To further explain. "Eternal Life" is not a status or a condition given to us. It is an Object, a Person, Jesus Christ, who comes to abide within us if we are born anew or obey the Commandments. This "Eternal Life" in John is synonymous with "Kingdom of Heaven" in the Synoptics. It is Christ's presence within the grace-filled man. It does not follow that "Eternal Life" will remain within us ETERNALLY! A man can disinherit himself from the Kingdom of Heaven - which casts out "Eternal Life" that was formerly residing within us. We ALWAYS have the ability to reject the Spirit while here on earth. "Eternal Life" in John's Gospel refers to a Person, not a status. Do you think Catholics believe that if they go to Communion (eat Christ's Body) that they are guaranteed heaven? That is what your interpretation of John 6 would tell us... I do grant you that context is important, and that sometimes, eternal life refers to life in heaven. But usually, John means the Person of Christ.
"eternal life" means eternal life in heaven in the presence of and in communion with, God.
Jesus DEFINES Eternal life : "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." John 17:3
That is the message of John's Gospel. To believe that Christ is God's messenger. HE is life eternal. He is not a status! In some instances, Paul talks about eternal life as you mention, but he also qualifies this by saying we can become disinherited by our actions. So even in Paul's case, eternal life is not guaranteed until after death.
How about the word "love"? Does that mean the same thing to God as it does to man? You're giving us corporeals a wee bit too much credit I think. :)
Our definitions are the same. It is our execution that is lacking. God taught us what love was through the death of His only Son. We "know" what love is. The problem is putting it into action.
Yes, the elect of men persevere by God acting through them. So, your correction is better.
So when Jesus tells us to be awake, to persevere, He really is talking to the Father? I disagree. God expects MAN to persevere by using the grace God gives men in each situation. God is not persevering through men. That is ridiculous - God judges MAN. We don't judge God for His perseverance through men.
If I am still wrong, then I am not fairly safe, but fairly lost. :) You are now espousing a OSAS model from infant baptism. For you, this is a bit.... irregular. :)
A baby has his "ticket punched" as a result of infant baptism because he has no stain of sin remaining. He has received sanctifying grace, and has no personal sin. What would keep him out of heaven, FK? Original sin and personal sin keep us out of heaven. A baby has had the former removed and doesn't have the latter. I don't see this a problem. Of course, we are presuming that the infant subsequently dies. Once a child commits mortal sin, all bets are off on this "ticket being punched".
So to those who have it, sanctifying grace is really, truly a "guarantee" of NOTHING. It is a temporary condition, that when lost, may or may not be restored. You call that a "guarantee"? When you go to get your car fixed, and the shop owner gives you a "guarantee" of his work, is this the sense in which you accept it? The work is guaranteed, until the car breaks down, and then it is no longer guaranteed, but might be again if you hire the same guy to fix it a second time?
A guarantee doesn't guarantee the problem will not re-occur. It means that IF it DOES, they will fix it for free! How can a human shop owner "guarantee" that a car will not break? The sacrament of Confession is our guarantee for us when we sin after Baptism. We call upon the work of Christ to free us from our self-imposed sin (not authored by God). Just because we have been Baptized doesn't guarantee we won't sin - but we have a guarantee that we can get fixed. Again, I don't see a problem here.
Man is sinful, making him wholly unfit for heaven. All men. A price must be paid in atonement. This is God's way as we see throughout the OT. Man does not have the required price, only God does.
So who does God pay?
My position is that therefore, the God-determined price, according to His justice, must have been the death of Christ on the cross. That makes the sacrifice real, and fully selfless. It was necessary and He did it because if He did not do it, none of us are saved.
I disagree with this concept of "Atonement", that God owes something to someone as to ransom man from something, although it is not necessarily a false belief, since some Church Fathers have held it. I realize that Paul uses this in comparison to Hebrew sacrifices, which discuss man atoning for sins through sacrifice. But God? Who does God owe anything to? I think this is a misinterpretation of the bible and has led to many problems in our relationship with God. It tends to cause us to forget that God is Love and rather focus on God as being Just. Of course, this is true, but God is Mercy and Love first, as James and John say. God sent His Son to die on the cross to show us His love for mankind, not because He was forced to out of some debt. Who can make God pay them anything? Even Satan cannot. The Catholic paradigm is that God is Love and Mercy first.
Regards
I just wanted you to see this statement by itself. :)
Do you think Catholics believe that if they go to Communion (eat Christ's Body) that they are guaranteed heaven? That is what your interpretation of John 6 would tell us...
I don't believe Catholics think anything in the Bible guarantees them heaven. :) If you are referring to the passage I think you are in John 6, then I see that as another way of putting what He already said earlier in the chapter, that whoever believes on Him will have eternal life.
So when Jesus tells us to be awake, to persevere, He really is talking to the Father? I disagree.
No, He is talking to us. He is telling us to not succumb to the remnant, to trust in Him for perseverance, etc.
A baby has his "ticket punched" as a result of infant baptism because he has no stain of sin remaining. He has received sanctifying grace, and has no personal sin. What would keep him out of heaven, FK?
But to carry the analogy, you also believe that the baby, when he grows up, can "unpunch" his own ticket. That means it was never punched in the first place, and in fact, never is during life. If the analogy had to do with a ringing bell, you would say it makes perfect sense that it can be "unrung"!
A guarantee doesn't guarantee the problem will not reoccur. It means that IF it DOES, they will fix it for free! How can a human shop owner "guarantee" that a car will not break?
The shop owner guarantees that his work was sound and that the problem will not occur again outside of normal wear and tear. He promises to fix the car if it breaks down because of some error in his work. He doesn't guarantee anything if something else breaks down. However, God's guarantees are much grander. He guarantees that none of His sheep will ever be lost for good. If the sheep were cars, God guarantees that He will fix the car whenever it breaks down again for any reason (perseverance, sanctification). God fixes all parts of the car for any reason.
Just like the shop owner, God doesn't promise us that we will never sin again, but God does promise to fix us. You deny this and say that in some cases, God refuses the repair when the customer doesn't bring the car back in, even when it's broken. I believe that God happens to keep good records and knows where all the cars are. He loves us so much that He even comes out to the house to make repairs, even if we don't know that something is wrong.
FK: "Man is sinful, making him wholly unfit for heaven. All men. A price must be paid in atonement. This is God's way as we see throughout the OT. Man does not have the required price, only God does."
So who does God pay?
Even in our system of jurisprudence we recognize that when a payment of justice is made, there does not necessarily have to be a direct beneficiary of the payment. When a convicted killer is executed, and "pays" with his life, who is the direct beneficiary? That's one way to look at it. Another would be that God pays "Himself", in order to satisfy His requirement for perfect justice. We also see that in our justice system. When a governmental agency is held guilty of a crime and must pay a fine, who does it pay it to? Another governmental agency. That satisfies justice, even though all the money stays within the "government".