There's no OSAS

[jcoldc]

I really like this!!

Peace
James

Wow, thanks! That means a lot to me.

Yeah for me.:clapping:

 

[brkn1]

Phil (et. al.),

Do you believe God loves us all more than we can know love? More than parents can love their children? (If no, then please correct me.)

Why the condemnation? Why judge us going to hell? Isn’t that God’s job? Aren’t you going against the bible by doing this?

Hi Everyone! (et. al. here)

I erased the analogy to cut to the chase.

Yes, God loves us all and He rains grace upon both the good and the bad. God saves all in the sense that He delays the deserved immediate destruction of any (which would be all of us) who sin against Him. By Grace, God even eternally saves some of us.

No, the Bible does not say that all are God’s children. Original sin separates mankind from such a claim and the Bible does not hide that fact.

Except a person of this world become born again, that person can not become a child of God. The indwelling of the Holy Spirit becomes the permanent seal of the new creature in Christ as we automatically get placed into GOD’s Church of which Christ is the Head. “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and all made to drink into one Spirit” (1 Cor. 12: 12-13)

Now, I would not dare to judge or condemn anyone as to whether they are saved or not, since as you clearly asked: “Isn’t that God’s job?” YES that is GOD’s job, not mine or anyone else’s!

There are evident works that a born again person will do through the Spirit that proves to the world that he is likely a saved person. James goes into that evidence in Scripture.
Still, no one but God can judge or condemn another’s soul to Hell. Only God has that right and ability to judge rightly, since only God can truly and completely know what is in a man’s heart.

A person that gives evidence of not being saved now, may someday find salvation by God’s Grace.
Jesus distinguished between those who were (and would be) His in this prayer: “I pray for them: I pray NOT for the world, but for them which Thou (Father) hast given Me; for they are Thine.”
The “Thine” are God’s children.

With all that I just said in mind, I would like to point out something that seems to be overlooked by Catholics when they question others judging and condemning:

The following Canons, in regard to any who disagree with the Roman Catholic Church about the question of justification by “faith alone”, begin with the following:
“If any one shall say…”

and ends with: “…—let him be ACCURSED.”

Canons: 9, 12, 23, 24

“Isn’t that GOD’s job?”

 

[JRKH]

Hi Everyone! (et. al. here)

With all that I just said in mind, I would like to point out something that seems to be overlooked by Catholics when they question others judging and condemning:

The following Canons, in regard to any who disagree with the Roman Catholic Church about the question of justification by “faith alone”, begin with the following:
“If any one shall say…”

and ends with: “…—let him be ACCURSED.”

Canons: 9, 12, 23, 24

“Isn’t that GOD’s job?”

brkn1,
Could you provide the exact source for the canons above?
I looked at the "Code of Canon Law (1983) and none of your numbers match up with what you are trying to say.

Peace
James

 

[VociMike]

brkn1,
Could you provide the exact source for the canons above?
I looked at the "Code of Canon Law (1983) and none of your numbers match up with what you are trying to say.

He’s referring to the Council of Trent. Problem is, they don’t use the word “accursed” they use the entirely different word “anathema”. Somebody, either through ignorance or malice, has misrepresented the meaning of “anathema”.

brkn1, I hope you will acknowledge this error in your claim.

 

[JRKH]

He’s referring to the Council of Trent. Problem is, they don’t use the word “accursed” they use the entirely different word “anathema”. Somebody, either through ignorance or malice, has misrepresented the meaning of “anathema”.

brkn1, I hope you will acknowledge this error in your claim.

VociMike,
Thanks for the clarification.
I finally found them They are here, if any wish to read them for themselves.

 

[jcoldc]

Now, I would not dare to judge or condemn anyone as to whether they are saved or not, since as you clearly asked: “Isn’t that God’s job?” YES that is GOD’s job, not mine or anyone else’s!

There are evident works that a born again person will do through the Spirit that proves to the world that he is likely a saved person. James goes into that evidence in Scripture.
Still, no one but God can judge or condemn another’s soul to Hell. Only God has that right and ability to judge rightly, since only God can truly and completely know what is in a man’s heart.

A person that gives evidence of not being saved now, may someday find salvation by God’s Grace.
Jesus distinguished between those who were (and would be) His in this prayer: “I pray for them: I pray NOT for the world, but for them which Thou (Father) hast given Me; for they are Thine.”
The “Thine” are God’s children.

Hi brkn1,

I hope you weren’t insulted by et. al. But bless you for not being so judgmental.

For brkn1, or Phil, or et. al. ( I guess if you don’t think Catholics are going to hell, you probably at least know people who do. So feel free to respond.) For those who go strictly by the bible and think Catholics are going to hell, why would they make claims that anyone, Catholic or not, is going to hell? The bible that they claim to follow so closely, says that God will judge. What would be the point of God judging, if salvation was already figured out so definitively on earth? It’s one thing to feel like your religion is right. (Of course we all feel that way.) But to simply boil it down to accepting Christ on “our interpreted words” or your out?? We all can throw scripture back and forth at each other. I think the only thing that should leave us with is that everyone is interpreting the bible the best they can. Really they sound like, if you’re a star belly sneetch you’re in, if you’re a plain belly sneetch you’re out. Doesn’t sound like there’s any need for judging. I don’t think God would like that very much.

I will leave the argument about Catholics claiming others are going to hell to the previous posters.

Sorry if I’m repeating someone else, or getting off topic.

 

[JoeyWarren]

---

What would be the point of God judging, if salvation was already figured out so definitively on earth?

**
I don’t think I have ever seen that argument before. Well done!
*

 

[brkn1]

He’s referring to the Council of Trent. Problem is, they don’t use the word “accursed” they use the entirely different word “anathema”. Somebody, either through ignorance or malice, has misrepresented the meaning of “anathema”.

brkn1, I hope you will acknowledge this error in your claim.

Hi VocMike,
It would have been a good idea for you to have straightened me out by giving a full definition of the meaning of “anathema”, instead of asking me for an acknowledgement of my being in error in my use of “accursed” in place of “anathema”.

I looked up “anathema” in Strongs:

anathema (G331) …accursed, anathema, curse, X great

It might be ignorance that you find me in occassionally, but I pray God that it is not malice that motivates my discussions and arguments with those who disagree with me on our understanding of the gospel of Christ. We agree on many of the most important areas of the gospel, but there are other areas where one of us is definitely wrong. I see Scripture as being able to clearly show the correct Gospel to anyone born of God, but the RCC seems to believe that such ability only exists as the RCC allows it, which is reserved only for itself.

 

[Delta2]

Sorry my ignorance, but what is OSAS ?

Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome ? lol

Once Saved Always Saved ?

Open Systems Accounting Software ?

 

[JRKH]

Hi VocMike,
It would have been a good idea for you to have straightened me out by giving a full definition of the meaning of “anathema”, instead of asking me for an acknowledgement of my being in error in my use of “accursed” in place of “anathema”.

I looked up “anathema” in Strongs:

anathema (G331) …accursed, anathema, curse, X great

It might be ignorance that you find me in occassionally, but I pray God that it is not malice that motivates my discussions and arguments with those who disagree with me on our understanding of the gospel of Christ. We agree on many of the most important areas of the gospel, but there are other areas where one of us is definitely wrong. I see Scripture as being able to clearly show the correct Gospel to anyone born of God, but the RCC seems to believe that such ability only exists as the RCC allows it, which is reserved only for itself.

Just as an expansion on the definition issue, I found this at CatholicReference.net. Since the word is used in a Catholic Document I thought it best to look at a Catholic source for the definition.
Brkn1, I know you and have never seen any dishonesty in any of your posts, However I can certainly see VociMike’s point here that, If one quotes from Catholic Church Documents they should quote the terms in those documents.
Did you get your quotes from a Catholic Source?

Peace
James

 

[brkn1]

Hi brkn1,

I hope you weren’t insulted by et. al. But bless you for not being so judgmental.

For brkn1, or Phil, or et. al. ( I guess if you don’t think Catholics are going to hell, you probably at least know people who do. So feel free to respond.) For those who go strictly by the bible and think Catholics are going to hell, why would they make claims that anyone, Catholic or not, is going to hell? The bible that they claim to follow so closely, says that God will judge. What would be the point of God judging, if salvation was already figured out so definitively on earth? It’s one thing to feel like your religion is right. (Of course we all feel that way.) But to simply boil it down to accepting Christ on “our interpreted words” or your out?? We all can throw scripture back and forth at each other. I think the only thing that should leave us with is that everyone is interpreting the bible the best they can. Really they sound like, if you’re a star belly sneetch you’re in, if you’re a plain belly sneetch you’re out. Doesn’t sound like there’s any need for judging. I don’t think God would like that very much.

I will leave the argument about Catholics claiming others are going to hell to the previous posters.

Sorry if I’m repeating someone else, or getting off topic.

Hi Jcoldc,
I did not take “et. al.” as an insult at all.

It is not my right to declare anyone as going to hell. Jesus said in this regard: “…what is that to thee? follow thou Me.” Even the RCC says that no one but God knows who will be allowed to enter Heaven at judgement day.

I differ from the RCC in my understanding and reality of my own salvation though. I know that a person can be sure of their own salvation by the experience of being born again by the Holy Spirit.
This experience is misrepresented by many, but it is very real. It gives a person, such as Peter, the ability to stand before others with no hesitation to boldly declare the Gospel, even with the threat of death or imprisonment being the obvious result. The power of being sure of already possessing one’s eternal salvation in Christ makes such boldness possible.
Christ was sure that He would rise again. We also must have that same faith in Christ, that we too are eternally saved by what Jesus did to save and give us assurance of our salvation while still on this earth. True Faith, and its substance as that sure Hope in Christ’s Victory which saves us, is what eternally saves us. Love of God and His children (Charity) is the evidence of that True Faith, which makes eternal salvation a present possession necessary before we die.

 

[VociMike]

Hi VocMike,
It would have been a good idea for you to have straightened me out by giving a full definition of the meaning of “anathema”, instead of asking me for an acknowledgement of my being in error in my use of “accursed” in place of “anathema”.

I looked up “anathema” in Strongs:

anathema (G331) …accursed, anathema, curse, X great

Fair enough. The Church has always used “anathema” to mean separated from the Church, but never as a declaration that the person is accursed (for she is in no position to make such a declaration about any person). As the Catholic Encyclopedia states it, “Anathema remains a major excommunication which is to be promulgated with great solemnity.”

(p.s. Excommunication is not accursedness either )

 

[VociMike]

Just as an expansion on the definition issue, I found this at CatholicReference.net. Since the word is used in a Catholic Document I thought it best to look at a Catholic source for the definition.
Brkn1, I know you and have never seen any dishonesty in any of your posts, However I can certainly see VociMike’s point here that, If one quotes from Catholic Church Documents they should quote the terms in those documents.
Did you get your quotes from a Catholic Source?

Peace
James

To be clear, I understood that brkn1 was just quoting from something he (she?) found, but somebody somewhere down the line replaced “anathema” with “accursed” and that was unjustified and probably a deliberate attempt to paint the Church in a bad light.

 

[brkn1]

Just as an expansion on the definition issue, I found this at CatholicReference.net. Since the word is used in a Catholic Document I thought it best to look at a Catholic source for the definition.
Brkn1, I know you and have never seen any dishonesty in any of your posts, However I can certainly see VociMike’s point here that, If one quotes from Catholic Church Documents they should quote the terms in those documents.
Did you get your quotes from a Catholic Source?

Peace
James

Hi James,
I did not get my quotes from a Catholic source, which could taint them as you suggest. I thank you for supplying some sources that I can look to now, although you must appreciate that I can not assume a Catholic source or any other source for that matter as the final word, which I reserve the Bible as having. You are still correct in my need to quote directly from the Catholic Church Documents, when presenting such arguments, and I now appologize for not doing so.

Yours in Christ, brkn1

 

[brkn1]

Fair enough. The Church has always used “anathema” to mean separated from the Church, but never as a declaration that the person is accursed (for she is in no position to make such a declaration about any person). As the Catholic Encyclopedia states it, “Anathema remains a major excommunication which is to be promulgated with great solemnity.”

(p.s. Excommunication is not accursedness either )

My appology to James includes one to you also VociMike.

Thanks for the explanation of the RCC position.

In Christ, brkn1 (he)

 

[Delta2]

Hey there

Can someone tell me what is OSAS ?

 

[brkn1]

Hey there

Can someone tell me what is OSAS ?

If you are Catholic, it is a very bad thing!

 

[Delta2]

If you are Catholic, it is a very bad thing!

I’m roman catholic

but can you say what the hell is OSAS ?

Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome ???

 

[jcoldc]

I’m roman catholic

but can you say what the hell is OSAS ?

Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome ???

Once saved always saved.

Some people believe that once you receive Christ as your savior and are born again, you will be going to heaven. You cannot do anything to jeopardize your salvation.

 

[VociMike]

OSAS is Once Saved Always Saved. It is the (mistaken) belief that one is saved in an instant, and from that instant on one cannot lose (that is, reject) that salvation under any circumstances or by any actions.

“But what if the person later blows up a classroom full of kids?!” you might ask. Then, you will be told that the person was never saved to begin with. So OSAS really translates to OSITSTBWAS. Once saved, if truly saved to begin with, always saved.