Salvation Assurance: Myth or Reality for average Joe / Jane Catholic @ CAF

[Pastor_Jim]

Was Jim Baker saved to begin with? How about Jimmy Swaggert?Jim Jones? Oral Roberts?

I’m not Catholic, so I’m not in the habit of declaring people saved or unsaved.

However, I will say that Jimmy Swaggart’s repentance for his sins is a very good sign that the Holy Spirit was at work in him.

What about all those people those above lead to the truth?

What about them? They’re saved by Christ, not the men you listed.

How can one be assured he is saved to begin with?

Because the Bible tells us that we can have the assurance of our salvation.

Having knowledge of truth once does not mean OSAS…in my opinion.

I agree. Having knowledge of truth doesn’t mean OSAS. However, being born again does.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I’m not Catholic, so I’m not in the habit of declaring people saved or unsaved.

However, I will say that Jimmy Swaggart’s repentance for his sins is a very good sign that the Holy Spirit was at work in him.

What about them? They’re saved by Christ, not the men you listed.

Because the Bible tells us that we can have the assurance of our salvation.

I agree. Having knowledge of truth doesn’t mean OSAS. However, being born again does.

Having knowledge of truth and accepting that truth, which is Christ, is not what you consider to be born again? Respectfully, I disagree. Having and accepting that knowledge is the beginning of one’s salvation. Maintaining one’s faith and doing the Lord’s work until the end is the way.

I really don’t want to play Bible ping-pong with you and I’m not trying to argue with anyone. Please see my posts #2 and 3 on this thread. I feel it explains a Biblical perspective of Catholic justification pretty well (I’m always on the watch to add to that ).

May the peace of the Lord be with you,
Prodigal Son1

 

[terryobrien80]

If Paul fell into unrepentant sin, that would be evidence that he wasn’t saved in the first place and, thus, not subject to OSAS.

That line of reasoning never fails to amaze me. It is utterly devoid of logic. You would tell someone, “Hey, all you have to do is accept Jesus as your personal Lord and savior amd you’re saved!” But later, when its apparent they are not saved, you would say, “well, you weren’t rerally saved in the first place.” LOL. So where’s the assurance?

The fundamental flaw with this line of reasoning is the idea that salvation is a one-time event. It is not. Its an ongoing process. The Bible says, I am already saved (Rom. 8:24, Eph. 2:5–8), but I’m also being saved (1 Cor. 1:8, 2 Cor. 2:15, Phil. 2:12), and I have the hope that I will be saved (Rom. 5:9–10, 1 Cor. 3:12–15). In other words, its a process, which is completed only upon entrance into heaven.

So, like the apostle Paul, the true Christian is working out their salvation in fear and trembling (Phil. 2:12), with hopeful confidence in the promises of Christ (Rom. 5:2, 2 Tim. 2:11–13)."

 

[terryobrien80]

I’m not Catholic, so I’m not in the habit of declaring people saved or unsaved…

You’re half right: We do declare people saved - the Saints! - but we have never declared anyone unsaved. We leave that to the Fundies who always condemn entire groups to damnation.

 

[BRB]

The totality of scripture shows that we can have an absolute assurance of the sufficiency of Christ’s grace to save us. The scriptures speak of salvation as the culmination of a life lived in faith; not as a one-time event that occurs at some point along the continuum of human existence. Salvation is waiting at the end of a long race that we endure only through the grace of God.

Absolute assurance of sufficiency is not at question. Absolute assurance of salvation is a different matter entirely. It takes the first … to accomplish the second.

Many, many salvation conversions have happened at ‘point in time’ events in human lives. Miraculous spiritual healings are very common … both OT and NT times. Moses, David, Mary Magdalene, the blind man forgiven of blindness & sins by Christ, Zacchaeus, Cornelius, Paul, Augustine, etc.

Every true convert has experienced a spiritual miracle performed by Christ. Irenaeus described the Trinity as God holding forth his two hands to mankind. Christ in one, the H.S. in the other.

When man accepts the hand of Christ … the other hand is soon to follow. The 3rd Person of Godhead is the assurance of one’s salvation that Christ promised to his disciples. They experienced it at Pentecost … and never doubted thereafter.

Does God withhold the H.S. til we finish the race ? No, he knows we would grow weary and stop early if not for the H.S. … our counselor and blessed assurance.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

That line of reasoning never fails to amaze me. It is utterly devoind of logic. You would tell someone, “Hey, all you have to do is accept Jesus as your personal Lord and savior amd you’re saved!” But later, when its apparent they are not saved, you would say, “well, you weren’t rerally saved in the first place.” LOL. So where’s the assurance?

The fundamental flaw with this line of reasoning is the idea that salvation is a one-time event. It is not. Its an ongoing process. The Bible says, I am already saved (Rom. 8:24, Eph. 2:5–8), but I’m also being saved (1 Cor. 1:8, 2 Cor. 2:15, Phil. 2:12), and I have the hope that I will be saved (Rom. 5:9–10, 1 Cor. 3:12–15). In other words, its a process, which is completed only upon entrance into heaven.

So, like the apostle Paul, the true Christian is working out their salvation in fear and trembling (Phil. 2:12), with hopeful confidence in the promises of Christ (Rom. 5:2, 2 Tim. 2:11–13)."

I have a little analogy about being saved. I’ve had one Protestant point out the word was used in the past tense.

If you and I were standing on the side of a lake, and for the sake of this demonstration let’s say you can’t swim, and you fall in. I jump in and drag you to shore. You can say you have been saved. I leave and you fall back in. Are you still saved? Having been saved once, is it going to help you this time?

OSAS, doesn’t make much sense to me. I’m surprised people accept it because of those who say, that one was never saved to begin with. There’s certainly no assurance involved, again in my opinion.

May the peace of the Lord be with you,
Prodigal Son1

 

[BRB]

Was Jim Baker saved to begin with? How about Jimmy Swaggert? Jim Jones? Oral Roberts?

What about all those people those above lead to the truth?

How can one be assured he is saved to begin with?

.

Just as the Church teaches … its Christ working thru his priests. Can the priests be flawed and yet have Christ work thru them ?

You know it.

 

[Pastor_Jim]

You’re half right: We do declare people saved - the Saints! - but we have never declared anyone unsaved. We leave that to the Fundies who always condemn entire groups to damnation.

Ex ecclesia nulla salas.

 

[Pastor_Jim]

That line of reasoning never fails to amaze me. It is utterly devoid of logic. You would tell someone, “Hey, all you have to do is accept Jesus as your personal Lord and savior amd you’re saved!” But later, when its apparent they are not saved, you would say, “well, you weren’t rerally saved in the first place.” LOL. So where’s the assurance?

The fundamental flaw with this line of reasoning is the idea that salvation is a one-time event. It is not. Its an ongoing process. The Bible says, I am already saved (Rom. 8:24, Eph. 2:5–8), but I’m also being saved (1 Cor. 1:8, 2 Cor. 2:15, Phil. 2:12), and I have the hope that I will be saved (Rom. 5:9–10, 1 Cor. 3:12–15). In other words, its a process, which is completed only upon entrance into heaven.

So, like the apostle Paul, the true Christian is working out their salvation in fear and trembling (Phil. 2:12), with hopeful confidence in the promises of Christ (Rom. 5:2, 2 Tim. 2:11–13)."

Oh good, another strawman argument.

 

[Robert_in_SD]

I’m not Catholic, so I’m not in the habit of declaring people saved or unsaved.

As a Catholic, I’m not in the habit of declaring people saved or unsaved. I think the point of the post by P.S. was that these men proclaimed their own salvation… they said they were “saved” by Christ and yet, each had a rather dramatic moment following that, where they appeared to fall from that grace. Were they always saved? Were they “saved” even when they were living in their sins? Will they remain “saved” for the remainder of their years?
Pastor Jim:

However, I will say that Jimmy Swaggart’s repentance for his sins is a very good sign that the Holy Spirit was at work in him.

I don’t think we would dispute the fact that the Holy Spirit moves men and women to repentence. But this is not determinative of one’s ultimate salvation. One can die while rejecting the urgings of the Holy Spirit. What then? Salvation?
Pastor Jim:

What about them? They’re saved by Christ, not the men you listed.

There’s no dispute that Christ is the only one who saves. The question is how one appropriates that salvation by faith. What does the bible mean (what did Jesus mean) when he spoke of faith. Is the faith that is spoken of a one-time act of faith, or is faith something more, an abiding in Christ - a living of a life in devotion to Christ, that is where saving faith lives?
Pastor Jim:

Because the Bible tells us that we can have the assurance of our salvation.

We can be assured that salvation exists for those who have enduring faith. The bible does not teach that one can be sure of a ticket to heaven just by making a single sincere act of faith. If that is what you are suggesting, then I respectfully disagree with your understanding of the nature of saving faith in the context of scripture.
Pastor Jim:

Having knowledge of truth doesn’t mean OSAS. However, being born again does.

I disagree with you. Having a “born-again” experience - and I’m assuming a sincere meaningful and even profound experience with Christ - does not assure one of ultimate salvation. That question - ultimate salvation - can only be answered at the end of a life. But one who endures in faith can have the moral assurance that Christ will not fail to save.

Peace,
-Robert

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Just as the Church teaches … its Christ working thru his priests. Can the priests be flawed and yet have Christ work thru them ?

You know it.

I know.

I was using them as examples since PastorJim stated there would have been evidence that St. Paul was never saved to begin with had he fallen to desires of the flesh.

I, like St. Paul, work at my own salvation trembling. I certainly don’t suppose myself to think like God and do not assume anyone has been condemned to hell, or that someone is going there.

I pray often:

Oh my Jesus, forgive us our sins and save us from the fires of hell. Lead all souls to heaven, especially those in most need of your mercy. Amen.

May the peace of the Lord be with you,
Prodigal Son1

 

[Robert_in_SD]

Ex ecclesia nulla salas.

This teaching does not result in your damnation. If you are baptized, you are joined to the Church and have the possibility of salvation. There are many threads that address this issue in detail here.

Peace,
-Robert

 

[terryobrien80]

Originally Posted by terryobrien80
*That line of reasoning never fails to amaze me. It is utterly devoid of logic. You would tell someone, “Hey, all you have to do is accept Jesus as your personal Lord and savior amd you’re saved!” But later, when its apparent they are not saved, you would say, “well, you weren’t rerally saved in the first place.” LOL. So where’s the assurance?

The fundamental flaw with this line of reasoning is the idea that salvation is a one-time event. It is not. Its an ongoing process. The Bible says, I am already saved (Rom. 8:24, Eph. 2:5–8), but I’m also being saved (1 Cor. 1:8, 2 Cor. 2:15, Phil. 2:12), and I have the hope that I will be saved (Rom. 5:9–10, 1 Cor. 3:12–15). In other words, its a process, which is completed only upon entrance into heaven.

So, like the apostle Paul, the true Christian is working out their salvation in fear and trembling (Phil. 2:12), with hopeful confidence in the promises of Christ (Rom. 5:2, 2 Tim. 2:11–13)*."

Oh good, another strawman argument.

How do you figure that? How can you go to a new Christian, tell them they have an assurance of salvation, then later, when they fall away, tell them they weren’t really saved? You can’t see that hypocrisy in that position?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

As a Catholic, I’m not in the habit of declaring people saved or unsaved. I think the point of the post by P.S. was that these men proclaimed their own salvation… they said they were “saved” by Christ and yet, each had a rather dramatic moment following that, where they appeared to fall from that grace. Were they always saved? Were they “saved” even when they were living in their sins? Will they remain “saved” for the remainder of their years?

I don’t think we would dispute the fact that the Holy Spirit moves men and women to repentence. But this is not determinative of one’s ultimate salvation. One can die while rejecting the urgings of the Holy Spirit. What then? Salvation?

There’s no dispute that Christ is the only one who saves. The question is how one appropriates that salvation by faith. What does the bible mean (what did Jesus mean) when he spoke of faith. Is the faith that is spoken of a one-time act of faith, or is faith something more, an abiding in Christ - a living of a life in devotion to Christ, that is where saving faith lives?

We can be assured that salvation exists for those who have enduring faith. The bible does not teach that one can be sure of a ticket to heaven just by making a single sincere act of faith. If that is what you are suggesting, then I respectfully disagree with your understanding of the nature of saving faith in the context of scripture.

I disagree with you. Having a “born-again” experience - and I’m assuming a sincere meaningful and even profound experience with Christ - does not assure one of ultimate salvation. That question - ultimate salvation - can only be answered at the end of a life. But one who endures in faith can have the moral assurance that Christ will not fail to save.

Peace,
-Robert

Thanks Robert. You have articulated what I was trying to say. (I have a slight headache and need to take a break it appears.)

Thanks again!

May the peace of the Lord be with you,
Prodigal Son1

 

[Robert_in_SD]

Oh good, another strawman argument.

Why is this a straw man. How does it misrepresent what you have described as an assurance of salvation. I’m serious in my confusion here. I really would like you to explain to me why you think this is a “straw man.” How does it misstate your position.

Peace,
-Robert

 

[Pastor_Jim]

Why is this a straw man. How does it misrepresent what you have described as an assurance of salvation. I’m serious in my confusion here. I really would like you to explain to me why you think this is a “straw man.” How does it misstate your position.

Because neither I, nor anyone I know would ever tell someone, “Hey, all you have to do is accept Jesus as your personal Lord and savior amd you’re saved!”

This teaching does not result in your damnation. If you are baptized, you are joined to the Church and have the possibility of salvation. There are many threads that address this issue in detail here.

I see. So then, I can be baptized and still knowingly reject the authority of the Catholic church and it’s doctrines and be saved?

I’ve heard many pastors on television and radio say essentially what you have denied… that an assurance of salvation can be attained by accepting Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior.

Then they’re wrong.

That is the nature of the “altar call” a common practice at many bible-only churches, is it not?

No, it isn’t. All an altar call is is an opportunity toward the end of a service for people to go up and ask for prayer or counseling. 99 times out of 100, it has nothing to do with salvation.

Perhaps they have a sick loved one they’re asking for prayer for. Or maybe there is some besetting sin they need deliverance from. They may just want to give a testimony.

What would you say to someone who asks, “What must I do to be saved?”

Repent and turn from your sin and place your faith in Christ and His atoning work on your behalf at the cross.

 

[Pastor_Jim]

This teaching does not result in your damnation. If you are baptized, you are joined to the Church and have the possibility of salvation. There are many threads that address this issue in detail here.

Peace,
-Robert

I see. So then, I can be baptized and still knowingly reject the authority of the Catholic church and it’s doctrines and be saved?

I’ve heard many pastors on television and radio say essentially what you have denied… that an assurance of salvation can be attained by accepting Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior.

Then they’re wrong.

That is the nature of the “altar call” a common practice at many bible-only churches, is it not?

No, it isn’t. All an altar call is is an opportunity toward the end of a service for people to go up and ask for prayer or counseling. 99 times out of 100, it has nothing to do with salvation.

Perhaps they have a sick loved one they’re asking for prayer for. Or maybe there is some besetting sin they need deliverance from. They may just want to give a testimony.

What would you say to someone who asks, “What must I do to be saved?”

Repent and turn from your sin and place your faith in Christ and His atoning work on your behalf at the cross.

 

[Robert_in_SD]

Because neither I, nor anyone I know would ever tell someone, “Hey, all you have to do is accept Jesus as your personal Lord and savior amd you’re saved!”

I’ve heard many pastors on television and radio say essentially what you have denied… that an assurance of salvation can be attained by accepting Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior. That is the nature of the “altar call” a common practice at many bible-only churches, is it not?

If you hold a different view from these other pastors, then please tell me…

What would you say to someone who asks, "What must I do to be saved?"

Peace,
-Robert

 

[Pastor_Jim]

I’ve heard many pastors on television and radio say essentially what you have denied… that an assurance of salvation can be attained by accepting Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior.

Then they’re wrong.

That is the nature of the “altar call” a common practice at many bible-only churches, is it not?

No. Not even close. All an altar call is is an opportunity toward the end of a service for people to go up and ask for prayer or counseling. 99 times out of 100, it has nothing to do with salvation.

Perhaps they have a sick loved one they’re asking for prayer for. Or maybe there is some besetting sin they need deliverance from. They may just want to give a testimony.

What would you say to someone who asks, "What must I do to be saved?"

Repent and turn from your sin and place your faith in Christ and His atoning work on your behalf at the cross.

 

[Robert_in_SD]

I see. So then, I can be baptized and still knowingly reject the authority of the Catholic church and it’s doctrines and be saved?

I did not say that either. The teaching of nulla sala is directed to those who are already Catholic. As set forth most recently in Lumen Gentium (par. 14 and 15, infra.), the Church declared:

1. This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.

But the Church specifically addresses those who are Christian, but not Catholic in their beliefs, recognizing that through a belief in Christ and the scriptures, they are joined to the Church in a way that does not close off the possibility of salvation.

1. The Church recognizes that in many ways she is linked with those who, being baptized, are honored with the name of Christian, though they do not profess the faith in its entirety or do not preserve unity of communion with the successor of Peter. (14*) For there are many who honor Sacred Scripture, taking it as a norm of belief and a pattern of life, and who show a sincere zeal. They lovingly believe in God the Father Almighty and in Christ, the Son of God and Saviour. (15*) They are consecrated by baptism, in which they are united with Christ. They also recognize and accept other sacraments within their own Churches or ecclesiastical communities. Many of them rejoice in the episcopate, celebrate the Holy Eucharist and cultivate devotion toward the Virgin Mother of God.(16*) They also share with us in prayer and other spiritual benefits. Likewise we can say that in some real way they are joined with us in the Holy Spirit, for to them too He gives His gifts and graces whereby He is operative among them with His sanctifying power. Some indeed He has strengthened to the extent of the shedding of their blood. In all of Christ’s disciples the Spirit arouses the desire to be peacefully united, in the manner determined by Christ, as one flock under one shepherd, and He prompts them to pursue this end. (17*) Mother Church never ceases to pray, hope and work that this may come about. She exhorts her children to purification and renewal so that the sign of Christ may shine more brightly over the face of the earth.

I cannot say whether or not you will be saved under the circumstances you describe, because it does not depend solely upon your rejection of Church doctrine. It ultimately depends upon your personal rejection of Christ.

Peace,
-Robert