Why don't you believe God would know who to give eternal life to (in all cases always) so that it lasts forever? That is, some would be saved but could lose salvation tomorrow? This is not a sure salvation it seems. Am I wrong? Look forward to your response.
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Eternal life
- Thread starter PamC
- Start date
- Status
I am having trouble understanding your question, but it seems to me that you are asking why do we Orthodox not believe in "once saved always saved"...? Am I correct?
Well to answer your question, God does know who will be saved and who won't, but no one can or will be saved while still alive. If we die repentant of our sins, and did all or most of what He commanded us to do while alive, then when we die, that is when we are saved. You see sin moves us further and further away from God (in the salvation sense) so how can we humans who are full of sin, be saved while we are still sinning? Every sin moves us away, while repententing brings us closer. So we hope that when we die, we hope we are closer to God by our tears of repentance, so that we may be saved. Professing a belief in Jesus and faith in Him does not save us, we must work at it and live a life of repentance...after all Satan and his demons believe in God and have faith He exists, does that mean they are saved?
Well to answer your question, God does know who will be saved and who won't, but no one can or will be saved while still alive. If we die repentant of our sins, and did all or most of what He commanded us to do while alive, then when we die, that is when we are saved. You see sin moves us further and further away from God (in the salvation sense) so how can we humans who are full of sin, be saved while we are still sinning? Every sin moves us away, while repententing brings us closer. So we hope that when we die, we hope we are closer to God by our tears of repentance, so that we may be saved. Professing a belief in Jesus and faith in Him does not save us, we must work at it and live a life of repentance...after all Satan and his demons believe in God and have faith He exists, does that mean they are saved?
Upvote
0
I am saved right now. God has told me that I was chosen before the foundations of the world. I did not know this before I was saved. I only found out after I entered into the new creation when I was born-again. When I die, I am not saved; thank God death is not salvation. The reason we still sin is because though we have died on the cross with Christ and God says the flesh has been crucified, there is still the body; and as long as there is the physical body, the flesh will always try to rear its ugly head. My salvation is not a hope to be saved as is yours (but it is unto rewards), but it is an accomplished fact! Jesus says that if you believe you are saved; and so you continue to grow in that new life unto perfection. Satan and the demons know God exists, but they are spirits and such spirits were not offerred a redemption through the cross. They do not know the experience of the precious blood and co-crucifixion with Christ. To know God exists is not the same thing as to believe to receive God's grace for forgiveness of sins at regeneration in new birth.
Upvote
0
My heart is always saddened to hear someone say they don't know if they are saved, that maybe, just maybe they could lose once-saved-always-saved eternal life, that then would be not so eternal would it?
Upvote
0
- Jul 2, 2005
- 6,598
- 527
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
We believe that people can always freely reject the salvation that God has offered to us.
Upvote
0
But once one has received God's gift of eternal life at new birth, then isn't that person forever saved because God foresees infinitely in the new creation when giving eternal life to someone? Wouldn't we be placing the determination on man if man could choose to not be saved after being saved?
Upvote
0
PamC said:
The life one receives in Holy Baptism (the sacrament of spiritual rebirth) is eternal life because it is God's life one receives. It is not eternal because of us and whether or not we eternally maintain it is irrelevant to the eternity of eternal life, since it is God's eternal life.
To your sadness corresponds mine, when I hear people assume their salvation as an established fact irrespective of their holiness of life in Christ, as if it were magic. As baptized Orthodox, striving for a life in Christ according to His command we do not doubt our salvation, we are confident that God is saving us which will be completed in the resurrection of the body. Until such a time, we neither doubt our salvation nor do we claim it as an established fact, until such a time we life in the life-giving hope of salvation.
Gregorios
Upvote
0
It is God's will that all men are saved, but it operates in conjunction with our will. We can choose to walk apart. The Father will watch and wait for our return, but does not force us to stay against our will.
The problem I have seen in my experience with "once saved-always saved" is that it leads to pride...a kind of "I'm chosen, but you're not" attitude. It's a gnostic type of concept which the scriptures and the Fathers fought against. The same applies to those who believe they have "spiritual gifts" over and above others.
There is assurance in believing that you can never fall from grace, that is true. But in constantly striving, constantly understanding we are imperfect and unworthy, there will come a sense of humility. It is in this humility that we can then truly begin to have the Spirit live in us.
As for me, I would rather live my life constantly climbing to attain that which lies before me, then to reach a lower rung of the ladder and believe I'm already there.
Just my opinion - forgive me.
The problem I have seen in my experience with "once saved-always saved" is that it leads to pride...a kind of "I'm chosen, but you're not" attitude. It's a gnostic type of concept which the scriptures and the Fathers fought against. The same applies to those who believe they have "spiritual gifts" over and above others.
There is assurance in believing that you can never fall from grace, that is true. But in constantly striving, constantly understanding we are imperfect and unworthy, there will come a sense of humility. It is in this humility that we can then truly begin to have the Spirit live in us.
As for me, I would rather live my life constantly climbing to attain that which lies before me, then to reach a lower rung of the ladder and believe I'm already there.
Just my opinion - forgive me.
Upvote
0
So when God says we are chosen, we are not really chosen? How can there not be doubt if one can lose eternal life, God's uncreated life, tomorrow? Who is the author of such doubt? Why does new birth have to be irrespective of holiness for isn't it God's holiness that gives eternal life, giving the believer a new life to grow confidently?
Upvote
0
OK. Hypothetical, let's say I am "saved" in the sense that you speak of. Then tomorrow I go out and Decide to reject God, and do all sorts of sinful things. What then, what happens to me?PamC said:
Upvote
0
E
eoe
Guest
Pam - here is a fact. Cold hard fact. Ready?
No church taught what you are talking about until about 350-400 years ago.
That is a fact. Why is that? Why did it take 1600+ years for this doctrine to be revealed? Why did those that learned directly from the apostles teach something totally different?
No church taught what you are talking about until about 350-400 years ago.
That is a fact. Why is that? Why did it take 1600+ years for this doctrine to be revealed? Why did those that learned directly from the apostles teach something totally different?
Upvote
0
OK but then How can I be sure I was saved in the fist place, If I heard God Call me tell me I was chosen and got Baptised.
Upvote
0
E
eoe
Guest
Pam this is the very definition of the No True Scotsman logical fallacy.
No true Scotsman is a term coined by Antony Flew in his 1975 book Thinking About Thinking. It refers to an argument which takes this form: Argument: "No Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge."Reply: "But my uncle Angus likes sugar with his porridge."Rebuttal: "Ah yes, but no true Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge." This form of argument is a fallacy if the predicate ("putting sugar on porridge") is not actually contradictory for the accepted definition of the subject ("Scotsman"), or if the definition of the subject is silently adjusted after the fact to make the rebuttal work.
The truth of a proposition is its adequacy to its object ("Is the drawing a true likeness of Antony Flew?"). The truth of an object is its adequacy to its concept ("Is the figure drawn on the paper a true triangle?"). Problems arise when the definition of the concept has no generally accepted form. "A true Scotsman" (a concept) is not on the same level as "a true triangle" (a concept) never mind "the true Antony Flew" (a concrete existing object). The formal similarity, "true X", the feeling that they should be on the same level, in some sense must be on the same level (even perhaps all exist as objects), motivates the fallacy. It is short step from that feeling to treating one's own definition of a "true Scotsman" (who else's?) as having the same objectivity as that of a geometrical figure or an existing individual, and then attempting to make the world agree.
Some elements or actions are exclusively contradictory to the subject, and therefore aren't fallacies. The statement "No true vegetarian would eat a beef steak" is not fallacious because it follows from the accepted definition of "vegetarian": Eating meat, by definition, disqualifies a (present-tense) categorization among vegetarians, and the further value judgement between a "true vegetarian" and the implied "false vegetarian" cannot likewise be categorized as a fallacy, given the clear disjunction.
Using the context of culture, individuals of any particular religion, for example, may tend to employ this fallacy. The statement "no true Christian" would do some such thing is often a fallacy, since the term "Christian" is used by a wide and disparate variety of people. This broad nature of the category is such that its use has very little meaning when it comes to defining a narrow property or behaviour. If there is no one accepted definition of the subject, then the definition must be understood in context, or defined in the initial argument for the discussion at hand.
It is also a common fallacy in politics, in which critics may condemn their colleagues as not being "true" Communists, liberals or conservatives because they occasionally disagree on certain matters of policy. It comes in many other forms - "No decent person would" - it is argued "support hanging/watch pornography/smoke in public", etc. Often the speaker seems unaware that he/she is, in fact, coercively (re)defining, 'objectifying', what the phrase "decent person" means to include/exclude what he/she wants and NOT simply following what the phrase is already accepted as meaning. The argument shifts the debate from being about hanging/pornography/smoking and tries to make it seem that anyone disagreeing with the speaker is arguing for the "indecent".
Allow me to demonstrate..
"No Christian will fall away"
"I know a Christian that fell away"
"Oh, well no true Christain will fall away!"
This is a logical fallacy. It is like asserting that 2+2=9
Upvote
0
E
eoe
Guest
Pam - Why not find out why no church older than 400 years teaches this? Why not figure out why the HUGE majority (70+%) Of all Christians reject this doctrine?
No joke. I would say that a minimum of 70% of Christains reject this outright. That is being VERY conservative.
No joke. I would say that a minimum of 70% of Christains reject this outright. That is being VERY conservative.
Upvote
0
kamikat
my love is bigger than a cadillac
- Apr 22, 2005
- 8,963
- 353
- 52
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
eoe said:
eoe-I might even raise that estimate to 80%, as there are many Protestant, even "bible believing" denominations that reject Once Saved, Always Saved. Most Christians do believe that a Christian can lose their salvation if they do not persevere to the end.
kamikat
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
