Salvation loss. Is it possible?

[pia]

that is a search engine search, right there--up to 70 words, i think it is, will search; see that that is a link that you can click right now

Is that right. Jeez it must be a doozie that site. thanks again.....

 

[pia]

the problem being that if your terms are not correct, they will hinder the search--so iow if it was not in Acts, or Paul did not immediately get with the other Apostles after conversion, it will mess up the search sometimes

maybe I should just read through Acts, did it in the early 90's, but have forgotten a bunch lol

 

[tabletalk]

I am not nor have I EVER claimed to be ANY denomination, and why do you keep ignoring me when I point out that Jesus did NOT tell me to go to a Catholic church, and if that had been a MUST, He would have!

Just a note about which Jesus you are referring to: Your Jesus is a flesh and blood man you have had several encounters with over the years, face to face. Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

[epostle1]

Why do you keep doing that, to what you call Protestants, when you have such a stonehard stance on your Catholicism ?
I am not nor have I EVER claimed to be ANY denomination, and why do you keep ignoring me when I point out that Jesus did NOT tell me to go to a Catholic church, and if that had been a MUST, He would have! You seem to have enormous issues with Christ being real, why is that ? Ok, so I suppose you answered my question.....There is no way you will even begin to try and have peace, what a darn shame...........To your last question, well obviously not all ARE listening to the Holy Spirit.... So my question to you....How come if the bible has been written through the Holy spirit, how can there be so many varied opinions on what it says? Sure one can read it in the flesh and get more confused than ever That should be easy for a catholic to answer, right? You are a stickler for the bible, so does it not say that " God is NOT the author of confusion.", so why is the bible such a confusing document, or for that matter when did Jesus say :" I will cause a book to be written which will bring to your remembrance what so ever I have told you, follow that, and follow and build on everything the others have, not what I can tell you." I feel both sad and perplexed by you... Are you only on here to make everyone feel like what you would term failures ( for not being in the catholic church ), or to get up peoples noses so far you will have difficulty finding your way out again? How are you even allowed to be on a forum such as this, you do NOTHING but be a running commercial for the catholic church, doesn't that belong elsewhere ? You make kindness and tolerance extremely difficult, and the bible you claim to know so well, tells us NOT to be a stumbling block to other believers, and quite frankly, that is all I see in you, you have had zero reality to add to anything, only spouting scriptures all over the place along with what your church has taught you it means. Do you have any ideas why God would have sent the Holy spirit, if all He has to do is to sit by ( bored ) twiddling His 'thumbs' ? I think you need to kneel and get before God and sincerely ask Him to show you if you have any error, the way most of the rest of us do. Or are you too learned to do that ?

The Jerusalem Council certainly regarded its teachings as infallible, and guided by the Holy Spirit Himself.
The Bible repeatedly teaches that the Church is indefectible; therefore, the hypothetical of rejecting the (one true, historic) Church, as supposedly going against the Bible, is impossible according to the Bible. It is not a situation that would ever come up, because of God’s promised protection.

What the Bible says is to reject those who cause divisions, which is the very essence of the onset of Protestantism: schism, sectarianism, and division. It is Protestantism that departed from the historic Church, which is indefectible and infallible (see also 1 Tim 3:15).

The one true Church is and always will be in harmony with God’s inspired revelation, the Bible. Thus, we reject any form of Protestantism, because they fail this test.

The Bible presents Scripture-Tradition-Church as a “three-legged stool”: the rule of faith. All are in harmony; all work together.
Q. And is any church and any teacher to be rejected who strays from God’s words, as Paul commands? That is the fundamental issue.

Sure; this is why we reject any form of Protestantism, because all fail the test of allegiance to God’s Word in Holy Scripture, and the historical pedigree that the fathers always taught was necessary. Every heretic in the history of the world thumbed their nose at the institutional Church and went by Scripture alone. It is the heretical worldview to do so, precisely because they know they can’t prove that their views were passed down through history in an unbroken succession.

Therefore, heresies and Protestantism either had to play games with history in order to pretend that it fits with their views, or ignore it altogether.
It is the pitting of the ultimate source against the secondary, human source (the Church) which is the problem in your approach and that of Protestantism in general. You guys don’t like human, institutional authority and don’t have enough faith to believe that God can and does preserve it, so you try to undermine it by fallacious arguments, as presently...

Protestants don’t have enough faith to believe that God could preserve an infallible Church, even though they can muster up even more faith than that, which is required to believe in an infallible Bible written by a bunch of sinners and hypocrites.

We simply have more faith than you guys do. It’s a supernatural gift. We believe that the authoritative Church is also a key part of God’s plan to save the souls of men. We follow the model of the Jerusalem Council, whereas you guys reject that or ignore it, because it doesn’t fit in with the man-made tradition of Protestantism and a supposedly non-infallible Church.

Read more at Dialogue with a Calvinist: Was Paul a "Lone Ranger"?

 

[bbyrd009]

yikes, what a mess

 

[bbyrd009]

You guys don’t like human, institutional authority

They have not rejected you; they have rejected Me as their king. 
8They are doing the same thing to you that they have done to Me,  since the day I brought them out of Egypt until this day, abandoning Me and worshiping other gods.
9Listen to them, but you must solemnly warn them hand tell them about the rights of the king who will rule over them.”

 

[pia]

Just a note about which Jesus you are referring to: Your Jesus is a flesh and blood man you have had several encounters with over the years, face to face. Please correct me if I am wrong.

No, He has no blood in Him, He seems to be filled with the glory of God instead, as He has a 'light' in Himself. he explained that his blood is on the mercy seat in Heaven, as it still has the life in it.....He was without sin ! I know what you are getting at, and like so many others you have a difficult time believing that He is THAT real, and I can't blame you. I sincerely mean it when I say, that you could have literally knocked me over with a feather when He turned up like that. I wasn't even a believer at that time, and yet, He saved me from the realm of the dead. If you don't think it was Him, why don't you inquire from Him ?

 

[pia]

The Jerusalem Council certainly regarded its teachings as infallible, and guided by the Holy Spirit Himself.
The Bible repeatedly teaches that the Church is indefectible; therefore, the hypothetical of rejecting the (one true, historic) Church, as supposedly going against the Bible, is impossible according to the Bible. It is not a situation that would ever come up, because of God’s promised protection.

What the Bible says is to reject those who cause divisions, which is the very essence of the onset of Protestantism: schism, sectarianism, and division. It is Protestantism that departed from the historic Church, which is indefectible and infallible (see also 1 Tim 3:15).

The one true Church is and always will be in harmony with God’s inspired revelation, the Bible. Thus, we reject any form of Protestantism, because they fail this test.

The Bible presents Scripture-Tradition-Church as a “three-legged stool”: the rule of faith. All are in harmony; all work together.
Q. And is any church and any teacher to be rejected who strays from God’s words, as Paul commands? That is the fundamental issue.

Sure; this is why we reject any form of Protestantism, because all fail the test of allegiance to God’s Word in Holy Scripture, and the historical pedigree that the fathers always taught was necessary. Every heretic in the history of the world thumbed their nose at the institutional Church and went by Scripture alone. It is the heretical worldview to do so, precisely because they know they can’t prove that their views were passed down through history in an unbroken succession.

Therefore, heresies and Protestantism either had to play games with history in order to pretend that it fits with their views, or ignore it altogether.
It is the pitting of the ultimate source against the secondary, human source (the Church) which is the problem in your approach and that of Protestantism in general. You guys don’t like human, institutional authority and don’t have enough faith to believe that God can and does preserve it, so you try to undermine it by fallacious arguments, as presently...

Protestants don’t have enough faith to believe that God could preserve an infallible Church, even though they can muster up even more faith than that, which is required to believe in an infallible Bible written by a bunch of sinners and hypocrites.

We simply have more faith than you guys do. It’s a supernatural gift. We believe that the authoritative Church is also a key part of God’s plan to save the souls of men. We follow the model of the Jerusalem Council, whereas you guys reject that or ignore it, because it doesn’t fit in with the man-made tradition of Protestantism and a supposedly non-infallible Church.

Read more at Dialogue with a Calvinist: Was Paul a "Lone Ranger"?

May I ask , why are you replying to this?
I wasn't writing to you, and if all you're going to do is to go on and on how Jesus is wrong in the things he has told me, I really can't stomach too much more of that . If you and BOL are so sure about all that you say, I would like to see you challenge Him, instead of me. what's the old saying :" Don't shoot the messenger" . I would love to be a fly on the wall when you call Him a liar.......

 

[bbyrd009]

i'm guessing they hate each other lol

 

[pia]

i'm guessing they hate each other lol

Hi, do you mean BOL and kepha31 ? They both come from the same mold though, and both seem to utterly reject the living Christ....But they surely aren't filled with the Love of God, anyone can see that !

 

[epostle1]

May I ask , why are you replying to this?

Because its a public forum.

I wasn't writing to you, and if all you're going to do is to go on and on how Jesus is wrong in the things he has told me, I really can't stomach too much more of that.

Maybe Jesus does speak to you directly; how about you ask Him if He loves His mother.

If you and BOL are so sure about all that you say, I would like to see you challenge Him, instead of me. what's the old saying :" Don't shoot the messenger" . I would love to be a fly on the wall when you call Him a liar.......

That has not, nor ever will, happen.

Hi, do you mean BOL and kepha31 ? They both come from the same mold though, and both seem to utterly reject the living Christ....But they surely aren't filled with the Love of God, anyone can see that !

"seem to utterly reject the living Christ" Really? Truth is not always agreeable. You offer no reply to my post (#744), just emotional reactions and cheap shots (but you are filled with the love of God and we are not). It's wise to say nothing if you have nothing relevant to say.

 

[pia]

Because its a public forum.
Maybe Jesus does speak to you directly; how about you ask Him if He loves His mother. That has not, nor ever will, happen.

"seem to utterly reject the living Christ" Really? Truth is not always agreeable. You offer no reply to my post (#744), just emotional reactions and cheap shots (but you are filled with the love of God and we are not). It's wise to say nothing if you have nothing relevant to say.

Fine, it's all good. Would have appreciated BOL to answer my questions.that's all, and whether he is aware of it or not, He IS calling Jesus a liar, in saying that what He has told me is incorrect and that I am a , what was it? A cowboy Christian was it? As I keep telling him , take it up with the Lord, but it seems he is unresponsive to that idea. I may not have
carefully read all you wrote just then, but I have read quite a few others you have sent where you make your position clear. If I am such a 'liar' why don't you or BOL, show me where Jesus led me astray? Can you fault a single thing He has told me? if you can I would love to hear it. I am the first to admit that I am no Bible scholar, but frankly, I am ever so grateful not to be, as I would be as full of those doctrines as other theologians, and when a glass is full, there is simply no room for any more, and sadly a few people here seems to be just that.
We are to empty us of ourselves, so He can fill us with the Truth, something Bible scholars have an awfully difficult time doing. All the best to you and your commitment to whatever it actually is that you are committed to.........

 

[BreadOfLife]

Sooooooo, do you think David went to Heaven?

Stranger

A repentant liar is not the same as an unrepentant one.

 

[BreadOfLife]

You are avoiding the point. I say again:

"This is not a Protestant or Catholic issue. It is a "body of many members" issue, and therefore wrong to take such a self-damning position. We are the members of one body, and "God has set the members, each one of them, in the body just as He pleased."

"Have you no knowledge of God's own "confusion" placed upon all language, or His sending "strong delusion", or His sending a spirit of "slumber" until the fullness of the gentiles has come - that these are all His doing, even if they are to our own shame?

"Have you not been counseled to love, rather than hate? Indeed, you have."

ONE Body with many parts, as described in 1 Cor. 12 is NOT what you have in Protestantism.

You have tens of thousands of perpetually splintering bodies with many splintering parts. That is NOT the unity Jesus prayed for at the Last Supper (John 17:20-23).

Our Lord is not the God of confusion - no matter how much this splintering tragedy tried to make Him one.

 

[pia]

ONE Body with many parts, as described in 1 Cor. 12 is NOT what you have in Protestantism.

You have tens of thousands of perpetually splintering bodies with many splintering parts. That is NOT the unity Jesus prayed for at the Last Supper (John 17:20-23).

Our Lord is not the God of confusion - no matter how much this splintering tragedy tried to make Him one.

No, you're right in that, He is NOT the author of confusion, so why do you lean on nothing but the writings? What on earth have you got against the real risen Christ?

 

[BreadOfLife]

Why do you keep doing that, to what you call Protestants, when you have such a stonehard stance on your Catholicism ?
I am not nor have I EVER claimed to be ANY denomination, and why do you keep ignoring me when I point out that Jesus did NOT tell me to go to a Catholic church, and if that had been a MUST, He would have! You seem to have enormous issues with Christ being real, why is that ? Ok, so I suppose you answered my question.....There is no way you will even begin to try and have peace, what a darn shame...........To your last question, well obviously not all ARE listening to the Holy Spirit.... So my question to you....How come if the bible has been written through the Holy spirit, how can there be so many varied opinions on what it says? Sure one can read it in the flesh and get more confused than ever That should be easy for a catholic to answer, right? You are a stickler for the bible, so does it not say that " God is NOT the author of confusion.", so why is the bible such a confusing document, or for that matter when did Jesus say :" I will cause a book to be written which will bring to your remembrance what so ever I have told you, follow that, and follow and build on everything the others have, not what I can tell you." I feel both sad and perplexed by you... Are you only on here to make everyone feel like what you would term failures ( for not being in the catholic church ), or to get up peoples noses so far you will have difficulty finding your way out again? How are you even allowed to be on a forum such as this, you do NOTHING but be a running commercial for the catholic church, doesn't that belong elsewhere ? You make kindness and tolerance extremely difficult, and the bible you claim to know so well, tells us NOT to be a stumbling block to other believers, and quite frankly, that is all I see in you, you have had zero reality to add to anything, only spouting scriptures all over the place along with what your church has taught you it means. Do you have any ideas why God would have sent the Holy spirit, if all He has to do is to sit by ( bored ) twiddling His 'thumbs' ? I think you need to kneel and get before God and sincerely ask Him to show you if you have any error, the way most of the rest of us do. Or are you too learned to do that ?

Jesus didn't leave us a Book to be our earthly Authority. He left us a CHURCH.

When people like you claim that Jesus doesn't want them to be part of the Body - I can only assume that it was Satan and NOT Jesus who told you to do this. Jesus fervently prayed for the unity of His Church at the Last Supper. He prayed that His Church remain ONE in unity - as He and the Father are ONE. He didn't want millions of Lone Rangers running around making their own rules. He set up a hierarchy to guide His Church that would i turn, be guided by the Holy Spirit (John 16:12-15).

I'm not running a "commercial" for the Catholic Church. My SOLE purpose on this forum - as I have stated many times - is to expose the lies you guys keep telling about what the Catholic Church teaches. I do this so that the others who come here searching for the truth won't be seduced by your lies.

Now - if you and your anti-Catholic friends here would just be charitable towards Catholics as you are towards each other - there would be no need for people like me here . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

No, you're right in that, He is NOT the author of confusion, so why do you lean on nothing but the writings? What on earth have you got against the real risen Christ?

You are accusing a Catholic of being "too Scriptural"??
That's a hot one.

The Catholic Church has always been accused by Protestants of NOT being Biblical enough.
TRUST me - I don't lean on "nothing but" the writings, sister . . .

 

[Stranger]

The Jerusalem Council certainly regarded its teachings as infallible, and guided by the Holy Spirit Himself.
The Bible repeatedly teaches that the Church is indefectible; therefore, the hypothetical of rejecting the (one true, historic) Church, as supposedly going against the Bible, is impossible according to the Bible. It is not a situation that would ever come up, because of God’s promised protection.

What the Bible says is to reject those who cause divisions, which is the very essence of the onset of Protestantism: schism, sectarianism, and division. It is Protestantism that departed from the historic Church, which is indefectible and infallible (see also 1 Tim 3:15).

The one true Church is and always will be in harmony with God’s inspired revelation, the Bible. Thus, we reject any form of Protestantism, because they fail this test.

The Bible presents Scripture-Tradition-Church as a “three-legged stool”: the rule of faith. All are in harmony; all work together.
Q. And is any church and any teacher to be rejected who strays from God’s words, as Paul commands? That is the fundamental issue.

Sure; this is why we reject any form of Protestantism, because all fail the test of allegiance to God’s Word in Holy Scripture, and the historical pedigree that the fathers always taught was necessary. Every heretic in the history of the world thumbed their nose at the institutional Church and went by Scripture alone. It is the heretical worldview to do so, precisely because they know they can’t prove that their views were passed down through history in an unbroken succession.

Therefore, heresies and Protestantism either had to play games with history in order to pretend that it fits with their views, or ignore it altogether.
It is the pitting of the ultimate source against the secondary, human source (the Church) which is the problem in your approach and that of Protestantism in general. You guys don’t like human, institutional authority and don’t have enough faith to believe that God can and does preserve it, so you try to undermine it by fallacious arguments, as presently...

Protestants don’t have enough faith to believe that God could preserve an infallible Church, even though they can muster up even more faith than that, which is required to believe in an infallible Bible written by a bunch of sinners and hypocrites.

We simply have more faith than you guys do. It’s a supernatural gift. We believe that the authoritative Church is also a key part of God’s plan to save the souls of men. We follow the model of the Jerusalem Council, whereas you guys reject that or ignore it, because it doesn’t fit in with the man-made tradition of Protestantism and a supposedly non-infallible Church.

Read more at Dialogue with a Calvinist: Was Paul a "Lone Ranger"?

The Jeusalem council wasn't the Roman Church.

That the Church is indfectibile is accurate as far as the true Church is concerned. That the Church is the Roman Church is where the problem lies.

You speak half truths. Another word for a lie. The Bible says to "mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. (Rom. 16:17) My how clear it is when you read the whole verse. 'contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned'. There were those causing divisions by changing the doctrine that had been taught by the apostle Paul.

As far as division itself, the believers will divide, and should divide in order to maintain the truth. (Luke 12:51) "Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division." Jesus caused division because He was the truth and taught the truth. The believers in (Rom. 16:17) who were doctrinally correct were the ones dividing, and were commanded to do so by Paul. Thus your speech about Protestants being wrong, in dividing from the Roman Church and with anyone whose doctrine is incorrect, is wrong.

Your faith is only as good as what you put it in. No matter how much of it you have.

You mean there are more falsehoods?

Stranger

 

[bbyrd009]

dang Stranger, very nice imo

Hi, do you mean BOL and kepha31 ? They both come from the same mold though, and both seem to utterly reject the living Christ....But they surely aren't filled with the Love of God, anyone can see that !

oh, ppl are multi-faceted, and we are on an internet forum. Meaning i wouldn't judge too harshly, this is not IRL. but i would agree that ppl become known by their works, ya.

 

[BreadOfLife]

k i'm putting you back on ignore now, because otherwise pity seems the best i can do?
If you go to heaven though, and it is actually a place that people go after they die, which i seriously doubt, i hope i go to hell.

And therein lies your problem . . .

 

[bbyrd009]

No, you're right in that, He is NOT the author of confusion, so why do you lean on nothing but the writings? What on earth have you got against the real risen Christ?

"The Bible says to "mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. (Rom. 16:17)"