[classyT]

WG,

He paid for all of my sins... all means all. He is the author and finisher of my faith... I am NOT. Thank heavens. But again, I don't believe there are many TRUE Christians that reject him and walk away for the rest of their lives. There are always exceptions but when you KNOW him, have a relationship with him, how are you going to leave never to return? It would be difficult. Of course if you just had some head knowledge about Christ and never had a personal relationship with him and rejected him... well, it is possible the person was never really saved to begin with.

Interesting you believe we can use free will to reject Christ and He will put us out of His family. However, people can use their free will to reject the notion of Satan and it doesn't take them out of his family. THINK about it.

[Wondergirl]

Interesting you believe we can use free will to reject Christ and He will put us out of His family.

HE doesn't put us out of His family. We could do it.

Scenario: Christian man's daughter is in a horrible car accident. She's hospitalized and struggles to live. He prays constantly for her survival. After a week, she dies. He becomes angry at himself for not praying hard enough and at God for not saving her. He refuses to listen to anyone/Christians who try to help him through this tragedy. He turns his back on God. A year later, on the anniversary of his daughter's death, he kills himself. (Gee, I should write a book!)

Okay, does God look into his heart and hope to see faith in there somewhere? Or the mental/emotional distress caused faith to be clouded by life circumstances, but the faith is still there -- crushed and faint, but there?

[classyT]

WG,

Oh my! I believe with all my heart that man who lost his daughter and committed suicide would be with the Lord Jesus. He paid for all of his sins and just because he stop believing God was Good didn't make it so. He would be with the Father... forever. He will NEVER leave us or forsake us.

WG, take that same man. Say he goes wild instead of depressed. Lets say he sleeps with woman, take drugs to ease the pain. Oh sure, he shows up to church here and there but in general he is steeped in sin. Say that man is killed accidentally from driving drunk... is he any less saved? NO... he would be with the Father. That is my story and I believe it to my core. OUR GOD is GOOD. Salvation has NOTHING to do with us.. he did it all... we only need to accept it FREELY. Freely means FREELY.

[dwashbur]

A very simple question comes to mind: if I can't do anything to merit RECEIVING salvation, what makes me think I can do something to merit LOSING it? Either grace is apart from works or it's not.

This is more than just an academic question for me. My middle daughter, who was a staunch believer in childhood, has basically turned her back on Christianity. When this change happened, she told me "I don't believe in God any more." Because I understand the nature of grace and God's forgiveness, I was able to respond in a calm voice: "That's okay. He still believes in you." And yes, I firmly believe that.

[classyT]

Amen Dave! Salvation isn't about us... it is about HIM and what HE did. Our part is to believe, and should we fail to keep believing and wander like stupid sheep do... he keeps us. Just like a earthy Daddy would do.

[Athos]

"Once saved, always saved".

It doesn't stand up to a certain kind of logic, but the idea is psychologically valid. Believers will tend to live their lives accordingly. It's true that it can also be seen as a license to sin, but this is very unlikely and surely psychologically INVALID.

On a practical level, I have seen a number of born-agains whose lives have been changed for the good by the simple belief that God is ALWAYS with them no matter what they do, and that He will never abandon them.

It's a powerful belief.

[Riot]

Salvation is a gift...
Generally, gifts arnt taken back.

For example, when God gives us his Holy Spirit as a gift, he doesn't take it away from someone if they later decide to stop going to church.
Ie - if someone received the Holy Spirit and then a year later left church to do their own thing and be caught up in various sins. Now if they had some kind of revelation and came back to the church, repended and so forth, they would not need to receive the Spirit for the 2nd time. Because it was a gift from the first time...

[Wondergirl]

Now if they had some kind of revelation and came back to the church, repended and so forth, they would not need to recieve the Spirit for the 2nd time. Because it was a gift from the first time...

What if they didn't have a revelation and come back to the church?

[classyT]

It is important to back you what you believe with scripture. There is NO WHERE in the bible that suggests the Holy Spirit lives in a believer and then leaves. Quite the contrary. We are sealed with him. He isn't going anywhere. If He can leave us ( which we are clearly told he WILL not) what sin is it that caused his departure. Is it many? If so HOW many? It simply isn't so. He doesn't leave and come back when someone decides to live right. The thought goes against all of what salvation IS and what Jesus DID. He DID it... there is NOTHING left for man to do but believe it. NOTHING. The law taught us that already... we can't DO IT... we never could. Jesus didn't die so that we could believe that and continue to TRY to be good enough. He finished the work and he told us to believe it. Isn't that what the thief on the cross did? HE believed Jesus was who he said he was. Not a good work involved. It is simple and we make it complicated because we do not believe that God is really that good.

[Wondergirl]

It is important to back you what you believe with scripture. There is NO WHERE in the bible that suggests the Holy Spirit lives in a believer and then leaves.

So then what is the sin against the Holy Spirit? A non-believer hardening his heart so that the HS can't come in in the first place? (e.g. Pharaoh)

I ask again, What if they didn't have a revelation and come back to the church?

[dwashbur]

I ask again, What if they didn't have a revelation and come back to the church?

What if they didn't? What of it?

[Wondergirl]

What if they didn't? What of it?

Is that a sin against the Holy Spirit and is that person consigned to hell? Or does God still claim him as His own?

[classyT]

WG,

we are told we can grieve the Holy Spirit and I am sure he is grieved when we turn away fro the Lord... but he NEVER leaves us or forsakes us.

My personal belief the unpardonable sin is rejecting the Holy Spirit over and over again when a person is presented with the gospel. I also think when the Lord performed all the miracles and people walked away in unbelief THAT too was blaspheming. Just my thoughts though

[Wondergirl]

we are told we can grieve the Holy Spirit and I am sure he is grieved when we turn away fro the Lord... but he NEVER leaves us or forsakes us.

Is. 49:15b,16: Yes, they may forget, yet will I not forget you. Behold, I have graven thee upon the palms of my hands; thy walls are continually before me.

My personal belief the unpardonable sin is rejecting the Holy Spirit over and over again when a person is presented with the gospel. I also think when the Lord performed all the miracles and people walked away in unbelief THAT too was blaspheming. Just my thoughts though

I agree.

[JoeT777]

"Once saved, always saved".

It doesn't stand up to a certain kind of logic, but the idea is psychologically valid. Believers will tend to live their lives accordingly. It's true that it can also be seen as a license to sin, but this is very unlikely and surely psychologically INVALID.

On a practical level, I have seen a number of born-agains whose lives have been changed for the good by the simple belief that God is ALWAYS with them no matter what they do, and that He will never abandon them.

It's a powerful belief.

‘Once saved always saved is a type of self certified-salvation-obtained-in-the-here-and-now.’ This is a delusional and presumptuous state of euphoric self-justification that simply doesn’t exist. Certitude of salvation:

“For as no pious person ought to doubt the mercy of God, the merit of Christ and the virtue and efficacy of the sacraments, so each one, when he considers himself and his own weakness and indisposition, may have fear and apprehension concerning his own grace, since no one can know with the certainty of faith, which cannot be subject to error, that he has obtained the grace of God. (The Council of Trent Session VI, January, 1547, Pope Paul III)

A salvific faith is always accompanied by hope and charity. Implied in the first half of Romans 3:28 is a faith formed in charity; a faith that moves toward God in hope – the ‘works’ of hope and charity are present in St. Paul’s understanding of justification. As to the second part of the verse “without the works of the law” St. Paul is suggesting that the ritualistic washing pots and pans will not produce faith. "Faith is the substance of things to be hoped for, the evidence of things that appear not."(Hebrews 11:1)

Faith is a virtue of the knowledge of God’s love hoped for but not yet realized. Furthermore, a virtuous faith is formed in charity. Hope is a movement toward, or the vision of a thing not yet realized. We know that hope is forward looking, or the effects of our hope are realized in that future. Once the future object is obtained it is no longer hope, “hope that is seen, is not hope. For what a man seeth, why doth he hope for?” (Roman 8:24) “

Augustine says (De Doctr. Christ. iii, 10): "By charity I mean the movement of the soul towards the enjoyment of God for His own sake." Cf. John 15:15 (c. St. Thomas, II, II, 23, 1), i.e. friendship.

The nature of charity is:

“Charity is patient, is kind: charity envies not, deals not perversely, is not puffed up, is not ambitious, seeks not her own, is not provoked to anger, thinks no evil: Rejoices not in iniquity, but rejoices with the truth: Bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. (1 Corinthians 13:4-7)

As a consequence charity is required for justification: "Let all your things be done in charity." (1 Corinthians 16:14). Given these definitions of faith, hope, and charity we can conclude the following:

• If we have faith alone, we obtain justification in this life (i.e. salvation) then we don’t have a virtuous hope. Given that faith is defined as the substance of things hoped for, and without hope we cannot please God. Obviously this mode of obtaining salvation by faith alone and once-saved-always-saved becomes an absurdity as faith is always a lifelong struggle to persevere in hope and charity.
  
  
• If we have faith alone and we have obtained justification with certitude, not only is it not faith alone, it becomes a justification obtained without hope. This kind of faith is obtained in the great Divine lottery of predestination. This is another absurdity given that faith is formed without hope cannot be a realized as salvation in the here and now.
  
  
• If we have faith alone and somehow overcoming the previous objections, we are still left with an absurdity as that faith is formed in charity. And when added to ‘faith alone’ it is no longer a homogeneous salvation that saves in the here and now.

Once-saved-always-saved does indeed fail logic.

JoeT

[dwashbur]

Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur View Post
What if they didn't? What of it?
Is that a sin against the Holy Spirit and is that person consigned to hell? Or does God still claim him as His own?

Not even. I already pointed out that we don't know what this sin against the Holy Spirit is; anything we come up with is nothing but speculation. And again, I can't do anything to merit gaining salvation; how egotistical is it to think I can do anything to lose it? We're told that there will be rewards of some kind, and that some will get in by the skin of their teeth. But we don't see anybody actually losing salvation and ending up consigned to hell.

I have no idea what this unforgivable sin is, but I still tend to believe that if I'm worried I might have committed it, I undoubtedly haven't. Because if I had, I wouldn't care. I would be that far gone. Honestly, I couldn't say for sure that anyone in all of human history has ever committed it; it's possible Jesus was speaking hypothetically. John tells us there is a sin that leads to death, but not to hell.

Ultimately, I choose to shrug my shoulders about topics like this one, and go back to trying to focus on living the part that I DO understand.

[dwashbur]

Joe,
I don't care what popes or Augustine or councils or anybody else says. John 5:24 says the one who hears Jesus' words and believes in the One who sent him, HAS eternal life and SHALL NOT come into condemnation, but HAS PASSED from death to life.

These things are all stated as accomplished facts, a done deal. It would seem that your authorities are at odds with Jesus himself. Guess who I'm going with?

[JoeT777]

Joe,
I don't care what popes or Augustine or councils or anybody else says. . .

That's unfortunate. Those who hear His Apostles and their successors truly hear Christ.

He that heareth you, heareth me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth me; and he that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me.Luke 10:16

JoeT

[dwashbur]

Originally Posted by dwashbur View Post
Joe,
I don't care what popes or Augustine or councils or anybody else says. . .
That's unfortunate. Those who hear His Apostles and their successors truly hear Christ.

He that heareth you, heareth me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth me; and he that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me.Luke 10:16

I hear the apostles through their writings. But I do not believe they had any "successors." Once the eyewitnesses passed off the scene, that was it for apostleship in the Peter-James-John sense. Beyond that, my view carries just as much authority as Augustine's or anyone else's. So does ClassyT's, yours, and all the rest of us. I don't buy apostolic succession. Looking at the history of the church, that idea was little more than a power grab. But we could go around and around about that all day and all night. I would rather see you deal with the verse in John that I mentioned.

[JoeT777]

I hear the apostles through their writings. But I do not believe they had any "successors." Once the eyewitnesses passed off the scene, that was it for apostleship in the Peter-James-John sense.

That's it? Do you think Divine Justice rewards by throwing you off like a used snot rag? Nor does it make much sense. Only four gospels were written and only two of them by the original TWELVE. Consequently, what you do have in the way of the bible is at best second hand from the Apostles, third generation from Christ. In spite of the fact that you think Christ came just for you, He came for all of mankind; inviting them to friendship by partaking of His sacrament, i.e. the Catholic Church, originally known as 'The Way'.

Beyond that, my view carries just as much authority as Augustine's or anyone else's.

And such a limited view too, completely devoiced from the Divine Church's history and doctrine. It must be lonely, just you and what you think is Christ.

So does ClassyT's, yours, and all the rest of us.

?

I don't buy apostolic succession.

Its not for sale.

Looking at the history of the church, that idea was little more than a power grab.

And such a limited view makes you a poor judge for the Saints.

But we could go around and around about that all day and all night. I would rather see you deal with the verse in John that I mentioned.

I would be happy to discuss the verse of John if I knew what it was.

JoeT