There's no OSAS

[JRKH]

When I say that God takes us away, I am referring to verse 2 of (John 15): “Every branch (IN ME) that beareth not fruit HE (the Father) taketh away,…”
What “taketh away” must mean, is that the Father takes that “branch in Christ” away in death to Heaven or the Father sets that “branch in Christ” aside temporaily until death, or until that “branch in Christ” gets sufficiently convicted by the Father’s chastening , that the “branch in Christ” confesses and receives forgiveness so that the “branch in Christ” can again abide in the Vine. The Father is not described as casting the “branch in Christ” here as you assume. The “man” in verse 6 is. That “man” is only described “as a branch”, not a “branch in Christ”, as verse 2 says.

I hope I am being more clear in this post. There is logic to it if you look carefully at it I think.

In Christ

Certainly there is a logic to the passage if you look at it as a whole.

But here again you are taking individual verses and changing meanings in different verses instead of taking the teaching as a whole. In your statement above you include in parenthesis the words “in me” for verse 2, even though those words don’t appear there. Then you want to use the fact that “in me” isn’t in verse 6 as meaning that “man” as referenced there was never part of the vine of Christ.

What you are doing is trying to make these verses fit the OSAS dogma and they just won’t.

Below is the passage with the verse numbers removed. This is as it would have been read at the time it was written. The way that the Apostles would have heard it. Not disected by verses. Not interpreted as seeming individual and independant statements. Try reading the passage through as a coherent whole.

I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. 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. You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you. 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. I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing. 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 you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. My Father is glorified by this, that you bear much fruit, and so prove to be My disciples.
(New American Bible John 15:1-8)

Jesus opens this analogy by declaring that He is the vine and His father is the vinegrower or vinedresser. This is the core of the entire passage. That the Vine is Jesus. His Father tends the vine and removes any branch that is dead or unfruitful. He also trims (tests) fruitful branches to increase their yield. From what vine is He cutting these dead and non-productive branches? From the Vine of Jesus. There can be no other understanding.
Jesus then goes on to tell His apostles that they are ready to carry on their mission form Him. That they are trimmed and prepared by His teaching. That, so long as they “abide” in Him, they will be fruitful. They are now mature branches and they are expected to produce fruit for the Glory of the Father, the vinegrower. He admonishes them that they are expected to produce fruit if they are to remain on the vine since any branch that does not produce good fruit will be cut off and cast away.

If you insist that the “man” in verse 6 is the same person as the “branch in Christ” of verse 2, then that means that as soon as you or any person sins and is no longer abiding in Christ, they must IMMEDIATELY be cast into Hell, with no chance of confessing sins and being forgiven.

First of all when we sin we are “no longer abiding in Christ”, however that does NOT mean IMMEDIATE removal. After all vines are only pruned and dressed at certain times in the year. So if a branch is having problems there is still a chance to confess and be forgiven.
That is why, in the catholic church we have the prayer “The act of Contrition”, and also the sacrament of Reconciliation (Confession).

Peace
James

 

[brkn1]

Certainly there is a logic to the passage if you look at it as a whole.

But here again you are taking individual verses and changing meanings in different verses instead of taking the teaching as a whole. In your statement above you include in parenthesis the words “in me” for verse 2, even though those words don’t appear there. Then you want to use the fact that “in me” isn’t in verse 6 as meaning that “man” as referenced there was never part of the vine of Christ.

What you are doing is trying to make these verses fit the OSAS dogma and they just won’t.

Below is the passage with the verse numbers removed. This is as it would have been read at the time it was written. The way that the Apostles would have heard it. Not disected by verses. Not interpreted as seeming individual and independant statements. Try reading the passage through as a coherent whole.

Jesus opens this analogy by declaring that He is the vine and His father is the vinegrower or vinedresser. This is the core of the entire passage. That the Vine is Jesus. His Father tends the vine and removes any branch that is dead or unfruitful. He also trims (tests) fruitful branches to increase their yield. From what vine is He cutting these dead and non-productive branches? From the Vine of Jesus. There can be no other understanding.
Jesus then goes on to tell His apostles that they are ready to carry on their mission form Him. That they are trimmed and prepared by His teaching. That, so long as they “abide” in Him, they will be fruitful. They are now mature branches and they are expected to produce fruit for the Glory of the Father, the vinegrower. He admonishes them that they are expected to produce fruit if they are to remain on the vine since any branch that does not produce good fruit will be cut off and cast away.

First of all when we sin we are “no longer abiding in Christ”, however that does NOT mean IMMEDIATE removal. After all vines are only pruned and dressed at certain times in the year. So if a branch is having problems there is still a chance to confess and be forgiven.
That is why, in the catholic church we have the prayer “The act of Contrition”, and also the sacrament of Reconciliation (Confession).

Peace
James

Your last comment about a branch “no longer abiding in Christ”, but (in effect) still allowed to “temporarily abide” in the Vine, is quite a contradiction in the story line; and Jesus does not tell such contradictory stories. Is that temporary pass at abiding even suggested by what is said, or are you adding that to fit your version, as you accuse me of doing?

Verse 2 is talking about a “branch already abiding in Christ” that is not “BEARING FRUIT”, which is the reason the Father taketh it away.

Verse 6 is talking about a man (anyone) that is not even abiding in the Vine, which results in that (anyone) being “cast forth as a branch”.

You can push both verses together as close as you want, but they are not talking about the same thing if you look at them more closely instead.

There are very different “reasons for” and “methods of” removal described here:

v.2…abiding on the Vine, but not bearing fruit…taken by God

v.6…not even abiding on the Vine…cast forth

You probably will say that bearing fruit and abiding are identical, but you honestly know that there is a difference in meaning, although they are closely related. That difference should not be dismissed or the conclusion ends up twisted (which means you are wrong, of course ).

 

[guanophore]

  It does not say that I have to confess the church or pope before men either. That is nowhere to be found in Scripture.

Well, it is clear from the NT witness, and that of the early fathers, that there is no distinction between Jesus and His Church, or the disciples and the Apostles. There was perfect unity, and one who confessed Christ confessed to be a member of the Church, and in unity with the Apostles (Peter being the Rock). The separation of all these is a new doctrine emanating from the Reformation.

 I confess the Lord Jesus Christ alone

If Jesus did not intend for you to be the member of a Body, why did He create one? This “Jesus Alone” doctrine is less than 100 years old.

There is no such thing as being unborn physically and the same thing applies to never being unborn spiritually. A child of God is forever a child of God.

It is true that scripture indicates the last state of the apostate will be worse than the first. You were a child of God when you were created, too, but that does not mean you will choose to be with Him in that capacity for eternity. Some people reject the purpose of God for themselves, even after they are called and justified.

I can thank my Lord and my God for that gift of eternal salvation, but you can not honestly do so, since you are not sure in your faith that God has given you that gift, which makes your faith incomplete and therefore possibly of no value towards saving you.

I don’t understand this. Can you explain? How is salvation not a free gift? Once a person is born again, how is that faith “of no value” toward salvation?

You can't trust or have complete faith in God because you see your life as a form of roulette, where you need to work at being "lucky in the state of grace" at death. You also have to depend on the church for salvation, which means it is not only Jesus that saves you.

This is even more confusing. How is the Christian walk “roulette”? Do you not think that Christians make choices about how they live before God?

I think that being in a state of grace has nothing to do with “luck”. On the contrary, one must work hard at remaining in a state of grace. There is no distinction between Christ and His church, so depending on Jesus means depending on His Church. This does not mean that it is not Jesus that saves. The Church is the normative means by which He has chosen to save us.

 You believe that you can earn or merit the "gift of salvation", which the bible clearly tells you can NEVER be earned or deserved, since it would no longer be a gift.

Can you please show how the Catholic church teaches that one can earn or merit salvation? I am confused about this too.

Peter is not biblically described at being at Heaven's gate either. Jesus is the door or gate, and a person can spiritually enter now as a child of Heaven. A born again child of God is only a pilgrim and he becomes a grateful and willing servant of the Lord on this earth, until the Lord receives him finally in Heaven. OSAS makes sense to me.

Yes, I think the characterization of Peter at the gates has to do with Jesus leaving him the Keys, but I agree, the Keys are for earth, and not heaven. Jesus has those keys. What do you think the keys given to Peter represent?

I guess Jesus should have avoided parables by your brother’s standards.

I have had an OSAS person tell me “Jesus did not have a lot to say about salvation” and therefore avoided parables when addressing this topic. Do you agree with that?

Birth does occur in a moment. You are not born until completely out of your mother. That would be the moment. And you can’t go back and get unborn either!

I agree with you on this one. I think one place where Protestants and Catholics get into trouble discussing this is semantics. Protestants call the process “sanctification”, where CAtholics are talking ab out the same process, but will refer to it as justification or salvation.

What happened to Paul on the road to Damascus? He was converted 180 degrees in a moment.
Why would Paul say in (2Cor.1:21-22) , “Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath annointed us, is God.
Who hath also SEALED us, and given the EARNEST of the Spirit in our hearts.”?

This is a good question. I think Jesus called him. However, I don’t think he was born again until he was baptized.

Are you saying that the seal and earnest of God can be broken or made null and void?

Hmm. There are many seals spoken of in scripture. I will say that one is sealed in the HS at baptism, and that the mark of this seal is irrevocable. If one falls away from grace after this, then his last state is worse than his first.

How could Paul declare: “And the Lord shall deliver me from every evil work, and will preserve me unto his heavenly kingdom, to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.” (2 Tim.4:18), if Paul was not completely sure that he was already permanently saved and completely in the hands of God, even before entering God’s presence? That is OSAS talk from Paul.

I believe that Paul had the gift of hope. But in other places, he refers to “not having attained” and “fighting the good fight” and “lest I run in vain”. One can exercise hope without making presumptions. Paul was not OSAS. He wrote quite a bit about Christians getting cut off, burned, thrown into the fire, etc.

 

[guanophore]

First of all, a gift is not a gift if there are continued requirements to even accept it. The bible is clear about that in Romans.

I don’t see why not. If I decide to give my grandson a car when he graduates from High School, does that not seem to imply that he has to stay in school an graduate to qualify? Is it any less a gift?

Or, maybe a better example, there is a group here on campus giving away water bottles. Some students don;t like the logo, so they don’t take one. Is it any less a free gift?

Supposing Jesus went to the slave auction where we were all chained up and paid for all of us. They chains are removed, but some of the slaves decide not to get in the cart and go with Him. Is the price He paid any less? Is the gift no longer free, because some refused to accept it?

Being able to even accept God’s gift of salvation is also a gift of God. We do not earn that gift over a period of time following requirements the way you describe it. We could boast otherwise: “Thank you Lord that I am not like the publican over there. I…I…I…Me Me Me” . Grace alone here too.

I agree that the ability to accept God’s grace is also a gift. However, we are expected to do some “work” in accepting it. Grace must be mixed with faith in order to be effective. The publican did not “do nothing”. He showed up for prayer, he humbled himself, he repented and poured out his heart to God. He took responsiblity for his sins, and threw himself upon the mercy of God. These are all things that a person does. They are all “works”. Granted, none of them can be done apart from God’s grace, but people are not passive, either.

I would not waste time discussing these matters, if I did not recognize at least a basic common ground that we both have in the true faith revealed in Scripture.

Where do you believe the Scripture came from?

I can find no contradictions in any part of the Bible, when it is taken as a whole. It makes perfect sense, even the supernatural parts. It is so amazingly and perfectly put together, that just reading it confirms my faith in the fact that it is the Word of God. I would never say that I understand all of it, since no human could ever get all of the infinite wealth contained in it. That is what makes it so perfect: it is the infinite living water of the Living Word, Who is the Livimg Bread, Who came down so that we may have eternal life by, through, and in Him.

It is great that you have such love for the Word of God. I pray that you will also come to understand that there is no contradiction between it and the Catholic Teaching either.
You can not reject Christ’s Church when you are already sealed into that Church by the Holy Spirit.

The instrument of God’s grace comes completely through the gift of faith in Jesus alone and what He did to redeem me. I will not insult Jesus’ perfect work and gift by adding other “required instruments” to complete His already perfect work for my salvation.

 

[brkn1]

Well, it is clear from the NT witness, and that of the early fathers, that there is no distinction between Jesus and His Church, or the disciples and the Apostles. There was perfect unity, and one who confessed Christ confessed to be a member of the Church, and in unity with the Apostles (Peter being the Rock). The separation of all these is a new doctrine emanating from the Reformation.

If Jesus did not intend for you to be the member of a Body, why did He create one? This “Jesus Alone” doctrine is less than 100 years old.

It is true that scripture indicates the last state of the apostate will be worse than the first. You were a child of God when you were created, too, but that does not mean you will choose to be with Him in that capacity for eternity. Some people reject the purpose of God for themselves, even after they are called and justified.

I don’t understand this. Can you explain? How is salvation not a free gift? Once a person is born again, how is that faith “of no value” toward salvation?

This is even more confusing. How is the Christian walk “roulette”? Do you not think that Christians make choices about how they live before God?

I think that being in a state of grace has nothing to do with “luck”. On the contrary, one must work hard at remaining in a state of grace. There is no distinction between Christ and His church, so depending on Jesus means depending on His Church. This does not mean that it is not Jesus that saves. The Church is the normative means by which He has chosen to save us.

Can you please show how the Catholic church teaches that one can earn or merit salvation? I am confused about this too.

Yes, I think the characterization of Peter at the gates has to do with Jesus leaving him the Keys, but I agree, the Keys are for earth, and not heaven. Jesus has those keys. What do you think the keys given to Peter represent?

I have had an OSAS person tell me “Jesus did not have a lot to say about salvation” and therefore avoided parables when addressing this topic. Do you agree with that?

I agree with you on this one. I think one place where Protestants and Catholics get into trouble discussing this is semantics. Protestants call the process “sanctification”, where CAtholics are talking ab out the same process, but will refer to it as justification or salvation.

This is a good question. I think Jesus called him. However, I don’t think he was born again until he was baptized.

Hmm. There are many seals spoken of in scripture. I will say that one is sealed in the HS at baptism, and that the mark of this seal is irrevocable. If one falls away from grace after this, then his last state is worse than his first.

I believe that Paul had the gift of hope. But in other places, he refers to “not having attained” and “fighting the good fight” and “lest I run in vain”. One can exercise hope without making presumptions. Paul was not OSAS. He wrote quite a bit about Christians getting cut off, burned, thrown into the fire, etc.

You also get my “coveted” award of winning the argument by default. Congratulations! You won with that post and you even get an extra two stars, which are redeemable for three hours off in “purgatory”.

 

[JRKH]

Your last comment about a branch “no longer abiding in Christ”, but (in effect) still allowed to “temporarily abide” in the Vine, is quite a contradiction in the story line; and Jesus does not tell such contradictory stories. Is that temporary pass at abiding even suggested by what is said, or are you adding that to fit your version, as you accuse me of doing?

Verse 2 is talking about a “branch already abiding in Christ” that is not “BEARING FRUIT”, which is the reason the Father taketh it away.

Verse 6 is talking about a man (anyone) that is not even abiding in the Vine, which results in that (anyone) being “cast forth as a branch”.

You can push both verses together as close as you want, but they are not talking about the same thing if you look at them more closely instead.

There are very different “reasons for” and “methods of” removal described here:

v.2…abiding on the Vine, but not bearing fruit…taken by God

v.6…not even abiding on the Vine…cast forth

You probably will say that bearing fruit and abiding are identical, but you honestly know that there is a difference in meaning, although they are closely related. That difference should not be dismissed or the conclusion ends up twisted (which means you are wrong, of course ).

OK my friend, We have both placed our best arguments before the other. Neither has convinced the other, and we are bothed convinced that the other is wrong. So -
Please answer these two questions:

1. Can the Holy Spirit provide 2 such incompatible inspirations?
2. Who can we take this to so as to determine an “authoritative” interpretation?

I’m quite serious about this. You say above that I am wrong, which would place my soul in peril. I believe that you are just as wrong which would place your soul in the same peril.
Obviously the Bible has provided a cunundrum. Who shall untie the knot for us?

Peace
James

 

[Ronald_E]

Those are great points. I have just finished reading about the Chaplet of Divine Mercy. As Catholics we have the Sacraments as gifts of grace to deepen our relationship with God. If we are lukewarm in our faith it is a great danger to our souls. Since we are given more in the form of Sacraments more is expected from us in terms of bearing fruit. If we as Catholics are lukewarm what is guarranteed is judgment based on what is in our hearts and our actions. It seems to me that OSAS cannot be a belief for me as a Catholic because it is meaningless to me in living out my Christian faith. I am not concerned with myself as I was before I returned to my faith. Now I want to live out my faith as Jesus taught us to live. Faith is to be lived from moment to moment in a conscious relationship with Our Lord. The Sacraments He has given us as Catholics are there to be taken as nourishment for our souls in this world where we are in constant spiritual warfare. As a Catholic if I am lukewarm it means I do not appreciate what He has given me to nourish me in this life. OSAS cannot be something I base my salvation on.
It is obvious that brkn 1 is not lukewarm and that his passion for Our Lord does not bring judgment against him since Jesus revealed His Divine Mercy is the foundation of His judgment.
It would appear that if we follow what Jesus directs us to do which is to love God and love one another as the foundation of our faith then we bear fruit that keeps us in Christ.
OSAS does not seem to bear fruit.

 

[guanophore]

It’s good to see at least a little admission that OSAS has some Scriptural support.
The main verses used to prove OSAS generally would be:
(John 3:15-21)
(John 10:27-30)
(John 11: 25-26)
There is no honest way to argue around these verses as I see it, but I would be interested in reading any attempts to do so.

It is not a matter of “arguing around verses”. Scripture has to be taken as a whole, and an accurate doctrine cannot be built by selecting out a few verses then ignoring the other. Paul, who wrote a great deal that is also taken as “assurance of salvation” also wrote this:

Phil 3:12-16

12 Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect; but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own. 13 Brethren, I do not consider that I have made it my own; but one thing I do, forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, 14 I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. 15 Let those of us who are mature be thus minded; and if in anything you are otherwise minded, God will reveal that also to you. 16 Only let us hold true to what we have attained."

Now I have heard OSAS believers say that Paul was “just being humble” here.

What are the implications of this passage? What happens to one who thinks he is already erfect? What happens to one who fails to strain forward to what lies ahead? What happens if one does not “press on toward the goal”? What if one does not “hold true” to what was attained? Paul is just as clear that people can be cut off, and as Jesus says, “thrown into the fire”.

**I feel** differently about wanting to know or be sure of my salvation now. **I want **to know for sure and I'm not talking about being sure using intellect

This is one of my concerns about OSAS. It seems to be based on what people want, and prefer to feel.

The reason Jesus said He would send a Comforter (the Holy Spirit) is just for this very reason. The Holy Spirit is to indwell and seal us forever in Christ. The Holy Spirit makes God’s Word and the Living Word alive and real to me.
God can make Jesus more real than one’s own sense of life by the Holy Spirit’s presence and guidance. He has done it for me, but you don’t have to take my word for it. I don’t expect you to believe it either, since as you said, that is between God and myself.

Oh, I believe you! and Catholics have the same sentiments. However, we consider it a sin to be presumtuous upon the mercy of God. We believe that we can choose at any time to jump out of the palm of God’s had.

Just in case you want to accuse what I’ve said as being presumptuous, I would like to point you to David’s (Psalm 19). Read the whole psalm, but look especially at David’s prayer to keep him from being presumptuous (verse 13).
With that in mind, go to (Psalm 23). Look at how sure David is of his salvation as one of the Lord’s sheep.
Now read and try to understand exactly what assurance David had, when he said while still alive, “…: and I will dwell in the house of the Lord for ever.”
Even the Old Testament saints believed in OSAS, as I understand that statement.

If you look at this together with the other things that David has written and prayed, one will have a fuller picture. David was clear that he could step out of God’s grace. The issue is really more about when salvation happens. Jews, Catholics and Orthodox believe this does not occur until we go to our heavenly reward, because that is what Jesus and His Apostles taught. Some spiritual offspring of the reformers believe otherwise because they have become separated from the Apostolic succession.

May Our Gracious Lord bless and guide you into all Truth.

Indeed, all of us!

Russian roullette seems to be a better description of living life never fully sure that the ending might be eternal damnation in perpetual torment if you possibly did not cross all the "t"s or dot all the "i"s properly before the moment of death; which may be a long drawn out process, but there is still going to be a final moment when death, as in birth, is over.

I don’t understand this. How is it that, just because Catholics think it is a sin to be presumptuous, you seem to believe that all the passages you have cited don’t exist for them? All these promises of salvation are just as valid, whether one believes they are dependent upon “if you continue” or not. Catholics don’t believe salvation occurs at a moment in time, for all time. It is not that we think salvation can be “lost”. It is more a matter of not having attained it yet. In other words, it ain’t over till the fat lady sings, so to speak, but I really don’t see how these great and precious promises we have been given constitute “roulette”.

There is the added motivation of promised bonuses for running the race well also.

Do you not believe that God rewards good deeds?

I suppose a rational person might invent purgatory to cover that contingiency. I think they call that a “parachute” in the business world.

No, the damned don’t inherit the grace of purgatory. Protestants also believe in Purgatory, they just don’t use that word, because it sounds too Catholics. Everyone agrees that nothing impure can enter heaven. That is probably a matter for a different thread.

Good luck with the game of roullette, but you might want to look into God’s Word to see if maybe you have been reading the wrong instruction manual made by another company.

Such a characterization of the Teachings of the Apostles reveals a great ignorance.

 

[guanophore]

The key word in all of these verses is the word “abide”.
To undestand what is meant by this word, we go to the beginning of John 15.
We see in verses 1&2 that the Father is the Husbandman of the garden where Jesus is the True Vine. We are the branches that somehow got onto that Vine. The question now is, "How did we get on that Vine? The answer must be: “We were saved by the grace of God, through faith in Jesus Christ.”
You have to agree that no one starts out as a branch on that Vine, since all are sinners that need to first be saved through the grace of God. Then they get put onto that Vine, but not before.

If a person is a branch on that Vine, they are now “abiding”.

Notice that v.2 has the Father taking away every branch IN CHRIST that is not bearing fruit. Remember that being IN CHRIST does not speak about any of the unsaved people of the world, who are NOT branches that EVER abide in the VINE.

This just does make any rational sense to me. How did they get to be branches, if they dont’ belong to the tree in the first place?

Again I think that this problem stems from the idea that salvation is an action that occurs at one point in time. A branch can be growing as part of the tree, then die later. As a fruit farmer, I can assure you that fruit bearing branches can die, and need to be cut off. It is absurd to say that “they were never part of the tree in the first place”.

These branches are NOT the same thing as the “man …AS a branch” later described in verse 6. Those men never did abide in the Vine, and they are cast “as a branch” “into the fire” by men in that description. That man is not described as a branch already in Christ, which is taken away by the Father.

There are branches that have been grafted in, then die, and must be cut off. This is what Paul writes about in Romans.

Those branches in Christ, that do not bear fruit, will not receive any rewards in Heaven as Paul describes several times, but they still are saved or they would not be described as still “in Christ” in verse 2.

Well, at least we are in agreement that there are rewards!

According to your beliefs, such a branch could not be described as “in Christ”, because they would have already lost their “in Christ” status by not bearing fruit.

Is this your statement, or did it get mixed up in translation? do you believe Catholics think this?

Verse 9&10 speak of even further abiding in Jesus’ love as one keeps His commandments, which one can not do of oneself, but only as one already saved in Christ: " without Me (Christ) ye can do nothing." v.5

This is very Catholic.

The depth of our friendship with the Lord depends on how well a saved person obeys Him, but any lack in this does not cause an already saved person to get unsaved, since our salvation never originated from any of our works. Our lack might cause us to be taken away by God though, and there will be considerable loss of joy for us as a result. Salvation is the work of God. Look into Romans for confirmation of that.

This is very close to Catholic teaching. However, Catholics don’t consider a person who is justified or in a state of grace “saved” until the last day. Catholics believe that we are saved by grace, through faith (that is why our Catholic book reflects that.) However, Catholics also believe that God is at work within us to will and to do His good pleasure, and that it is our responsibility to abide in Him, and to bear fruit that befits repentance, and to work out our salvation with fear and trembling.

 

[brkn1]

OK my friend, We have both placed our best arguments before the other. Neither has convinced the other, and we are bothed convinced that the other is wrong. So -
Please answer these two questions:

1. Can the Holy Spirit provide 2 such incompatible inspirations?
2. Who can we take this to so as to determine an “authoritative” interpretation?

I’m quite serious about this. You say above that I am wrong, which would place my soul in peril. I believe that you are just as wrong which would place your soul in the same peril.
Obviously the Bible has provided a cunundrum. Who shall untie the knot for us?

Peace
James

We both could have done better by worldly standards, if we had put the extra effort into our arguments. You and others here, have done a very good job of presenting your side from the perspective of the RCC.

There is a point when the attempt at convincing the other will not produce the desired results, although the attempt may have the good benefits of setting the stage for God to do His Work of Salvation.

It is up to the Holy Spirit to convict either or both of us onto the proper way of Truth. If He is not the One doing the guidance and actual work of regenerating us as a new creature in Christ, we have not got a chance with our limited human abilities. Romans is very clear that the work of salvation is not ours. We can’t earn our way to Heaven or pay any price for the tiniest of our sins. Sin is so hateful and opposite to God’s nature, that the only Way He could make us right again, was to send His Only Begotten Son down to us to do all of the Work of Salvation on the only true altar, which was the cross. He did it all. We can only allow the Living Word enlightened by the Holy Spirit upon and into our hearts, to do God’s Work of saving us.

The cost was so tremendous, that even our Lord Jesus prayed to the Father for some other way, but there was no other way.
Jesus paid it all.
I will never presume that I can, in any manner, contribute to that Perfect Work that my Redeemer already did for my Salvation.

The idea that my belief in OSAS would then allow me to live any way I please, is so foreign to my grateful heart towards my Loving Saviour, that I view such sentiments with distain, not worthy of a second thought.

 

[JRKH]

We both could have done better by worldly standards, if we had put the extra effort into our arguments. You and others here, have done a very good job of presenting your side from the perspective of the RCC.

I agree that we could have done better, but in all I think it has been a beneficial debate. I have found it quite useful, even if frustrating at times. I hope that you have too.

There is a point when the attempt at convincing the other will not produce the desired results, although the attempt may have the good benefits of setting the stage for God to do His Work of Salvation.

Agreed. If one is not careful and charitable in argument it only serves to drive another away from the truth instead of drawing them toward it.

It is up to the Holy Spirit to convict either or both of us onto the proper way of Truth. If He is not the One doing the guidance and actual work of regenerating us as a new creature in Christ, we have not got a chance with our limited human abilities.

I assume this is intended to be in answer to my question about the HS giving contradictory interpretations. If so, I am afraid that it is unsatisfactory. Scripture as well as tradition tells us that we should take such disagreements to the Church. Even St Paul, after his conversion and preaching for a time, went to Jeruselem and presented himself to Peter and the other Church leaders to assure that what he was teaching was true and correct.
As I am sure you suspected I asked that question precisely because this is what scripture teaches. However you neatly sidestepped it because there is no good scriptural support for agreeing to disagree. Although I guess for now that is our impasse.

Romans is very clear that the work of salvation is not ours. We can’t earn our way to Heaven or pay any price for the tiniest of our sins. Sin is so hateful and opposite to God’s nature, that the only Way He could make us right again, was to send His Only Begotten Son down to us to do all of the Work of Salvation on the only true altar, which was the cross. He did it all. We can only allow the Living Word enlightened by the Holy Spirit upon and into our hearts, to do God’s Work of saving us.

I hear what you are saying and I will not dispute you because it is obvious from your posts that you - personally do not hold with the idea of OSAS allowing one to continue living an unchanged life. However, tempation is still out there and resistance still requires effort on our part.

The cost was so tremendous, that even our Lord Jesus prayed to the Father for some other way, but there was no other way.
Jesus paid it all.
I will never presume that I can, in any manner, contribute to that Perfect Work that my Redeemer already did for my Salvation.

The idea that my belief in OSAS would then allow me to live any way I please, is so foreign to my grateful heart towards my Loving Saviour, that I view such sentiments with distain, not worthy of a second thought.

Your last sentence is the key, and the one too often left out of the OSAS argument. Too often the argument put as, “Jesus has died for all my sins, past present and future, and so as long as I confess Jesus, I am saved regardless of how I choose to live my life from now on.” And the really sad part si that there are ministers out there who buy into this.
This is clearly a false concept as I am sure you would agree. A saved person must avoid sin. A saved person must bear testemony to that salvation through their life and the works there of. If the outward sings of change are not there then it is most likely that the inward change never occurred.
It is certainly possible that we are aguing the two sides of the same coin. In any case I hope that this discussion has been helpful and of use to you as it has been to me.
As you continue to study, I will reiterate my suggestion that you look into the early Church Fathers. You can find information on them here at CA and also order books easily enough. I think you will find them most interesting. (I don’t say this to try and convert you).

May God continue to enlighten you on your journey.
James

 

[brkn1]

I agree that we could have done better, but in all I think it has been a beneficial debate. I have found it quite useful, even if frustrating at times. I hope that you have too.

Agreed. If one is not careful and charitable in argument it only serves to drive another away from the truth instead of drawing them toward it.

I assume this is intended to be in answer to my question about the HS giving contradictory interpretations. If so, I am afraid that it is unsatisfactory. Scripture as well as tradition tells us that we should take such disagreements to the Church. Even St Paul, after his conversion and preaching for a time, went to Jeruselem and presented himself to Peter and the other Church leaders to assure that what he was teaching was true and correct.
As I am sure you suspected I asked that question precisely because this is what scripture teaches. However you neatly sidestepped it because there is no good scriptural support for agreeing to disagree. Although I guess for now that is our impasse.

I hear what you are saying and I will not dispute you because it is obvious from your posts that you - personally do not hold with the idea of OSAS allowing one to continue living an unchanged life. However, tempation is still out there and resistance still requires effort on our part.

Your last sentence is the key, and the one too often left out of the OSAS argument. Too often the argument put as, “Jesus has died for all my sins, past present and future, and so as long as I confess Jesus, I am saved regardless of how I choose to live my life from now on.” And the really sad part si that there are ministers out there who buy into this.
This is clearly a false concept as I am sure you would agree. A saved person must avoid sin. A saved person must bear testemony to that salvation through their life and the works there of. If the outward sings of change are not there then it is most likely that the inward change never occurred.
It is certainly possible that we are aguing the two sides of the same coin. In any case I hope that this discussion has been helpful and of use to you as it has been to me.
As you continue to study, I will reiterate my suggestion that you look into the early Church Fathers. You can find information on them here at CA and also order books easily enough. I think you will find them most interesting. (I don’t say this to try and convert you).

May God continue to enlighten you on your journey.
James

Hi James,

This discussion has been very helpful and of use to me. Anything that motivates a person to search deeper into Scripture for the Truth should be of benefit for the seeker of God and His Truth, if that person is sincere.

I did not intentionally sidestep the question which you posed about how to resolve the difference we see in our interpretations, especially on the subject we were discussing. My answer would be that I do not see the RCC as having the correct interpretation, since there are too many other answers that they have which I see as in direct contradiction to Scripture. They tell me that I must also have faith in them as part of my salvation, which scares me. My faith rests entirely on Jesus, regardless of what others tell me about that position. I do not see the Gospel as being anywhere near as complicated as the RCC presents it. The Bible makes sense to me, wherever in it I read; and I do not believe God would give us a book that only some would be able to understand. The Holy Spirit is not described as indwelling them more than any other member of the Body of Christ. You can believe that if you want, but I have to disagree; and that is not an “agree to disagree” as you put it.

The Rock I rest my faith on is not a fallible human or group of humans, but a God Man, Jesus. Jesus is the only true Head of His Church and He sent the Holy Spirit to indwell all believers. Anything that a human Church leader says is Truth must line up completely with the final authority, which is in God’s Word as revealed by the Holy Spirit. I know this makes me anathema according to the RCC, but that curse is not what I fear. I fear only that One who could cast both my body and soul in Hell, and that is God. Jesus told me to fear no other and I don’t. The arguments against people, who have faith in Jesus alone as I do, are weak when Scripture is carefully studied.

You are very good at explaining and defending your position and there is a quality about your posts that is exceptional.
I would say that your abilities far exceed mine in persuasion, but please do not take that as saying you convinced me.
We are both stubborn as you say.
I might consider your suggestion about reading some of what the early church leaders and expositors said. Augustine comes to mind as someone who both sides claim for themselves, so I would like to see what that is all about.

May our Gracious Lord enlighten you on your journey also.
Yours in Christ, brkn1

 

[JRKH]

Hi James,

This discussion has been very helpful and of use to me. Anything that motivates a person to search deeper into Scripture for the Truth should be of benefit for the seeker of God and His Truth, if that person is sincere.

Praise God. May he keep us both sincere in our search and studies.

I did not intentionally sidestep the question which you posed about how to resolve the difference we see in our interpretations, especially on the subject we were discussing. My answer would be that I do not see the RCC as having the correct interpretation, since there are too many other answers that they have which I see as in direct contradiction to Scripture.

Perhaps we can discuss some of these as well. Obviously we each consider the other to be a sincere, if misguided, child of God. Maybe we can be of further help to each other.
Of course it must be remembered that, by using the Bible you are, in fact, recognizing the authority of the Church for the central teaching of your faith is a book which you recieved through the Holy Catholic Church which assembled, protected, and defended it against many enemies of God.

They tell me that I must also have faith in them as part of my salvation, which scares me.

This is a common problem, and something of a misunderstanding. Yes we believe and have faith in the Church as THE Church which Jesus founded upon the Rock we call St Peter. However we do not, in any way, see the Church as a replacement or substitute for Jesus.

My faith rests entirely on Jesus, regardless of what others tell me about that position.

As well it should.

I do not see the Gospel as being anywhere near as complicated as the RCC presents it.

I agree that the Gospel message is not as complicated as many people make it. That is why I occasionally use the term “cut and paste theology”. (I appreciate that you didn’t seem disturbed by that term) I find that the best way to study the Gospels is to read them through as a whole and not try to disect each verse.
I believe the reason it becomes “complicated” is because we humans are always asking the Lord - “yea but what if…” and then each clear, general lesson gets broken down into pieces and turned into some kind of legaleze.

The Bible makes sense to me, wherever in it I read; and I do not believe God would give us a book that only some would be able to understand.

It is Good that the Bible makes sense to you. This is a great Gift, so long as you test your understandings against what is Good so that you know it is from God.
Yet if it is true, that we only need rely on the indwelling of the spirit to understand the Bible, why have we had teachers from the very beginning. Why did Jesus give us a Church based on an Oral tradition of His ministry instead of a book? Why did the Church not immediately ceate a bible for the faithful to use? These are interesting questions that make the study of early Church History quite fastinating.

The Holy Spirit is not described as indwelling them more than any other member of the Body of Christ. You can believe that if you want, but I have to disagree; and that is not an “agree to disagree” as you put it.

The Holy spirit dwells in all who believe in and follow Jesus. However, scripture tells us that the gifts of the spirit are distributed differently.

(Continued)

 

[JRKH]

(continued)

The Rock I rest my faith on is not a fallible human or group of humans, but a God Man, Jesus. Jesus is the only true Head of His Church and He sent the Holy Spirit to indwell all believers.

Amen to that. Jesus is the Head of the Church, and the Holy Spirit was sent by the Father to be with us always. No argument there from any Catholic.

Anything that a human Church leader says is Truth must line up completely with the final authority, which is in God’s Word as revealed by the Holy Spirit.

There is nothing in this statement that contradicts Church teaching. The great advantage that we have int he RCC is the teaching authority of the magesterium which works very hard to see that what is taught does line up with God’s Living word which is Jesus Christ, our Living Lord.

I know this makes me anathema according to the RCC, but that curse is not what I fear. I fear only that One who could cast both my body and soul in Hell, and that is God. Jesus told me to fear no other and I don’t. The arguments against people, who have faith in Jesus alone as I do, are weak when Scripture is carefully studied.

Well I must make a comment here on the OSAS issue. If you have already accepted Christ and assured your salvation, why do you fear, “that One who could cast both my body and soul in Hell”. Aren’t you already saved?
As to the other “arguments” I would have to hear them to know if they are “weak” or strong. Frankly I find little of what you have expressed that disagrees with me or with the Catholic Church.

You are very good at explaining and defending your position and there is a quality about your posts that is exceptional.
I would say that your abilities far exceed mine in persuasion, but please do not take that as saying you convinced me.
We are both stubborn as you say.

Thank you for your kind words. I have none to credit except the Holy Spirit.
We are stubborn, but in a brotherly Christian Spirit.

I might consider your suggestion about reading some of what the early church leaders and expositors said. Augustine comes to mind as someone who both sides claim for themselves, so I would like to see what that is all about.

I truly believe that you will not be disappointed.

May our Gracious Lord enlighten you on your journey also.
Yours in Christ, brkn1

I believe he will for He sends me others like yourself to challenge and strengthen me, just as you mentioned earlier that it helped you dig into scripture.

Peace
James

 

[Phil12123]

Your last sentence is the key, and the one too often left out of the OSAS argument. Too often the argument put as, “Jesus has died for all my sins, past present and future, and so as long as I confess Jesus, I am saved regardless of how I choose to live my life from now on.” And the really sad part is that there are ministers out there who buy into this.
This is clearly a false concept as I am sure you would agree. A saved person must avoid sin. **A saved person **must bear testemony to that salvation through their life and the works there of. If the outward sings of change are not there then it is most likely that the inward change never occurred.

**Hi Jim and brkn1,

I spent some time reading all the posts in this thread and I will not rehash them, but I have a question (or two or more) for Jim. When you say the words, “a saved person,” what do you mean? OSAS, standing for “once saved, always saved,” is what you and other Catholics here are saying is false, etc. Yet you, Jim, have said you are “saved.” What do you mean by that, from a Catholic viewpoint? Are you “saved” from hell or what? And if you think you can lose it, can you (or any other Catholic) ever really say you’re saved until you die and end up in heaven?**

 

[JRKH]

**Hi Jim and brkn1,

I spent some time reading all the posts in this thread and I will not rehash them, but I have a question (or two or more) for Jim. When you say the words, “a saved** person,” what do you mean? OSAS, standing for “once saved, always saved,” is what you and other Catholics here are saying is false, etc. Yet you, Jim, have said you are “saved.” What do you mean by that, from a Catholic viewpoint? Are you “saved” from hell or what? And if you think you can lose it, can you (or any other Catholic) ever really say you’re saved until you die and end up in heaven?

Phil,
Bring on your questions and we will try to answer them, although coming from different perspectives, we may confuse you more.

In a nutshell the Church holds that a person who is baptised is a member of Christs body. So long as we obey His commandments and confess Him and do His work, we are saved. However, if we turn away from God through willful sin, we have severed ourselves from His body and have given up our salvation. Others would say lost our Salvation. Of course, if this person repents and returns to Christ, he would be able to regain his salvation. Such repentance can occur even at the instant of death. As to what occurs at our judgement is strictly between the individual and the Almighty Judge.

We are saved from Hell by the Mercy and Grace of God. Of that there can be no argument from either Catholic or Protestant.

The problem that the Church has with the concept of OSAS is not necessarily in OSAS on an individual basis, but rather as a doctrine of belief by a congregation. For instance, as you read through the discussion, I am sure you noted that my respect for brkn1 grew. This is because it is apparent from his posts that he is a committed Christian who understands that changed behaviour is part and parcel to his salvation. This is salvation on a personal level. Brkn1 and I are both committed to living the Faith of Christ as best we can and continue to seek both knowledge and a type of “perfection” in Christ. If Brkn1 were to die today, I am confident he would be judged as Just. Where we differ is in the “not knowing” of tomorrow. Could brkn1 (or myself) be turned so away from God as to curse Him? If we did and then came before God in this state of anger and sinfullness could we be judged as being Just? As the saying goes. God only knows>

Now in my parish, family etc. we are consistantly admonished to avoid sin, to live a life in Christ, to live our faith, to confess our sins regularly and recieve Jesus in the Holy Eucharist. We do this so as to assure our salvation, to bear fruit, to prove ourselves worthy of being followers of Christ and worthy to share in the inheritance of heaven.

Now contrast this with the minister who preaches that all you have to do is come up and confess Jesus as your Savour and you will be saved regardless of what you have done in the past or may do in the future. Philisophically and theologially the argument might be supportable IF the person professing Christ is truly changed by the experience as Brkn1 seems to have been.
However it can be a fundamentally different mindset to many who are listening and don’t have a clear and solid theological grasp on the argument, and the need for fundemental change in the saved person. So someone who is emotionally vulnerable hears this message of salvation, goes forward, “gets saved”, and then believes they are covered by God’s salvation, but is not moved to make any permenant changes in their life.
I have seen this personally and there is no discussing with these people because “Their saved”. Even though they may lie, cheat, drink excessively, mistreat others, whatever the sin might be, they can’t see and don’t want to see, their danger because “God has already saved them”. These people have been mislead.

Only God knows if I am truly saved. I will not truly “know” until I stand before judgement. I know that I believe in God, and in Jesus as my Savior. I know that I belong to His Body through the Church which He Himself established. I know that I rely totally on the Grace of God to hold me in His Hand and am ever grateful for the blessings of His sacraments, especially the Eucharist. I also know that I am still a “work in progress”. I am a sinner in need of constant forgiveness and renewal for I am not yet perfected in Christ.

Not sure if I answered you questions here, I sometimes get to wandering. Feel free to ask more.

Peace
James

 

[Phil12123]

Jim, thank you for the excellent summary of your position. Please allow me to make some comments and observations.

In a nutshell the Church holds that a person who is baptised is a member of Christs body. So long as we obey His commandments and confess Him and do His work, we are saved. However, if we turn away from God through willful sin, we have severed ourselves from His body and have given up our salvation. Others would say lost our Salvation. Of course, if this person repents and returns to Christ, he would be able to regain his salvation. Such repentance can occur even at the instant of death. As to what occurs at our judgement is strictly between the individual and the Almighty Judge.

We are saved from Hell by the Mercy and Grace of God. Of that there can be no argument from either Catholic or Protestant.

I don’t want to turn this thread into a “faith alone vs. faith plus works” debate, but I think it worth noting that those who hold to OSAS would be in the “faith alone” camp and those who reject it are in the “faith plus works” camp, whether they are Catholics or non-Catholics. Since I want to explore briefly your concept of “saved” to understand where you’re coming from, I think it prudent to start with the very familiar passage using that word in relation to faith and works, Eph. 2:8-10 (NAB):

** 8. For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not from you; it is the gift of God;
9. it is not from works, so no one may boast.
10. For we are his handiwork, created in Christ Jesus for the good works that God has prepared in advance, that we should live in them.**

**To me, verses 8 and 9 are speaking of salvation, how it occurs, etc., and they relate to our standing before God—whether a person is “saved” or not “saved.” Verse 10 speaks of God’s plan for all “saved” people, His children, namely, their walk before God. Those are two distinct things, our standing and our walk. Our standing never changes. Our walk does, day-to-day. Our standing should produce the walk, not the other way around. Our walk does not produce, maintain, or assure our standing, because our standing is “not from you; it is the gift of God.” Once a gift is given and received, it is never “lost” based on anything the recipient does. It may arguably be thrown away by the recipient, but it is never taken back by the Giver.

That said, it appears that you agree that your standing is a Gift from God, by His mercy and grace, but that you only keep it by your doing things like not willfully sinning, keeping the commandments, obeying Him, confessing Him, and doing His work. So, you are making your standing, a Gift from God, dependent on your walk, as if it is something you must earn or be worthy of keeping or having in the first place. That is wrong and unscriptural. None of us sinners will ever be worthy of His wonderful gift of salvation. We are ALL “works in progress” needing daily forgiveness. That is our walk and the more it becomes Christlike, the more we please Him and glorify Him as HE works in and through us.

Now, I am fully aware of the many verses that can be cited that admonish believers to have a godly walk, etc., but the conflict between one set of verses in favor of OSAS and the other set of verses opposed to OSAS cannot be from the Holy Spirit talking out of two opposing sides of His mouth. They must be reconcilable because God is not the author of confusion and does not contradict Himself. We with our pea-brains simply cannot understand Him. One thing we should all agree on—a gift is a gift is a gift. No one is given a gift because he deserves it or has worked for it (like a wage or paycheck). He is given a gift purely by the graciousness of the Giver. HE gets all the praise and glory.

Peace
**

 

[JRKH]

Phil,
I read your response and will try to review and respond later.
we are watching our Holy Father on EWTN right now.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

There is s much information in your post that I decided to start fresh rather than try to address specifics. I apologize if this gets a bit choppy.

Our standing should produce the walk, not the other way around. Our walk does not produce, maintain, or assure our standing, because our standing is “not from you; it is the gift of God.” Once a gift is given and received, it is never “lost” based on anything the recipient does. It may arguably be thrown away by the recipient, but it is never taken back by the Giver.

1. What if the “standing” does not produce the “walk”?
2. Would you classify ‘walking” as work?
3. If I throw away a gift do I still have the Gift?

So, you are making your standing, a Gift from God, dependent on your walk, as if it is something you must earn or be worthy of keeping or having in the first place.

I am not making my standing, I am maintaining it, by doing “The work of the Father”.
Did Jesus tell us to hop on the cart of salvation or did he say take up your cross?

That is wrong and unscriptural.

Neither of these things is true.
Since you state below that there are verses in the bible to support both sides, so how can you say this now? You and I may not see eye-to-eye on things, but that does not support your conclusion here of wrong and unscriptural.

None of us sinners will ever be worthy of His wonderful gift of salvation. We are ALL “works in progress” needing daily forgiveness. That is our walk and the more it becomes Christlike, the more we please Him and glorify Him as HE works in and through us.

I really see nothing here to disagree with. I would ask though if you believe there are people who “Cry Lord Lord” but are unworthy of entering into heaven?
Also, do you see, “walking” and “becoming Christlike” as work or not?

Now, I am fully aware of the many verses that can be cited that admonish believers to have a godly walk, etc., but the conflict between one set of verses in favor of OSAS and the other set of verses opposed to OSAS cannot be from the Holy Spirit talking out of two opposing sides of His mouth. They must be reconcilable because God is not the author of confusion and does not contradict Himself. We with our pea-brains simply cannot understand Him.

Thank you for recognizing that there are verses supporting works (ations) as a part of the salvation process.
I absolutely agree that the HS does not send contradictory messages and these things must be reconcilable. In fact they were reconsiled centuries ago by the very earliest Catholic Church teachings.
The very fact that there are verses opposed to OSAS makes the case for us. If a passive, one time acceptance of a gift were all it took, then why do these verses exist? Why does Jesus constantly exhort his followers to do more; to “take up their cross”? Yes Salvation if from God and Yes we need to put forth effort to show we are as worthy to be diciples of Christ.

As directly relates to OSAS:
Please examine Luke 8;4-15 and Matthew 13:18-23. The parable of the seeds. Here Jesus clearly shows that His word falls on 4 kinds of people.
Those who reject Him outright; Those who receive and accept Him but sooner or later die spiritually; and Those who receive accept and bear fruit.
Do the persons who Receive Christ but later die spiritually also get into heaven?

Another point to remember is that, when many of the Epistles were written, there was much evangelization among the Jews. The Apostles would go to the temples to preach. So their audience and many of their converts were jews, who believed in salvation through an adherance to Mosaic law. The writers even refer to the “works of the Law”. This was a very large issue at the time and many of the references used to support OSAS really need to be seen in the context of the time. The Jews were trying to impose Mosaic Law on the Gentiles. Paul and the other writers are refering to this. The need for the works of Love are still there. We need to Love our Neighbors – and if that isn’t work sometimes I don’t know what is??

Peace
James

 

[Ronald_E]

Please forgive me if I am repetitive. I just scanned the posts. For me the word faith as a gift of grace from God encompasses the totality of God. I have been saved from my own ignorance and way of perceiving and acting. Faith saves me from myself. Faith gives me the passion to know God more deeply and to act from that relationship with God.
Faith moves me beyond fearful and selfish concerns about death and going to heaven or hell. Those are selfish concerns based on the flesh and my attachment to the flesh as my identity. Faith gives me the passion to move away from myself and to see the beauty of God in moments that may seem meaningless to others.
To be saved is to live now and to know God now. Every moment I am not aware of God and my love for God I am back in the flesh and dead.
I have to be saved from myself every moment just as St. Paul talked about being in the flesh and doing what he did not want to do.
You know the verses better than I do. Faith is the totality of God.
I think that OSAS diminishes God and prevents a deeper understanding. OSAS seems to create division and if a concept creates division and does not enlighten does it bear fruit?