The Commandments should not be followed ... Part 2

[BRB]

**2"Every branch in Me **that does not bear fruit, He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit.

Yes, very shallow roots … ones unable to withstand the wind, the drought, the storms of life.

Notice while they are briefly attached to Christ … they are never said to have BORN FRUIT. God looks for growth/fruits … these are the True Converts. The ones who have welcomed/accepted the H.S. … which is the lifegiver to the new Convert.

Those who fully accept the H.S. will be successful and remain faithful … and grow fruits. These are God’s elect … the ones who are the true sheep. They get ‘pruned’ and sealed into their election by the Gardener … secured and assured of their discipleship, of Christ, and their adoptions to the Kingdom.

 

[mikeledes]

It’s all pretty simple, folks:

**4"Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me. **

The word “meno” means to stay or continue, as Jesus clearly means when he says the branch must stay in the vine in order to bear fruit:

Matthew 10:11

**"And whatever city or village you enter, inquire who is worthy in it, and stay at his house until you leave that city. **

Matthew 26:38

**Then He said to them, “My soul is deeply grieved, to the point of death; remain here and keep watch with Me.” **

Acts 9:43

**And Peter stayed many days in Joppa with a tanner named Simon. **

Acts 16:15

And when she and her household had been baptized, she urged us, saying, “If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house and stay .” And she prevailed upon us.

Acts 21:7

When we had finished the voyage from Tyre, we arrived at Ptolemais, and after greeting the brethren, we stayed with them for a day.

1 Timothy 2:15

But women will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint.

So when Christ says “abide in me”, what does He mean? He means to stay in Him, to stay in Christ. If we do not stay in him, we cannot be saved, hence the fate of the branches that do not abide in Him. Just as a branch must stay in the vine, we must stay in Christ.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

Yes, very shallow roots … ones unable to withstand the wind, the drought, the storms of life.

Notice while they are briefly attached to Christ … they are never said to have BORN FRUIT. God looks for growth/fruits … these are the True Converts. The ones who have welcomed/accepted the H.S. … which is the lifegiver to the new Convert.

Those who fully accept the H.S. will be successful and remain faithful … and grow fruits. These are God’s elect … the ones who are the true sheep. They get ‘pruned’ and sealed into their election by the Gardener … secured and assured of their discipleship, of Christ, and their adoptions to the Kingdom.

If you are in Christ, you must be a true believer. You cannot be incoporated into Christ and be a false professor. So even if their attachment is 'brief", they must have true faith and they *must *have been justified in God’s sight. Otherwise, there would be no attachment to Christ.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[BRB]

What does “abide” mean? What does “thrown away” mean? What does “dries up” mean? Who are the “they” that does the “gathering”? What does “cast into the fire and burned” mean?"

God bless,
Michael

abide … remain faithful disciples
thrown away … same as ‘cut off’ from tree of life
dries up … dehydrates from lack of roots in Christ to receive his
daily holy water [H.S.]
they that gather … probably God’s angels assigned to
assist 1) us in life & 2) Christ in the harvest
cast into fire …the tares/cockle/goats — that don’t survive

 

[BRB]

If you are in Christ, you must be a true believer. You cannot be incoporated into Christ and be a false professor.

So … don’t some of you claim Judas was a true believer ?

He was certainly a false ‘professor’. That is why I don’t buy your case on Judas. Christ clearly taught Judas was in league with the devil from early on.

But, then aren’t we all … until we denounce satan and turn to the Lord in Full Faith. Judas never put down strong roots in Christ.

He was ‘cut off’ from the flock of Christ … as best I can determine. God alone knows the full story … we are not to judge another.

 

[mikeledes]

abide … remain faithful disciples
thrown away … same as ‘cut off’ from tree of life
dries up … dehydrates from lack of roots in Christ to receive his
daily holy water [H.S.]
they that gather … probably God’s angels assigned to
assist 1) us in life & 2) Christ in the harvest
cast into fire …the tares/cockle/goats — that don’t survive

All of these words refer to the same group of people and their end is the same. Thrown away means they have been “cut off.” They cannot be “cut off” unless they were an integral part of the True Vine in the first place. Once cut off, what happens to a branch? It withers, it dies. What happens next to these withered branches? They are gathered. By whom? You said angels, and i agree because that is what Jesus taught. But why do these angels gather these “branches?” For what?

and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned.

They are gathered by the angels for the sole purpose of being thrown into the fire and burned:

Matthew 13:39-40

…and the reapers are angels.
40"So just as the tares are gathered up and burned with fire, so shall it be at the end of the age.

Matthew 13:10,12

**10"The axe is already laid at the root of the trees; therefore every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
12"His winnowing fork is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clear His threshing floor; and He will gather His wheat into the barn, but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire." **

John 15:6 is a clear reference to eternal damnation and those who are cast into the fire are those who did not stay in Christ.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

So … don’t some of you claim Judas was a true believer ?

He was certainly a false ‘professor’. That is why I don’t buy your case on Judas. Christ clearly taught Judas was in league with the devil from early on.

But, then aren’t we all … until we denounce satan and turn to the Lord in Full Faith. Judas never put down strong roots in Christ.

He was ‘cut off’ from the flock of Christ … as best I can determine. God alone knows the full story … we are not to judge another.

Whether Judas was a believer or a false professor, John 15 clearly states that one can be “in Him” - which means one must be a true believer - and yet cease to be “in Him” (not abide, taken away, thrown away). The end of those who are not in Christ is eternal damnation, hence the gathering and casting into the fire.

God bless,
Michael

 

[sandusky]

mikeledes:

If you are in Christ, you must be a true believer.

Scriptural proof, or just your opinion?

mikeledes:

You cannot be incoporated into Christ and be a false professor.

Scriptural proof, or just your opinion?

mikeledes:

So even if their attachment is 'brief", they must have true faith and they must have been justified in God’s sight.

Scriptural proof, or just your opinion?

 

[Philthy]

moondweller:

Well, if you’re “being saved,” then you’re not saved, and if you’re hoping “to be saved,” then most certainly you’re not saved.

Well I guess that means I need to work on my belief (Faith).

Now, the difference between you and me is that I HAVE eternal life through faith in Christ (according to Christ Himself and Apostolic teaching), whereas you plan to “accept it” hopefully some time in the future.

Knowing that I accept it now I also hope to accept it always until my will is perfectly united to God’s will.

This sounds more like it’s taken away based on poor performance on your part, rather than you actually “rejecting” it yourself. In truth, it sounds more like you’re working for it, which then makes it a wage, or a reward, rather than a true gift.

Not at all MD. I recognize that I will continue to make real, consequential choices throughout my life. That has nothing to do with me “working” for it. What appears rather obvious, however, is that you need it to sound that way. Then the conversation can return to your favorite topic: faith alone.

It is recorded that God justified Abraham, and that through belief in Him, in only one place: Gen. 15:6. Even James cites that one and only passage, as does Paul. There simply is no other. Argue against this simple fact, till you fingers turn to nubs, but this fact you’ll never change. That’s the beauty of written Revelation.

But Scripture says “Wasn’t Abraham justified by works when he offered Isaac on the altar.”
Is this a recording of Abraham being justified: Yes - “Abraham (was) justified…”
Was this in Genesis 15:6? No, it was in Gen 22 when God “tested” Abraham.
In addition, James later goes on to say, "And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him as righteousness.” It actually sounds to me as if James is saying that Abrahams act in Gen 22 fufilled - in exactly the same manner - the justification through belief of Gen 15. He is making the point that acting on our faith is a requirement at times.
But anyhow, Scripture clearly says that Abraham was justified when he offered Isaac, and that was in Gen 22. If you wish to argue that although it “says” it it doesnt “mean” it then do so, but simply denying that it doesnt say it seems silly.

 

[Pax]

But Pax, it’s your position that in Hebrews 6, those described as having apostatized are Christians—New Creatures in Christ.

But Henry, in his Concise Commentary, which is devotional in nature, leads with his conclusion:The humbled sinner who pleads guilty, and cries for mercy, can have no ground from this passage to be discouraged, whatever his conscience may accuse him of. Nor does it prove that any one who is made a new creature in Christ, ever becomes a final apostate from him.
…
…

Normally, I would carefully consider whether or not I should at this point even entertain a response to your current allegation. However, I will go ahead and do so because I am finding this particular exchange to be thoroughly entertaining.

Let me take this from the top.

–I quoted a summary statement from Henry’s Concise Commentary and it does in fact agree with me on Apostasy.

–You accused me of using a Catholic source or apologetics website for my quote and that my quote was in error and that I was dodging and being dishonest.

–You then attempted to prove your point by quoting from a “different” commentary than the one I used, and indicated that I it did not support my position.

–I then gave the entirety of the Henry’s Concise Commentary as it pertains to Hebrews Chapter 6 which clearly supports my point.

–You then berated me for using Henry’s Concise Commentary and insisted that I use the Commentary that you quoted from which is a different version of Henry’s.

–I gave you my reasons for not doing so, and explained that the problem with conflicting protestant commentaries is not my of my doing and that you should complain to the editors, commentators, and perhaps now the publishers.

–Now you’ve given the above response. Please note that the way this commentary reads easily supports my view. You only quoted the part that you think helps your case.

You quoted this part:

Nor does it prove that any one who is made a new creature in Christ, ever becomes a final apostate from him.

This statement does not make your case. The commentator is only saying that there exists a possibility that a person can repent from apostasy and that it isn’t necessarily “final.”

The rest of the commentary is helpful in supporting my point.

The apostle is not speaking of the falling away of mere professors, never convinced or influenced by the gospel. Such have nothing to fall away from, but an empty name, or hypocritical profession. Neither is he speaking of partial declinings or backslidings. Nor are such sins meant, as Christians fall into through the strength of temptations, or the power of some worldly or fleshly lust. But the falling away here mentioned, is an open and avowed renouncing of Christ, from enmity of heart against him, his cause, and people, by men approving in their minds the deeds of his murderers, and all this after they have received the knowledge of the truth, and tasted some of its comforts.

Please note that the commentator admits above that these are believers, and that the commentator shows a proper understanding of the term apostasy, and that the commentator rightly points out that Hebrews 6 is about apostasy which is exactly what Moondweller has denied. This is an affirmation of my position.

 

[Pax]

Furthermore, in his unabridged, and unconcise and complete Commentary Henry says this:

Henry Hebrews 6:These lengths hypocrites may go, and, after all, turn apostates. Now hence observe, [1.] These great things are spoken here of those who may fall away; yet it is not here said of them that they were truly converted, or that they were justified; there is more in true saving grace than in all that is here said of apostates. [2.] This therefore is no proof of the final apostasy of true saints. These indeed may fall frequently and foully, but yet they will not totally nor finally from God; the purpose and the power of God, the purchase and the prayer of Christ, the promise of the gospel, the everlasting covenant that God has made with them, ordered in all things and sure, the indwelling of the Spirit, and the immortal seed of the word, these are their security. But the tree that has not these roots will not stand.Please explain how it is you’ve come to the conclusion that Henry agrees with you that those who apostatize are New Creatures in Christ, when he’s clearly saying the opposite?

I have never claimed that this particular commentary agrees with me, and I have not quoted it. Your point here is a red herring.

 

[Pax]

A tremendous apologetic statement you have found for us

alittle off topic … but, since Pax threw the pitch, you advance MD.

2 Runs score.

BRB,

You need to check your helmet. You’ve taken a few to the head while standing too close to the plate.

 

[moondweller]

According to you “in Christ” is the believer’s position. So when Christ says we must abide, abide in what? “Abide” means to continue or remain in a state, condition, or location one has already entered. Christ says abide in me!. Not abide in my church or abide in mere fellowship, but abide in Him. In other words, He’s saying that branches must remain in Christ, which you have defined as the believer’s position. Please explain how someone who does not remain in Christ can stil be saved?

You’re extrapolating something out of the passage that is not there. “Abide in Me” is not a reference to the believer’s new position “in Christ,” his new identity in Christ resurrected, the “Last Adam.” This eternal position is no more volitional than is the natural man’s position “in Adam.”

The phrase, “abide in Me” is totally volitional. It’s the believer’s decision to depend consciously upon Christ as the condition of fruitfulness. The subject of the passage being the bearing of fruit, NOT the maintaining of eternal life (an oxymoron). Jesus does not say to them, “Abide in Me that you may have eternal life.” That notion you’re reading into the text. The burning is a judgment upon fruitlessness, not an abandonment to eternal destruction.

So I’m assuming that you interpret withers or dries up as a reference to losing the power to bear fruit. Can you please explain how they lose this power without having lost it’s life, since life equals power?

AGAIN, Mike, the subject is the ability/power to bear FRUIT in one’s life here on earth. The Apostle’s earthly ministry, especially, depended on it. They were the foundation upon which Christ was about to build His church.

Can you please explain why the language used to describe the fate of these withered branches exactly corresponds to the language He uses regarding eternal damnation (gathered, thrown into the fire and burned)

First of all, God does not throw away and burn His own children. Especially those for whom Christ suffered and died, purchased with His own blood, and through Whom they’re adopted as sons. You’re getting the God of the Bible mixed up with the pagan gods of Rome. We’re talking Christianity, Mike. It doesn’t have pagan roots.

AGAIN, keep in mind the subject matter is bearing fruit, not believing in Christ for eternal life. In 1 Cor. 3:10-15 Paul teaches that the Christian worker has to, in the future, stand before the judgment seat of Christ to have his works evaluated. There the words “fire” and “burned up” are also figuratively used to describe that judgment, and they do not at all refer to eternal damnation of the Christian worker.

Don’t read more into a metaphor than what is there. And certainly don’t build contradictory doctrines on a metaphor.

 

[Pax]

Yeah, but you don’t.

You found the first part. Father Cantalamessa’s 3rd Advent Sermon (Part 1), but I don’t guess you bothered to read any further huh? Father Cantalamessa’s 3rd Advent Sermon (Part 2)

And then of course, there’s the thread where this was hashed out when Fr. C first preached it. Is “Faith Alone” alive and well in some parts of Catholicism?

Very old news…

CM,

Thanks for pointing this out.

 

[moondweller]

But anyhow, Scripture clearly says that Abraham was justified when he offered Isaac, and that was in Gen 22. If you wish to argue that although it “says” it it doesnt “mean” it then do so, but simply denying that it doesnt say it seems silly.

Can you quote for me the verse in Gen. 22 where God again justifies Abraham for offering up Isaac?

 

[moondweller]

Yeah, but you don’t.

You found the first part. Father Cantalamessa’s 3rd Advent Sermon (Part 1), but I don’t guess you bothered to read any further huh? Father Cantalamessa’s 3rd Advent Sermon (Part 2)

And then of course, there’s the thread where this was hashed out when Fr. C first preached it. Is “Faith Alone” alive and well in some parts of Catholicism?

Very old news…

And what did you find in P2 that contradicts what he said in P1?

 

[Pax]

Can you quote for me the verse in Gen. 22 where God again justifies Abraham for offering up Isaac?

I’m beginning to wonder just how low the limits of your logic really are. I demonstrated that many things that are not mentioned in the OT are nevertheless mentioned in the NT. I gave specific examples using the righteousness of Abel and Noah, and then showed where in the NT the references describe the righteousness of Abraham in two instances other than Genesis 22.

If you are incapable of grasping this simple truth then there is little hope for you understanding very much of anything. My guess is that you are plenty smart and intelligent, but that you are overwhelming stubborn and blinded by your doctrine. I do not mean to be uncharitable in this comment, but I cannot draw any other conclusion. You have not analyzed the posts I gave you, and you refuse to do so. That tells me something.

 

[Pax]

Now earlier you said:

So I’m assuming that you interpret withers or dries up as a reference to losing the power to bear fruit. Can you please explain how they lose this power without having lost it’s life, since life equals power?

Now you say thay the idea of eternal damnation in John 15:6 is all mine. Since it is the figment of my imagination, can you explain why other OSAS or Calvinist Protestants, such as anti- Catholic apologist James White, see it as a clear reference to eternal damnation and are consequently forced to interpret the fruitless branches differently? You now have the benefit of looking at the respected Matthew Henry Commentary’s explanation of John 15:6. Apparently Matthew Henry was imagining things as well. Can you please explain why the language used to describe the fate of these withered branches exactly corresponds to the language He uses regarding eternal damnation (gathered, thrown into the fire and burned), found in passages like:

Matthew 13:39-40, 49

… and the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are angels.
40"So just as the tares are gathered up and burned with fire, so shall it be at the end of the age.
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.

In your interpretation, who does the gathering and the throwing into the fire in John 15:6?

The analogies Christ makes are very simple and clear:

1. Christ is the Vine
2. Just as branches are members of a vine, all those incorporated into Christ are members of His body.
3. Just as in viniculture the vinedresser removes fruitless branches from the Vine, the Father takes away from Christ those branches that do not bear fruit.
4. Just as a branch must remain or continue to be in the Vine in order to have life and thus bear fruit, the Christian must remain or *continue to be * in Christ in order to have life and hence the power to bear fruit.
5. Just as in viniculture a branch that is cut off, dries up- as in death - is discarded and burned, those that do not remain in Christ will wither because they have been cut off from the source of life. The end of those who have no spiritual life is eternal damnation. Hence, as John 15:6 clearly states, the “dried up” branches will be gathered (by angles), thrown into the fire and burned.

This passage clearly contradicts OSAS and it’s proponents cannot even make up their minds what John 15 means. You have those who say the fruitless branches are false Christians and the fire is hell and you have those who say the fruitless branches are true Christians and the fire is not hell. Both of these are attempts to avoid the obvious meaning of the text. If you combine the second half of the former with the first half of the latter, you end up with the Catholic explanation.

God Bless,
Michael

You have been patient and done a very nice job of explaining this.

I would add only one more thing. The apostle Paul also uses this same language. In Romans 11:16-24 Paul says the following:

"If the dough offered as first fruits is holy, so is the whole lump; and if the root is holy, so are the branches. But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, a wild olive shoot, were grafted in their place to share the richness of the olive tree, do not boast over the branches. If you do boast, remember it is not you that support the root, but the root that supports you. You will say, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast only through faith. So do not become proud, but stand in awe. For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off. And even the others, if they do not persist in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again. For if you have been cut from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these natural branches be grafted back into their own olive tree.

This language of the branch and root is very similar to that of Jesus using the vine and the branches. The message is the same. Branches that are broken off will go off in punishment. The real clincher in this, however, is something else that Paul says that is not mentioned by Jesus in the parable.

Paul notes that those that are broken off are the natural branches which refers to the Jews. Salvation comes to the gentiles by being grafted in. Those that are broken off are not saved, while those that get grafted in are saved. Likewise, the branches that get broken off can be saved if they are "grafted in again."

The jews were broken off and there is the possibility that the gentiles will be broken off. As a gentile you will only **remain **grafted in "provided you continue in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off."

OSAS is simply untrue.

 

[sandusky]

Pax:

Please note that the commentator admits above that these are believers, and that the commentator shows a proper understanding of the term apostasy, and that the commentator rightly points out that Hebrews 6 is about apostasy which is exactly what Moondweller has denied. This is an affirmation of my position.

The apostle is not speaking of the falling away of mere professors, never convinced or influenced by the gospel. Such have nothing to fall away from, but an empty name, or hypocritical profession. Neither is he speaking of partial declinings or backslidings. Nor are such sins meant, as Christians fall into through the strength of temptations, or the power of some worldly or fleshly lust. But the falling away here mentioned, is an open and avowed renouncing of Christ, from enmity of heart against him, his cause, and people, by men approving in their minds the deeds of his murderers, and all this after they have received the knowledge of the truth, and tasted some of its comforts.

Thanks for that specific quote, Pax; that clears up my confusion.

 

[Pax]

…
…
The truth is, men are condemned because they would not believe. John 15:1-8 is not about salvation. It’s not even about damnation. Salvation and damnation are based solely on belief and unbelief.

We would agree that people are condemned for unbelief. Scripture says so and we agree with that. Scripture does not say, however, that unbelief is the only reason for condemnation.

Once again, you have ripped a scripture or two out of the bible in an effort to support your doctrine while ignoring all of the rest of what scripture has to say on the subject of heaven and hell.

Now, please put at the head of all that we say, and all that I am about to say, that Catholics believe that salvation with all of its dimensions is by grace. Please repeat this to yourself three times and devote it to memory. If you ignore this fact then you will not understand or appreciate anything about Catholic Christianity which is clearly based on scripture.

Likewise, we do not believe in any way shape or form that we save ourselves by works or by any other method. Our salvation is grace dependent. All of what we do in faith in our gospel religion of Christianity that is necessary and connected to salvation is by way of God’s grace. We are a “new creation in Christ Jesus for good works that the Father prepared” in advance of our justification. Please repeat all of this three times and devote it to your memory. Any deviation from this set of truths will distort your view of the apostolic teachings of the Catholic Church.

So what does scripture say about things that can cause a Christian to go to hell? Read the following which are not of grace, but are instead are contrary to grace and are rebellious and sinful acts that we are soley responsible for. We will go from the general to the specific. While the list of passages will be far from exhaustive, the list will prove our point.

John 5: 14
Afterward, Jesus found him in the temple, and said to him, “See, you are well! Sin no more, that nothing worse befall you.”

Rom 6: 1-2
What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it?

2 Peter 2: 20-22
For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overpowered, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment delivered to them. It has happened to them according to the true proverb, The dog turns back to his own vomit, and the sow is washed only to wallow in the mire.

Hebrews 10: 26-31
For if we sin deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful prospect of judgment, and a fury of fire which will consume the adversaries. A man who has violated the law of Moses dies without mercy at the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much worse punishment do you think will be deserved by the man who has spurned the Son of God, and profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and outraged the Spirit of grace? For we know him who said, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay.” And again, **“The Lord will judge his people.” **It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

Ephesians 5: 5
Be sure of this, that no fornicator or impure man, or one who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.

Galatians 5: 19-21
Now the works of the flesh are plain: fornication, impurity, licentiousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, anger, selfishness, dissension, party spirit, envy, drunkenness, carousing, and the like. ** I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.**

1 Corinthians 6: 8-10
But you yourselves wrong and defraud, and that even your own brethren. Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor sexual perverts, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.