I know, I know--it's like the old "do we jave free will, or is God all-knowing and we're just robots" argument. Been done to death. Still, I recently heard the best argument ever in favor of the premise:
Since God promised "eternal" life to believers, then to take that away from one who backslides, falls away, or whatever term you choose for not living up to an ideal, doesn't that refute the whole meaning of "eternal"? And since God does not lie, eternal life must BE truly eternal, right?
Originally posted by PinkFloyd I know, I know--it's like the old "do we jave free will, or is God all-knowing and we're just robots" argument. Been done to death. Still, I recently heard the best argument ever in favor of the premise:
Since God promised "eternal" life to believers, then to take that away from one who backslides, falls away, or whatever term you choose for not liv ...[text shortened]... g of "eternal"? And since God does not lie, eternal life must BE truly eternal, right?
Originally posted by PinkFloyd I know, I know--it's like the old "do we jave free will, or is God all-knowing and we're just robots" argument. Been done to death. Still, I recently heard the best argument ever in favor of the premise:
Since God promised "eternal" life to believers, then to take that away from one who backslides, falls away, or whatever term you choose for not liv ...[text shortened]... g of "eternal"? And since God does not lie, eternal life must BE truly eternal, right?
A person who continues in sin without a hint of repentance and has no good works to speak of, yet believes Christ is his savior, has not yet received grace. Whereas, a person who periodically falls into sin (and consistently repents of that sin) yet shows forth good works, has received grace.
There is no such thing as a sinless person, whether saint or sinner. Grace is not dependent on our merit, either before or after a person receives grace. And all those who receive grace never lose it.
To say that a person can lose it by continuing in sin without repentance is to misconstrue what is revealed, since only those who haven't yet received grace are able to continue in sin without repentance. Therefore, when someone continues in sin without a hint of repentance this only proves that that person has not yet received grace -- what it does not prove is that grace can be lost once it is received.
“Fire is not hot in order that it may burn, but because it burns. A wheel does not run nicely in order that it may be round, but because it is round. So no one does good works in order that he may receive grace, but because he has received grace." - St. Augustine
Originally posted by DoctorScribbles Well, I don't know what characterizes such a theory of belief. Is it epistemically sound?
The term was kind of a gag, but it seems to me that the meaning of the word "believe" can change with the speaker and/or topic. For instance one man may say he believes in fidelity in marriage meaning with an unshakable commitment. Another man may say he believes in fidelity in marriage meaning as a general idea which he may suspend should he find a willing partner that he finds sufficiently attractive.
When exploring the idea being 'saved' in Christianity, it seems prudent to try to assess what Jesus meant by 'believe'
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne Another man may say he believes in fidelity in marriage meaning as a general idea which he may suspend should he find a willing partner that he finds sufficiently attractive.
This is not belief in fidelity in marriage, plain and simple.
Originally posted by epiphinehas A person who continues in sin without a hint of repentance and has no good works to speak of, yet believes Christ is his savior, has not yet received grace. Whereas, a person who periodically falls into sin (and consistently repents of that sin) yet shows forth good works, has received grace.
There is no such thing as a sinless person, whether ...[text shortened]... ks in order that he may receive grace, but because he has received grace.[/i]" - St. Augustine
But I thought we receive grace first-- You know, "not by works, lest anyone should boast"? As I understand salvation, we are saved through grace ALONE--no works, no promises to be good, no walking the aisle or getting dipped in water, no nothin'. Thus, works can't be, in ANY way, a requirement to salvation.
Once saved, Always saved ?
26 Oct '07 22:34
Back to Top