Is 'once saved always saved' a biblical teaching?
- By Abraham1st
- General Theology
- 183 Replies
you have to figure that out, don't you.And what verse was that ??
dan p
Upvote
0
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.
you have to figure that out, don't you.And what verse was that ??
dan p
I mean… He likes weddings so much, he’s had three of them.He's turning the WH into a wedding venue.
I don’t know how common a belief it is, and I am not non-Chalcedonian so I don’t know their position. what I can say is that it is taught by St Mark of Ephesus, St Joseph the hesychast, St Xenia of St Petersburg, Fr Seraphim Rose, Fr Stephen De Young, etc.I am not Orthodox, but have done much research about Orthodoxy. Based upon what I have read, some Orthodox believe that the dead receive a conditional sentence when they die, but that no sentence is final until the second coming of Jesus. Based upon this assumption then, some Orthodox believe that it is possible for at least some of those who are destined now to go to Hell, may eventually have their sentences changed and that they at least have a chance to still end up in Heaven. How common said belief is in Orthodoxy I was unable to discern. I did run across though an interesting discussion once between an EO and an OO. The Oriental Orthodox person explained that they do not hold to such a belief. Army Matt, can you tell us how common the belief is within Eastern Orthodoxy that it might be possible for souls now destined for Hell, to have their sentences changed, up to the point of the second coming, as at that point sentences are considered final? Is this view a minority or majority position within Eastern Orthodoxy? Is it true that the Oriental Orthodox do not consider such a position to be valid?
The word ἑλκύω explains decisive movement. Any failure of the act would be on the part of the subject's weakness, not the object's resistance.
I don't think you can get this strictly from grammer, rather you need to look at the context.What I'm arguing is that the Father's drawing does not fail. It can't.
Again, notice what the drawing is: the operative verb is δύναται ("is able"). It's negated by the substantive οὐδεὶς ("no one"). No one is able. That is what the drawing of the Father is a remedy for: man's inability. So to say that the Father can fail to draw a person is to say that the Father can fail to make it possible for them to come. Man's resistibility is not a factor in this because the whole point of the drawing is that man has no capacity to come anyway. To say that man can successfully resist the Father's drawing would be to say that the Father can try to make it possible for someone to come to Christ, and the recipient say, "no, I refuse to allow that possibility." Man has no say in whether he is able to do something. Ability/inability is a function of our nature.
In other words, saying that man can resist the Father's drawing misunderstands what the Father's drawing is in John 6:44. What would that resistance look like? If we say that someone could reply, "I refuse to act on God's enablement by coming to Christ," that's not a resistance of the Father's drawing. Rather, it presupposes that the Father's drawing has already succeeded: they are able to come.
Now... as a separate issue, beyond the semantics of ἑλκύω, I would argue from the grammar of John 6:44 that the Father's drawing (enabling) leads necessarily to coming, because the "him" drawn is grammatically the same individual as the "him" raised. Thus, the Father's drawing is effectual in not only enabling sinners to come to Christ, but ensuring that they will do so. However, that is an implication of pronouns of the verse, not of ἑλκύω's meaning or function itself.
Well, it was fine until I got to loop statements, especially the for loops and nested links loops. Like, I understand them in theory, but have a hard time parsing what I am seeing and the code ends up not turning out right regardless of what I try.
Jesus, please be with Paidiske and help her work out her new place serving You.It's going to be a big adjustment to go from being "in charge" of a parish to a very different sort of role, and it's a whole new context and set of relationships, but so far I'm hoping that it will work out well.
I don't think Jesus looked down on the Pharisees when he called them out. Did Paul. Was it Paul who called the Pharisees or High Priests 'white washed walls'. I know he called out false teachers and sinners.I can give in to the temptation to look down on a hypocrite, and self-righteously judge the person.
I agree. And as a cradle Catholic I can say that converts seem to be much more knowledgeable about our faith. Or at least in my case.A convert is someone who had to overcome a lot to become Catholic. Cradle Catholics, by comparison, had it all just handed to them. Where’s the virtue in that? Yours was the more challenging path and kudos to you for taking it.
Intersexed does not count, because by definition they are not raised as men in male bodies then just sporting a dress and demanding access to anything, intersexed people are scientifically identifiable as mixed gender.Intersex could.
maybe if we keep talking to each other eventually the AI overlords will nuke this thread from orbit.Because it’s ridiculous. Don’t knock yourself out.