On Mon, 05-15-06 10:35 am
In an earlier post, I noted that Jesus failed (as best I could determine) a test that rendered Him 14% likely to go to hell. I then offered my own test that involved two questions and a simple scoring method:
(a) I have been saved by the Blood of Jesus Christ
(b) I have not been saved by the Blood of Jesus ChristScoring:
If (a), your chances of going to hell are 0%.
If (b), your chances of going to hell are 100%.”
Eric, whom I regard as a brother in Christ who happens to be Catholic, left the following comment (complete with the winking smiley face, as befits his pacific nature):
That presupposes belief in ‘once saved, always saved’. It also rejects the notion of mortal sin. Obviously, as a Catholic I’d have a problem with both.
”
Eric is corrrect: it does presuppose “once saved, always saved”; it makes that presuppositions based on my belief that the Bible - in both the Old Testament and the New - teaches that truth. It is important to note the verb tense and voice in Eric’s phrase: it is in the past tense and the passive voice. Both are significant. The tense is vital because it reflects the biblical teaching: our salvation was not only determined in the past (Eph 1.3-6) but also accomplished in the past (Rom 8.29-30). We are working out, i.e., fulfilling and consumating, our salvation (Php 2.12) but we are not adding anything to it or assuring it in any way. We have already been saved and already will be saved always; our present conduct either confirms that truth or contradicts it. But the truth remains unchanged.
The passive voice reinforces the biblical concept: salvation is something that has been done to and for us: our part is passive and receptive. Salvation is wholly a work of God and we are the beneficiaries of His work. Certainly we make a choice (even though that choice seems to be facililitated by God’s grace - Eph 2.8-9) but that does not contradict nor negate the fact that salvation is God’s work, not ours.
In agreement with Eric, I must say that my test and belief does exclude the possibility of mortal sin if by that you mean the loss of eternal salvation. If mortal sin only referred to loss of temporal, physical life and/or the possibility or hope of rewards in heaven, then I would agree with the notion. But that is not what is in view and thus I do reject the idea of mortal sin. This does cause problems for Catholics (even as other biblical teachings cause problems for other denominations) but it does not change what Scripture states.
Finally, neither objection addresses the point of the post: Jesus fails the test. If Jesus fails the test then we have a choice of believing that the Bible is wrong or that the test is wrong. I do not see how, with the test and teaching as it stands, Jesus Christ or anyone else can pass the test. Since He fails we need to reject the test and seriously question the doctrinal beliefs that undergird such a result.
May 16th, 2006 at 1:40 pm
Regarding assurance of salvation, I state the following.
I was saved when the Messiah died for my sins and the sins of the world.
I am being saved as the Holy Spirit works in me to sanctify me.
I hope to persevere until my death so that when I stand before the Father, He says, “Well done, good and faithful servant.”
Scripture frequently mentions belief as a prerequisite to salvation. I’d have to check the original languages to be certain, but I think the verb is meant to reflect perseverant belief as opposed to a single decision.
Even if it’s actually impossible to lose salvation once you “have” it, I think the concept lacks meaning prior to death. If apostasy indicates that one was never really saved, what information is coneyed when someone says “I believe and I’m saved”? They could be wrong and unless they apostasized publicly, nobody’d know they were wrong. Worse yet, that person could live their whole life thinking they’re saved and only find out at their judgement. So, even if salvation cannot be lost, I think we’d all be well advised to follow St. Paul’s example and work out our salvation with fear and trembling.
May 16th, 2006 at 2:33 pm
Eric:
I don’t know that I disagree very much with what you say: certainly the process of being saved cannot be separated from having been saved, although it can be distinguished (i.e., salvation and sanctification are intimately connected although not identical).
Re verb tense, the language of salvation is usually (but not always) in the aorist tense (e.g., 1 Tim 1.15), which tells us nothing about continuation but only that it is something that happens or has happened; at other times it is in the present tense which, like the aorist, does not tell us much either. Same goes for the future tense. I cannot recall a usage of present perfect, although there may be such occurences, which would entail continuance or perseverance.
Hopefully, though, the issue of “loss of salvation” never comes up: far better for every believer to pursue their relationship with God through Christ and to submit to His lordship than to run the risk of finding out who’s right, you or me, Arminius or Calvin! So, as you say, it is best if we work out our salvation with fear and trembling, but also with a mature love that casts out fear (i.e., fear of punishment), as John instructs us.
But I still don’t know how Jesus could pass the quiz! (Remember, my main point was about it being a biased test that guaranteed a negative outcome.)