Its another way of saying “eternal security” - that once we are saved through faith and are justified - we can’t lose that faith and salvation. Catholics believe the we are saved though faith (and unmerited act of grace) leading to justification as well. However, Catholic doctrine teaches that justification is an ongoing process and we can lose our salvation - not by the act of anyone else or any third party, but by our free will exercise of turning away from Christ.
As I understand it it relates to the Calvinistic position of predestination. Those who are distined to be saved, will come forward, pray the sinners prayer and enter the body of Christ. Once there, nothing they ever do will cause them to lose their salvation. That Christ already died for any sins they committed or might commit in the future - and there in lies the danger. I have seen people who believe this and their lives have not been reformed. When they forst became Christians, they were gung-ho, doing all they could for their church and evangelizing all within earshot, but later their ardor cooled, they went to church less, and reverted to many sinful habits. Yet they retained the notion that they ARE SAVED. They do not see that they are spiriually dead like the seed in the parable which falls on rocky ground, sprouts but then is choked out for there are no roots.
Thank you - yes, I understand the doctrine as you describe it. One of the principal problems with this approach is that there are verses in scripture clearly directed to “believers” (real believers) that warn them of falling away. One example is Paul’s discussion of Gentile “believers” who can be pulled out of the root stock. Also, there are verses described “believers” who cast out demons in Jesus name (that requires the power of the Holy Spirit - only avaliable to "believers) who ultimately are rejected by Christ.
I like the ideas presented here of “Perseverence of the saints”. It is a very Catholic understanding of how one lives the life of redemption.
First of all - Redemption is NOT Salvation.
1 John 5:13
I’ve searched the Scriptures for years for solid Scriptual proofs to support the apparrent free will of man after the fall. I have yet to find a bibilical case for free will as understood by most. Please start with John chapter 1 and tell me why you are in Christ… was it the will of man or the will of God that you believe in Christ? What was lost in the garden?
Here’s an answer to your question that I changed to red text.
That part’s easy my friend. The Hebrew scriptures and NT are permeated with “free will”. We are told that before us lies life or destruction “choose” life; we are told/exhorted by Jesus to “repent” (suggests choice); we are told to preach the gospel (why? if no choice). The concept that we are powerless to choose, once God is made known to us makes a mockery (really) of the gospel which is a message that is otherwise of application only to those chosen by God and who then are incapable of making a “choice”.
Please post that apparent scriptures in context to make your case for free will. Please start with the so called free choice verses in Joshua.
2nd Adam:
I’ve noticed that many of the Catholics on this site will pull a single verse out of context to make it mean something other than what is true when taken in context of the surrounding verses. Let’s start with your first verse of Joshua 24:15. Therefafter, we can go through each of the verses that you posted in its proper context.
What are the choices of Joshua? They are choices between two idols.I’ve noticed that many of the Catholics on this site will pull a single verse out of context to make it mean something other than what is true when taken in context of the surrounding verses. Let’s start with your first verse of Joshua 24:15.
LOL - that’s funny - well, I’m not Catholic (yet) and I certainly don’t try to pull verses out of context and am likely as familiar with scripture (and theology and Christian doctrine) as most anyone participating on this Board. That being said, I approach scripture with tremendous humility and take Peter at his word about the dangers of twisting, for example, Paul’s words to our own destruction (given their difficulty). This is why context is important as is the “historical” understanding of these verses by the apostles. That will help build the case for apostolic succession as well as our need of the interpretative authority of the magesterium to prevent us all from being our own “teacher” and our own “pope”.
That being said, I’m not sure why you think the cited verse in Joshua is out of context. The surrounding context does not attack the understanding that his is a “choice” of free will.
It is true that after the coming of Christ - our salvation is based upon faith (new covenant) and that faith requires the action of the Holy Spirit. The fact that our “choice” becomes active (today - after Christ) only after the action of the Holy Spirit is not the issue - the issue is whether the story of the scriptures gives us “free will” and choice. In the old covenant - the answer was “yes” and though our nature was wounded, God forgave our transgression through the system of sacrifice which covered our sin (didn’t wash it away).
In the new covenant - our nature is made clean/righteous by Christ’s perfect sacrifice - now we can have faith (through the act of the Holy Spirit) but must still “choose” life.
Blessings,
Brian
I think free will has to do with the unregenerate choosing life based on his own free will… without any outside influences. Now, if we agree that God the Holy Spirit is required for a sinner who is in enmity with God (dead in His sins and trespasses) to come to Christ, then how does the Holy Spirit enable the sinner to freely choose Christ? Does the Spirit open the hearts of certain sinners like Lydia to believe in the good news? When the unregenerate is being influenced by God the Holy Spirit, maybe the will of man in no longer free at that point? Let’s skip ahead in regards to Joshua and see Romans 9, 10, 11 in regards to apostate jews and the true jew (Rom 2). So which Israelite believed in an effectual way according to Romans 11?LOL - that’s funny - well, I’m not Catholic (yet) and I certainly don’t try to pull verses out of context and am likely as familiar with scripture (and theology and Christian doctrine) as most anyone participating on this Board. That being said, I approach scripture with tremendous humility and take Peter at his word about the dangers of twisting, for example, Paul’s words to our own destruction (given their difficulty). This is why context is important as is the “historical” understanding of these verses by the apostles. That will help build the case for apostolic succession as well as our need of the interpretative authority of the magesterium to prevent us all from being our own “teacher” and our own “pope”.
That being said, I’m not sure why you think the cited verse in Joshua is out of context. The surrounding context does not attack the understanding that his is a “choice” of free will.
It is true that after the coming of Christ - our salvation is based upon faith (new covenant) and that faith requires the action of the Holy Spirit. The fact that our “choice” becomes active (today - after Christ) only after the action of the Holy Spirit is not the issue - the issue is whether the story of the scriptures gives us “free will” and choice. In the old covenant - the answer was “yes” and though our nature was wounded, God forgave our transgression through the system of sacrifice which covered our sin (didn’t wash it away).
In the new covenant - our nature is made clean/righteous by Christ’s perfect sacrifice - now we can have faith (through the act of the Holy Spirit) but must still “choose” life.
Blessings,
Brian