Is Final Salvation Free or Contingent upon Obeying Commandments?

[truefiction1]

Bless you friend, how do you interpret John 15:1-10? Jesus’ warning to His 11 faithful apostles is a pretty strong indication that even those who have faith must also obey and bear fruit. Verses 2 and 6 are pretty strong evidence that those who are in Christ can fall from grace.

Without a doubt.

 

[truefiction1]

My guess is to show where the fruit comes from.

Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me. (John 15:4, NASB)

I’m not sure it’s a command.

It's a command. Scripture is full of commands.

 

[Hammster]

Excludes everything other than faith for justification (as understood in the imputed framework).

That is the broadest definition that some Protestants use. Some others would define it more narrowly.

If we are talking about a transition from a state of unrighteousness to righteousness, works play no part in that from a Catholic perspective. Our main gripe with the phrase "faith alone" in that context is that the phrase excludes not only works but everything except faith (i.e. hope and love are excluded). Trent is fairly clear about that.

My guess, then, is the misunderstanding of what’s meant. To me, it’s the gospel. We are declared righteous by God. That’s because we are in Christ and rely solely on His finished work. This is different from a lot of OSAS folks who think that once you say a prayer and walk the aisle, if you are sincere, you are saved regardless of you lifestyle afterwards. That’s not true.

So from a Reformed viewpoint, we are saved by grace through faith, but the grace also leads to obedience because we have a new heart that wants to love God and serve Him. We still battle with flesh, as scripture shows. But ultimately our bent is towards God.

 

[Hammster]

Distinction is one thing, but separation is quite another, and these distinct things cannot be separated. It is an ontological impossibility due to how we've been designed by God from the beginning.

They will both be present, if that’s what you mean.

 

[Hammster]

No it doesn’t say grafted it only says they are in Christ and implies that they attached to the vine. They cannot be cut off from the vine if they are not attached. I used the word grafted in in reference to Romans 11.

A little more thinking on this. It could also be referring to our mindset. It I’m focused on Christ, then I’m not trying to do my own thing. In that sense, I’m abiding. The pruning comes when I try to do things own my own power. But the thing to remember is that He didn’t say He would cut off branches that stopped bearing fruit. They never bore fruit at all.

 

[BNR32FAN]

My guess is to show where the fruit comes from.

Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me. (John 15:4, NASB)

I’m not sure it’s a command.

When I read it all together the context sounds like a warning. First Jesus states His expectations, then He states the consequences, then He states the reason for His expectations.

 

[Hammster]

It's a command. Scripture is full of commands.

Then it’s one that his followers will obey. We know from earlier that His sheep hear His voice and follow. So if He commands, then believers will obey.

 

[Grip Docility]

My guess, then, is the misunderstanding of what’s meant. To me, it’s the gospel. We are declared righteous by God. That’s because we are in Christ and rely solely on His finished work. This is different from a lot of OSAS folks who think that once you say a prayer and walk the aisle, if you are sincere, you are saved regardless of you lifestyle afterwards. That’s not true.

So from a Reformed viewpoint, we are saved by grace through faith, but the grace also leads to obedience because we have a new heart that wants to love God and serve Him. We still battle with flesh, as scripture shows. But ultimately our bent is towards God.

I’m most definitely not Reformed, and yet, I agree with every word you have written.

 

[Shimokita]

My guess, then, is the misunderstanding of what’s meant. To me, it’s the gospel. We are declared righteous by God. That’s because we are in Christ and rely solely on His finished work. This is different from a lot of OSAS folks who think that once you say a prayer and walk the aisle, if you are sincere, you are saved regardless of you lifestyle afterwards. That’s not true.

So from a Reformed viewpoint, we are saved by grace through faith, but the grace also leads to obedience because we have a new heart that wants to love God and serve Him. We still battle with flesh, as scripture shows. But ultimately our bent is towards God.

Hmm. Would you consider yourself among the so-called "Lordship Salvation" Calvinists (e.g. John MacArthur)?

 

[Hammster]

Hmm. Would you consider yourself among the so-called "Lordship Salvation" Calvinists (e.g. John MacArthur)?

You’ll have to refresh my memory. It’s been awhile since I heard that term, and I think MacArthur has said he regretted using it.

 

[truefiction1]

Then it’s one that his followers will obey. We know from earlier that His sheep hear His voice and follow. So if He commands, then believers will obey.

Yes, and being that He gives the command, it follows that it is possible to not obey, Otherwise the command need not be given. So there is this matter of freewill at play in the great mystery of Salvation.

 

[Hammster]

Yes, and being that He gives the command, it follows that it is possible to not obey, Otherwise the command need not be given. So there is this matter of freewill at play in the great mystery of Salvation.

Why would it not need to be given? Are there other commands that need not be given if we are new creations with new hearts? I can’t think of any.

 

[Shimokita]

You’ll have to refresh my memory. It’s been awhile since I heard that term, and I think MacArthur has said he regretted using it.

I do not know how they define themselves, but I would define them as putting a very strong emphasis on the necessity of obedience to have assurance that one is among God's elect. In other words, if a professed Christian is not living an obedient life, we know that he is not saved, because the elect will necessarily be obedient. It kind of the opposite of the so-called "easy believisim", while still holding faith as the formal cause of justification.

 

[Hammster]

I do not know how they define themselves, but I would define them as putting a very strong emphasis on the necessity of obedience to have assurance that one is among God's elect. In other words, if a professed Christian is not living an obedient life, we know that he is not saved, because the elect will necessarily be obedient. It kind of the opposite of the so-called "easy believisim", while still holding faith as the formal cause of justification.

Hmmm.

I’m not sure I’d phrase it that way. My assurance is that of being in Christ. Evidence of that is fruit, which obedience is part of.

I hope that doesn’t muddle it.

 

[Shimokita]

My guess, then, is the misunderstanding of what’s meant. To me, it’s the gospel. We are declared righteous by God. That’s because we are in Christ and rely solely on His finished work. This is different from a lot of OSAS folks who think that once you say a prayer and walk the aisle, if you are sincere, you are saved regardless of you lifestyle afterwards. That’s not true.

So from a Reformed viewpoint, we are saved by grace through faith, but the grace also leads to obedience because we have a new heart that wants to love God and serve Him. We still battle with flesh, as scripture shows. But ultimately our bent is towards God.

Well the frameworks are different. When I state that "a man is not saved by faith alone" or "a man is justified by works" many Protestants conclude that those statements mean something that I do not hold, because often they assume that I am operating within the same imputation / penal-substitution framework in which they operate. When I make those statements I make them in the context of a Catholic framework, and they typically mean something other than what the Protestant thinks they mean.

 

[Hammster]

Well the frameworks are different. When I state that "a man is not saved by faith alone" or "a man is justified by works" many Protestants conclude that those statements mean something that I do not hold, because often they assume that I am operating within the same imputation / penal-substitution framework in which they operate. When I make those statements I make them in the context of a Catholic framework, and they typically mean something other than what the Protestant thinks they mean.

What do you mean, then?

 

[Shimokita]

Hmmm.

I’m not sure I’d phrase it that way. My assurance is that of being in Christ. Evidence of that is fruit, which obedience is part of.

I hope that doesn’t muddle it.

I think that is the gist of it.

 

[Shimokita]

What do you mean, then?

When I speak of justification I do not assume an imputed state or standing before God. I assume a real, righteous, quality of a man's soul that results in the first instance from the infusion of grace merited by our Lord on the cross. This quality of the man's soul can increase after he is justified (became a child of God), making him even more justified. If this man who was once justified does good works for the love of God, God will reward them by justifying him further still (pouring more faith, hope and love into his soul).

So when I state that a person is justified by works, I do not mean that a man translates from the state of being a child of wrath to being a child of God, through good works. I mean that a person who is already justified (saved, a child of God) increases in justification.

Or as Trent puts it:

Paul III   Council of Trent-6​

THE INCREASE OF THE JUSTIFICATION RECEIVED
Having, therefore, been thus justified and made the friends and domestics of God,[49] advancing from virtue to virtue,[50] they are renewed, as the Apostle says, day by day,[51] that is, mortifying the members[52] of their flesh, and presenting them as instruments of justice unto sanctification,[53] they, through the observance of the commandments of God and of the Church, faith cooperating with good works, increase in that justice received through the grace of Christ and are further justified, as it is written:

He that is just, let him be justified still;[54] and, Be not afraid to be justified even to death;[55] and again, Do you see that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only?[56]

This increase of justice holy Church asks for when she prays:
"Give unto us, O Lord, an increase of faith, hope and charity."[57]​

 

[Hammster]

When I speak of justification I do not assume an imputed state or standing before God. I assume a real, righteous, quality of a man's soul that results in the first instance from the infusion of grace merited by our Lord on the cross. This quality of the man's soul can increase after he is justified (became a child of God), making him even more justified. If this man who was once justified does good works for the love of God, God will reward them by justifying him further still (pouring more faith, hope and love into his soul).

So when I state that a person is justified by works, I do not mean that a man translates from the state of being a child of wrath to being a child of God, through good works. I mean that a person who is already justified (saved, a child of God) increases in justification.

Or as Trent puts it:

Paul III Council of Trent-6​

THE INCREASE OF THE JUSTIFICATION RECEIVED
Having, therefore, been thus justified and made the friends and domestics of God,[49] advancing from virtue to virtue,[50] they are renewed, as the Apostle says, day by day,[51] that is, mortifying the members[52] of their flesh, and presenting them as instruments of justice unto sanctification,[53] they, through the observance of the commandments of God and of the Church, faith cooperating with good works, increase in that justice received through the grace of Christ and are further justified, as it is written:

He that is just, let him be justified still;[54] and, Be not afraid to be justified even to death;[55] and again, Do you see that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only?[56]

This increase of justice holy Church asks for when she prays:
"Give unto us, O Lord, an increase of faith, hope and charity."[57]​

Okay. Thanks. Obviously I disagree because the text doesn’t support that notion. But at least I understand better.

 

[def]

Excludes everything other than faith for justification (as understood in the imputed framework).

That is the broadest definition that some Protestants use. Some others would define it more narrowly.

If we are talking about a transition from a state of unrighteousness to righteousness, works play no part in that from a Catholic perspective. Our main gripe with the phrase "faith alone" in that context is that the phrase excludes not only works but everything except faith (i.e. hope and love are excluded). Trent is fairly clear about that.

Am I right to say you meant, 'from an unjustified state to a justified state, works play no part'?