OSAS and ephesians 4:30

[mikeledes]

Now let’s take a look at some of these “crowns” verses:

Revelation 2:10

Be faithful until death, and I will give you the crown of life.

So in this verse, the reception of the crown of life is clearly conditioned upon the faithfulness until death. Let’s look at another verse:

James 1:12

12Blessed is a man who perseveres under trial; for once he has been approved, he will receive the crown of life which the Lord has promised to those who love Him.

Once again, we see the crown of life being conditioned on faithfulness/perseverance. Based on the following verses (v.v. 13-15), the “trial” James specifically has in view is the temptation to sin. However, we also receive additional information from this verse. Reception of this crown is not only conditioned on faithfulness, but it is also described as being “promised to those who love Him.” Is he thus equating faithfulness to love of God? This is interesting because this same phrase appears in the following chapter:

James 2:5

5Listen, my beloved brethren: did not God choose the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him?

The kingdom which “He promised to those who love Him.” The same kind of language used to describe the crown of life. My point? That the crown, like the kingdom, is promised to all those Christians that have persevered to the end (i.e. the elect). Note that Revelation 2:10 bears a striking resemblance to

Matthew 10:22

**22"You will be hated by all because of My name, but t is the one who has endured to the end who will be saved. **

And Revelation 2:26

**26’He who overcomes, and he who keeps My deeds until the end, TO HIM I WILL GIVE AUTHORITY OVER THE NATIONS; **

The crown of life is not a separate reward for good works, but an integral and inseparable part of receiving the kingdom. It is like receiving the diploma at graduation. Those who do not receive the crown of life are coextensive with those who do not inherit the kingdom.

To be continued…

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

Were I you, Mike, I would take what I have said, and throw it away.

If you were me you would take what you have said and throw it all away? Don’t be so hard on yourself, Sandunsky. I don’t think your posts are that bad.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

Let’s look at another “crowns” verse:

2 Timothy 4:8

**8in the future there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day; and not only to me, but also to all who have loved His appearing. **

The “crown of righteousness” is promised to “who have loved His appearing.” What true Christian does not love His appearing? If all true Christians love His appearing, than that means that this crown is promised to all Christians. Once again, this crown is a univeral promise, a crown that allof the elect will infallibly receive because all of the elect will persevere.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

The article writer appeals to Gal 5:4 and says a believer can fall from grace; but, what does that mean? He loses his salvation? If that is what he believes it means, he should support it. This is the only time that phrase appears in the NT, and therefore, it is very specific as to how one “falls from grace.” One falls from grace, Paul says, when he attempts to return to the law to obtain righteousness from the law, and faith (cf Rom 10:1-4; Php 3:8-9). That cannot be done; righteousness is obtained either by faith, or by keeping the law perfectly.

He not only says that they have “fallen from grace”, but that “Christ will be of no benefit to you” and that they have been “severed from Christ.”

Galatians 5:1-4 (New American Standard Bible)

1It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery.
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.

The language is pretty severe. In what way is Christ a benefit to us? Obviously, salvation. So if Christ will be of no benefit to them, than that obvioulsy has eternal implications. They have also been severed/alienated from Christ, which also has clear eternal consequences:

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. **

If we do not abide/remain in Christ, we will suffer eternal damnation. I believe that in the case of the elect, this “fall from grace” will be temporary. In the case of the “justified” reprobate, there will ultimately be a permanent “fall from grace.” But I’ll discuss that in the “Golden Chain” thread.

Moreover, It says they have fallen from grace because of their reversion to the Law of Moses as the criteria for determining their relationship with God, not that this is the only way one can fall from grace.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

Apparently the gentiles were boasting in and of themselves of God’s acceptance of them, and His rejection of Israel; that is pride; God hates pride, and will deal with it harshly. Paul reminds them of the severity of God in cutting off Israel for unbelief. Paul’s admonition to the gentiles is to “stand by your faith, and don’t be conceited; but fear” (v20); he states his reason for telling them all of this: so that they would not be ignorant of the mystery (cf Mt 13:11; Rom 16:25; 1 Cor 2:7-10; Eph 3:3-5, 9), and, so that they would not be wise, (proud), in their your estimation of themselves. The admonition was to “knock off the boasting, or else,” Though harsh, it cannot mean that they could lose their salvation if they didn’t stop being conceited; after all, just two chapters earlier, he assured them that they could not lose their salvation—if they were elect. Nevertheless, I’m certain they took the warning to heart

A “warning” inherently means there is a real danger involved. God never gives empty warnings. God warned Adam that if he ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, he would die. Adam ate and he died (spiritually and later physically). If there is no real danger, than there is also no real need to fear. Finally, becoming conceited can lead to eternal damnation:

1 Timothy 3:6 (New American Standard Bible)

**6and not a new convert, so that he will not become conceited and fall into the condemnation incurred by the devil. **

You can’t fall into condemnation if you never escaped condemndation in the first place. You can’t fall into a hole you are already in. The cutting off from the “olive tree” obviously has eternal consequences because one has been essetially cut off form the root that gives life.

The elect will ultimately freely chose to heed the warning, the “justified” reprobate will ultimately not heed the warning. But, again, that’s the topic of another thread.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[sandusky]

mikeledes:

This is very interesting. When the day of judgement is actually described in the Bible, there is actually no mention of the giving or taking away of crowns:

So, there’s no mention of crowns in the day of judgment…

mikeledes:

The crown of life is not a separate reward for good works, but an integral and inseparable part of receiving the kingdom. It is like receiving the diploma at graduation. Those who do not receive the crown of life are coextensive with those who do not inherit the kingdom.

So when I “receive the kingdom,”—IOW, when I first believed—I got my crown? But, I don’t have a crown right now.

Do you?

If, as you say above, there are no crowns mentioned in the day of judgment, when does a believer get this crown?

mikeledes:

Let’s look at another “crowns” verse:

You mentioned two crowns, and who gets them; who gets the other crowns, and, if they don’t get them at the judgment, when do they get them?

mikeledes:

He not only says that they have “fallen from grace”, but that “Christ will be of no benefit to you” and that they have been “severed from Christ.”

The language is pretty severe. In what way is Christ a benefit to us? Obviously, salvation. So if Christ will be of no benefit to them, than that obvioulsy has eternal implications. They have also been severed/alienated from Christ, which also has clear eternal consequences:

Repentance?

mikeledes:

A “warning” inherently means there is a real danger involved. God never gives empty warnings. God warned Adam that if he ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, he would die. Adam ate and he died (spiritually and later physically). If there is no real danger, than there is also no real need to fear. Finally, becoming conceited can lead to eternal damnation:

There is no “real danger” for the elect.

mikeledes:

You can’t fall into condemnation if you never escaped condemndation in the first place. You can’t fall into a hole you are already in.

It also says in the next verse that he must have a good reputation outside the church so that, “he will not fall into reproach and the snare of the devil"—do you really think that those things mean eternal damnation?

mikeledes:

If we do not abide/remain in Christ, we will suffer eternal damnation. I believe that in the case of the elect, this “fall from grace” will be temporary. In the case of the “justified” reprobate, there will ultimately be a permanent “fall from grace.” But I’ll discuss that in the “Golden Chain” thread.

Of course you don’t, only the “justified” reprobate—an oxymoron—will permanently
“fall from grace.”**For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus.**Isn’t justification a good work? And what does Paul say about a good work God begins
in a reprobate?

Unless of course, you believe that this pertains only to the Philippians?

We have two very different understandings of predestination/election to salvation. I find the scripture teaching one kind of predestination/election: those elected will persevere to salvation because it is God who saves them, and it is only they who will be saved.

The RCC teaches at least two kinds, and correct me, if I am wrong.

The first is predestination to “blessedness,” or “final perseverance.”

The second is predestination to ‘justification,” with no assurance of perseverance; those elected in that way, may lose their salvation, on the basis of their own “free-will” choice. IOW, no one can snatch them out of the hand of the Father, but they can leave on their own, or as the analogy given earlier in this thread states:

No one is capable of nullifying your salvation. It would be like saying that no one is capable of pulling you out of a car driving at eighty miles per hour. This does not mean that you are incapable of opening the door and jumping out.

But, that kind of predestination means that God was deceitful in His statement to the Philippians; therefore, all of His promises are rendered suspect.

 

[Pax]

The devils believe too …and we ARE justified on the basis of faith alone. Not faith that IS alone.

James 2:19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

James 2 describes dead, useless, demonic belief…

James 2:14 What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can *that faith *save him? 17 Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself.

We ARE justified on the basis of faith alone. Not faith that IS alone.

And, again - they did not hear properly and what they THOUGHT they had was taken away.

Luke 8:18 “So take care how you listen; for whoever has, to him more shall be given; and whoever does not have, even what he thinks he has shall be taken away from him.”

You have not rebutted the points made concerning the parable of the Sower. You simply repeated part of what you said prior to my rebuttal. My post #91 refuted what you have simply repeated.

Moving on, however, you have now brought up James again. Okay, let’s look at what James says vs. what you think he says.

You claimed that "we are saved by faith alone."

Contrary to this James says the following:

***“Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar?” ***[James 2:21]

"You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone."[James 2:24]

"And in the same way was not also Rahab the harlot justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?" [James2:25]

So James does not say that we are justified by faith alone as you do. That is your idea and is the exact opposite of what the apostle actually says.

You then said, “Not that faith IS alone.” and went on to speak of the demons as quoted by James. What you did in this case was a clear contradiction. James says in verse 19, “Even the demons believe–and shudder.” Please note that their faith** IS **alone. Their problem is not “belief” or faith. Their problem is that in spite of believing in God they are at enmity with God. The demons have no love for God. The demons have no fruit or good works stemming from the grace of God which is given to those who love Him.

There is a great deal more that can be said concerning James chapter 2 that demonstrate that we are not saved by faith alone. What has been given to you should, nevertheless, suffice.

 

[sandusky]

Pax:

Sandusky,

One of the passages I quoted was Rev 3:4-5 which says:

Yet you have still a few names in Sardis, people who have not soiled their garments; and they shall walk with me in white, for they are worthy. 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.

All of Jesus comments concerning “He who conquers” are tied together.

Comments?

Those who have “not soiled their garments, and conquer” are the elect.

Going back to Rom 8:33, Paul names those mentioned in the preceding passages as “the elect,” and he lists things that cannot separate the elect from God; in v37 he says of the elect, ”we overwhelmingly conquer,” literally “more than conquerors,” and that “through Him who loved us.”

Christ further says, “…I will not blot his name out of the book of life.” It is usually assumed by the one who offers this verse, that it proves that a name, previously written in the book of life, can be erased from the book of life, IOW, a loss of salvation.

That is an assumption. Some argue, with varying intensity, that the verse doesn’t preclude the possibility of a loss of salvation, others argue that it implies that possibility, and some take from it a simple inference.

I argue that the description of the elect given in the new testament should remove all doubt that any of the above-mentioned assumptions are possible at all, and that this is a further assurance to the elect of their safety in Christ (cf Mt 10:32). (Non-catholics use the same argument as Catholics with respect to the “blotting out,” but the N-Cs who have raised this with me have the same “one kind of election,” understanding. I believe the RCC teaches at least “two kinds of election,” and so, I think the differences between you and me, in defining the elect, preclude our ever agreeing on the meaning of this passage).

“I will not…” in the passage is an emphatic double negative: ou mā; it says literally, “I will no no, or not not. Because of the emphatic nature of the double negative, no not [ever], is an accurate understanding.

Again, I find this a continuing assurance.

 

[HailMary]

You’re right; I missed this:

Your question is, ”does their ministry refer to their moral conduct?”

The answer is, no; it does not.

Judgment of moral conduct is judgment of sin; as I stated earlier, a believe does not come into judgment/condemnation (cf the verses I cited in my earlier post: Jn 3:18, Jn 5:24, I think it was).

The entirety of the believers sin was judged at the Cross:Colossians 2:13-14

When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, ***having forgiven us **ALL our transgressions, having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, *HAVING NAILED IT TO THE CROSS.It was the practice of the Romans to write out the crime, or crimes of the one crucified, and then, to nail it to the cross upon which the criminal was crucified.

Paul is saying that God did the same for the believer: He listed the crimes against him, and nailed the list of crimes to the Cross of Christ (the substitution of Christ for us, cancelled the debt, as the passage above states (cf, the end of your original passage: 2 Cor 5:21, which states: He made Him who knew no sin, to be sin for us); therefore, no punishment for sin awaits the believer. (One must first understand the cross for what it is—a penal-substitutionary act—in order to grasp this).

The judgment seat of Christ is concerned with deeds done ”through the body”, as I said, those temporal works of the believer, such as: identifying, and using his spiritual gifts for the edification of the body, practicing the “one anothers”, being a good steward of his possessions, and money, and giving it not only to the church, and missions, but also to other believers who have need (your money is not yours, but God’s given to you to care for yourself, and your family, both physical, and spiritual), and so on.

IOW, the bema judgment is concerned with: ***how you lived your life with respect to Christ, and His body:***Did you live your life:

All for Christ, and none for yourself?
The greater part for Christ, and the lesser part for yourself?
Half for Christ, and half for yourself?
The lesser part for Christ, and the greater part for yourself?
All for yourself, and none for Christ?That list is, from top to bottom, good to bad.

The one who did good gets a great reward.

The one who did bad(ly) does not get a great reward.

The reward is not heaven, which is a gift.

The reward consists of the crowns mentioned in scripture, and whatever else of which we have not been told.

Does that answer your question?

Not really since for me to understand things the way you see it I would need to know Greek and declare infalliably that the verse sad “bad” and not evil. You see, if it says evil, your argument falls apart and many protestant bibles say evil.

My whole point is very simple: OSAS is against Jesus’ teaching since once you are “saved”, that does not mean you are not liable for sin anymore.

Matthew 5:30:

And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one of your members than to have your whole body go into Gehenna.

These words STILL APPLY to those people who believe in Jesus Christ, therefore its possible to go to hell even after you have been “saved”.

 

[sandusky]

Not really since for me to understand things the way you see it I would need to know Greek and declare infalliably that the verse sad “bad” and not evil. You see, if it says evil, your argument falls apart and many protestant bibles say evil.

My whole point is very simple: OSAS is against Jesus’ teaching since once you are “saved”, that does not mean you are not liable for sin anymore.

Matthew 5:30:

These words STILL APPLY to those people who believe in Jesus Christ, therefore its possible to go to hell even after you have been “saved”.

I worded something badly, and would like to clarify what I wrote. It won’t make any difference to you, but let me correct it just the same.

When I said, "deeds done through the body, I mean temporally, in our bodies.

The way I phrased it in the post seems more like I’m saying things done in the body of Christ, which of course will be judged, but the deeds done through the body are deeds done in our physical bodies.

 

[christcnection1]

Those who have “not soiled their garments, and conquer” are the elect.

We actually agree. All those who are part of the elect will ultimately go to heaven. There are no exceptions. Catholics believe in predestination, just in a different way.

I think where we deviate is that as individuals do not know with “absolute assurance” that we will be among the elect. It’s something we can have great faith and hope in; however, there are countless people who, at some point, are “assured” of their salvation, only to fall away. Even the Westminster Confession agrees…

“As typified in the Westminster Confession, the Evangelical admits there may be people in good standing in the Church who appear to have faith, who believe they have faith, who have “assurance” of God’s favor, but who will perish because their faith and their assurance are false. The Church is unable to discern these false sons, and they themselves don’t know their souls are in peril. There is no objective test of the validity of a person’s experience. The only safeguard the individual has is the totally unwarranted, subjective assertion that his “assurance” is true.”

catholic.com/thisrock/1992/9204fea2.asp

Would you agree with the Westminster Confession on this point? How consoling is our assurance if we can’t know whether our assurance is a true assurance or a false one? In my opinion, there is nothing assuring about it.

Does this reflect your personal views…
(I am especially interested in the highlighted points.)

CALVINISM AND CATHOLICISM CONTRASTED

Calvin : God’s sovereignty determines the will.
Catholic : God’s sovereignty includes free will.

Calvin : Predestination as predetermination.
Catholic : Predestination as infallible foreknowledge.

Calvin : God desires only the salvation of the elect.
Catholic : God desires the salvation of all.

Calvin : God provides grace only to the elect.
Catholic : God provides grace to all, though not all accept it.

Calvin : Christ died only for the elect.
Catholic : Christ died for all men.

Calvin : God predetermines some for hell.
Catholic : Men merit hell by their own wickedness.

Calvin : The elect include all those born-again.
Catholic : The elect are those who persevere to the end.

Calvin : Grace co-opts human free will.
Catholic : Grace perfects the free will that cooperates.

Calvin : Those in grace (born-again) can’t fall away.
Catholic : Those in grace can freely sin and lose grace.

Calvin : The elect will unfailingly persevere.
Catholic : The elect are those who have persevered.

Calvin : The elect are assured of their salvation.
Catholic : Yes, but only God knows who they are.

Calvin : Predestination eliminates merit and guilt.
Catholic : Predestination includes merit and guilt.

from bringyou.to/apologetics/num21.htm

Finally, is it your view that all Catholics and/or Protestants that do not believe in OSAS are going to hell? Is it your view that all people who believe in infused righteousness (versus imputed) will be damned?

 

[Linkowski]

You have not rebutted the points made concerning the parable of the Sower. You simply repeated part of what you said prior to my rebuttal. My post #91 refuted what you have simply repeated.

Moving on, however, you have now brought up James again. Okay, let’s look at what James says vs. what you think he says.

You claimed that "we are saved by faith alone."

Contrary to this James says the following:

***“Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar?” ***[James 2:21]

"You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone."[James 2:24]

"And in the same way was not also Rahab the harlot justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?" [James2:25]

So James does not say that we are justified by faith alone as you do. That is your idea and is the exact opposite of what the apostle actually says.

You then said, "Not that faith IS alone." and went on to speak of the demons as quoted by James. What you did in this case was a clear contradiction. James says in verse 19, “Even the demons believe–and shudder.” Please note that their faith** IS **alone. Their problem is not “belief” or faith. Their problem is that in spite of believing in God they are at enmity with God. The demons have no love for God. The demons have no fruit or good works stemming from the grace of God which is given to those who love Him.

There is a great deal more that can be said concerning James chapter 2 that demonstrate that we are not saved by faith alone. What has been given to you should, nevertheless, suffice.

You are out of line scripturally with your comments and there really is no point in continuing to converse with you since you are regularly twisting things to your own satisfaction…now, I leave you the podium to accuse me of the same thing. What a viscious circle.

 

[HailMary]

You are out of line scripturally with your comments and there really is no point in continuing to converse with you since you are regularly twisting things to your own satisfaction…now, I leave you the podium to accuse me of the same thing. What a viscious circle.

Link, are you liable to sin anymore?

If you are (and I’m pretty sure the answer to that question will be yes), maybe you can tell me how you are absolutely saved when Jesus said

Matthew 5:30:

And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one of your members than to have your whole body go into Gehenna.

The effect of sin is hell, if it is mortal.
The wages of sin is death right? How can that make sense if OSAS is true?

 

[Linkowski]

Link, are you liable to sin anymore?

If you are (and I’m pretty sure the answer to that question will be yes), maybe you can tell me how you are absolutely saved when Jesus said

Matthew 5:30:

The effect of sin is hell, if it is mortal.
The wages of sin is death right? How can that make sense if OSAS is true?

This was to show that one cannot get to heaven by the flesh…the only way you and I could get to heaven by “law-keeping” is if we were to cut off our hands, feet, pluck out our eyes…etc. The idea, again, is that no flesh can be justified by law keeping…we must be born again.

Your reference was to…

Mt 5:29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

---

Ro 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Ga 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

 

[HailMary]

This was to show that one cannot get to heaven by the flesh…the only way you and I could get to heaven by “law-keeping” is if we were to cut off our hands, feet, pluck out our eyes…etc. The idea, again, is that no flesh can be justified by law keeping

You didn’t answer the questions. boo.

we must be born again.

This is baptism.

Acts 8:36-38

As they traveled along the road they came to some water, and the eunuch said, “Look, there is water. What is to prevent my being baptized?”
And Philip said, "If you believe with all your heart, you may.’ And he said in reply, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.’
Then he ordered the chariot to stop, and Philip and the eunuch both went down into the water, and he baptized him.

 

[christcnection1]

This was to show that one cannot get to heaven by the flesh…the only way you and I could get to heaven by “law-keeping” is if we were to cut off our hands, feet, pluck out our eyes…etc. The idea, again, is that no flesh can be justified by law keeping…we must be born again.

We also believe you must be born again.
catholic.com/library/are_catholics_born_again.asp

The mosaic law is no longer in effect; the moral law is still mandatory.
catholic.com/thisrock/1997/9706chap.asp

However, if you are born of the Spirit, then you love God. If you love God, you will not want to commit sin. You are a new creature in Christ. It’s not a legalistic issue; it’s a love issue. If you commit sin, refuse to repent, then you choose not to love God.

Loving God is the pinnacle of God’s will in our lives, but not all those who say Lord, Lord shall enter into the Kingdom. It’s only those that do the will of the Father in Heaven. (Matthew 7:21)

Because God gave us the gift of free will, we can stop loving Him at any time. Our Lord is not a divine rapist, forcing us to love Him. We have a choice in the matter. How how we decide to live has eternal consequences.

 

[HailMary]

Link and any other OSAS believers, this is how it goes:

If you believe that the wages of sin are death

Romans 6:23

For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

AND you agree that you are STILL CAPABLE OF SINNING (ie: by lusting, porn, etc)

Matthew 5:30:

And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one of your members than to have your whole body go into Gehenna.

then OSAS is LOGICALLY impossible since if you are “Once Saved, Always Saved”, this would imply, magically, that you are incapable of sinning hence making the teaching of Jesus Christ, “if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.”, effectively meaningless for the faithful.

 

[sandusky]

Link and any other OSAS believers, this is how it goes:

If you believe that the wages of sin are death

Romans 6:23

AND you agree that you are STILL CAPABLE OF SINNING (ie: by lusting, porn, etc)

Matthew 5:30:

then OSAS is LOGICALLY impossible since if you are “Once Saved, Always Saved”, this would imply, magically, that you are incapable of sinning hence making the teaching of Jesus Christ, “if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.”, effectively meaningless for the faithful.

You are arguing against a Straw man.

Who is in the better position to understand what “eternal security,” or “OSAS,” as you call it, means? The one who holds the position, or you, who does not hold the position, but loves to attack it in the form you’ve envisaged ?

 

[Linkowski]

Link and any other OSAS believers, this is how it goes:

If you believe that the wages of sin are death

Romans 6:23

AND you agree that you are STILL CAPABLE OF SINNING (ie: by lusting, porn, etc)

Matthew 5:30:

then OSAS is LOGICALLY impossible since if you are “Once Saved, Always Saved”, this would imply, magically, that you are incapable of sinning hence making the teaching of Jesus Christ, “if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.”, effectively meaningless for the faithful.

You are not looking at these scriptures in the full context of the Bible. First off, you make a mistake in saying that a born again believer can sin mortally…this is not possible as I have shown many a time lately. In the context of your passage that you cite for mortal sin we see this…

1John 5:16 If anyone sees his brother committing a sin not leading to death, he shall ask and God will for him give life to those who commit sin not leading to death. There is a sin leading to death; I do not say that he should make request for this.
17 All unrighteousness is sin, and there is a sin not leading to death.
18 We know that no one who is born of God sins; but He who was born of God keeps him, and the evil one does not touch him.
19 We know that we are of God, and that the whole world lies in the power of the evil one.

Does this mean that is a person has been born again they never sin…no! They never sin in this way. Mortal sin is rooted in unbelief in a person that never was a believer…This refers to falling into habitual sin that is done wilfully without conviction or chastisement.

1John 3:6 No one who abides in Him sins; no one who sins has seen Him or knows Him.

Anyone who does this HAS NOT SEEN HIM!

So, your concept of mortal sin is not biblical.

Justification is by faith…not baptism…

Romans 5:1 Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,

Romans 10 tells us how it happens…

Ro 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;
10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.
11 For the Scripture says, “WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED.”
12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, abounding in riches for all who call on Him;
13 for “WHOEVER WILL CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED.”
14 How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher?
15 How will they preach unless they are sent? Just as it is written, “HOW BEAUTIFUL ARE THE FEET OF THOSE WHO BRING GOOD NEWS OF GOOD THINGS!”
16 However, they did not all heed the good news; for Isaiah says, “LORD, WHO HAS BELIEVED OUR REPORT?”
17 So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.

Sending…Preaching…Hearing…Believing…Calling…

It is illustrated here in Acts 10 very nicely…

Peter was sent…he preached…they believed - AND notice, the Holy Spirit being received as a result of hearing the gospel NOT baptism…

Acts 10:42 "And He ordered us to preach to the people, and solemnly to testify that this is the One who has been appointed by God as Judge of the living and the dead.
43 “Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins.”
44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message.
45 All the circumcised believers who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also.
46 For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter answered,
47 “Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?”

Galatians 3:2 This is the only thing I want to find out from you: did you receive the Spirit by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith?

Once truly born again…there is a new creature and faith will abide forever…no mortal sin…the elect will never fall.

Ro 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.

 

[sandusky]

christnection1:

I think where we deviate is that as individuals do not know with “absolute assurance” that we will be among the elect. It’s something we can have great faith and hope in; however, there are countless people who, at some point, are “assured” of their salvation, only to fall away. Even the Westminster Confession agrees…

"As typified in the Westminster Confession, the Evangelical admits there may be people in good standing in the Church who appear to have faith, who believe they have faith, who have “assurance” of God’s favor, but who will perish because their faith and their assurance are false. The Church is unable to discern these false sons, and they themselves don’t know their souls are in peril. There is no objective test of the validity of a person’s experience. The only safeguard the individual has is the totally unwarranted, subjective assertion that his “assurance” is true."

Would you agree with the Westminster Confession on this point?

It doesn’t make that point.

Obviously you are not accustomed to doing any work, but prefer instead to rely on
“canned e-pologetic arguments.” :tsktsk:

I suggest you stop entrusting yourself to the sources you have been relying on in this thread, and invest some of your own effort into verifying whether or not what those sources are telling you is true, rather than just accepting that it is true, simply because they are Catholic sources.

Westminster Confession of Faith, Ch. 18, “Of Assurance of Grace and Salvation:

I. Although hypocrites and other unregenerate men may vainly deceive themselves with false hopes and carnal presumptions of being in the favor of God, and estate of salvation (which hope of theirs shall perish): yet such as truly believe in the Lord Jesus, and love Him in sincerity, endeavouring to walk in all good conscience before Him, may, in this life, be certainly assured that they are in the state of grace, and may rejoice in the hope of the glory of God, which hope shall never make them ashamed.

II. This certainty is not a bare conjectural and probable persuasion grounded upon a fallible hope; but an infallible assurance of faith founded upon the divine truth of the promises of salvation, the inward evidence of those graces unto which these promises are made, the testimony of the Spirit of adoption witnessing with our spirits that we are the children of God, which Spirit is the earnest of our inheritance, whereby we are sealed to the day of redemption.

III. This infallible assurance does not so belong to the essence of faith, but that a true believer may wait long, and conflict with many difficulties, before he be partaker of it: yet, being enabled by the Spirit to know the things which are freely given him of God, he may, without extraordinary revelation in the right use of ordinary means, attain thereunto. And therefore it is the duty of every one to give all diligence to make his calling and election sure, that thereby his heart may be enlarged in peace and joy in the Holy Ghost, in love and thankfulness to God, and in strength and cheerfulness in the duties of obedience, the proper fruits of this assurance; so far is it from inclining men to looseness.

I don’t have time at the moment to get to the rest of your post in which your above misstatements appeared; however, I will get to it by tomorrow.