Posted on 11/13/2006 11:01:10 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg
That is an ad hominem.
-A8
How do you know that you will not fall away 10 years from now and become a Muslim? - I don't.
Based upon your argument you should not even wear the title until after you die. - How would that follow?
I would think that would be obvious. Those who fall away never really were. That doesn't stop people from saying their Christians just as it shouldn't stop people from saying they are elect or chosen of God. You call yourself a Catholic so, by your reasoning, you shouldn't really use the title until you die. Of course by then it's a little late to be printing up business cards.
1 John 5:13
These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.
I don't know about you, but I don't invent "logic" which contradicts Scripture and then accuse others of abandoning logic. Here is the truth of the matter for all to see. I, John, Disciple, Apostle, personal friend of the Lord Jesus the Logos of God, son of Thunder, am writing to believers with a purpose, even if some may like to think that I must have abandoned logic for old Calvinist wives tales, that you who are believers may know that you have eternal life. Not might have or have it just for today, but HAVE.
adiaireton8, you may choose to believe that this verse applies to you or not. I am a true believer; I know. This verse applies to me. Take your accusations of logic up with John & Jesus.
post tenebras lux,
(1) Those who fall away were never Christian.
(2) You don't know that you will never fall away.
Therefore,
(3) You don't know that you are a Christian right now.
Unlike Calvinists, I reject premise (1); therefore I do not have to accept (3).
-A8
1Jo 2:19 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.
-A8
-A8
" I am a true believer; I know."
_____________________________
Amen! Shout it from the mountain top! Be bold!
Jesus not only told us. He proved he was who he said he was and on that rock of ages I place all my faith.
The Muslims, Mormons, JWs, Scientologists, Heaven's Gaters, Branch Davidians, Hyoo-Go's, Moonies, the Baha'is, Theosophists, Hare Krishnas, Aum Shinrikyos, Oneness Pentecostals, and Christian Scientists, all say the same.
Apparently, if you just pound the table hard enough when you say it, it must be true!
-A8
I believe the assurance verses apply to all who possess Trinitarian faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, you included, because Scripture clearly affirms this belief.
You choose not to see them as such. Instead, when I asked in post #99 what your standard of truth is, you replied in post #108 that your standard of truth is not Scripture, but the "Sacred Magisterium."
The only objective means anyone knows anything is by tangible results. Trinitarian faith in Jesus Christ, founded on God's word and the sure witness of the Holy Spirit, brings forth good and sustained fruit.
The fruit of men and magisteriums is also on display.
Pontius Pilate said the same thing.
Accusing me of not believing the Scripture is indeed an hominem. You are essentially accusing me of denying Scripture. I have never stated anywhere that I disbelieve a single verse of the Bible.
You're the one having a difficult time believing the assurance verses actually mean what they say and have the integrity of actual intent.
This is another ad hominem.
Any time you criticize *me* personally, or accuse me personally, that's an ad hominem. If you disagree with my *position*, that's fine; go ahead and criticism my position all you want. But please, stop criticizing *me*. Ad hominems are fallacies.
-A8
Chapter and verse?
-A8
I quit posting to A8 when he accused me of the same thing. It's obvious that he or she is really not interested in discussing theology but in something else altogether.
Another ad hominem.
-A8
It's all you can do. Fortunately their little ploys are transparent. To confirm it all you have to do is check recent posts and see the pattern. I just sneeze now and it's ad hominem to some. The irony is too, when they accuse you, they are "reading your mind", and prescribing motives, since it was never what you intended, but they fail to see that.
"I'll be darned, me too."
Let me know if you want the alumni credit card or the tee shirt.
"Let me know if you want the alumni credit card or the tee shirt."
_________________________
Give me the tee shirt. I already have enough bills to pay.
I am assuming they are not alike in fact, not in appearance. I acknowledge there are false believers who appear convincing, so we wouldn't necessarily be able to weed them out. However, I think it's definitional that a false believer's heart is not right with God. I would "think" that such a person would know it, if he honestly assessed himself. Because I wasn't saved until 17, I have a full memory of what my heart was like as a lost person and what it is like now. Day and night. Therefore, I suppose what I'm alleging is that the heart of a non-believer (former me) is similar to that of a false believer (what I claim I know I'm not). I think that's reasonable as salvation is such a black and white issue, one either is or is not.
Where? Judas sure fooled the rest of the Twelve. Philip was fooled by Simon Magus into baptizing him. ...
You're right, I misspoke. I should have said the faith of a false believer or apostate is shown in the Bible, not "one-to-be". The moment we are aware of a false faith it is no longer "to-be".
All Christians (which would include the elect) must take care not to "fall away from the living God". That makes absolutely no sense if the the faith of the elect is presently in no way like the 'faith' of the apostates-to-be.
I would agree in terms of outward faith, but not inward. The author says "any" because he can't be certain which among the others had true faith. Outwardly, all may have appeared similar. The other issue is what is the sense of "fall away"? Each of us could interpret that in a way favorable to our side, so I see that one as a wash.
When Peter says in 2 Peter 3 that the beloved should be on their guard so that they are not carried away by the error of unprincipled men and fall from their own steadfastness, this implies that those with steadfastness can lose their steadfastness. Does it not?
Yes, the elect and the non-elect can each act like the other outwardly, but after regeneration, the same cannot be true inwardly by definition. I believe that true regeneration creates a real change in the individual that is perceptible to him. You can testify to it. Apostates-to-be never experience this. They can lie to others and perhaps even to themselves, but for me at least it was unmistakable. I am certain of it.
But assurance in Catholic theology is not "present and certain knowledge that one is elect". Rather, it is a knowledge of God's promise that if we abide in Him He will not cut us off, ...
Abiding necessarily includes works, so since you use "if", indicating free will choice, how is this not salvation by works?
To do justice to your question, we should consider the assurance verses one by one. But to speak generally, these verses give us assurance in the sense I just mentioned above ...
OK, how about:
1 John 5:13 : I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.
This doesn't appear to match a conditional assurance. If it was conditional, wouldn't it say something much more like "so that you may have hope for eternal life"?
[On believing oneself to be led by God to do something:] I'm not saying that the Holy Spirit cannot and does not speak to us internally. I'm saying that there has to be some *objective* way of testing such subjective leading; otherwise its a crap shoot.
I agree with your skepticism so all I can do is test it against scripture. When I hear a televangelist say that God led him to ask viewers to send in $10 mil. for a new building, I don't buy it. However when an individual told me once that God had led him to tithe 15% instead of 10% (because God had been so good to him in his career), I believed him. Several years ago my music minister told me that God had led him to leave our church to serve in another. To me, that was a scriptural wash so I just took his word for it.
Correct, as long as by 'assurance' you mean "present and certain knowledge that one is elect".
Yes. My wife and I have been happily and faithfully married for 18 years. If I said that I was "certain" that I would never cheat on her, this would be a very different meaning and use of the word. My confidence about my salvation is leagues higher because it is only dependent on God and his promises. It is possible for me to blow my marriage, but it is not possible for me to blow my salvation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.