/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

I want someone to posta an extra-biblica, pre-revolt("reformation) endorsement of this "tempting"doctrine.

>>562185

No such endorsement exists

because

It was made up in the reformation

the council of trent KINDA supports this

>>562189

I want to investigate all POVs.

>>562191

Supports the doctrine of OSAS?

>>562194

the doctrine of grace alone.

which is kind of the same thing,TBQB

>>562195

>grace alone

"If anyone says that man can be justified before God by his own works, whether done by his own natural powers or by the teaching of the Law, without divine grace through Jesus Christ, let him be anathema" (Session 6; can. 1)

"If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone, meaning that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to obtain the grace of justification and that it is not in any way necessary that he be prepared and disposed by the action of his own will, let him be anathema" (Session 6: can. 9)

So, yeah, Grace Alone saves, but not in the sense that the Protestants mean it.

>>562189

>It was made up in the reformation

But then why does my bible say Jesus taught it?

>>562230

>But then why does my bible say Jesus taught it?

Could you give me a reference in scripture?

>>562185

>why aren't there any writings of ye olde early church fathers that support X?

this line of reasoning would sway me if the majority of the people who kept this history weren't part of the same political/crypto-political organization that's been known to forge documents, and light books and people they don't like on fire.

most of the doctrines the Bible clearly express and rome rejects would have been a major threat to its power.

>>562182

>21 “Brother will hand over brother to death, and a father his child. Children will rise against parents and have them put to death.

>22 And you will be hated by everyone because of my name. But the one who endures to the end will be saved.

>23 Whenever they persecute you in one place, flee to another. I tell you the truth, you will not finish going through all the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes. (Matthew 10:21-23)

this is talking about being saved from the tribulation they're going to endure, not about enduring the sacramental treadmill without committing a mortal sin,

doesn't contradict OSAS

>Ephesians 2:10

that's a why, not a how.

doesn't contradict OSAS

>unto us which are being saved

>we […] are being saved

since the subjects are plural, it can still be referring to a one time event, just happening to different people.

doesn't contradict OSAS

>1 Cor 4:3-4

not talking about whether or not he's saved from damnation

doesn't contradict OSAS

>1 Cor 9:27

Paul had no fear about losing his salvation (see Romans 8:1, 29-39)

in this passage, he was worried about losing his reward, he thought it would be pathetic to forfeit a crown through his own lack of self-discipline or by breaking the Judge's rules since he had instructed others concerning how to win one.

doesn't contradict OSAS

>>562232

John 6:40

>>562233

how do you know Rome didn't accept them but then Rome itself changed stuff so its tho as it doesn't accept them now?

I think that the reformation really didnt ever happen and its all a scam run by a third party

>>562235

>For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day."

<believes in Him will have eternal life

<will have

Future tense, not present tense.

Its not "believes in Him has eternal life"

>>562239

Also, I just looked at the Greek and it is in fact present tense.

>>562249

>Also, I just looked at the Greek and it is in fact present tense.

Yes in the Greek it is present tense.

However the Greek also translates "Believes" into present tense.

<Believing

There goes your OSAS

>>562241

>implying that belief in things isn't subject to change

You believed in Santa Claus at one point, most likely. You probably don't believe in him now. Do you honestly think that a person who believes in Jesus for a season, then becomes a staunch atheist and a hedonist for the rest of his life is saved?

>inb4 he never really believed

That's stupid and you're wrong. OSAS requires circular reasoning.

>>562233

>this is talking about being saved from the tribulation they're going to endure

>"If you endure to the end of the tribulation, the tribulation will be over."

That's retarded and not worth saying. It's pretty self-apparent that since they were being persecuted in His name, that if you endure in His name, you will be saved… as opposed to NOT enduring in His name, and losing your salvation.

>since the subjects are plural, it can still be referring to a one time event, just happening to different people

Paul was an Apostle writing to a Church of baptized people. He wasn't writing to non-believers, and there is no indication that he was talking to people not-yet admitted.

>not talking about whether or not he's saved from damnation

>"because I said so and I'm going to ignore what he was clearly saying because it isn't my own comfy theology"

>Paul had no fear about losing his salvation

"Work out your salvation with fear and trembling." t. Paul

Just because there is no condemnation in Christ, doesn't mean you cannot cease being in Christ.

>being saved

>>562182

>"And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved." Matthew 10:22

This literally contradicts the "salvation is a one time event in the past" since it asks the subject to endure through faith continuously, until the finish line/judgment/death, to persist until the end and then he will be saved….

Anyway Paul already dispelled the "one time event" when he said: So that, my beloved, as ye always obey, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, with fear and trembling your own salvation work out, Philipians 2:12…this was a letter to believers asking them to continue workout out their salvation with fear and trembling. Why? Because they must endure and persist. Salvation is a life time process.

>>562241

certainty is a psychological state that does not guarantee ontological truth. For example a person can be certain he is Christian & saved yet be a mormon who is totally not-saved.

Or via 1 John 2:19 they could be certain they are christian/saved, yet eventually stray away becase they "were never really among us"...

>>562249

To clarify: Now that we looked into the Greek and saw that both "shall" and "believes" are present tense, the text would sound like this.

>who beholds the Son and is BELIEVING in Him HAS eternal life.

<believing

is a continuous action,

so once someone ceases to be believing; he no longer HAS eternal life.

This is a contrary to OSAS.

>>562251

Saving faith isn't a one time fedora tip

>>562259

>Do you honestly think that a person who believes in Jesus for a season, then becomes a staunch atheist and a hedonist for the rest of his life is saved?

I don't believe saving faith is mental assent

>>inb4 he never really believed

It's entirely possible for someone to give assensus to Jesus and not be saved. When the bible says to be saved by believing in Jesus, that has a specific meaning.

>That's stupid and you're wrong

Is 1 John 2:19 stupid and wrong?

>>562265

>This literally contradicts the "salvation is a one time event in the past" since it asks the subject to endure through faith continuously, until the finish

Faith and justification are distinct categories.

>Why?

To move them to humble obedience.

>Salvation is a life time process

Certainly, but here Paul is speaking specifically of admittance into heaven.

>>562266

>certainty is a psychological state that does not guarantee ontological truth

A promise from God is always true

>For example a person can be certain he is Christian & saved yet be a mormon who is totally not-saved.

>Or via 1 John 2:19 they could be certain they are christian/saved, yet eventually stray away becase they "were never really among us"…

Just because some men are self-deceived doesn't mean no one can be certain.

>>562267

>so once someone ceases to be believing; he no longer HAS eternal life.

>This is a contrary to OSAS.

Men who John says 'believed' in Jesus Jesus Himself says were not 'believing'. This is because John utilizes the tense to describe different kinds of faith. He uses the past tense to describe a kind of faith which only exists for a moment, and for true faith, which is "living", which is fiducia, he uses the present tense, since it continues to exist.

Jesus says all who are believing in Him will have eternal life. The present tense is used because it is so certain, it already belongs to them.

>>562259

>"If you endure to the end of the tribulation, the tribulation will be over."

>That's retarded

do you realize, if your private interpretation of this verse is wrong and mine is right, you just called Jesus a retard for being a little redundant?

you must be pretty sure of yourself, but look at the next verse:

>Whenever they persecute you in one place, flee to another. I tell you the truth, you will not finish going through all the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.

that's obviously what He's saying.

>Paul was an Apostle writing to a Church of baptized people.

correct, they are those "which are being saved" (one time event) rather than "them that are perishing"

they were "them that are perishing" before the one time event of them being saved happened.

>"because I said so and I'm going to ignore what he was clearly saying because it isn't my own comfy theology"

yeah i didn't offer an explanation, i was hoping you'd be like "nah uh, (argument)"

it'd give me more to work with than "look at this verse"

>>562279

>Saving faith isn't a one time fedora tip

I agree with you.

Now tell me teacher, what is true "saving faith" then?

>>562279

>John utilizes the tense to describe different kinds of faith.

>He uses the past tense to describe a kind of faith which only exists for a moment, and for true faith, which is "living", which is fiducia, he uses the present tense, since it continues to exist.

Then tell me, what is "true faith"?

Simply a "fiducia" kind of faith? and how do i obtain it?

>Jesus says all who are believing in Him will have eternal life.

Now you're getting it.

What happens when a person ceases "believing" then?

>>562292

>if your private interpretation of this verse is wrong

You mean the "private interpretation" that is communicated by the Church that Jesus Christ Himself bestowed His authority on? You mean the "private interpretation" expressed by every Christian for the first 1,600 or so years of Christianity? You mean the "private interpretation" that is currently expressed by almost every Christian on the planet excluding a few theologically backward American sects?

>>562297

>Now tell me teacher, what is true "saving faith" then?

It is when a sinner, seeing that they have no hope, place in Jesus Christ all their hope, and rest upon Him as their sole source of righteousness.

>What happens when a person ceases "believing" then?

We have already established that "believing" is a kind of faith. For a person to cease believing is for them to no longer have that kind of faith. This is impossible, because this faith is a work of God, and God does not fail. But that is ontological, and if we look at it forensically instead, there is a different answer. If a person is "believing", but returns to their old ways and again wages war on God (remember this is an impossible scenario), they will still be justified because Jesus believed perfectly, and He died for unbelief.

>>562279

>>562279

>Just because some men are self-deceived doesn't mean no one can be certain

>A promise from God is always true

Again a person can be certain and wrong.

Certainty is a psychological state of a subject, it does not equate to having a true opinion.

If a person is certain he is saved and then a decade later converts to atheism or islam he clearly was never saved to begin with or he lost his salvation. Either way the idea of "once saved always saved" is fruitless, since no one can see into their future, and their future can revoke and dismantle the so-called "moment of salvation" they believed, with certainty, they had. Yet they never did

>>562319

<Now tell me teacher, what is true "saving faith" then?

>It is when a sinner, seeing that they have no hope, place in Jesus Christ all their hope, and rest upon Him as their sole source of righteousness.

So faith alone is not sufficient to save, but also a degree of hope?

>We have already established that "believing" is a kind of faith.

No that has not been established. Belief and faith are different.

> If a person is "believing", but returns to their old ways and again wages war on God (remember this is an impossible scenario),

Tell me why this is impossible.

> they will still be justified

No because they ceased believing.

>We have already established that "believing" is a kind of faith

Can you give me the biblical definition of belief?

>>562336

>Again a person can be certain and wrong

It doesn't matter, it's a question if someone can be appropriately certain

>If a person is certain he is saved and then a decade later converts to atheism or islam he clearly was never saved to begin with or he lost his salvation. Either way the idea of "once saved always saved" is fruitless, since no one can see into their future

But someone who is truly "saved" can know they are, and because of that receive perfect inerrant assurance of salvation.

>their future can revoke and dismantle the so-called "moment of salvation" they believed, with certainty, they had. Yet they never did

It sounds like you're arguing against the concept of truth; men can believe they are correct about things, and yet be wrong, therefore no one can know what the truth is.

>>562339

>So faith alone is not sufficient to save, but also a degree of hope?

No. Faith is trust. This trust alone justifies, because it alone acquires the righteousness of Christ.

>No that has not been established. Belief and faith are different.

Belief and faith are synonyms

>Tell me why this is impossible.

Were you not paying attention?

<this faith is a work of God, and God does not fail

>No because they ceased believing.

Again, what the bible says about when men cease believing is irrelevant, because this scenario is impossible, and those scriptures are about things which actually happen. If a person is believing, they will have eternal life. What we are talking about is a hypothetical "what if".

>Can you give me the biblical definition of belief?

It can mean a number of things, including profession of faith, or mere mental assent, or a trust in Christ which is not a trust in Christ as savior, or a proper fiducia.

>>562309

not seeing an argument, guess we're done here.

>>562341

>But someone who is truly "saved" can know they are, and because of that receive perfect inerrant assurance of salvation.

we are asked to believe and have faith in God and his mercy, not acquire absolute gnosis of our future destinies.

belief and faith always have an element of risk and uncertainty, this helps promote humility in the subject.

>It sounds like you're arguing against the concept of truth; men can believe they are correct about things, and yet be wrong, therefore no one can know what the truth is.

no. just because we have access to some truths doesn't mean we have access to all truths.

This notion of [OSAS] + (salvation is simply a moment in the past) is not one of the "truths" we can honestly be certain about. You can have pseudo-certainty, sure, you can convince yourself of it, but that is not honest, that is a form of self delusion.

I don't think they are even correct in terms of scripture, let alone metaphysically.

>>562341

> Faith is trust. This trust alone justifies

<You see that a man is justified… not by faith alone. (James 2.24)

>It is when a sinner, seeing that they have no hope, place in Jesus Christ all their hope, and rest upon Him as their sole source of righteousness.

So this is not true"saving faith" since it relies on hope.

Again tell me, what is true "saving faith" then?

>Belief and faith are synonyms

No, clearly biblical belief is different from faith.

<He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does NOT OBEY the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.”

"Believing" entails obedience,

"Faith" does not entail obedience.

They are different. I want you now to tell me the relationship of belief and faith according to scripture.

>this faith is a work of God, and God does not fail.

Again, you have not proved that belief is "a kind of faith"

Your whole argument relies on equating "believing" and "faith" in scripture.

Is believing "a kind of faith", or synonymous to faith, or different than faith. Show me this in scripture, then i can understand your argument.

>Again, what the bible says about when men cease believing is irrelevant

Could you give me a reference in scripture?

<Can you give me the biblical definition of belief?

>It can mean a number of things, including profession of faith, or mere mental assent, or a trust in Christ which is not a trust in Christ as savior, or a proper fiducia.

Again, what is the relationship with belief and faith according to scripture. I would like a clear answer.

>>562350

><You see that a man is justified… not by faith alone. (James 2.24)

James uses justify to mean 'demonstrate righteousness', whereas Paul uses it to mean 'declare righteous'.

>So this is not true"saving faith" since it relies on hope.

Why are you being facetious?

>"Believing" entails obedience,

>"Faith" does not entail obedience.

The word rendered 'believes' in this verse is πιστεύων, a form of the word πιστεύω "to have faith in", which itself comes from πίστις "faith". The English words belief and faith are synonyms, but in Greek the connection between belief and faith is only clearer. By arguing that these words mean different things, you're climbing up a hill 90 degrees steep.

>I want you now to tell me the relationship of belief and faith according to scripture

It is the relationship of a thing to itself

>Again, you have not proved that belief is "a kind of faith"

Yes I have. If you would like to attempt a counter-argument, feel free to do so. I explained how "believing" is a kind of faith and "believed" is a different kind, because if they weren't Jesus' words would be false.

>Could you give me a reference in scripture?

Again, why are you being facetious?

Does osas mean you never sin or that you sin but dont go to hell?

Where is sin punished then?

>>562525

>Where is sin punished

On the cross.

>>562525

>Where is sin punished then?

on the cross around 2000 years ago

>>562526

>>562527

>sacrifice is punishment

It wouldn't hurt you to use your brain every once in a while

>>562533

Galatians 3:13

>>562537

>becoming a curse==being punished

Which dictionary are you using?

>>562542

>the curse for sin is not punishment

Which bible are you using?

>>562525

That your sins don't cont against you for salvation. Read Romans 5-7 again

>>562543

>sin

here you bring in a concept not included in your quotation. why?

>>562545

>the curse of the law

>>562533

Are youbsaying Jesus wasn't punished for our sins?

Revelation 21:8b says "…and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death." and Romans 3:4a says "God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar;…" Therefore every man is condemned no matter what they do, which is consistent with Galatians 5:4 and James 2:10 respectively: "Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace." & "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all." So if we are putting any faith or trust in our works, then we are behaving lawlessly by disobeying the law of grace:

"27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.

28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law."

Romans 3

If we believe, then we are sealed with the Holy Ghost: "In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise," (Ephesians 1:14) A seal is responsible for keeping two things together. That coincides with what Jesus says "I will never leave thee nor forsake thee."

So to reconcile your situation in the most biblically consistent way, I would allege that if you truly believed, then it is not possible for you to ever stop FULLY believing that you are saved by grace because you are sealed with the third person of the Godhead. It is guiding you in all truth. So either you never believed and therefore you were never sealed indefinitely with the Holy Ghost: "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us." (1 John 2:19) or you have a diminished amount of belief – perhaps as a function of giving in to the old man too often and have thus become "backslidden." Even if you are convinced that you have completely stopped believing, then "If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself." (2 Timothy 2:13) since God cannot lie and take back his promise "In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;" (Titus 1:2)

So if you lose your eternal life, then that means that it was never eternal. It sounds too good to be true because as I've said on another post I believe God has a feedback loop to check this. I think it becomes harder for a person to "repent" and believe the gospel the more and more they ignore their guilty conscience. God darkens our hearts the more we sin prior to believing because even the lost still function to a certain extent on natural law. I believe that someone who cannot understand why it's so easy to be saved is demonstrating their lack of understanding. I mean, think about it, someone who is denying that it is that easy to be saved is demonstrating the very darkening of the heart I am pointing out because they are inevitably relying on their own self righteousness by logical deduction. And God gave us a hypothetical response to that scenario:

"21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful WORKS?

23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that WORK iniquity."

(Matthew 7)

>>562550

I'm saying the Law required a sacrifice for sins, and since Jesus came to fulfill the law, He came to be sacrificed. The sacrifices of the ancient Jews weren't culpable, and this is what He's been.

>>562557

The law required a sacrifice for sins because sinners require atonement

>>562549

I'm afraid you'll have to type a coherent sentence because I can't make heads or tails of what you're trying to say

>>562540

Also how Jesus said if you believe in him you will NEVER thirst again

35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.

>>562558

I agree?

>>562522

>James uses justify to mean 'demonstrate righteousness', whereas Paul uses it to mean 'declare righteous'.

So you then agree words can be changed according to their context/author?

Both Paul and James use the word "dikaioutai" for "justified"

>The word rendered 'believes' in this verse is πιστεύων, a form of the word πιστεύω "to have faith in"

Now according to your own logic above, I can claim that πιστεύω entails obedience since in John 3.36 the opposite of "believes" is "to disobey".

Therefore my argument that "faith" and "belief" are not synonymous according to John still stands.

Unless you concede that "faith" entails obedience also, which then refutes "faith alone".

>James uses justify to mean 'demonstrate righteousness', whereas Paul uses it to mean 'declare righteous'.

Again, according to your own logic that πιστεύω has a relationship to faith as >of a thing to itself

Then both Paul and James would have used "Justified" (since they are the same word) in both ways to mean the same thing. which you clearly disagree with.

Tell me then, which is it, to 'demonstrate righteousness' or to mean 'declare righteous'?

>Why are you being facetious?

My soul is in jeopardy here. I beg you Teacher, you claim that true "saving faith" will grant me eternal life. I wouldn't want to have a different kind of faith or else I won't have eternal life.

Tell me what is this true "saving faith". And how do I obtain it.

<Again, you have not proved that belief is "a kind of faith"

>Yes I have

No you haven't

I have provided a counter argument, Belief according to scripture contains obedience. Would you then claim that also faith requires obedience?

<Could you give me a reference in scripture?

>Again, why are you being facetious?

Since when has asking for evidence on a claim been facetious.

You are making authoritative claims on the word of God without scripture to back you up.

Sincerely I ask you: Could you give me a reference in scripture?

>>562563

>Belief according to scripture contains obedience

That doesn't make any sense. You're obviously conflating "obedience" with works and

>And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

Romans 11:6

>>562564

>You're obviously conflating "obedience" with works

Yeah I mean Jesus has never told us to be good to our neighbors

>>562566

>when he said whosoever beliveth and not of works what he really meant was of works

>>562566

I agree?

>>562564

>That doesn't make any sense. You're obviously conflating "obedience" with works

I never used the word "works" in my argument.

Reread it.

>Romans 11:6

I can argue Paul was referring to "works of the law" and not obedience.

>>562567

>whosoever beliveth and not of works

???

>>562569

ebin

>>562571

John 6:47 and Ephesians 2:8-9

>>562570

But he just said works so he means both like in Romans 4:5

>>562567

>when he said whosoever beliveth and not of works

My sides

>>562575

I think you also lost your brain

>>562576

He's not actually reading what you're saying, he's responding to your flag.

This is an unfortunate side effect of catholic and orthodox iconography.

I would advise you to hide your flag.

polite af sage

>>562573

>But he just said works so he means both like in Romans 4:5

I can still argue he was referring to "works of the law"

>But he just said works so he means both like in Romans 4:5

You are equating "works" with "obedience"???

Works isn't even my argument, Make your own thread about "faith alone" this thread is about OSAS.

>>562573

>unmerited grace saves

>faith, given by grace, saves

>following the orders of Him who told you #2 is completely optional, though

I think I've pulled my grey matter with all the jogging it's been doing

>>562583

>I think I've pulled my grey matter with all the jogging it's been doing

That's unfortunate. What seems to be your question?

>>562585

I have no question, I'm telling >>562573 that his brain doesn't work right

>>562563

>So you then agree words can be changed according to their context/author?

Yep.

>Now according to your own logic above, I can claim that πιστεύω entails obedience since in John 3.36 the opposite of "believes" is "to disobey"

The opposite of belief is not disobedience, it's unbelief. True faith produces works, so those who do not obey do so because they do not truly believe.

>Therefore my argument that "faith" and "belief" are not synonymous according to John still stands

No it doesn't. James takes up the entirety of a large passage defining justify, we have one verse in John. There is no sign that John is using anything but the normal definition for the word.

>Then both Paul and James would have used "Justified" (since they are the same word) in both ways to mean the same thing

Except the context demonstrates a different usage. The context of John 3:36 shows normal usage of 'believes'

>Tell me what is this true "saving faith"

It is when a sinner, seeing that they have no hope, place in Jesus Christ all their hope, and rest upon Him as their sole source of righteousness.

>And how do I obtain it

Merely place all your faith in Jesus Christ, and do nothing to be saved.

>Belief according to scripture contains obedience

Belief produces obedience, it doesn't contain obedience.

>Since when has asking for evidence on a claim been facetious.

I didn't make a claim, I gave an explanation

>>562570

>I can argue Paul was referring to "works of the law" and not obedience.

Works of the law are obedience. All men are required to perform works of the law, including Christians.

>>562586

oh ok. There is no difference between "obedience" and following the "works of the law."

Most Christians don't understand what the word "law" means. Every single commandment is the law and therefore doing something like "thou shalt not lie" is a work of the law just as much as the commandment to get circumcized. Because that's what the bible is – revealed law.

So referring to my post above >>562555

>Revelation 21:8b says "…and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death." and Romans 3:4a says "God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar;…" Therefore every man is condemned no matter what they do, which is consistent with Galatians 5:4 and James 2:10 respectively: "Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace." & "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all." So if we are putting any faith or trust in our works, then we are behaving lawlessly by disobeying the law of grace:

<"27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.

<28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law."

Romans 3

His brain works correctly because he's making abnegating the alleged distinction you are assuming.

>>562587

>True faith produces works

But it's not what saves you because I could be doing works right now arguing with you but in an hour I could be getting drunk or watching pornography. Since we still struggle with the old man in this life it is impossible to stop sinning until we die, therefore we are saved by belief and NOT by anything physical that we do.

You're also making the assumption of saving faith from a shoddy modern translation from James 2:14

<What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?

KJV

<What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith but has not works? Can his faith save him?

<What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him?

NABRE

So there's a difference in implication of "can faith save him" versus "can THAT" or "can HIS" faith save him. You're introducing the concept of a different kind of faith which makes a distinction between saving versus UNsaving faith. Which is obviously preposterous since Jesus said:

>And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you.

Matthew 17:20

>>562590

>True faith produces works but it's not what saves you

I don't know, smells like heresy to me

>>562590

Without the erroneous assumption of 2 different types of faith, Jesus' message is that it's EASY to be saved and that it doesn't require any work to demonstrate to God that you're saved since faith is in the heart and not in what you do. Works is for showing man your faith, not God.

When you assume the possibility of an unsaving faith rather than understanding that "unsaving" faith is just simply NOT having faith, then obviously the meaning of Matthew 17:20 changes to the corrupted catholic doctrine of salvation by sacraments (works).

>>562593

>smells like heresy

According to who?

>That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.

1 Corinthians 2:5

>But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

1 John 2:27

>>562594

>According to who?

You just said true faith doesn't save you but produces works. Read your post again.

>>562597

No YOU re-read what I said again.

Works are not necessary for salvation before God, works are only for demonstrating to man your faith.

>But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Romans 4:5

>>562598

>works are only for demonstrating to man your faith

Personally I couldn't care less about showing off my faith, unbelievers will mistake them for insincerity and believers don't need witnessing. It doesn't make any sense.

Or are you saying that faith is received by witnessing good works, and not by supernatural grace?

>>562590

What are you even saying?

>>562599

>I couldn't care less about showing off my faith

Right. That's problematic because Jesus commands us to preach the gospel. By preaching the gospel, you are demonstrating your faith by works.

Here's another example. If you're at a church and you're married and your wife wants to commit extortion by using the family court system to extract your wealth and commit adultery, it is the church's duty to fight against any agent of the civil government who would function complicitly with the extortioners, which is the wife and the agents of the civil government who are cooperating with the wife. Therefore your brothers would show their works by being willing to fire back assuming that they fire on you for non-compliance.

However if you choose to be lazy and not preach or a coward and not protect the sanctity of your brother's property as a duty and obligation as a church congregant, it doesn't mean that you're not saved.

>>562600

>What are you even saying?

<For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which ARE SAVED it is the power of God.

1 Corinthians 1:18

>>562599

>Personally I couldn't care less about showing off my faith,

1 Corinthians 4:1-4

Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God.

Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful.

But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self.

For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord.

James 2:18

Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

>>562587

>The opposite of belief is not disobedience, it's unbelief.

<He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not OBEY the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him." (John 3.36)

Clearly its not.

>True faith produces works

I never said anything about works.

>so those who do not obey do so because they do not truly believe.

So are you claiming it is impossible to disobey without truly believing?

>No it doesn't. James takes up the entirety of a large passage defining justify.

Show me the scripture.

>There is no sign that John is using anything but the normal definition for the word.

I gave you John 3.36

Unless you give me evidence, i can also claim there's no sign that James didn't either use the normal definition either.

>Except the context demonstrates a different usage.

Yes thats the exact logic you should you for "Belief" too

>The context of John 3:36 shows normal usage of 'believes'

I disagree since he uses the opposite of "believes" as "not obey".

>It is when a sinner, seeing that they have no hope, place in Jesus Christ all their hope, and rest upon Him as their sole source of righteousness.

So faith alone is not sufficient to save, but also a degree of hope?

>Belief produces obedience, it doesn't contain obedience.

Can you show me the scripture so that i may be convinced?

>I didn't make a claim, I gave an explanation

Okay good, show me the scripture.

>Works of the law are obedience

How are they the same?

> All men are required to perform works of the law, including Christians

We are required to preform works of the law? All 613? even to be circumcised? to be saved?

>>562601

>>562602

>faith is received by witnessing good works, and not by supernatural grace

wew

>>562606

Nope, but 2 Corinthians 4:3 is true.

>>562603

You're a catholic so clearly you understand the nature of lawyers since your priests use useless statute to make an appeal for a person to surrender their principal/agency and give it over to a man to think for you.

<Principal: the person with the highest authority or most important position in an organization, institution, or group.

>Thus saith the Lord; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord.

Jeremiah 17:5

oops..

Anyway, imagine you're on trial and God the Father says "anon, why should you be allowed in? You've lied before at least once, you've watched months and months worth of pornography, you disrespected your dad"

Are you going to say "Lord Lord I have done many wonderful works and prophesied on 8chan in your name!?"

No.

Jesus is your advocate, he's your lawyer/priest and he's your sacrifice. You plead "Innocent by proxy" since Jesus paid your atonement.

>And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

John 6:40

How hard is this to grasp?

>>562606

Yeah ok. that's not what I implied and the second person you referenced isn't me, genius.

8chan can be an exciting place to exchange ideas, however impulsive personalities have a predisposition to make themselves appear as fools.

>>562608

>that's not what I implied

That's what it boils down to.

>>562607

So we should be shining examples to people who are blind so they may see our light while still being blind?

>>562610

"it" being your post

>>562610

Acts 5:32

And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.

>>562610

Yeah dude God loves us and just because we abdicate our responsibilities doesn't mean that we lose our salvation/justification (same thing) since we cannot justify ourselves. If we have to maintain our justification then that means that we were insufficiently justified by the sacrifice of Jesus CHrist and therefore Jesus would have to keep dying over and over again.

>4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,

>5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,

>6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

Hebrews 6

>>562608

This thread is about OSAS. Go to the faith alone general and debate there.

>>562612

When mentioning a post that's not by you that post's author expects a reply, not a phrase at random; you may dissolve the aura of opacity which naturally forms around a straight bible quote by adding a foreword to it.

>>562614

The two are completely hand in hand. If you do not believe in OSAS then you do not believe in faith alone. It is not possible to discuss one without the other.

>>562615

lol!

>>562594

>Jesus' message is that it's EASY to be saved

Jesus' message is that it's impossible to be saved. It's not easy, it's not hard, it's impossible. That's why God came down from heaven, to save men who without grace would never even think of believing in Him.

>it doesn't require any work to demonstrate to God that you're saved

You're right, God already knows someone's saved because He's the one who saved them. Part of the process of their salvation is sanctification, by which they produce works through which we see their righteousness.

>When you assume the possibility of an unsaving faith rather than understanding that "unsaving" faith is just simply NOT having faith

Unsaving faith is faith which is not saving faith. The difference is in the faith; a faith which is mere mental assent will never save anybody, but true faith is trust in Christ as savior.

>then obviously the meaning of Matthew 17:20 changes to the corrupted catholic doctrine of salvation by sacraments (works)

The difference between saving and unsaving faith isn't works, it's nature. True faith has absolutely no need of works to make it efficient unto justification, it's just that it will absolutely produce works. Someone with false faith can produce works, however not necessarily. It is possible for someone to claim to believe but by their actions prove they do not, at least not truly.

>>562601

><For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which ARE SAVED it is the power of God.

This is best rendered 'being saved'. That's clear from the context, because it doesn't make any sense for it to be talking about already justified since this is about evangelism and who is disposed to receive Christ. However 'being saved' makes the most sense because it is about those who have begun the process of salvation in regeneration.

>>562603

>I never said anything about works

You can't obey the Son without doing good works

>So are you claiming it is impossible to disobey without truly believing?

It's impossible for someone who truly believes to be disobedient

>Show me the scripture

The passage is James 2:14-26

>I gave you John 3.36

And you made no attempt to defend your interpretation, so my point stands.

>Yes thats the exact logic you should you for "Belief" too

It is the exact same logic I use

>So faith alone is not sufficient to save, but also a degree of hope?

Faith is hope that Christ will save them.

>Can you show me the scripture so that i may be convinced?

Ephesians 2:10

>Okay good, show me the scripture.

John 6:40

>How are they the same?

Because God commanded them

>We are required to preform works of the law? All 613? even to be circumcised? to be saved?

Yes every single one, which is why Christ performed them all.

>>562615

The word speaks for itself. I'm not sure what more of an answer or explanation you could want. God told us to witness to the lost and even to the blind. He never said it would work. And it's not us only, but rather the Holy Spirit is working in them when they believe this witness.

>>562619

So you're saying that men other than the receiver can collaborate to the saving of someone?

>>562617

>That's clear from the context, because it doesn't make any sense for it to be talking about already justified since this is about evangelism and who is disposed to receive Christ. However 'being saved' makes the most sense because it is about those who have begun the process of salvation in regeneration.

No it has to do with the whole counsel of God

>For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God.

Acts 20:27

The unsaved are going to find the bible stupid if they don't have the Holy Ghost indwelling them. That's why atheists always scoff at the bible and think it's stupid or antiquated.

You might not know this but the bible is a pretty big book. Like 1600+ pages..

=/

What's the rest of your post? No, "BEING saved" doesn't make sense. While it's true that God draws in those who are seeking truth, once you accept THE truth

>Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

>the truth

Then you receive the Holy Ghost by believing that you're saved and that you can never lose your salvation, thus SEALED with the Holy Ghost >>562555

<In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise," (Ephesians 1:13) A seal is responsible for keeping two things together. That coincides with what Jesus says "I will never leave thee nor forsake thee."

If you're suggesting that you can break the seal that God puts on you, then you're calling God's seal weak and you're calling him a liar.

Salvation is a one time done deal. It has to be, otherwise Romans 11:6 wouldn't make sense. Romans 4:5 wouldn't make sense..

Come to think of it, the entire new testament wouldn't make sense assuming salvation is a process and that doing anything other than believing that Jesus died for all of your past, present, and future sins atones for you is acting lawlessly.

>27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.

>28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

Romans 3

>>562621

I'm saying one man can get the word of God to another. At that point, his job is finished. Now it's up to the individual and God's will whether the word effectually works in them.

>>562625

So it's third parties who initiate the process of salvation

>>562626

Salvation is literally a third-party process.

Abel's salvation was a third party process. Cain thought it wasn't.

>>562626

There is no process. A person is saved if they believe the word of God.

>>562628

Right. It's transitive. Salvation IS a process that has been completed by Jesus on the cross.

Romans 10:14-17

How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?

So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

John 15:22-25

If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloke for their sin.

He that hateth me hateth my Father also.

If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin: but now have they both seen and hated both me and my Father.

But this cometh to pass, that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause.

Acts 28:25-28

And when they agreed not among themselves, they departed, after that Paul had spoken one word, Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias the prophet unto our fathers,

Saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive:

For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it.

John 3:19

And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

>>562624

>No it has to do with the whole counsel of God

Acts 20:27 and 1 Corinthians 1:18 are not in the same passage

>The unsaved are going to find the bible stupid if they don't have the Holy Ghost indwelling them. That's why atheists always scoff at the bible and think it's stupid or antiquated.

1 Corinthians 1:18 says 'the preaching of the cross', not the bible

>While it's true that God draws in those who are seeking truth

And that's what this verse is about, it is explicitly about the message of the gospel ("preaching of the cross"), and who will accept or reject it. It is a foolish message to those who are perishing, but to those who are being saved (those whom the Father is drawing, and therefore, saving) it is the power of God unto salvation. It's not talking about people who have already believed the message, it's about those who are receiving the message.

>Then you receive the Holy Ghost by believing that you're saved and that you can never lose your salvation

That isn't what men are to believe in to be saved. The object of saving faith isn't salvation, it's Jesus.

>If you're suggesting that you can break the seal that God puts on you, then you're calling God's seal weak and you're calling him a liar

I agree. If you think I don't then you haven't been paying attention.

>Come to think of it, the entire new testament wouldn't make sense assuming salvation is a process and that doing anything other than believing that Jesus died for all of your past, present, and future sins atones for you is acting lawlessly.

Salvation is a process, justification is a component of that process which is a one time done deal, as you put it.

>>562627

The third party in a relationship between God and any man is a different man

>>562628

Yes, if he keeps collaborating with the supernatural grace he receives

>>562617

>You can't obey the Son without doing good works

Are you saying that we should not obey The Son since it entails doing good works?

<who does not obey the Son will not see life

I would argue what Paul argues here

<who will render to each person according to his deeds: 7 to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life; 8 but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation.

>It's impossible for someone who truly believes to be disobedient

So I would take it that you truly believe, since you are teaching me how to be saved.

Have you ever transgressed Divine law? are there sins that are permissible and not disobedient?

Is it when you are sinless you truly know you are saved?

>The passage is James 2:14-26

I must be interpreting that passage differently than you, can you explain it?

>And you made no attempt to defend your interpretation

The opposite of "believes" is "not obey" according to John. In conclusion, belief also entails obedience.

>Faith is hope

Hope and faith are different words clearly, and clearly they do not mean the same thing.

<Now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love. 1 Corinthians 13.13

Paul makes faith and hope distinct from one another, yet you say:

>Faith is hope

>Ephesians 2:10

>Belief produces obedience, it doesn't contain obedience.

So we are saved with faith working with charity?

and not faith alone?

>John 6.40

<believes in Him will have eternal life

<will have

future tense, not present tense.

You seriously want to do this again?

<We are required to preform works of the law? All 613? even to be circumcised? to be saved?

>Yes every single one, which is why Christ performed them all.

So we are required to be circumcised???? Preform all of the ceremonies and observe the sabbath. LMAO what???

<If you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.

<Let no man . . . judge you in meat or in drink, or in respect of a festival day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come

<In saying a new (testament), he hath made the former old: and that which decayeth and groweth old, is near its end.

<I do not spurn the grace of God. If we can be justified through the law, then Christ’s death was needless.

<We are required to preform works of the law? All 613? even to be circumcised? to be saved?

>Yes every single one, which is why Christ performed them all.

That… that is just wrong. i'm done here

>>562639

>Acts 20:27 and 1 Corinthians 1:18 are not in the same passage

Why do you think that I think that they are the same passage? They're clearly not the same passage, however they are appealing to the same principle.

>1 Corinthians 1:18 says 'the preaching of the cross', not the bible

okay, well what is "the cross"? in this context? I submit to you that it is metonymy for the whole counsel of God.

<metonymy: the substitution of the name of an attribute or adjunct for that of the thing meant, for example suit for business executive, or the track for horse racing (dictionary.com)

>It's not talking about people who have already believed the message, it's about those who are receiving the message.

You're still not recognizing your contradictory theological perspective. If I believe, right now, that Jesus died for all of my sins – past present AND future – then that means that i cannot lose my salvation.

>For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

You're misquoting 1 Corinthians 1:18. That is 1 Corinthians 1:18.

It says "TO THEM THAT PERISH." Meaning that once they die without having Christ, then they will proceed to be in a perished state of eternal hellfire.

>I agree. If you think I don't then you haven't been paying attention.

I groan at you in exasperation.

Salvation is indeed a process, a process that has been fulfilled for us already at the cross.

>>562644

Jesus Christ is a man.

>>562648

>You can't obey the Son without doing good works

<Are you saying that we should not obey The Son since it entails doing good works?

What the fuck?

>>562649

>Jesus Christ is a man.

Yes, and?

>>562651

>Yes, and?

And scene.

>>562650

No you cannot do any good works as a function of contributing to your salvation. Please understand. I'm speaking very clear English here. Are you ESL?

>>562646

Acts 13:48

And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

2 Corinthians 1:21-22

Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God;

Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.

Romans 8:30

Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

>>562650

You can't rest on your works to be saved or else you haven't believed the word of God which says it is the gift of God. Grace is not of works, or it is no more grace, Romans 11:6.

>>562653

>You can't rest on your works to be saved

>have faith

>do works

>repent of and confess your sins

<don't be so sure you'll get to heaven, papist!

lamo

>>562657

There is none occasion of boasting with us. It's excluded. You'll have to understand that boasters in their works are missing the Gospel.

It is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self.

>>562659

I agree.

>>562659

Where did I mention boasting?

>>562664

When you magnified your own works instead of what should be magnified.

>>562649

>Why do you think that I think that they are the same passage?

Because you seem to think they are relevant to each other

>okay, well what is "the cross"?

That's a tough one. My money's on the crucifixion of Jesus

>You're still not recognizing your contradictory theological perspective

You haven't pointed out any contradiction

>If I believe, right now, that Jesus died for all of my sins – past present AND future – then that means that i cannot lose my salvation.

No, that is not saving faith. Even the demons believe that, and tremble. For a man to be saved he must trust Jesus alone to save him. Mental assent to an event does not factor in.

>You're misquoting 1 Corinthians 1:18. That is 1 Corinthians 1:18.

Uhh

>It says "TO THEM THAT PERISH."

It's present tense, it describes an ongoing thing. They are perishing right now. Those who are perishing are the reprobates, and those that are being saved are the elect.

>I groan at you in exasperation

k

>>562527

>>562526

this makes me feel less guilty ridden really

>>562672

I have literally never done that, if you don't believe me go check

>>562688

Wide is the gate indeed

>>562684

>okay, well what is "the cross"?

<That's a tough one. My money's on the crucifixion of Jesus

metonymy, stupid.

>You're still not recognizing your contradictory theological perspective

<You haven't pointed out any contradiction

Yes I did. Romans 11:6 says

>And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

Therefore if you believe you have to do works to keep your salvation, you are categorically contradicting grace. derp.

>If I believe, right now, that Jesus died for all of my sins – past present AND future – then that means that i cannot lose my salvation.

<No, that is not saving faith. Even the demons believe that, and tremble. For a man to be saved he must trust Jesus alone to save him. Mental assent to an event does not factor in.

The demons are not flesh. The covenant of salvation by faith is given to mankind, mankind unlike the demons is born of flesh. Demons are not flesh, they are strictly spiritual, therefore they cannot be saved. It's not hard to understand, check this out:

>5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

>6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

John 3:6 defines John 3:5. Demons are born of spirit and not flesh, therefore they cannot be saved by belief. I don't even know if they can be saved. It's not relevant to me since I'm not a demon.

>It's present tense, it describes an ongoing thing. They are perishing right now. Those who are perishing are the reprobates, and those that are being saved are the elect.

Okay. I agree with you here and disagree with everything else you said.

>>562692

penal substitutionary atonement

>>562691

>Okay. I agree with you here and disagree with everything else you said.

1 Corinthians 1:18 and Acts 2:47 and Luke 13:23 are not all mistranslated; see Revelation 21:24. It is present tense, not ongoing.

1 Corinthians 1:18 is an excellent proof in its own right of the eternal security of the believer.

>>562710

>1 Corinthians 1:18 is an excellent proof in its own right of the eternal security of the believer.

yes.

>>562691

>Therefore if you believe you have to do works to keep your salvation

When did I say that?

>>562739

I'm hoping that's NOT what you said.

>>563386

11 In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will, 12 so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory. 13 In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is the guarantee[d] of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it,[e] to the praise of his glory.

ESV

>>562182

>"Nothing can separate a child of God from the Father’s love (Romans 8:38–39). Nothing can remove a Christian from God’s hand (John 10:28–29). God guarantees eternal life and maintains the salvation He has given us. The Good Shepherd searches for the lost sheep, and, “when he finds it, he joyfully puts it on his shoulders and goes home” (Luke 15:5–6). The lamb is found, and the Shepherd gladly bears the burden; our Lord takes full responsibility for bringing the lost one safely home"

A helpful article on this subject:.

https://www.gotquestions.org/Christian-lose-salvation.html

>>564133

>"Nothing can separate a child of God from the Father’s love (Romans 8:38–39)

Which does not mean that we cannot lose salvation. Romans 11

>Nothing can remove a Christian from God’s hand (John 10:28–29).

Save himself, as it is clear from John 17:12 and Romans 11

> God guarantees eternal life and maintains the salvation He has given us. The Good Shepherd searches for the lost sheep, and, “when he finds it, he joyfully puts it on his shoulders and goes home” (Luke 15:5–6).

But he is not tyrant nor does he force grace upon anyone. One can "resist Holy Spirit". One can "fall from Grace". One can die while being lost.

>The lamb is found, and the Shepherd gladly bears the burden; our Lord takes full responsibility for bringing the lost one safely home"

Jesus: the wishing machine dependent on will of human, for salvation is of ourselves.

>A helpful article on this subject:.

<Gotquestions

<helpful

>>563386

18 The eyes of your heart enlightened, that you may know what is the hope of his calling, and what are the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints,

One cannot have hope if he is certain. For we are saved by hope. But hope that is seen, is not hope. For what a man seeth, why doth he hope for? But if we hope for that which we see not, we wait for it with patience.

“Watch for your life’s sake. Let not your lamps be quenched, nor your loins unloosed; but be ye ready, for ye know not the hour in which our Lord cometh. But often shall ye come together, seeking the things which are befitting to your souls: for the whole time of your faith will not profit you, if ye be not made perfect in the last time.”

>>564154

how did you get this:

>Jesus: the wishing machine dependent on will of human, for salvation is of ourselves.

from this:

>The lamb is found, and the Shepherd gladly bears the burden; our Lord takes full responsibility for bringing the lost one safely home"

?

>>562197

>"If anyone says that man can be justified before God by his own works, whether done by his own natural powers or by the teaching of the Law, without divine Grace through Jesus Christ, let him be anathema" (Session 6; can. 1)

One has to bear in mind that the council of Trent never argued against the necessity of Grace. Grace is a common thing in religion Catholics believe in it, Mormons believe in it and heck even Muslims do, but it was the reformers that said that it was Grace "alone" that saves. You see the council of Trent was saying that we must work together with Christ and that although it is God's Grace that saves us, we must still work with it. My view is that it is God alone who foreknows, predestines, calls, justifies and Glorifies. Humans have no part and so working together with Christ does not exist but rather it is Christ alone that saves.

>>564161

>Lord takes full responsibility for bringing the lost one safely home

From this. For this say nothiong but "I can do whatever I want; God HAVE TO bring me to heaven, God is BOUND to give me salvation, I was Saved, behold my salvation I can do nothing to lose it for!"

>>564622

>Humans have no part and so working together with Christ does not exist but rather it is Christ alone that saves.

1 Tim. 4:16 Take heed to thyself and to doctrine: be earnest in them. For in doing this thou shalt both save thyself and them that hear thee.

And also the Greek verb sunergeo, meaning to work together, appears in New Testament five times, of which three are:

And they went forth and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked [Greek sunergountos] with them and confirmed the message by the signs that attended it. Amen (Mark 16:20).

We know that in everything God works [Greek sunergei] for good with those who love him, who are called according to his purpose (Romans 8:28)

Working together [Greek sunergountes] with him [God], then, we entreat you not to accept the grace of God in vain (2 Corinthians 6:1)

Scripture also uses corresponding Greek adjective sunergos, meaning fellow worker, eleven times, one of them is:

For we are God’s fellow workers [Greek sunergoi]; you are God’s field, God’s building (1 Corinthians 3:9, RSV)

Synergism is biblical. For we have free will. To deny synergy of us in God (though God is always and only possible initiator and fount of salvation) is to deny free will.

Hypothetically, if one was about to commit a very serious crime out of necessity, should they get saved first in case something were to go wrong? Asking for a friend.

>>564683

>necessity

gib an example of whenever a crime(a sin?) can be needed

>>563386

Do not meme on the word of God, anon. You might seriously confuse people. Even if it was supposed to be funny, that might be the only time they read Ephesians 1:13-14.

Ephesians 1:13-14

In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

>>564160

>One cannot have hope if he is certain.

Hebrews 6:18-19

That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us:

Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil;

>>564692

Dude stole my "friend's" qt gf. Gotta teach said dude a lesson he will never forget.

>>564701

were they married?

>>564700

>Hebrews 6:18-19

But hope that is seen, is not hope. For what a man seeth, why doth he hope for? But if we hope for that which we see not, we wait for it with patience.

We hope. Hope is gift, great gift. And by hope we are saved. But hope is not, by definition, absolute certainty. Paul himself says, that he "judge not mine own self". For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord. Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God.

There will be moment when you will be certian about your salvation. It's when you die.

Also, Hebrews 6 is funny thing to bring up: 4 *For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, have tasted also the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,

5 Have moreover tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,

6 And are fallen away, to be renewed again unto penance, crucifying again to themselves the Son of God, and making a mockery of him.

Christian can fall, and they cannot obtain baptism again which is normal mode of salvation.

>>564720

>But hope that is seen, is not hope.

Nice word games. You can be certain of things you do not see.

<Hebrews 11:1

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

>Paul himself says, that he "judge not mine own self".

Right, that's talking about man's judgment in 1 Corinthians 4, which is a counterpart to James 2:14-26. Let me post the passage in context for you.

<1 Corinthians 4:1-4

Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God.

Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful.

But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self.

For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord.

>Also, Hebrews 6 is funny thing to bring up

Alright, this is irrelevant to the discussion but hey why not. This is talking about reprobates. Tasting of the heavenly gift is not the same as receiving it. Being made partakers of the Holy Ghost and tasting of the powers of the world to come corresponds to the people in Matthew 7:22 who trusted in their works. Knowing and realizing that the word of God is true but rejecting it makes a reprobate.

Also crucifying to themselves the Son of God afresh is a reference to catholic mass.

<Hebrews 6:4-6

For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,

And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,

If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

>>564678

how do you get

>Jesus: the wishing machine dependent on will of human, for salvation is of ourselves.

from

>"I can do whatever I want; God HAVE TO bring me to heaven, God is BOUND to give me salvation, I was Saved, behold my salvation I can do nothing to lose it for!"

?

how do you get

>"I can do whatever I want; God HAVE TO bring me to heaven, God is BOUND to give me salvation, I was Saved, behold my salvation I can do nothing to lose it for!"

from

>Lord takes full responsibility for bringing the lost one safely home

?

>>564731

>Nice word games. You can be certain of things you do not see.

I quoted Paul. Romans 8:24 KJV: Hope that is seen is not hope.

>Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

This verse does not inviolate Romans 8:24.Faith is evidence for hope. But hope that is seen is not hope.

>Right, that's talking about man's judgment in 1 Corinthians 4, which is a counterpart to James 2:14-26. Let me post the passage in context for you.

Do you like to be beaten my friend? For you give me club.

Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God.

That is, the dogmas of faith, revealed by the Almighty.

Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful. But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self.

Paul, the same Paul that became "all for all" does not care of judgment of man for it is worthless if they say "he is not saved". But he do not judge himself ethier.

For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord.

This great apostle of the Gentiles, though conscious to himself of no breach of duty, still does not dare to call himself just. How different is the conduct of this apostle, from those wicked impostors, who teach, that a man is justified by believing himself so.

If this privileged apostle was afraid to from any judgment of his own heart and thoughts, whether they were pure or not, but left the trial thereof to the day of judgment, the day of his death, how presumptuous are they, who dare to pronounce on their election and predestination!

And if you like contxet so much (I know you don't)

Therefore judge not before the time: until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise from God.

>Alright, this is irrelevant to the discussion but hey why not.

It is not. We talk about OSAS ultimately.

>This is talking about reprobates. Tasting of the heavenly gift is not the same as receiving it.

One cannot taste something if he not recevied it. It's logic 101

>Being made partakers of the Holy Ghost and tasting of the powers of the world to come corresponds to the people in Matthew 7:22 who trusted in their works.

Oh, but those in Matt 7:22 had faith. For Paul teaches: How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed?

And again:

For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

>Knowing and realizing that the word of God is true but rejecting it makes a reprobate.

So if true, justified Christian falls from faith he become reprobate. How this is not losing salvation?

Also, you completely skipped over baptismal context of this passage.

>Also crucifying to themselves the Son of God afresh is a reference to catholic mass.

Actually, is is reference to anabaptist and other who rebaptise Romans 6:3-6

It is Catholic dogma that Christ is crucified by once. Representation is word for you to learn.

>>564747

Do I have to be even more simple? So be it.

You say that "Lord takes full responsibility for bringing the lost one safely home". What does it mean in way presented? It means as following:

>I can sin how much I want.

For I cannot lost my salvation right? This means that I can do whatever I want. If God will absolutly bring me back then I do not have to repent. I do not have to put on new man. I do not have live by faith. I do not have to have faith anyome ethier. God will do it for me.

>God is bound to save me.

For I cannot lost my salvation right? God tells me to go and sin no more? Sorry God, you have to save for I have been saved once. God tells me to repent? Sorry God, I was saved, you can do shit. God tells me that "not evryone who call upon me will be saved", that "if you will not feed hungry etc you cannot enter heaven", that "repent, unless you likwise perish", that "neither murdered, neither adultres, nethier homsexuals etc can enter heaven"?I am not bound by it, I was OSAS. YOU God, are one bound to bring me to yourself.

>I was saved, therefore I cannot lose it.

Self explanatory.

I doubt I can get it even more simple.

>>564801

>But hope that is seen is not hope.

We said certainty, not sight. No one said hope is "seen" in the first place. Yep, no one said that. We have certainty. Hebrews 11:1.

>impostors, who teach, that a man is justified by believing himself so.

No one said this.

>who dare to pronounce on their election and predestination!

Ephesians 1:11-14

In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:

That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.

In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

>One cannot taste something if he not recevied it. It's logic 101

They tasted it and rejected it. It's that simple.

>Oh, but those in Matt 7:22 had faith.

Nope.

>For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Out of context. Every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord in the last day. Philippians 2:11. Romans 10:14 which you quoted is before that happens.

>Actually, is is reference to anabaptist and other who rebaptise

The mass is a propitiatory sacrifice. Hence, crucifying TO THEMSELVES the Son of God afresh. And Jesus Christ is not crucified every time someone is baptized. You are confused.

>So if true, justified Christian falls from faith he become reprobate.

Never justified. He never knew them, not that he used to know them. See Matthew 7:23— "And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

>For I cannot lost my salvation right? This means that I can do whatever I want.

That's antinomianism. Just as bad as your Pelagianism. We don't have to choose between the two, so this is where you're wrong.

>I can sin how much I want.

All of this is you talking and revealing how you think. That's all.

>>564801

>I can sin how much I want [and not go to hell.]

there are other reasons to abstain from sin and attempt to please God, salvation from eternal damnation isn't everything:

<out of love and respect for God (John 14:15)

<to avoid chastisement in this life (Hebrews 12:4-9)

<to not lose your reward (2 John 1:8)

<because it's the right thing, etc

>God is bound to save me.

right, because He's not a liar, and He already paid for my sins

>I was saved, therefore I cannot lose it.

amen.

i still don't see how you got "Jesus is a wishing machine, dependent on will of human" and "human salvation is of ourselves" from that though.

>>562182

yes but nobody knows for sure if his name is in the Book of Life. So the whole discussion about it will be forever fruitless.

>>564821

>We said certainty, not sight. No one said hope is "seen" in the first place. Yep, no one said that. We have certainty. Hebrews 11:1.

And we wait for it ergo not have it.

>No one said this.

Luther did. And most of protestants "I have faith, ergo I am saved"

>Ephesians 1:11-14

Predestination unto glory=/=predestination unto grace

>They tasted it and rejected it. It's that simple.

And to taste it they had to have it in the first place.

>Nope.

Yes. You cannot call upon Lord, what they do, if you have no Faith.

>Out of context. Every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord in the last day. Philippians 2:11. Romans 10:14 which you quoted is before that happens.

So all will be saved then? "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."

>he mass is a propitiatory sacrifice. Hence, crucifying TO THEMSELVES the Son of God afresh.

Mass is the same sacrifice that one on calvary. I am happy to discuss mass but it have nothing to do with OSAS. But if you please.

>And Jesus Christ is not crucified every time someone is baptized. You are confused.

Romans 6:3-6 When you are baptised you are join to Christ's crucifixion.

>Never justified.

Yes. Hebrews 6, 2 Peter 2.

>He never knew them, not that he used to know them. See Matthew 7:23— "And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

I recomend you to read Matthew 25, especially v.12. And ask yourself, do Bridegroom invited someone who he never knew? And yet he know them not.

Not to mention that 7:23 alone teaches against OSAS and Faith Alone as whole

>That's antinomianism. Just as bad as your Pelagianism. We don't have to choose between the two, so this is where you're wrong.

There is no point in not sining in OSAS other than "I feel I should not" for it cannot do anything with salvation.

>All of this is you talking and revealing how you think. That's all.

I was quoting baptist posters here. Believe me, if I was to think that I would never ever ever come in 50 miles to nearest Catholic Church

>>564822

>there are other reasons to abstain from sin and attempt to please God, salvation from eternal damnation isn't everything:

It's essential. Anything else is measured by it

<out of love and respect for God (John 14:15)

Tough shit God, you gave me salvation and you cannot do anything about it. I love you and all but I will sin. If it really matters I would not continue to be saved, right?

<to avoid chastisement in this life (Hebrews 12:4-9)

This life is but blink compared to eternity. Plus there were, is and will be billions of wicked that lived sining and had not chastisements so it does not even matter.

<to not lose your reward (2 John 1:8)

Don't you tell me that you believe in this romish dogmas about merit.

<because it's the right thing, etc

So feels over reals then. Not that I care, I was saved and once saved always saved.

>right, because He's not a liar, and He already paid for my sins

Then I can sin and do whatever I want. God is my personal wishing machine.

>i still don't see how you got "Jesus is a wishing machine, dependent on will of human"

Salvation in osas 101, starting human and Jesus:

>human: I believe and accept Christ as my Lord and savior

>Jesus the washing machine: Here have salvation, you deserve it, I have no longer power over it, you can do what you want

>h: thanks. I will go now and sin more.

>and "human salvation is of ourselves" from that though.

If you cannot do anything to lose salvation that means that you have absolute power over it. And that means that salvation is dependent on your one time decision.

>>564882

>feels over reals

you don't believe there are objective moral truth values?

>starting human and Jesus:

no, Jesus started it ~2000 years ago

>Here have salvation, you deserve it,

it's undeserved, it's mercy, it's free

>if you cannot [change X] that means you have absolute power over [X]

that doesn't make any sense

>salvation is dependent on your one time decision

you need to make it, place your trust fully in the only work that matters when it comes to salvation, the one time sacrifice Jesus made on the cross.

>>564882

>"I have faith, ergo I am saved"

That's not the same as saying you are "justified by believing himself so." The reason is faith, not just because you think you are justified. For instance, if someone "believes" they are justified by works, they are not actually justified.

>Predestination unto glory=/=predestination unto grace

Romans 8:30.

>So all will be saved then?

That's what I'm asking you. After all, you quoted Romans 10:14 as """proof""" that "everyone has faith" because of them saying it in Matthew 7:22!

I'm saying you are out of context and wrong for that very reason. Jesus will be present then, it will be too late for them to have faith. It's not the same as Romans 10:14 at all. So you were wrong.

>When you are baptised you are join to Christ's crucifixion.

But you said before, that somehow, baptizing a person is causing Christ to be "crucified afresh." Please tell us how.

>2 Peter 2

They had the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, and rejected it. Just like I said before, it is possible to realize the truth and to reject it. Hard to imagine, but some have done it.

>There is no point in not sining in OSAS other than "I feel I should not" for it cannot do anything with salvation.

Maybe if you only think about your own benefit in all things.

>And that means that salvation is dependent on your one time decision.

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.

>Matthew 24:22 And if those days had not been shortened, no human being would be saved; but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened.

What did he mean by this?

>>564919

>That's not the same as saying you are "justified by believing himself so." The reason is faith, not just because you think you are justified. For instance, if someone "believes" they are justified by works, they are not actually justified.

That's the same thing. Why are you saved, you will ask, and they will answer "I have faith and by faith alone someone is justified". And when you ask "So you believe that you are saved" "Yes". And even though Calvin says that some of reprobates belive theselves to be saved you are sure that you aren not one of them? "This cannot be, I am saved, I have faith"

>Romans 8:30.

This is predestination unto glory. Notice absence of adjectives "onl" or "alone" there. Hath thou not read, that "Many are called but few are chosen"?

>That's what I'm asking you. After all, you quoted Romans 10:14 as """proof""" that "everyone has faith" because of them saying it in Matthew 7:22!

Answer me then how can one call upon God whom he do not believe against what Paul teaches?

>I'm saying you are out of context and wrong for that very reason. Jesus will be present then, it will be too late for them to have faith. It's not the same as Romans 10:14 at all. So you were wrong.

That's right, at end times we will be fixed in our death stance. Unbelievers will not start to believe. And thus they cannot call upon name of Lord. For how can they call if have no faith? They cannot.

>But you said before, that somehow, baptizing a person is causing Christ to be "crucified afresh." Please tell us how.

REbaptizing. For those who wish to be baptised again wish to themselves to yet again partake in crucifixion as in first baptism, to remit they sin and all stains and debts of thereof

>They had the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, and rejected it. Just like I said before, it is possible to realize the truth and to reject it. Hard to imagine, but some have done it.

And thus lose salvation. Notice language "the sow that was washed, to her wallowing in the mire returned". This is clear reference to baptism and lose of grace which is the life of God and salvation.

>Maybe if you only think about your own benefit in all things.

In OSAS I have all benefits that someone could wish for i.e. salvation for eternity - why should I deprive myself of sinful pleasures here on earth? I cannot lose my slavation, right?

>For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Yes, OSAS is clear teaching against this and many other passages for it make salvation depend of ourselves.

>>564911

>you don't believe there are objective moral truth values?

I do thereafore I don't belive in OSAS - for nothing can be said to be objectively wrong if it can pass unto Heaven where nothing unclean shall enter.

>no, Jesus started it ~2000 years ago

No, Jesus finished it, Anno Domini 33, April 5th when he rised from death.

>it's undeserved, it's mercy, it's free

Not in OSAS

>that doesn't make any sense

Let me use simpler language than. If your salvation is absolutely yours, bound to you, that you can do nothing to lose it then you have power over it. For if by mortal sin like Christ, Peter, John James, Paul and Jude teached, salvation could be lost, then salvation is not of you for if it was of you, you could do anything you want.

>you need to make it, place your trust fully in the only work that matters when it comes to salvation, the one time sacrifice Jesus made on the cross.

So slavation is of ourselves in OSAS. For I am saved because I belive that

>>571695

>And even though Calvin says that some of reprobates belive theselves to be saved you are sure that you aren not one of them? "This cannot be, I am saved, I have faith"

No reason to doubt their words unless they make it manifest they are not, 1 John 2:19. And yet it's not the same with yourself in the first person because you know whether or not you actually believe. If you're not sure then you don't believe.

>This is predestination unto glory.

All who are chosen, are also called. All who are glorified, are also justified. Hence, whoever is predestined to glory is necessarily also to justification.

>Unbelievers will not start to believe. And thus they cannot call upon name of Lord.

Philippians 2:10-11. So either you believe unbelievers will be saved, or you believe that Romans 10:14 is about before the Second coming of Christ. I believe the latter, but you can keep on struggling to understand this concept of Romans 10:14 and Philippians 2:11 both being true, and somehow thinking you've "proven" something by intentionally misunderstanding my explanation about one verse or the other. Even though I already said many times Romans 10:14 is about BEFORE Philippians 2:11 happens, and Matthew 7:22 is after Philippians 2:11 happens.

>For those who wish to be baptised again wish to themselves to yet again partake in crucifixion as in first baptism

Wait a second here. You say that baptism actually in fact crucifies Christ again or not? Please be clear about this. Yes or no, is the Lord Jesus Christ crucified each time someone is baptised? If three people get baptised is He crucified three times?

>why should I deprive myself of sinful pleasures here on earth? I cannot lose my slavation, right?

It's clear you don't believe Romans 6:1-2.

>Yes, OSAS is clear teaching against this and many other passages for it make salvation depend of ourselves.

Faith is not of ourselves, again, Ephesians 2:8.

>If your salvation is absolutely yours, bound to you, that you can do nothing to lose it then you have power over it.

No, God actually said it cannot be lost, by his word, therefore we do believe that. John 5:23. I don't have power over it.

You actually think God's word will be undone by human actions, not me.

>then salvation is not of you for if it was of you, you could do anything you want.

I don't understand this. God said that he has saved certain men, so there's nothing we can do about this. Anything we do won't change this, so how does that make it "of us" if we can't change it? I cannot save or unsave anyone, even myself. It wasn't my ability or choice to believe, it just happened. We don't get any credit for it.

>>571695

>nothing can be said to be objectively wrong if it can pass unto Heaven where nothing unclean shall enter.

Christians are washed clean by the blood of the Lamb.

>Let me use simpler language than.

it wasn't that your language was too complex for me, it was that what you were saying was illogical, and now you're repeating the same nonsense:

>If your salvation is absolutely yours, bound to you, that you can do nothing to lose it then you have power over it.

if something can't be affected by you, you have no power over it.

>So slavation is of ourselves in OSAS. For I am saved because I belive that

no, Christians are saved by Grace through faith, and that is not of ourselves, it is the gift of God

>>562182

"Once saved always saved" should really be understood as "Once justified always justified" because that's what most people mean when they say it.

This of course leaves open the idea that God continues to work towards our final salvation from the corruption which sin has brought throughout a persons life, but this is a salvation which will ultimately be accomplished by Him in the end.

<Romans 8:29-30> "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified."

<Philippians 1:6> "Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:"

<Philippians 2:12-13> "Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure."

>>571742

>No reason to doubt their words unless they make it manifest they are not, 1 John 2:19.

So even when they are not saved yet manifest and claim to have faith, as Calvin proved to be possible? What's assurance then you have that you are not one of them?

> And yet it's not the same with yourself in the first person because you know whether or not you actually believe.

And reprobates search themselves also find no fault in their belief. What assurance do you have, that you are not one of them?

Also, St. Paul was not bold enough to know if he himself was saved, why would you be?

>If you're not sure then you don't believe.

So salvation comes from assurance of being saved.

>All who are chosen, are also called. All who are glorified, are also justified. Hence, whoever is predestined to glory is necessarily also to justification.

But some are not predestined to glory but to grace. And by grace there is justification.

>Philippians 2:10-11

Nice arguments for existence of purgatory but confessing that Christ is God =/= calling upon his name.

>So either you believe unbelievers will be saved, or you believe that Romans 10:14 is about before the Second coming of Christ.

Or I simply believe what Paul teaches, that man is not saved by faith alone, not to mention being once and thus always saved.

>Wait a second here. You say that baptism actually in fact crucifies Christ again or not? Please be clear about this. Yes or no, is the Lord Jesus Christ crucified each time someone is baptised? If three people get baptised is He crucified three times?

I thought that I was clear but let's start yet again.

Know you not that all we, who are baptized in Christ Jesus, are baptized in his death? For we are buried together with him by baptism into death.

When we are baptised we are join into relaity of Christ death and ressurection. Thus, it can be only once done. Those who wish to be baptised again wish to join this reality yet again. But they cannot. For Christ died only once for there is one Lord, one baptism.

>It's clear you don't believe Romans 6:1-2.

I believe in it and thus reject heresy of OSAS

>Faith is not of ourselves, again, Ephesians 2:8.

I know that, thus I reject OSAS who says contrary.

>No, God actually said it cannot be lost, by his word, therefore we do believe that. John 5:23. I don't have power over it.

Actually, Lord says very clearly that salvation can be lost "Every branch in me, that beareth not fruit, he [Father] will take away"

>John 5:23

That all men may honour the Son, as they honour the Father. He who honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father, who hath sent him.

What does it have to do with OSAS is beyond me.

>You actually think God's word will be undone by human actions, not me.

You do it actually. For when word of God says "Do this and you will be cut off", "those have no place in Heaven", "nothing unclean shall enter it", "you have fallen from grace", "there is a sin that kills" etc etc you deny it and say "nay, for I am saved always"

>I don't understand this. God said that he has saved certain men, so there's nothing we can do about this.

Same God says that you can do something about it. And if you do it, you will no longer be saved.

>Anything we do won't change this, so how does that make it "of us" if we can't change it?

It makes salvation yours only and not God's who by his nature cannot partake with sin (and grace is the very life o God)

>I cannot save or unsave anyone, even myself. It wasn't my ability or choice to believe, it just happened. We don't get any credit for it.

If that was the case you would not be so bold and sure. Insted, you would be fearful and trembling to not lose gift who is yours only by mercy of God and God can and will take it away if you fail to keep it.

>>571745

>Christians are washed clean by the blood of the Lamb.

Then for Christian there is no sin right? For if this washing was understood as Church understood it it would be washing from exiting filth and not this that is to come and thus contrary to OSAS heresy.

>if something can't be affected by you, you have no power over it.

I cannot affect my soul in any way, Yet I have power over it.

>no, Christians are saved by Grace through faith, and that is not of ourselves, it is the gift of God

I try to tell this. If you believe in it, reject teaching that teaches contrary i.e. OSAS

>>562550

No He was not punished - through His resurrection He triumphed over death, and reclaimed from Satan the power over the grave.

>>571813

>vaticancatholic

>>571815

Romans 8:33-34

>>571810

>What's assurance then you have that you are not one of them?

Because God's word is true.

>And reprobates search themselves also find no fault in their belief.

They're not in fact believing God's word though.

>Also, St. Paul was not bold enough to know if he himself was saved

1 Corinthians 1:18

For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

>So salvation comes from assurance of being saved.

Did I say that? I don't think I said that.

>Nice arguments for existence of purgatory but confessing that Christ is God =/= calling upon his name.

You are the one who brought up Matthew 7:22 as your argument, which I have been saying all along is after Philippians 2:11. This was your attempt at an argument but I have shown it has failed.

>Or I simply believe what Paul teaches, that man is not saved by faith alone

See for instance Romans 3 thru 6, Acts 16:31, Romans 10:9, 11:6, 1 Corinthians 1:21, Galatians 2:16, Ephesians 1:13-14, 2:8-9, Philippians 3:9, 1 Timothy 1:16, James 2:10.

>I thought that I was clear but let's start yet again.

So you can't say yes or no. Alright then. Well I continue to say that the mass is intended to be (to themselves) a propitiatory sacrifice and thus, crucifying to themselves the Son of God afresh. That closes the book on the matter.

>What does it have to do with OSAS is beyond me.

I meant to quote John 5:24. I guess you don't check for context or you would have seen it anyway.

>For when word of God says "Do this and you will be cut off", "those have no place in Heaven", "nothing unclean shall enter it", "you have fallen from grace", "there is a sin that kills" etc etc you deny it

Those are all true. First four are unbelievers, fifth one is talking about a consequence of physical death.

Hebrews 12:6

For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.

>And if you do it

The fact you say "if" here means you doubt the word of God is true. Because there is no "if." Hebrews 6:18. It would be like saying "And if God lied, …"

>If that was the case you would not be so bold and sure.

1 John 5:20

And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.

>>562182

Sounds cool and all, but it's not true, because Jesus can't save you. There also is no end times that someone will do all the work for you in getting back home, you are being deceived

>>571835

Yes, and?

>>578859

Christ Jesus is the one who died (as opposed to us, the ones who deserved it)

>>571745

I'm a Christian and I assure you that it doesn't give you carte blanche. Unless you repent, stop sinning (to the best of your abilities), then is when God's love towards his Son will play a role.

>>578867

>stop sinning (to the best of your abilities)

can you justify what's in the parentheses with scripture?

the rest of your post was vague enough for me (ID: 40dc45) to agree with

>>578870

Peter 2:22, or Ecclesiastes 7:20. For the rest of us, the only thing we can do is to try not to sin. But that's impossible since we are not Him.

Even saints sin all days.

>>578876

>[N/A] (Peter 2:22)

>For there is not one truly righteous person on the earth who continually does good and never sins.(Ecclesiastes 7:20)

i'm aware that there is not one truly righteous person on the earth who continually does good and never sins,

what i'm asking is how just trying "to the best of your abilities" to stop sinning is good enough to not (assuming this is what you were implying, again, you were very vague) lose your salvation.