Regarding Once Saved, always Saved

[1voice]

it would be great to believe that but i have heard this from more than one (reliable) source - that Hitler has been heard throiugh possessed people. I have read a few books written by exorcists themselves

i think Hitler went beyond the point of no return in this life - and of course, he knew at what point that had happened & didn’t care

I’m sure he cares NOW though

Hitler cant come back from the dead and possess anyone. If a spirit speaks through a person possessed … it is an evil spirit impersonating Hitler. Demons use tricks to fool people. Demons are liars by nature.

Hitler took massive amounts of drugs every day in order to function. He had a ‘doctor’ that prepared a shot for him twice a day. Toward the end of his life the shots stopped working and he went into fits of rage with massive headaches. Hitler was the same as Judas … he thought he was doing the right thing … but he was possessed by evil.

 

[EMTWB141]

I figure I should probably start off explaining my views on this then explain. I think both Calvinism and Armenianism both have flaws. Calvinism suggests that God randomly selected people before even making them to save. This has a bunch of flaws. If God was going to purposely choose people before hand to save (so much so that they can’t even have a say in it) then why not save everyone? Armenianism on the other hand suggests that it’s all in our hands. But I know if it was in my hands entirely, then I’d fail. Just like all the other humans failed under law. We can’t save ourselves. Hence why we needed Jesus. I feel God makes the gift to everyone. At some point in our lives, we come across God with an open mind. Whether we’re a kid, college student, or adult and wonder ‘why are we here? Is there a higher purpose?’ Sometimes we aren’t as decided as we think (when people decide they’re hardcore atheist, but then something clicks and they realize God exists). But personally, I think it boils down to this. God knew everyone who’d believe and come to Him. Everyone. Therefore He predestines them as saved.

I believe a truly saved person is always saved, but I feel that if they’re saved, they’ll persevere. Someone who truly loves God and wants to know Him is willing to endure because they know God is with them. God gives them strength and they’d never want to leave. Sometimes they may stray, and I’ve heard lots of stories where the person falls into drugs or alcohol or sex or something, but something suddenly wakes them up and they come back (epiphany). I also mention the Parable of the Lost Sheep. It refers to us before we come to Jesus, but do you think once we come that God just gives up and says ‘well, I did my part?’ Remember, Jesus told us He was the Good Shepherd and that those who hear His voice are His sheep and we’ll answer when He calls. The sheep metaphor wasn’t just a grasp. People are like sheep. We all heard along to cliques or popular fads and such. But when Jesus calls us, we come to Him. Whether it be a sudden realization ‘I haven’t prayed in forever’ or ‘Man this is wrong, I’ve messed up.’ Or even a billboard that catches your attention, God’s calling you.

I also saw someone on here quoting the bible verse: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand (John 10:28) stating that they can take themselves out or walk away. I’m not trying to incite full on argument, but I point out that it says ANY man. Last time I checked, we’re all people (men). God is a lot bigger. If you didn’t do anything to earn salvation, how can you do something to lose it? God saved us all when we were sinners, He knows we don’t suddenly change.

I also ask this. Does God make mistakes? Why would God truly give someone Salvation, if He knew they’d lose it?

 

[lutherlic]

Catholics should not judge that Hitler or anyone else (including Judas) is in hell. It is not our call.

 

[CopticChristian]

I am always surprised when I visit these doctrinal threads and see no Scripture. Personally, I don’t subscribe to OSAS but there is Scriptural backing for this.
Romans 8:35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? 36 As it is written, “For your sake we are being killed all the day long; we are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered.” 37 No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. 38 For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.
OSAS people explain that if nothing can separate us from the love of God then sin can’t separate us. They would say that people who fall away weren’t serious in their conversion. This developed
Let’s say a Christian dies in the middle of a crisis of faith following a personal tragedy, the death of a young spouse or child. They may stop going to church, be angry with God, maybe turn to drink or gambling or some other diversion to try to cope. OSAS people say that God knows their heart and whether they really believed or not. However, some get carried away and teach that as long as you have said the sinner’s prayer you are assured salvation. To them I would point to the sixth chapter of Hebrews
Hebrews 6:4 For it is impossible, in the case of those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 and then have fallen away, to restore them again to repentance, since they are crucifying once again the Son of God to their own harm and holding him up to contempt.

The problem with using who shall separate us comes on the heels of “provided we suffer with him” and description of being sheep to be slaughtered. The nothing shall separate us is all forms of suffering. If you convince yourself that Nothing can separate us from the love of God, shall Murder, shall Adultery, shall persistent fornication, and all other manner of sin…oh no for in these we are more than conquerors…let me know because there are many other passages as to what happens to these and those that continue.

 

[1voice]

Catholics should not judge that Hitler or anyone else (including Judas) is in hell. It is not our call.

John 6:70
Then Jesus replied, “Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!”

 

[babylonsfalling]

Sorry if is ignorant to ask but some Christians believe that once you’re saved you’re always saved. Or that, all you have to do is believe that Jesus died for you, and you will go to heaven.

What about people like Hitler? Obviously no-one knows if he is in heaven or hell, but do some Christians believe that he can only be in heaven because he had been baptised and may have believed in Jesus up until his death?

An OSAS believer once said about the sin of her upcoming fourth divorce, “it doesn’t matter because I’m already forgiven”

I’ve heard of some non Catholic preachers saying the same thing to women who were considering abortion and knew it was a sin…“it’s a sin but you’re already forgiven”

That’s the problem with OSAS, it leads to an acceptance of whatever sin might tempt you.

One of the things which helped in my return to the Catholic Church is that I’ve never heard a Catholic say in reference to any sin which haunts them, “it doesn’t matter”

 

[Publisher]

As Itwin began to touch on but didn’t really get into, we must distinguish between Calvinistic views of predestination and Perseverance of the Saints on the one hand and Once Saved Always Saved on the other.

Perseverance of the Saints means that those who become Christians never fall away. That means that if someone appears to have fallen away, they were never really a Christian in the first place. Their apparent Christianity was just some sort of act, never something truly believed and heartfelt. This is different from OSAS, in which even if you fall back into a sinful lifestyle or even apostatize from Christianity, **you will still be saved because you once believed.**Both these views are a separate issue from predestination, which gets into why one person makes a choice in favor of God and another makes a choice against Him. OSAS could work with either a strong view of predestination (predestination determining our choices) or a weak one (predestination being based on our choices).

I think Itwin may be on to something in suggesting OSAS may originally stem from a misunderstanding of Calvinism, though the key element of Calvinism in question would not be predestination but rather Perseverance of the Saints. I don’t know if history would back up such a connection to Calvinism though.

From my understanding…that IS NOT the reason they are saved…the reason they are saved is because God has chosen them for salvation…let’s not forget “limited atonement” along with “perseverance of the saints” and “predintation” and God’s Soverign Will determines who is saved and who is damned…it is HIS decision and HIS alone…some Calvinists believe when the “last member of the Body of Christ” takes his or her place among the “saved”…Christ will return.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

From my understanding…that IS NOT the reason they are saved…the reason they are saved is because God has chosen them for salvation…let’s not forget “limited atonement” along with “perseverance of the saints” and “predintation” and God’s Soverign Will determines who is saved and who is damned…it is HIS decision and HIS alone…some Calvinists believe when the “last member of the Body of Christ” takes his or her place among the “saved”…Christ will return.

This is all true regarding Calvinism. But remember, OSAS is different from Calvinism, and indeed it’s my impression that most Baptists believe in both OSAS and a basically Arminian view of predestination, and therefore I would guess that most OSAS people believe in conditional election, not unconditional. The key point of OSAS is the idea that once God saves you absolutely nothing, not even your own choices, can “unsave” you, even in theory. You will always remain saved because you once were saved, and you once were saved because at one point you believed in Jesus and accepted Him as your personal Lord and Savior. This as opposed to the Calvinist idea of perseverance of the saints, in which it is held that no one who is initially saved will ever fall away, but in theory if a person did fall away it would mean they would lose their salvation.

As I believe I said in my previous post, this OSAS view could work equally well with a strong-predestination/unconditional election view (like in Calvinism) or a weak-predestination/conditional election view (like in Arminianism). The issue of whether election is conditional or unconditional would speak to why one person accepts Christ and another does not. Whether it is possible to fall from grace after initial conversion is another question entirely.

 

[CopticChristian]

Sorry if is ignorant to ask but some Christians believe that once you’re saved you’re always saved. Or that, all you have to do is believe that Jesus died for you, and you will go to heaven.

What about people like Hitler? Obviously no-one knows if he is in heaven or hell, but do some Christians believe that he can only be in heaven because he had been baptised and may have believed in Jesus up until his death?

If he was truly a devout Catholic up to his death, his eternal destiny would be easier to discern than most, however we have no idea what happened at his death or if he died.

If he was Catholic, was with a Protestant, and he said the sinners prayer, then they would believe once saved always saved if truly saved. We would hold the same opinion stated above.

 

[CopticChristian]

John 6:70
Then Jesus replied, “Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!”

Was he talking about Hitler?

 

[CopticChristian]

From my understanding…that IS NOT the reason they are saved…the reason they are saved is because God has chosen them for salvation…let’s not forget “limited atonement” along with “perseverance of the saints” and “predintation” and God’s Soverign Will determines who is saved and who is damned…it is HIS decision and HIS alone…some Calvinists believe when the “last member of the Body of Christ” takes his or her place among the “saved”…Christ will return.

Let us not forget that this paradigm is only true in Protestant thought and not universally believed by all that claim the name Christian.

 

[CopticChristian]

I figure I should probably start off explaining my views on this then explain. I think both Calvinism and Armenianism both have flaws. Calvinism suggests that God randomly selected people before even making them to save. This has a bunch of flaws. If God was going to purposely choose people before hand to save (so much so that they can’t even have a say in it) then why not save everyone? Armenianism on the other hand suggests that it’s all in our hands. But I know if it was in my hands entirely, then I’d fail. Just like all the other humans failed under law. We can’t save ourselves. Hence why we needed Jesus. I feel God makes the gift to everyone. At some point in our lives, we come across God with an open mind. Whether we’re a kid, college student, or adult and wonder ‘why are we here? Is there a higher purpose?’ Sometimes we aren’t as decided as we think (when people decide they’re hardcore atheist, but then something clicks and they realize God exists). But personally, I think it boils down to this. God knew everyone who’d believe and come to Him. Everyone. Therefore He predestines them as saved.

I believe a truly saved person is always saved, but I feel that if they’re saved, they’ll persevere. Someone who truly loves God and wants to know Him is willing to endure because they know God is with them. God gives them strength and they’d never want to leave. Sometimes they may stray, and I’ve heard lots of stories where the person falls into drugs or alcohol or sex or something, but something suddenly wakes them up and they come back (epiphany). I also mention the Parable of the Lost Sheep. It refers to us before we come to Jesus, but do you think once we come that God just gives up and says ‘well, I did my part?’ Remember, Jesus told us He was the Good Shepherd and that those who hear His voice are His sheep and we’ll answer when He calls. The sheep metaphor wasn’t just a grasp. People are like sheep. We all heard along to cliques or popular fads and such. But when Jesus calls us, we come to Him. Whether it be a sudden realization ‘I haven’t prayed in forever’ or ‘Man this is wrong, I’ve messed up.’ Or even a billboard that catches your attention, God’s calling you.

I also saw someone on here quoting the bible verse: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand (John 10:28) stating that they can take themselves out or walk away. I’m not trying to incite full on argument, but I point out that it says ANY man. Last time I checked, we’re all people (men). God is a lot bigger. If you didn’t do anything to earn salvation, how can you do something to lose it? God saved us all when we were sinners, He knows we don’t suddenly change.

I also ask this. Does God make mistakes? Why would God truly give someone Salvation, if He knew they’d lose it?

Matt Slick uses that passage from John to prove perseverance. Predestined to be conformed to the image of the son. We are all created to be conformed. Not all of us are conformed. I once obtained a binder full of information, written by William Most, concerning the Catholic Church teaching on Predestination. I read it, said huh, and heard Scott Hahn read and take his finger to his lips and make a noise like who knows how to understand the mind of God. The Catholic Church official position is “its a mystery”.

 

[lutherlic]

Catholics should not judge that Hitler or anyone else (including Judas) is in hell. It is not our call.

John 6:70
Then Jesus replied, “Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!”

1voice, note that Pope John Paul II said:

Can God, who has loved man so much, permit the man who rejects Him to be condemned to eternal torment? And yet, the words of Christ are unequivocal. In Matthew’s Gospel He speaks clearly of those who will go to eternal punishment (cf. Mt 25:46). Who will these be? The Church has never made any pronouncement in this regard. This is a mystery, truly inscrutable, which embraces the holiness of God and the conscience of man. The silence of the Church is, therefore, the only appropriate position for Christian faith. Even when Jesus says of Judas, the traitor, “It would be better for that man if he had never been born” (Mt 26:24), His words do not allude for certain to eternal damnation.

The Catholic Answers apologetics section Michelle Arnold wrote:

Theologically speaking, we do not know Judas’s fate. Some Christian theologians have presumed him damned based on Scripture passages such as Matthew 26:24 and John 17:12, but the Church has never officially declared that Judas is in hell. At this point, we will only know his fate in the next life, but we can say that it is highly unlikely that the Church would ever nominate Judas Iscariot for sainthood.

In This Rock the answer to the question “Did Judas go to hell?” was:

Jesus said, “Woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! It would have been better for that man if he had not been born” (Matt. 26:24). While this statement implies that Judas’s final destination was hell, it cannot be known whether or not he repented of his sins before his death, and so it cannot be said with certainty that he is in hell.

 

[antonivs]

I would not wish an eternity in Hell on anyone. The horror of unending torment and torture for all eternity is too enormous. After a million million years, you would still have eternity to go. God have mercy on us all.

 

[Publisher]

Let us not forget that this paradigm is only true in Protestant thought and not universally believed by all that claim the name Christian.

I don’t believe anyone suggested otherwise.

 

[CopticChristian]

I don’t believe anyone suggested otherwise.

Publisher,

Understand that my perspective is Christian Semantics and Linguistics. When I read “my understanding” I see that someone is stating an opinion of understanding based on their perspective. When I then see the word “is” that becomes an absolute.

Example:
This is a table
This wooden furniture appears to be a table

Your post goes on to state “the reason”, without my seeing, in my opinion and understanding based on my belief “my understanding” it then becomes in my mind stated as an absolute.

As you read through you will see what appears to be other absolutes like “is because”, “lets not forget”, the limited atonement, perseverance, predestination that follow unqualified become statement of believed doctrine and you can understand what I mean when you read the following:

Salvation…let’s not forget “limited atonement” along with “perseverance of the saints” and “predestination” and God’s Sovereign Will.

The use of quoatations provides me no indication that you understand and want the reader to understand that you are using some other source, it is then inferred that you are quoting these as absolutes. Compare and contrast the following:

Salvation, in my understanding based on my beliefs, cause me to recall the points of Calvin that include “limited atonement” along with “perseverance of the saints” and “predestination” and God’s Sovereign Will.

By doing this you qualify that this is not necessarily a universally accepted belief. When you provide the sentences you wrote it causes me to think, gosh I wonder if this person believes that this is a universally accepted belief.

You do mention Calvin at the end as an afterthought but there is no way for me to understand if you are providing me a summary of what you understand Calvinism to believe or it is something you believe.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

Let us not forget that this paradigm is only true in Protestant thought and not universally believed by all that claim the name Christian.

Since we are on the subject of semantics, let me point out that whether we are talking about Calvinism or Once Saved Always Saved here it is not universal in Protestantism, or even the majority view (globally that is, as opposed to in certain regions perhaps).

Let’s also remember that some important elements of the Calvinist “paradigm,” like unconditional election, are shared by some Catholic schools of thought (though other common elements of Calvinism do indeed contradict Catholic doctrine and are not shared by any Catholic school of thought). We have to be careful in our criticism of Calvinism lest we rashly condemn a position which is in fact allowed in the Catholic Church and held by some faithful Catholics, unless of course we believe we are ready and willing to make a firm judgment against one theological school or another.

 

[CopticChristian]

Since we are on the subject of semantics, let me point out that whether we are talking about Calvinism or Once Saved Always Saved here it is not universal in Protestantism, or even the majority view (globally that is, as opposed to in certain regions perhaps).

Let’s also remember that some important elements of the Calvinist “paradigm,” like unconditional election, are shared by some Catholic schools of thought (though other common elements of Calvinism do indeed contradict Catholic doctrine and are not shared by any Catholic school of thought). We have to be careful in our criticism of Calvinism lest we rashly condemn a position which is in fact allowed in the Catholic Church and held by some faithful Catholics, unless of course we believe we are ready and willing to make a firm judgment against one theological school or another.

So that I am clear, is it your understanding that the Catechism has the elements of Catholic teaching and we follow the Bishop of Rome or is it that Catholics follow one school or another?

I am allowed to believe in evolution as long as I do not deny the creation of the souls of Adam and Eve but that does not mean that the Church teaches evolution.

Is it schools we follow or the Magesterium?

 

[Aelred_Minor]

We follow the Magisterium of course, but that does not mean theology has no valid place in the Church.

Theology, to use Chesterton’s definition, is thought applied to religion. Considering the Church’s general respect for both faith and reason and the interaction between the two (see Vatican I, for example) I think it’s pretty clear that theology is something likely to be beneficial for many Catholics.

The thing is, different theologians sometimes come to different conclusions on matters the Magisterium has not yet formally defined, or not yet at least, leading to different “schools” of theology within the Church.

In some cases the Magisterium may take such results of theological development and incorporate them into its teachings. In other cases the Magisterium may condemn certain ideas theologians have developed, even though the topic in question had not been formally defined in the past. In still other cases, the Magisterium may decline to do either.

In those cases in which the Magisterium permits, at least for a time, a wide diversity of theological opinions, it would be wise keep up a degree of caution when speaking of disputed subjects. Many may choose to simply stay neutral on issues like conditional vs. unconditional election, and this is an entirely legitimate option. But others will feel compelled, by studious or curious intellectual vigor, by struggling with certain Bible verses, by conversations with people who already have firm positions on the issue, or by whatever other motivation, to seek an answer to these theological questions the Magisterium has not clearly settled. This also is a legitimate option, at least in theory, though of course it carries with it the danger of falling into error since you don’t have explicit Church teaching on the subject to guide you.

The primary danger I was talking about though was the danger of taking sides on an unsettled theological question without fully realizing you are doing so, by condemning ideas found outside the Catholic Church which also happen to be options inside. This is something I think I’ve seen some Catholics (not you specifically, as far as I can recall) seem to fall into at times regarding Calvinism. Calvinism does indeed contain heretical elements which must be rejected, but it also contains elements which are found in some though not all Catholic schools of thought and which have not been condemned by the Magisterium. The heretical nature of some elements of Calvinism does not automatically invalidate those other elements which have neither been approved nor condemned by Church teaching. It’s not the place of us laypeople to declare something heresy which the Magisterium has not, especially in a case like this in which the Magisterium, when it did consider these matters closely several centuries ago, so conspicuously declined to give a judgment, but rather (from what I’ve read) forbade each side from calling the other heretics. I doubt that rule still applies canonically, but it is probably still a good one to go by until such time as the Magisterium does clearly rule on the subject.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

But this thread is supposed to be about Once Saved Always Saved, not Calvinism and the Thomist-Molinist-Assorted Others debate. :doh2:

I guess we should get back on topic.

Once Saved Always Saved quite clearly contradicts Magisterial Teaching (cf. the canons of Trent on Justification) and unlike Calvinism is defined by a single heretical position, so what I’ve written in my last post doesn’t apply to this issue.