, but climbs up some other way, he is a thief and a robber.
2 “But he who enters by the door is a shepherd of the sheep.
3 “To him the doorkeeper opens, and the sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out.
4 “When he puts forth all his own, he goes ahead of them, and the sheep follow him because they know his voice.
5 “A stranger they simply will not follow, but will flee from him, because they do not know the voice of strangers.”
6 This figure of speech Jesus spoke to them, but they did not understand what those things were which He had been saying to them.
7 So Jesus said to them again, “Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep.
8 “All who came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them.
9 “I am the door; if anyone enters through Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture.
10 “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly.
11 “I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep.
12 “He who is a hired hand, and not a shepherd, who is not the owner of the sheep, sees the wolf coming, and leaves the sheep and flees, and the wolf snatches them and scatters them.
13 “He flees because he is a hired hand and is not concerned about the sheep.
14 “I am the good shepherd, and I know My own and My own know Me,
15 even as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep.
16 “I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will hear My voice; and they will become one flock with one shepherd.
17 “For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again.
18 “No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father.”
19 A division occurred again among the Jews because of these words.
20 Many of them were saying, “He has a demon and is insane. Why do you listen to Him?”
21 Others were saying, “These are not the sayings of one demon-possessed. A demon cannot open the eyes of the blind, can he?”
22 At that time the Feast of the Dedication took place at Jerusalem;
23 it was winter, and Jesus was walking in the temple in the portico of Solomon.
24 The Jews then gathered around Him, and were saying to Him, “How long will You keep us in suspense? If You are the Christ, tell us plainly.”
25 Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe; the works that I do in My Father’s name, these testify of Me.
26 “But you do not believe because you are not of My sheep.
27 “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me;
28 and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand.
29 “My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.
30 “I and the Father are one.”After all of that, you’re telling me that He’s going to cast them into the fire?
Read that passage carefully; the entire reasoning, for and against, is in it.
(continued)
S
sandusky
Guest
(continued from post #303)
mikeledes:
mikeledes:
(continued)
Those verses are speaking of His elect, regenerated/justified, and glorified sheep?
”Ballo” is the only Greek word used in the NT for throwing/casting. So to single it out, as you have, is irrelevant and unimpressive, IMO.
(continued)
S
sandusky
Guest
(continued from post #304)
mikeledes:
In Jn 15, Jesus is talking to believers, about believers—those elect to salvation, or, as you state it, ”predestined to glory”.**Romans 8:30
and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.**Those God justifies, He also Glorifies!
The clear testimony of Scripture is that, everyone justified by God is also glorified by God.
Calvinism is the only soteriology that adheres to the testimony of God with respect to that fact! All of those who contend that one can lose justification, do not adhere to that fact.
mikeledes:
As I’ve stated before, any seeming contradiction to the facts stated in Jn 10:28ff, Rom 8:29, et al, must be subordinated to those facts, and, another, more plausible explanation is to be sought in light of those and other passages.
God doesn’t lie concerning the elect—His immutability with respect to election is clearly stated to Israel, and, therefore, it applies as well to the in-grafted church:Malachi 3:6
“For I, the Lord, do not change; therefore you, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed.He doesn’t change concerning Israel, because of the unilateral promise made to Abraham in Gen 15.
mikeledes:
Again, the Calvinist position subordinates any seeming contradiction to the greater statements concerning the elect—they understand the promises made to the elect; therefore, they endeavor to find explanations that don’t contradict those greater statements. Thus, they maintain that although Jesus is talking about elect believers in Jn 15, their being cast into the fire must have another meaning than that fire being eternal damnation, or, it is not the believer, but his works that are burned (cf 1 Cor 3:15).
You, OTOH, maintain that God will not glorify all of those whom He justifies, in direct contradiction to God’s Word which states that ”[All of] these whom He justified, He also glorified," and you do that in contradiction to Jesus’ promise that His sheep will
never perish (Jn 10).
I’m in full understanding and agreement with the promises made to the elect; IMO, it’s the CC, and others, who contradict those promises.
You want us to believe that the promises made to the elect are not true!
In Jn 15, Jesus is talking to believers, about believers—those elect to salvation, or, as you state it, ”predestined to glory”.**Romans 8:30
and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.**Those God justifies, He also Glorifies!
The clear testimony of Scripture is that, everyone justified by God is also glorified by God.
Calvinism is the only soteriology that adheres to the testimony of God with respect to that fact! All of those who contend that one can lose justification, do not adhere to that fact.
There is no equivocation; as stated above, Calvinist soteriology is the only soteriology that holds fast to the fact that, before the foundation of the world, God glorified each of those whom He justified. You reject that!
As I’ve stated before, any seeming contradiction to the facts stated in Jn 10:28ff, Rom 8:29, et al, must be subordinated to those facts, and, another, more plausible explanation is to be sought in light of those and other passages.
God doesn’t lie concerning the elect—His immutability with respect to election is clearly stated to Israel, and, therefore, it applies as well to the in-grafted church:Malachi 3:6
“For I, the Lord, do not change; therefore you, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed.He doesn’t change concerning Israel, because of the unilateral promise made to Abraham in Gen 15.
The CC is who is between a rock and a hard place!
Again, the Calvinist position subordinates any seeming contradiction to the greater statements concerning the elect—they understand the promises made to the elect; therefore, they endeavor to find explanations that don’t contradict those greater statements. Thus, they maintain that although Jesus is talking about elect believers in Jn 15, their being cast into the fire must have another meaning than that fire being eternal damnation, or, it is not the believer, but his works that are burned (cf 1 Cor 3:15).
You, OTOH, maintain that God will not glorify all of those whom He justifies, in direct contradiction to God’s Word which states that ”[All of] these whom He justified, He also glorified," and you do that in contradiction to Jesus’ promise that His sheep will
never perish (Jn 10).
I’m in full understanding and agreement with the promises made to the elect; IMO, it’s the CC, and others, who contradict those promises.
S
sandusky
Guest
And you don’t attempt to redefine in order to fit your theological framework?**Romans 8:30
and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.**Those He justifies, He also glorifies, like it or not.
You say no to that—you’re redefining in order to fit your theological framework.
It’s a maxim; whatever the hierarchy decides you must believe, you must believe; in whatever they give leeway, you must remain within the boundaries of the leeway; in whatever they give free rein, you have free rein; correct?
IMO, that statement can never be used out of context; it’s a self-contained, self-contextualized, self-defining statement.
Talk about a text without a context being a pretext:**Ephesians 1:3-4
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ
just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world…**There’s the larger context of Eph 2:8.
The elect are chosen in Him [Christ] before the foundation of the world.
That truth is realized in time, and it will happen, just as Rom 8:30 states it will and has, in time and eternity.
S
sandusky
Guest
Who says the elect "never sin?"
F
fbl9
Guest
…since they are already saved in this life they can go straight to heaven.no thing that is defiled can enter heaven.one can not enter heaven with the sin that leads to death, unforgiven on their soul.thus an elect can not commit sin that is unto death.Who says the elect "never sin?"
S
sandusky
Guest
All true, and they still sin.
F
fbl9
Guest
…sandusky’s reply yes all true.and they still sin…it is by little things the just man falls.
S
sandusky
Guest
But never fully, never finally (Lk 22:31-32; Heb 7:25 etc.).
N
Namesake
Guest
Your post was too long for my feeble attention span. Did you mention Mark 10:15? All ya’all are gettin’ way to complicated I think.
King James Bible
Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.
P
peary
Guest
Historically, the Catholic Church IS the one true Church; it always has been, it always is, and it always will be.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
Now THAT’S what I call a PPP!!!
S
Sean_Boyle
Guest
To bad God is not a Calvinist. If he were these objections that you have to Christ Church might mean something.
God doesn’t follow John Calvin’s teachings.
S
sandusky
Guest
Correct; it’s Calvin who follows God’s teachings.
- Status