Based on the information provided, I'm with Oldbear, as it regards his note at the end. IMO, the guy probably goes to hell. His sincere profession of faith, covered by God's grace, had him headed towards heaven. However, his following actions reversed that direction. Although we are saved by God's grace, there will be judgment, and our actions, including our motives, following our conversion will be evaluated.
The leaders of his congregation may be held accountable, depending upon their actions in bringing the new Christian into the fold and afterwards.

BUDOS said:

---

Based on the information provided, I'm with Oldbear, as it regards his note at the end. IMO, the guy probably goes to hell. His sincere profession of faith, covered by God's grace, had him headed towards heaven. However, his following actions reversed that direction. Although we are saved by God's grace, there will be judgment, and our actions, including our motives, following our conversion will be evaluated.
The leaders of his congregation may be held accountable, depending upon their actions in bringing the new Christian into the fold and afterwards.

---

So if a sincere believer willfully sins and dies right after, he goes to hell?

I will bet that every believer who's ever lived has willfully sinned after becoming a Christian, being that they are still sinners. What you're saying really doesn't sound like the gospel at all.

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

The history of the Bible in English (excluding the proliferation of 20th century translations):

1525: William Tyndale's New Testament translated from the Greek MSS; This is the first New Testament to be printed in the English language on the printing press. Tyndale did not finish translating the Old Testament.

1535: Myles Coverdale's Bible; The first complete Bible to be printed in the English Language (80 Books: Old Testament and New Testament including the Apocryphal books which are non-canonical).

1537: Matthews Bible; The second complete Bible to be printed in English. Done by John "Thomas Matthew" Rogers (80 Books).

1539: The "Great Bible" or "Cramner's Bible" printed; The first English language Bible to be authorized for public use (80 Books).

1560: The Geneva Bible Printed; The First English Language Bible to add numbered verses to each chapter (80 Books).

1568: The Bishops Bible Printed; The Bible of which the King James was a revision (80 Books, as well as a 20% cut and paste from the Geneva Bible).

1609: The Douay Old Testament is added to the Rheimes New Testament of 1582 (Catholic translation) making the first complete English Catholic Bible; It was translated from the Latin Vulgate (80 Books).

1609: The first printing of the King James Bible; originally with All 80 Books.

1611: The King James Bible revised and printed; all 80 Books.

1885: The British & Foreign Bible Society redacts the deuterocanonical books and publishes the 66 book KJV.

If you want to be sola scriptura, you shouldn't be using a 140 year old canon.

---

"Sola Scriptura" is a doctrine and not reflective of the process of coming together of the Bible in 33 AD to 90 AD. The pastors of that early time were already preaching the good news as came it to them in oral form plus scrolls being passed from church to church. The gentile world was unaware of Jesus so they yearned for it when they heard, "There is a God and that God loves." The kerygma or proclamation addressed the hearer as a self. In other words the hearer hears a decisive word that changes everything in that one's life.
The kerygma was patchwork and probably haphazard but eventually was redacted by each of the gospel writers. These gospel evangelist were theological geniuses. We owe them a great of gratitude.

---

Then why did Jesus Himself quote Scripture as authoritative from God? 1) The Kerygma of the early church said He did, in part, because of the the church's early ties to Judaism.
When did The canon close on the OT? Which canon was Jesus referring to?

The OT Scriptures were already known to be authoritative by the Jews. The Gospel writers were inspired by God Himself. Peter affirms Paul's writings as Scripture and Authoritative from God. The Bible is the Word of God. Which begs the question "What is the 'Word of God'?

---

BUDOS said:

---

Based on the information provided, I'm with Oldbear, as it regards his note at the end. IMO, the guy probably goes to hell. His sincere profession of faith, covered by God's grace, had him headed towards heaven. However, his following actions reversed that direction. Then this is not grace. If God is immutable and the overwhelming witness of scripture says so then grace is grace, not judgment.
Although we are saved by God's grace, there will be judgment, and our actions, including our motives, following our conversion will be evaluated. Our judgment comes from the consequences of our sin in this life not the life to come. Again, God's grace is immutable or its not. I vote that grace is immutable.
The leaders of his congregation may be held accountable, depending upon their actions in bringing the new Christian into the fold and afterwards. A pastor or leader of the church cannot be held accountable for the actions of others.

---

BUDOS said:

---

Based on the information provided, I'm with Oldbear, as it regards his note at the end. IMO, the guy probably goes to hell. His sincere profession of faith, covered by God's grace, had him headed towards heaven. However, his following actions reversed that direction. Although we are saved by God's grace, there will be judgment, and our actions, including our motives, following our conversion will be evaluated.
The leaders of his congregation may be held accountable, depending upon their actions in bringing the new Christian into the fold and afterwards.

---

There will be Judgements, HOWEVER, Christians are NOT Judged on their sins. They are Judged on their rewards for what they have done for Jesus Christ. This Judgement is called "The Judgement Seat Of Christ".

1 Corinthians 3

12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;

God is going to determine the quality of our works for Him as Christians. Wood, Hay and Stubble are works that were not done for the right reasons, done for pride, ect. Gold, Silver and Precious Stones are works done for the right reasons.


13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

The works done for the right reasons shall be rewarded with eternal rewards in heaven.

14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

Those done for the wrong reasons, sin, ect. shall be burned up and shall not be rewarded. Many will lose eternal rewards in this Judgement.


15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

But the man Himself, shall be saved, yet so by fire. Regardless of how many rewards or lack of them, the BELIEVER will be saved. This is not a Judgement for sins. It's a Judgement for REWARDS.

This is some good stuff to discuss and I appreciate that you don't just go headlong into attack mode. Let's see if a few others will join in and then I will respond.
Looking forward to this opportunity to discuss something actually important.

This is a difficult question, but in the end we have to depend on Scripture.

Hell is an undeniable fact. For all the efforts to explain it away as not something a good God would do, Jesus had a lot of warnings about Hell. For example, in Matthew 8:12 Christ warned of a place of "weeping and Gnashing of teeth", and that this would be the 'subjects of the kingdom', that is, the people who arrogantly assumed they were safe from such a fate.

In Matthew 25:46 Christ warned that those who were hard of heart and cold to those in need would go to "eternal punishment".

Jesus strongly warned people not to fear even those who could kill their bodies, but they should "fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell." (Matthew 10:28)

We would do well to consider the fate of Judas. It's easy to pretend none of us would betray Christ as Judas did, yet think about it: Judas followed Christ for years, heard what he taught, saw His miracles, and had access to the Lord such as no one today can even imagine.

Yet in the end, Judas chose according to his heart, and it destroyed him. Scripture even says Judas felt remorse when he realized what he had done, but even that did not lead to his redemption ... only his suicide and descent to hell.

We should not assume we will end up better just because we are not Judas.

Then again, there is hope in Scripture as well. Consider Ezekiel 18:19-23:

"Yet you ask, 'Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?' Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them.

"But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not die. None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live?"

One important key to Scripture, is that it is consistent. God does not change His mind or alter His promises. The covenant God made with Noah was consistent with the one God made with Abraham, then David, and so on. It is rightly said that the Old Testament points ahead to Christ, and the New Testament back to Him. And the Redemption of Man through Christ is the power behind every promise of hope offered by God. And that hope is revealed through exercise of Faith.

It is wrong to claim that a man can go to Heaven if he does good works, because our sin cannot be washed away by our works. But faith in God, expressed in work, reveals God at work in us.

Consider that when Jesus spoke of the Good Samaritan, He spoke of a man who did not just say good words or offer a prayer, but took it upon himself to go out of his way to help a man he did not even know.

So coming back to the question of someone who professes faith but falls back into sin. The answer ultimately is that God knows what is in someone's heart, and we should work out where we are with the Lord, as the verse says, with 'fear and trembling'.

Believe in God but don't assume He is obligated to give you what you want just because your assumption is convenient. Many who play up their religion will find that God is not impressed with them, while others who seem to be of no significance to people, are treasured by God and will be welcomed into His House with great praise.

With all that said, keep in mind that I know no more than anyone else, and have a set of flaws and blunders to make anyone blush. Whether my words seem wise or not to you, I commend us all to depend more on Scripture and Prayer than an internet forum.

Oldbear83 said:

---

This is a difficult question, but in the end we have to depend on Scripture.

Hell is an undeniable fact. For all the efforts to explain it away as not something a good God would do, Jesus had a lot of warnings about Hell. For example, in Matthew 8:12 Christ warned of a place of "weeping and Gnashing of teeth", and that this would be the 'subjects of the kingdom', that is, the people who arrogantly assumed they were safe from such a fate.

In Matthew 25:46 Christ warned that those who were hard of heart and cold to those in need would go to "eternal punishment".

Jesus strongly warned people not to fear even those who could kill their bodies, but they should "fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell." (Matthew 10:28)

We would do well to consider the fate of Judas. It's easy to pretend none of us would betray Christ as Judas did, yet think about it: Judas followed Christ for years, heard what he taught, saw His miracles, and had access to the Lord such as no one today can even imagine.

Yet in the end, Judas chose according to his heart, and it destroyed him. Scripture even says Judas felt remorse when he realized what he had done, but even that did not lead to his redemption ... only his suicide and descent to hell.

We should not assume we will end up better just because we are not Judas.

Then again, there is hope in Scripture as well. Consider Ezekiel 18:19-23:

"Yet you ask, 'Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?' Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them.

"But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not die. None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live?"

One important key to Scripture, is that it is consistent. God does not change His mind or alter His promises. The covenant God made with Noah was consistent with the one God made with Abraham, then David, and so on. It is rightly said that the Old Testament points ahead to Christ, and the New Testament back to Him. And the Redemption of Man through Christ is the power behind every promise of hope offered by God. And that hope is revealed through exercise of Faith.

It is wrong to claim that a man can go to Heaven if he does good works, because our sin cannot be washed away by our works. But faith in God, expressed in work, reveals God at work in us.

Consider that when Jesus spoke of the Good Samaritan, He spoke of a man who did not just say good words or offer a prayer, but took it upon himself to go out of his way to help a man he did not even know.

So coming back to the question of someone who professes faith but falls back into sin. The answer ultimately is that God knows what is in someone's heart, and we should work out where we are with the Lord, as the verse says, with 'fear and trembling'.

Believe in God but don't assume He is obligated to give you what you want just because your assumption is convenient. Many who play up their religion will find that God is not impressed with them, while others who seem to be of no significance to people, are treasured by God and will be welcomed into His House with great praise.

With all that said, keep in mind that I know no more than anyone else, and have a set of flaws and blunders to make anyone blush. Whether my words seem wise or not to you, I commend us all to depend more on Scrupture and Prayer than an internet forum.

---

So with regard to someone who doesn't just profess a belief but truly believes in Jesus in their heart - if that person heppened to fall back into sin once and then dies right after, does that person go to hell?

BUDOS said:

---

This is some good stuff to discuss and I appreciate that you don't just go headlong into attack mode. Let's see if a few others will join in and then I will respond.
Looking forward to this opportunity to discuss something actually important.

---

I commend you for recognizing the utmost importance of the subject. Though in the spirit of having a discussion, I would like an answer to my question: if a believer sins after becoming a Christian and then dies right after, do they go to hell?

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

I commend you for recognizing the utmost importance of the subject. Though in the spirit of having a discussion, I would like an answer to my question: if a believer sins after becoming a Christian and then dies right after, do they go to hell?

---

Post baptism, if a person freely, willingly, and knowingly commits a mortal sin WITHOUT repentance, then, YES. That person, in principle, sends themself to hell.

Please take the time to read this first post if you haven't yet thank you

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

I commend you for recognizing the utmost importance of the subject. Though in the spirit of having a discussion, I would like an answer to my question: if a believer sins after becoming a Christian and then dies right after, do they go to hell?

---

Post baptism, if a person freely, willingly, and knowingly commits a mortal sin WITHOUT repentance, then, YES. That person, in principle, sends themself to hell.

---

All Christians have freely, willingly, and knowlingly sinned after becoming a Christian. There isn't a difference between sins - any type of sin separates you from God. James 2:10 says "For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it."

Is it your view that if a true believer sins after becoming a Christian, and fails to repent of it for whatever reason, such as forgetting to, or because they die right afterwards without having the chance, then regardless of their faith in Jesus, they are going to hell? If so, then that is NOT the gospel.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

All Christians have freely, willingly, and knowlingly sinned after becoming a Christian. There isn't a difference between sins - any type of sin separates you from God. James 2:10 says "For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it."

Is it your view that if a true believer sins after becoming a Christian, and fails to repent of it for whatever reason, such as forgetting to, or because they die right afterwards without having the chance, then regardless of their faith in Jesus, they are going to hell? If so, then that is NOT the gospel.

---

Well, 1 John 5:17 states:

"All unrighteousness is sin, and there is sin not leading to death."

If there is sin that is NOT leading to death, then, obviously, there is sin that is mortal.

How does one "forget" to repent of a mortal sin?

St Paul says in Galatians 5:4, "You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace," suggesting that falling from grace is possible.

Jesus also tells us in Matthew 24:13, "But he who endures to the end shall be saved." Salvation is not a one-time event.

This is difficult for those that subscribe to the "once saved, always saved" doctrine. This is what the gospel teaches.

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

All Christians have freely, willingly, and knowlingly sinned after becoming a Christian. There isn't a difference between sins - any type of sin separates you from God. James 2:10 says "For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it."

Is it your view that if a true believer sins after becoming a Christian, and fails to repent of it for whatever reason, such as forgetting to, or because they die right afterwards without having the chance, then regardless of their faith in Jesus, they are going to hell? If so, then that is NOT the gospel.

---

Well, 1 John 5:17 states:

"All unrighteousness is sin, and there is sin not leading to death."

If there is sin that is NOT leading to death, then, obviously, there is sin that is mortal.

How does one "forget" to repent of a mortal sin?

St Paul says in Galatians 5:4, "You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace," suggesting that falling from grace is possible.

Jesus also tells us in Matthew 24:13, "But he who endures to the end shall be saved." Salvation is not a one-time event.

This is difficult for those that subscribe to the "once saved, always saved" doctrine. This is what the gospel teaches.

---

If there is sin that leads to death, how do you know that doesn't mean physical death, or, if "death" here is actual spiritual death (as in going to hell) that the sin it's referring to is the sin of unbelief? Catholics say that simply missing mass on purpose, for example, is the kind of "mortal sin" this verse is referring to. By what revelation do Catholics claim this?

If a mortal sin involves a wicked thought, then it would be very plausible that someone could go on with their day, and completely forget that they had that thought earlier.

Yes, you can fall away from grace if you go back to obeying the law as the means for being justified, and rejecting Jesus' gospel of grace. That's what Paul's talking about in Galatians 5:4.

The question isn't whether salvation is a "one time event" or not. The question is what is salvation based on - faith, or in part or wholly due to our works. Salvation does require keeping one's faith and not falling away from it. In that sense, it does involve your faith "enduring to the end".

But this isn't a question about "once saved, always saved". I didn't really get an answer to the question - if a true believer makes a mistake and sins, and dies before they could repent for whatever reason, does that Christian go to hell?

Let's step back a minute or two. If I recall correctly we, as Christians are followers of Christ, follow him. He is the judge, not me nor you.
Y'all have stated the guidelines for salvation, which may or may not apply in the given situation. Basically when the book of life is opened a believer, who is saved by faith through God's grace, is then subject to having their works reviewed. A person's beliefs are revealed by their actions and vice versa.
Christ then judges. We don't.
Where the Bible speaks we should speak and where it is silent we should be also. Problem arises when we come across situations like this one and we forget who will be THE judge. A judge who repeatedly tells us we, as Christians are to be known for our love not our human tendency to judge others.
My opinion is that Christ will review this person's life and he will judge, with love The judgment may be heav or hell; whichever it is, it will be just.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

The Council of Nicea had nothing to do with the canon. It was in various councils such as Hippo, Carthage, Rome, Trullo, Laodicea, etc where canons were endorsed. However, it is important to note that there were differences in the canons between these councils, and that church history clearly shows that there really wasn't agreement with those various councils with respect to the canon (mainly the Old Testament) among the church. In fact, as I had outlined, in the Western Church the dominant view was that which was held by Jerome, that the deuterocanonicals (apocrypha) were NOT part of Old Testament canon.

---

These are assertions trying to lead people away from the truth. Hippo, Carthage (both of them), and Rome ALL affirm the Deuterocanon.

You'll need to back up your claim that "Western Church the dominant view was that which was held by Jerome, that the deuterocanonicals (apocrypha) were NOT part of Old Testament canon." Please cite Catholic sources, not one exceedingly-biased Protestant author.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

It wasn't until the Council of Trent in the 1500's when the Catholic Church made official their Old Testament canon which included the Apocryphal books, mainly in response to the Reformation. But the major problem with this council was none of the presiding bishops were experts in church history, and thus their decision seemingly ignored and was in complete opposition to the major view held by the Western Church throughout history up until the time of the Reformation. This prompted notable church historians and theologians like B.F. Wescott to call the Council of Trent's ruling a "fatal decree".

---

As I mentioned earlier, the only reason the Church didn't dogmatize the full 73-book canon until after the Protestant rebellion is because the canon was never challenged until Luther moved the Deuterocanon, parts of Ester and Daniel, and tried to remove Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation. The Church felt it necessary to define, defend, and protect the true canon.

Similarly, you will need to find Catholic sources that back your both false claims that "none of the presiding bishops were experts in church history, and thus their decision seemingly ignored and was in complete opposition to the major view held by the Western Church throughout history up until the time of the Reformation."

BUDOS said:

---

Let's step back a minute or two. If I recall correctly we, as Christians are followers of Christ, follow him. He is the judge, not me nor you.
Y'all have stated the guidelines for salvation, which may or may not apply in the given situation. Basically when the book of life is opened a believer, who is saved by faith through God's grace, is then subject to having their works reviewed. A person's beliefs are revealed by their actions and vice versa.
Christ then judges. We don't.
Where the Bible speaks we should speak and where it is silent we should be also. Problem arises when we come across situations like this one and we forget who will be THE judge. A judge who repeatedly tells us we, as Christians are to be known for our love not our human tendency to judge others.
My opinion is that Christ will review this person's life and he will judge, with love The judgment may be heav or hell; whichever it is, it will be just.

---

This is most certainly NOT the gospel . Jesus is explicitly clear about those who put their faith in him avoiding the judgement:

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth him that sent me, hath eternal life, and cometh not into judgment, but hath passed out of death into life." - John 5:24

* When Jesus says "Verily" twice, it means what he is saying is about the most truthful thing that can ever be stated. You can count on these words being true with the utmost, absolute certainty.

Believers in Jesus will be judged, though, but it will be to determine heavenly rewards, not salvation.

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

The Council of Nicea had nothing to do with the canon. It was in various councils such as Hippo, Carthage, Rome, Trullo, Laodicea, etc where canons were endorsed. However, it is important to note that there were differences in the canons between these councils, and that church history clearly shows that there really wasn't agreement with those various councils with respect to the canon (mainly the Old Testament) among the church. In fact, as I had outlined, in the Western Church the dominant view was that which was held by Jerome, that the deuterocanonicals (apocrypha) were NOT part of Old Testament canon.

---

These are assertions trying to lead people away from the truth. Hippo, Carthage (both of them), and Rome ALL affirm the Deuterocanon.

You'll need to back up your claim that "Western Church the dominant view was that which was held by Jerome, that the deuterocanonicals (apocrypha) were NOT part of Old Testament canon." Please cite Catholic sources, not one exceedingly-biased Protestant author.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

It wasn't until the Council of Trent in the 1500's when the Catholic Church made official their Old Testament canon which included the Apocryphal books, mainly in response to the Reformation. But the major problem with this council was none of the presiding bishops were experts in church history, and thus their decision seemingly ignored and was in complete opposition to the major view held by the Western Church throughout history up until the time of the Reformation. This prompted notable church historians and theologians like B.F. Wescott to call the Council of Trent's ruling a "fatal decree".

---

As I mentioned earlier, the only reason the Church didn't dogmatize the full 73-book canon until after the Protestant rebellion is because the canon was never challenged until Luther moved the Deuterocanon, parts of Ester and Daniel, and tried to remove Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation. The Church felt it necessary to define, defend, and protect the true canon.

Similarly, you will need to find Catholic sources that back your both false claims that "none of the presiding bishops were experts in church history, and thus their decision seemingly ignored and was in complete opposition to the major view held by the Western Church throughout history up until the time of the Reformation."

---

I've stated actual historical facts on the matter. The sources ARE Catholic. It's all there in print in all my posts. You're not dealing with them, you're just resorting to denial.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

If there is sin that leads to death, how do you know that doesn't mean physical death, or, if "death" here is actual spiritual death (as in going to hell) that the sin it's referring to is the sin of unbelief?

---

Does it say the "sin of unbelief"? No. John is talking about actual sin here.
Does any scholar or anyone during this time believe that sin would cause physical death? No. You are trying to isogete your belief into this passage.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Catholics say that simply missing mass on purpose, for example, is the kind of "mortal sin" this verse is referring to. By what revelation do Catholics claim this?

---

"Keep the Lord's Day holy"

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

If a mortal sin involves a wicked thought, then it would be very plausible that someone could go on with their day, and completely forget that they had that thought earlier.

---

A wicked thought does not necessarily mean one has committed a mortal sin. We all have thoughts that pop into our head. Dwelling on those thought is one way for them to become evil.

Matthew 5:28 - "But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."

A mortal sin must contain three elements - Grave nature (breaking a commandment), knowing that it is of grave nature, and freely committing it.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Yes, you can fall away from grace if you go back to obeying the law as the means for being justified, and rejecting Jesus' gospel of grace. That's what Paul's talking about in Galatians 5:4.

---

The point here is that one CAN fall away from Grace. If one trying to "be justified by the law" is enough to make one fall from grace, then surely a mortal sin does the same.

I've already demonstrated how the bible does distinguish between mortal and venial sins.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

The question isn't whether salvation is a "one time event" or not. The question is what is salvation based on - faith, or in part or wholly due to our works. Salvation does require keeping one's faith and not falling away from it. In that sense, it does involve your faith "enduring to the end".

---

Who has brought works into this discussion?

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

But this isn't a question about "once saved, always saved". I didn't really get an answer to the question - if a true believer makes a mistake and sins, and dies before they could repent for whatever reason, does that Christian go to hell?

---

Maybe you missed it, but I answered, YES, in capital letters.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

This is most certainly NOT the gospel . Jesus is explicitly clear about those who put their faith in him avoiding the judgement:

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth him that sent me, hath eternal life, and cometh not into judgment, but hath passed out of death into life." - John 5:24

* When Jesus says "Verily" twice, it means what he is saying is about the most truthful thing that can ever be stated. You can count on these words being true with the utmost, absolute certainty.

Believers in Jesus will be judged, though, but it will be to determine heavenly rewards, not salvation.

---

James 2:19:
"You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believeand tremble!"

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

The Council of Nicea had nothing to do with the canon. It was in various councils such as Hippo, Carthage, Rome, Trullo, Laodicea, etc where canons were endorsed. However, it is important to note that there were differences in the canons between these councils, and that church history clearly shows that there really wasn't agreement with those various councils with respect to the canon (mainly the Old Testament) among the church. In fact, as I had outlined, in the Western Church the dominant view was that which was held by Jerome, that the deuterocanonicals (apocrypha) were NOT part of Old Testament canon.

---

These are assertions trying to lead people away from the truth. Hippo, Carthage (both of them), and Rome ALL affirm the Deuterocanon.

You'll need to back up your claim that "Western Church the dominant view was that which was held by Jerome, that the deuterocanonicals (apocrypha) were NOT part of Old Testament canon." Please cite Catholic sources, not one exceedingly-biased Protestant author.

---

...and the Council of Laodicea did not include the deuterocanon, and the Council of Trullo approved the canons of Athanasius, Amphilochius, and the Apostolic canons, which rejected all the major books of the deuterocanon. This was already discussed in previous posts, and you've yet to deal with this fact. It's not leading people away from the truth, it's presenting it to them

The "exceedingly-biased Protestant author" is citing history using Catholic sources.

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

This is most certainly NOT the gospel . Jesus is explicitly clear about those who put their faith in him avoiding the judgement:

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth him that sent me, hath eternal life, and cometh not into judgment, but hath passed out of death into life." - John 5:24

* When Jesus says "Verily" twice, it means what he is saying is about the most truthful thing that can ever be stated. You can count on these words being true with the utmost, absolute certainty.

Believers in Jesus will be judged, though, but it will be to determine heavenly rewards, not salvation.

---

James 2:19:
"You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believeand tremble!"

---

How does this refute the truth I just posted?

Belief that there's one God is not the same as the belief/faith in Jesus. You are again missing the mark.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

I've stated actual historical facts on the matter. The sources ARE Catholic. It'all there in print in all my posts. You're not dealing with them, you're just resorting to denial.

---

Actually, no. You are not dealing with 1500 years of Church history in it's totality. You've mentioned a few of the Church Fathers didn't consider the Deuterocanon as canon.

The earliest councils and the Church all affirmed the Deuterocanon. Jerome listened to the Church because he was a faithful son of the Church and the Church obviously were believed they were inspired.

Here are two good articles about the with respect to Jerome and the formation of the canon.

You continue to construe actual history to fit your narrative.

We will not be able to change each other's mind in this regard. Again, we'll have to agree to disagree.

We may as well move on to another topic.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

How does this refute the truth I just posted?

Belief that there's one God is not the same as the belief/faith in Jesus. You are again missing the mark.

---

You are missing the mark.

Different types of beliefs and faith exist. The demons believe as evidenced by in Demons recognize Jesus as the "Son of God" in passages like Mark 3:11.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

How does this refute the truth I just posted?

Belief that there's one God is not the same as the belief/faith in Jesus. You are again missing the mark.

---

You are missing the mark.

Different types of beliefs and faith exist. The demons believe as evidenced by in Demons recognize Jesus as the "Son of God" in passages like Mark 3:11.

All your passage said that all they had to do was believe in him and the one that sent him.

Finally, why do you not accept the "verily, verily" in John 3:5 - Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God."

Or the one in John 6:53 - " "Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you."?

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

If there is sin that leads to death, how do you know that doesn't mean physical death, or, if "death" here is actual spiritual death (as in going to hell) that the sin it's referring to is the sin of unbelief?

---

Does it say the "sin of unbelief"? No. John is talking about actual sin here.
Does any scholar or anyone during this time believe that sin would cause physical death? No. You are trying to isogete your belief into this passage.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Catholics say that simply missing mass on purpose, for example, is the kind of "mortal sin" this verse is referring to. By what revelation do Catholics claim this?

---

"Keep the Lord's Day holy"

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

If a mortal sin involves a wicked thought, then it would be very plausible that someone could go on with their day, and completely forget that they had that thought earlier.

---

A wicked thought does not necessarily mean one has committed a mortal sin. We all have thoughts that pop into our head. Dwelling on those thought is one way for them to become evil.

Matthew 5:28 - "But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."

A mortal sin must contain three elements - Grave nature (breaking a commandment), knowing that it is of grave nature, and freely committing it.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Yes, you can fall away from grace if you go back to obeying the law as the means for being justified, and rejecting Jesus' gospel of grace. That's what Paul's talking about in Galatians 5:4.

---

The point here is that one CAN fall away from Grace. If one trying to "be justified by the law" is enough to make one fall from grace, then surely a mortal sin does the same.

I've already demonstrated how the bible does distinguish between mortal and venial sins.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

The question isn't whether salvation is a "one time event" or not. The question is what is salvation based on - faith, or in part or wholly due to our works. Salvation does require keeping one's faith and not falling away from it. In that sense, it does involve your faith "enduring to the end".

---

Who has brought works into this discussion?

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

But this isn't a question about "once saved, always saved". I didn't really get an answer to the question - if a true believer makes a mistake and sins, and dies before they could repent for whatever reason, does that Christian go to hell?

---

Maybe you missed it, but I answered, YES, in capital letters.

---

- I'm not exegeting anything. If anything YOU are the one exegeting if you are saying that a list of Catholic "mortal sins" are what's being referred to in that verse. I'm simply saying that you haven't proven that what I'm saying about the verse is wrong.

- Where does it say that failing to "keep the Lord's day holy" is a "mortal sin" that if you commit, you go to hell despite your faith in Jesus? See who's "exegting"?

- Yes, and what you're describing about sinful thoughts CAN be forgotten about. That's the point. You denied that it can.

- More bad logic. Because you CAN fall away from grace because you are denying that grace, then it means you can fall away from grace from anything else Catholics call "mortal sin". The former is logically true, and it is biblical. The latter is a Catholic innovation.

- Your case about mortal and venial sins being biblical is very weak. I've demonstrated that.

- "who has brought works into the discussion" - HUH? Not sure what you're point is here. It doesn't refute anything that's been said. And it's been a central part of the discussion throughout this whole thread. You are saying works are part of salvation by insisting that we keep from committing "mortal sins".

- if your answer is YES, then you don't have the gospel.

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

How does this refute the truth I just posted?

Belief that there's one God is not the same as the belief/faith in Jesus. You are again missing the mark.

---

You are missing the mark.

Different types of beliefs and faith exist. The demons believe as evidenced by in Demons recognize Jesus as the "Son of God" in passages like Mark 3:11.

All your passage said that all they had to do was believe in him and the one that sent him.

Finally, why do you not accept the "verily, verily" in John 3:5 - Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God."

Or the one in John 6:53 - " "Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you."?

---

The verse is only talking about believing in one God. That's the verse YOU quoted. That belief is not the same belief as belief/faith in Jesus. You're now trying to add verses. Please stay focused. With regard to Mark 3:11, though the demons believe he was the Son of God, that is not the same believe as believing IN him. You missed the mark again.

And good question about John 6. If you believe in the literal meaning of Jesus' words in John 6: "Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day" - then how could a mortal sin send someone to hell, if they've taken part in the Eucharist? Jesus clearly states that once they've eaten him, they HAVE eternal life, and Jesus WILL raise them on the last day, correct?

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

I've stated actual historical facts on the matter. The sources ARE Catholic. It'all there in print in all my posts. You're not dealing with them, you're just resorting to denial.

---

Actually, no. You are not dealing with 1500 years of Church history in it's totality. You've mentioned a few of the Church Fathers didn't consider the Deuterocanon as canon.

The earliest councils and the Church all affirmed the Deuterocanon. Jerome listened to the Church because he was a faithful son of the Church and the Church obviously were believed they were inspired.

Here are two good articles about the with respect to Jerome and the formation of the canon.

You continue to construe actual history to fit your narrative.

We will not be able to change each other's mind in this regard. Again, we'll have to agree to disagree.

We may as well move on to another topic.

---

A "few of the Church Fathers"? All I can say at this point, is that you're intellectually dishonest, or you're just in denial.

You are also still ignoring the Councils of Laodicea and Trullo.

If anyone's not dealing with 1500 years of Church history, it is your position, the Catholic position. I've clearly demonstrated this.

You seem to know the Bible well. Review the book of James and summarize your thoughts on what he said about the issue. I think that is a good starting point.

Do you agree or disagree with the following statements:
Once one is saved, are they always saved?
Do works save?
Does His grace do the saving?
Where does faith fit in?
Where do works fit in, or do they?

I'm not attempting to be cute or critical. Jesus spent much of his time talking about these issues with his followers. I would think those conversations continued among themselves when he was not around. Let's try to do that.

BUDOS said:

---

You seem to know the Bible well. Review the book of James and summarize your thoughts on what he said about the issue. I think that is a good starting point.

Do you agree or disagree with the following statements:
Once one is saved, are they always saved?
Do works save?
Does His grace do the saving?
Where does faith fit in?
Where do works fit in, or do they?

I'm not attempting to be cute or critical. Jesus spent much of his time talking about these issues with his followers. I would think those conversations continued among themselves when he was not around. Let's try to do that.

---

It isn't a conversation if you won't answer questions. Can we start there? If a true believer commits a sin and dies before he can repent/ask for forgiveness, does he go to hell?

And do you agree that your view you stated earlier about being judged by Jesus is wrong according to John 5:4?

BUDOS said:

---

You seem to know the Bible well. Review the book of James and summarize your thoughts on what he said about the issue. I think that is a good starting point.

Do you agree or disagree with the following statements:
Once one is saved, are they always saved?
Do works save?
Does His grace do the saving?
Where does faith fit in?
Where do works fit in, or do they?

I'm not attempting to be cute or critical. Jesus spent much of his time talking about these issues with his followers. I would think those conversations continued among themselves when he was not around. Let's try to do that.

---

Thank you BUDOS, for your post and thoughts.

I believe James made clear that our works do not save us - the only work that did this was Christ dying on the cross for us.

But Jesus gave many warnings about hell, even to His own followers. And so the key question for anyone here in the matter of their personal destination, is whether they have reconciled with God.

BTD asks if a true believer can go to hell if he sins. The real problem is the assumption that someone is right with God. Jesus plainly said there would be surprises, people entering Heaven who didn't look the part, and people going to hell who were sure their place with Jesus was secured.

It's God's grace that gives us hope, and we should all be careful to never assume God is locked in to our assumption just because we want that outcome.

Much better for us to pray, work at being better servants, and fight against our old nature rather than think the usual routine marks us as belonging to Christ.

It's more satisfying doing the right thing because you love your neighbor, anyway.

Oldbear83 said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

You seem to know the Bible well. Review the book of James and summarize your thoughts on what he said about the issue. I think that is a good starting point.

Do you agree or disagree with the following statements:
Once one is saved, are they always saved?
Do works save?
Does His grace do the saving?
Where does faith fit in?
Where do works fit in, or do they?

I'm not attempting to be cute or critical. Jesus spent much of his time talking about these issues with his followers. I would think those conversations continued among themselves when he was not around. Let's try to do that.

---

Thank you BUDOS, for your post and thoughts.

I believe James made clear that our works do not save us - the only work that did this was Christ dying on the cross for us.

But Jesus gave many warnings about hell, even to His own followers. And so the key question for anyone here in the matter of their personal destination, is whether they have reconciled with God.

BTD asks if a true believer can go to hell if he sins. The real problem is the assumption that someone is right with God. Jesus plainly said there would be surprises, people entering Heaven who didn't look the part, and people going to hell who were sure their place with Jesus was secured.

It's God's grace that gives us hope, and we should all be careful to never assume God is locked in to our assumption just because we want that outcome.

Much better for us to pray, work at being better servants, and fight against our old nature rather than think the usual routine marks us as belonging to Christ.

It's more satisfying doing the right thing because you love your neighbor, anyway.

---

But what's your answer to my question? It is a question that goes to the heart of what the gospel is, and what it means. It goes to the heart of what you believe the gospel is. Also, given that EVERY Christian has sinned after becoming a Christian, it is a highly, highly relevant, real world question. Avoiding the question is an indicator of something, too, and it usually isn't good.

You say we can't assume God is locked in to our assumption, but God IS locked in to His promises in His Word. We don't have to assume, we have His Word before us and can know and fully trust it. Jesus gives us one such promise - "Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life."

So in light of such a promise, if a true believer, one who has heard Jesus' word and believes in those words and in God who sent him, sins and then dies right after without repenting - does that Christian go to hell? What would you say to a new Christian who asks you this?

For the Catholic and Orthodox Christians -

If a non-believer were to break in a church during the Eucharist, and eat the bread and drink the wine after it has become Jesus' real flesh and blood, is that person saved? If you believe that John 6 is to be taken literally, then wouldn't it mean absolutely that he is?

And if so, why not then just have a priest call down Jesus into a massive amount of bread and wine, and just feed it to the world, regardless of what they believe, and therefore the whole world will be saved?

To be fair, BTD, I asked you first long ago and you never answered,

So, I have been waiting longer.

Here's another one, though:

Do you want to have an argument or a discussion?

Oldbear83 said:

---

To be fair, BTD, I asked you first long ago and you never answered,

So, I have been waiting longer.

Here's another one, though:

Do you want to have an argument or a discussion?

---

If I never answered, I apologize - there are so many questions thrown around it's easy to overlook some. That's why I repeatedly ask the same question so as to avoid that. But yet, as many times as I ask, it still goes unanswered.....

I think my answer to the question has been clear - I've said it's not the gospel. Therefore, being a believer in the gospel, I believe the answer is NO, the true believer does not go to hell.

Yes, I do want a discussion. But some of us still won't answer questions. And not just MY questions, but evidently, even their own....