Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
I don't feel the need to push my beliefs on anyone else, or "convince" anyone that I am right. I know that we are supposed to "abide" and live Godly lives.... but I can't imagine doing anything but that. My relationship with the Lord, I would describe as a romance. I can't wait to see what song the Lord is going to give my heart to sing! I long for his guidance and answers to my questions. Life with Jesus is a beautiful dance. It is difficult to understand what people consider the difficulty in abiding. It is pure joy!
When you meet the Good Shepherd, the last thing you want to do is run away.
Experience teaches us that it is much easier to prevent an enemy from posting themselves than it is to dislodge them after they have got possession.
~ George Washington
That is beautiful Miss Annie, and you are blessed. Your eternal salvation in this way depends on you continually living this faith and walking this walk. However, unfortunately, not everyone who believes in OSAS follows you, and many will be lost on account of the sins they did while falsely believing to be 'already saved'. That is the the great problem with this heresy and why it is dangerous to the faithful and why it must be rejected.
Last edited by TER; 04-16-2014 at 10:32 AM.
+'These things I command you, that you love one another.' - Jesus Christ
OSAS is not Biblical as was not taught for the first 1500 years of Christianity. I don't understand why some subscribe to this unbiblical and innovative theology.
Assurance of Instant Salvation / Salvation as a Process
1 Corinthians 9:271 Corinthians 10:12but I pommel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified.Galatians 5:1,4Therefore let any one who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall.Philippians 3:11-14. . . stand fast therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery . . . You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.1 Timothy 4:1that if possible I may attain the resurrection from the dead. Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect; but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own. Brethren, I do not consider that I have made it my own . . . I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.1 Timothy 5:15Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by giving heed to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons.Hebrews 3:12-14For some have already strayed after Satan.Hebrews 6:4-6Take care, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil, unbelieving heart, leading you to fall away from the living God. But exhort one another every day . . . that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. For we share in Christ, if only we hold our first confidence firm to the end.2 Peter 2:15,20-21For it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the goodness of the word of God, and the powers of the age to come, if they then commit apostasy . . .See also 1 Samuel 11:6, 18:11-12, Ezekiel 18:24, 33:12-13,18, Galatians 4:9, Colossians 1:23, Hebrews 6:11-12, 10:23,26,29,36,39, 12:15, Revelation 2:4-5Forsaking the right way they have gone astray; they have followed the way of Balaam, . . . For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overpowered, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment delivered to them.
+rep.
That Catholic faith is not one about either/or as the Protestant faith is. I would say that is one of the most fundamental differences between us.
This sums it up very well:
Either/Or -vs- Both/And
This brings us to the "either/or" phenomenon found in some Christian groups. It appears to work like this:
"if you don't believe that faith alone saves, then you must believe that you can work your way into Heaven (something Catholics are constantly falsely accused of believing),"
"if you don't believe in sola scriptura, then you are a follower of the 'traditions of men',"
"if you think we can cooperate in our salvation, then you're saying that Christ isn't enough,"
"if you believe that one can freely turn his back on God, then you're denying God's omnipotence," etc.
These either/or arguments consist of an "if" statement, coupled with an implied premise that amounts to a false dichotomy, and followed by an invalid conclusion.
Catholic rebuttals to these sorts of assertions often rely on the heavy use of prepositions:
"we are saved by grace, through faith and works inspired by the Holy Spirit's love,"
"the source of Christian Truth is the Church that is guided by the Holy Spirit and which is both the source of and is bound by Sacred Scripture,"
"we are saved solely by the grace of the Cross, with which we must co-operate,"
"God can do whatever He wants, whenever He wants, but He chose to give us free will with which we can freely choose Him," etc.
It's been said that the Catholic Church is a "both/and" Church; another way of saying it is that, when arguing with Protestants, we are a "Yes, but..." Church:
"Yes, grace saves through faith -- but a faith that works,"
"Yes, Christ is the only way to the Father, but we Christians co-operate with Him in His divine plan and therefore, in a real but limited sense, play a co-redemptive role in salvation history,"
"Yes, we must be born again, but 'born again' refers to Baptism,"
"Yes, Christ is the Spiritual Rock of the Church, but He made Peter the earthly Rock" etc.
Like I intimated, subtlety required. We don't see dichotomies where none exist.
http://www.fisheaters.com/differences.html
if being saved means holding up "your end" then it is not by grace we are saved but by grace and works. It isn't what we do that saves us, but what Jesus did that saves us.
OSAS means trusting fully in HIS FINISHED work at the Cross. Salvation is a free gift. Jesus isn't an indian giver. You do not "stay saved" by obedience as we all fall short; we all sin- every day. Jesus fulfilled every requirement and fully satisfied God's wrath against us, the sinner. When a believer is looked upon by the Father He sees Christ in us. Nothing we do or do not do can change our eternal security. The HS indwells every believer.
Last edited by Kevin007; 04-16-2014 at 12:32 PM.
Ephesians 2:8-9-
8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast.
Why do you believe that?
Either/Or -vs- Both/And
This brings us to the "either/or" phenomenon found in some Christian groups. It appears to work like this:
"if you don't believe that faith alone saves, then you must believe that you can work your way into Heaven (something Catholics are constantly falsely accused of believing),"
"if you don't believe in sola scriptura, then you are a follower of the 'traditions of men',"
"if you think we can cooperate in our salvation, then you're saying that Christ isn't enough,"
"if you believe that one can freely turn his back on God, then you're denying God's omnipotence," etc.
These either/or arguments consist of an "if" statement, coupled with an implied premise that amounts to a false dichotomy, and followed by an invalid conclusion.
Catholic rebuttals to these sorts of assertions often rely on the heavy use of prepositions:
"we are saved by grace, through faith and works inspired by the Holy Spirit's love,"
"the source of Christian Truth is the Church that is guided by the Holy Spirit and which is both the source of and is bound by Sacred Scripture,"
"we are saved solely by the grace of the Cross, with which we must co-operate,"
"God can do whatever He wants, whenever He wants, but He chose to give us free will with which we can freely choose Him," etc.
It's been said that the Catholic Church is a "both/and" Church; another way of saying it is that, when arguing with Protestants, we are a "Yes, but..." Church:
"Yes, grace saves through faith -- but a faith that works,"
"Yes, Christ is the only way to the Father, but we Christians co-operate with Him in His divine plan and therefore, in a real but limited sense, play a co-redemptive role in salvation history,"
"Yes, we must be born again, but 'born again' refers to Baptism,"
"Yes, Christ is the Spiritual Rock of the Church, but He made Peter the earthly Rock" etc.
Like I intimated, subtlety required. We don't see dichotomies where none exist.
...
What that article says either is right, or it is not.
Roman Catholicism is every bit as much either/or as any other religion or theological system is. Its either/ors shine forth in every canon of every creed, and the very views that article propounds could be formulated as either/or views just as starkly as the ones the article argues against. In fact, I could rewrite the whole thing, and use the same rhetoric to argue that evangelicalism differs from Roman Catholicism by the latter making everything either/or and the former being more nuanced. It would just be a simple matter of how I chose to frame the questions. I wouldn't really believe what I was writing, but I'm positive I could do it.
Last edited by erowe1; 04-16-2014 at 12:37 PM.
Kevin, I understand that is your belief. What me and others are trying to tell you is that this belief is an innovation and a distortion of the apostolic faith as believed, taught, and handed down from the beginning. You are more then free to believe OSAS if you wish. But you do so against the ancient teachings and witness of the Church and the saints of the past. I, and others, refuse to consider this a teneble or acceptable option, that is, picking up an innovative doctrine (in a matter this important) which is clearly unsupported and absent in the history of Christian worship and theology for 1600 years. Proof texting to justify your position is simply not an acceptable option either. Every heretical group going back to the Gnostics, the Arians, etc etc did the same thing.
Last edited by TER; 04-16-2014 at 12:45 PM.
+'These things I command you, that you love one another.' - Jesus Christ
You added this in the edit and I missed it in the above post.
This is off subject, but your post has me thinking. (My brain is a bit off too. I'm on the 2 day of a 3 day apple only cleanse. )
I've been told that I respect you because you never give a judgment on whether we're regenerate or not, but it is really your attempt to stick to your interpretation based on your understanding on the bible, history, logic, prayer, etc.
Most arguments on this forum do stem from saying if one's opponent believes one thing he MUST believes another. Yes Catholics use it too. I wasn't commenting that one group uses it in exclusion to the other (although the article may say that.)
Two people use this argument as probably 90% of their tactics. Stereotypes aren't based on majorities, but the loudest, most obnoxious members. I do cringe when I see attacks on Calvinists in general based on the action of a few. I've come close to falling for it. Lately when driving past a Reformed Church or when there is a homeschooling gathering at a Presbyterian church, I've found myself picturing an Army of the more vocal ones on the forum. I've also found myself treating others such as yourself with less respect than I should because I lump you in with them.
Although I disagree on occasion, I am thankful for yours and Beorn thoughtful responses on this forum, and I have learned some good info from you guys.
Last edited by RJB; 04-16-2014 at 02:07 PM.
...
Actually, I haven't seen any attacks on the Calvinists, but quite the opposite in here. They're the ones who seem to always resort to attacking the person by calling them insulting names instead of attacking the message. I've seen people defend themselves from these attacks by the Calvinists, but that's only expected when their person is being attacked and not the message.
There are blanket statements made about what "Calvinists" believe and their tactics. The next quotation is an example:
It's really 2 - 5 (depending on your definition) who do, and these guys aren't representatives of "Calvinists."They're the ones who seem to always resort to attacking the person by calling them insulting names instead of attacking the message.
...
I find it interesting that this thread has been just so dang peaceful!! We can agree to disagree and it does not affect the kindness and respect ( or the affection that we feel ) for each other!
TER and I disagree on this topic ..... But I adore the man.
Terry and I disagree on this topic, but we still treat each other like sweet sistahs.
Eduardo and I disagree on this topic and he is still charming.
TC and I disagree on this topic and he is still so kind.
There is no judgement. Just fair and honest discussion! What a breath of fresh air!!
Experience teaches us that it is much easier to prevent an enemy from posting themselves than it is to dislodge them after they have got possession.
~ George Washington
Doesn't the word "forgive" mean get out of jail free?
I have a hard time seeing how that's an argument against the view. Seems like a point in its favor.
Clarification:
Calvin and all the Reformers believe eternal security comes from God; not from human works of obedience. It is the doctrine called "Perseverance" or "Preservation" of the Saints.
Christians will endure all enemies and will overcome all spiritual obstacles by the indwelling power of the Holy Spirit = PERSEVERANCE
Christians are guaranteed everlasting life without fail because Christ has died for them on the cross (Justification); Christ rose from the dead as their Surety, that they too will without fail be resurrected bodily to glory; and because the Holy Spirit has sealed them and protects them and guides them into all truth, which prevents any falling away from grace = PRESERVATION
Every single saint, from Genesis through the N.T. has persevered in faith and has been kept in faith, unto everlasting life. You can read about many of them in Hebrews Chapter 11.
So eternal security has always been known to the sons of God, whether O.T. or N.T. This is not a new, nor an innovative doctrine as TER would suggest.
Calvin did not "invent" this doctrine; let alone did he invent OSAS, which is a different view of eternal security than the Reformed doctrine of "Perseverance/Preservation Of The Saints."
Unfortunately, many hold to OSAS thinking that once they make a decision to "accept Christ," their moral duties are ended, and they can live lawlessly and commit sins with impunity. Not all, like Kevin and Annie think this way, but many do. Kevin and Annie are actually agreeing with we Reformers, by giving God all the glory for keeping them unto everlasting life, which they know they cannot lose.
To claim that believers must work to eventually and ultimately stay saved, is denial of grace altogether. It is a life lived in fear, worry, and unbelief in God's covenant promise of sanctifying grace that leads only to everlasting life. (John 3:16) It totally overlooks the fact that all Christians have been adopted into the royal family of God. There is no undoing of this adoption as Kevin has pointed out. Denial of eternal security is wrong.
Christians: Do not be discouraged by those who would attempt to rob you of this blessed assurance!
Ephesians 1:13-14
II Corinthians 1:22, 5:5
I John 2:18-20
Last edited by Nang; 04-16-2014 at 03:17 PM.
The Bible says that every person has sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, but where in the Bible does it say that we sin "every day?" I've never read a passage which states that. We're certainly sinners who are saved by the blood of Christ, but I don't see where you get the idea that every single person sins "every single day." When you look at the story of Job in the Bible, he didn't sin the entire time that Satan was tempting him. He went through that entire time of testing without committing a sin. The Bible describes him as being "blameless and upright." It's true that none of us are without sin, but I don't really see any basis in the Bible for saying that no one can go a single day without sinning. I don't think it's impossible for someone to go a day or several days without sinning, or whatever period of time. You should keep in mind the verse that says "I can do all things through Christ who gives me strength."
+'These things I command you, that you love one another.' - Jesus Christ
Connect With Us