10andBOUNCE said:

---

So is it you or the Spirit working in you?

---

It's a cooperative effort. It is the Spirit prompting us to be holier, to do good thing, to go to Church, etc. I then either cooperate or not. The Spirit does not make me stand up, get dressed, get my car keys and go to Church. If He is doing the physical motions of my body, then every single time I voluntarily skipped Church is because the Spirit didn't want me to go that day. If He did, He would have made me. And if He isn't controlling my body, then clearly I have some role to play in doing what He's asking (not making) me do.

The Banned said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

So is it you or the Spirit working in you?

---

It's a cooperative effort. It is the Spirit prompting us to be holier, to do good thing, to go to Church, etc. I then either cooperate or not. The Spirit does not make me stand up, get dressed, get my car keys and go to Church. If He is doing the physical motions of my body, then every single time I voluntarily skipped Church is because the Spirit didn't want me to go that day. If He did, He would have made me. And if He isn't controlling my body, then clearly I have some role to play in doing what He's asking (not making) me do.

---

Galatians 2:15-21

We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners; yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified. But if, in our endeavor to be justified in Christ, we too were found to be sinners, is Christ then a servant of sin? Certainly not! For if I rebuild what I tore down, I prove myself to be a transgressor. For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose.

Henry's commentary on v20:
That, as he was dead to the law, so he was alive unto God through Jesus Christ (v. 20): I am crucified with Christ, etc. And here in his own person he gives us an excellent description of the mysterious life of a believer.
[1.] He is crucified, and yet he lives; the old man is crucified (Rom. 6:6), but the new man is living; he is dead to the world, and dead to the law, and yet alive to God and Christ; sin is mortified, and grace quickened.
[2.] He lives, and yet not he. This is strange: I live, and yet not I; he lives in the exercise of grace; he has the comforts and the triumphs of grace; and yet that grace is not from himself, but from another. Believers see themselves living in a state of dependence.
[3.] He is crucified with Christ, and yet Christ lives in him; this results from his mystical union with Christ, by means of which he is interested in the death of Christ, so as by virtue of that to die unto sin; and yet interested in the life of Christ, so as by virtue of that to live unto God.
[4.] He lives in the flesh, and yet lives by faith; to outward appearance he lives as other people do, his natural life is supported as others are; yet he has a higher and nobler principle that supports and actuates him, that of faith in Christ, and especially as eyeing the wonders of his love in giving himself for him. Hence it is that, though he lives in the flesh, yet he does not live after the flesh. Note, Those who have true faith live by that faith; and the great thing which faith fastens upon is Christ's loving us and giving himself for us. The great evidence of Christ's loving us is his giving himself for us; and this is that which we are chiefly concerned to mix faith with, in order to our living to him.

Its perfect. I didn't even get finished typing my response out and the post above mine is 10andBounce is resorting to appeals to authority in his study bible notes.

Where'd those notes come from bud?

The Banned said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

one MEEN Ag said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

We are not the ones who decide who is saved and who is not. I trust the Lord.

---

Right, even the orthodox, with the liturgical and sacramental rigor currently being discussed, don't opine on who is saved or not as you are correct that is the Lord's decision. Regardless of piety, if you are old enough to go to confession (the age of reason), a funeral liturgy is chock full of the Lord to have mercy on the departed. We are bound to the Lord, the Lord isn't bound to us.

But the church is established to be the conduit for theosis. It is the hospital for those suffering from the sicknesses of sin. So there is a necessity here for attending, participating, obeying, and doing what the church asks for us to grow in theosis.

We try not get caught up on the edge cases of saints like the Thief on the Cross or St. Mary of Egypt. If you find yourself dying next to the Lord, or the angels teaching you the psalms and the gospels in the desert - go for it. For the rest of us, its not supposed to be just me and my bible.

---

I agree even though I am not Orthodox. Maybe it is just me but it seems like a lot of this thread is posters trying to figure out who is a "real" Christian and who is not. Only God knows the heart, I have dealt with some mean ass professing Christian's and some non believers who acted like saints. I know we have discernment which is good. But it seems to easily morph into judgement by men.

---

Man. I really wish Jesus would have left some guys in charge to be able to sort that out...

---

The problem is being men, there was corruption. To me, the Reformation was more about purging the church than a huge theological shift. I believe Calvin went off the deep end with TULIP. I don't know for the life of me why he felt he had to change centuries old teachings. Especially on predestination and election.

dermdoc said:

---

The Banned said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

one MEEN Ag said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

We are not the ones who decide who is saved and who is not. I trust the Lord.

---

Right, even the orthodox, with the liturgical and sacramental rigor currently being discussed, don't opine on who is saved or not as you are correct that is the Lord's decision. Regardless of piety, if you are old enough to go to confession (the age of reason), a funeral liturgy is chock full of the Lord to have mercy on the departed. We are bound to the Lord, the Lord isn't bound to us.

But the church is established to be the conduit for theosis. It is the hospital for those suffering from the sicknesses of sin. So there is a necessity here for attending, participating, obeying, and doing what the church asks for us to grow in theosis.

We try not get caught up on the edge cases of saints like the Thief on the Cross or St. Mary of Egypt. If you find yourself dying next to the Lord, or the angels teaching you the psalms and the gospels in the desert - go for it. For the rest of us, its not supposed to be just me and my bible.

---

I agree even though I am not Orthodox. Maybe it is just me but it seems like a lot of this thread is posters trying to figure out who is a "real" Christian and who is not. Only God knows the heart, I have dealt with some mean ass professing Christian's and some non believers who acted like saints. I know we have discernment which is good. But it seems to easily morph into judgement by men.

---

Man. I really wish Jesus would have left some guys in charge to be able to sort that out...

---

The problem is being men, there was corruption. To me, the Reformation was more about purging the church than a huge theological shift. I believe Calvin went off the deep end with TULIP. I don't know for the life of me why he felt he had to change centuries old teachings. Especially on predestination and election.

---

There was corruption in Judaism. Did that mean the Jews stopped being the people God chose to enter into humanity through? Did Jesus Himself tell people to listen to the sinful, corrupt Pharisees anyway? Did Jesus not say His Church would be led into all truth? I know none of that will sway you and I know you are of good will. This isn't meant to have a bad tone, but I know it might read that way. Sorry in advance.

Go back and read Luther. He is the one who introduces monergism. He is the one that admits his doctrine on justification is unknown to the church fathers. Erasmus challenged Luther (not Calvin) on how he was essentially erasing free will. Calvin simply systematized the logical conclusions of the monergism of Luther.

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

I sincerely wonder why the Protestants converse with Catholics/EO on this board. Is it really doing any of us any good?

---

I wonder the same thing and have considered stopping altogether. I hope there are some silent lurkers that are benefiting from it because neither side is convincing their interlocutors.

Let's keep it simple. Do you play any role in the good works you did today, or is it 100% the work of the Spirit?

dermdoc said:

---

AGC said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Zobel said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Zobel said:

---

If you believe in once saved always saved, after you're saved, why does it matter if you go to church or not?

---

If you are truly saved you will want to do the things that please the Lord. If you are looking for the bare minimum, you likely never were saved.

---

So schroedinger's assurance

But further. If you're saved why does it matter if you do or don't do the things that please God? You're saved. End of discussion.

---

I believe that once you are truly saved, you are born again and filled with the Holy Spirit and do not want to sin. I do not think if you are truly born again that you think well, I am saved so I can do whatever I want to. Once saved, always saved doesn't work like that.
You are truly changed, a new creature. When my office manager rich family friend stole money from me, I was truly shocked anyone could do that. Then I realized because I had the Holy Spirit and was born again, I thought differently than she did. Not of my doing, but the doing of the Spirit. Sin is a horrible thing.

---

We get the example, but are left with the same problem: how much sin can you commit if you're born again? None? Just a little? Can you be saved and commit adultery (or does that mean you were never saved)? What about porn addiction? Can you struggle with drinking? Social media addiction? Anger with your children?

The flaw in this theology runs deeper than, "you'll be transformed." We're not promised perfection, nor do the epistles shy away from repentance and ending sinful habits if you're a Christian.

---

I don't think like that as I do not want to do any of those things although I do like a glass or two of wine. Sounds like you are talking about a works based salvation which is wrong in my opinion. Fruits come about naturally due to you being born again. I could turn your points about sin around to works. What works and how many do I have to do? What kind of works? Who defines them? In my opinion it is usually people.

---

Right, but you still sin from time to time since this 'moment' of salvation, no? Or are you perfect since baptism?

You can't turn my points around. I don't believe in a single moment of salvation, but a lifetime of faithfulness in more than the mind (it is not enough to say 'go and be warm'), and that I'll stand before God as my judge with my deeds written in the book of life for Him to decide.

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Let me ask you simply, once you are saved, who is it that performs the good works thereafter?

---

I don't believe in the premise of "once you are saved" much less once saved always saved. Question doesn't make sense.

But you also didn't answer my question?

Howdy, it is me! said:

---

Who would have thought a question with a super simple answer that we can ALL agree on - yes, go to church! - would devolve into the same ol', same ol'.

---

It isn't simple because Rome and EO doesn't believe we even go to a legitimate church. How could a protty legitimately weigh in?

The Banned said:

---

Let's keep it simple. Do you play any role in the good works you did today, or is it 100% the work of the Spirit?

---

I don't even think Paul knew exactly how it worked with the way he wrote some of his letters. It is both.

10andBOUNCE said:

---

The Banned said:

---

Let's keep it simple. Do you play any role in the good works you did today, or is it 100% the work of the Spirit?

---

I don't even think Paul knew exactly how it worked with the way he wrote some of his letters. It is both.

---

Both I can work with. We cooperate. If we can cooperate, we can also choose not to. If we can't choose not to, then it isn't cooperation.

Zobel said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Let me ask you simply, once you are saved, who is it that performs the good works thereafter?

---

I don't believe in the premise of "once you are saved" much less once saved always saved. Question doesn't make sense.

But you also didn't answer my question?

---

Sorry I may have missed it or not answered how you would have liked.

The Banned said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

The Banned said:

---

Let's keep it simple. Do you play any role in the good works you did today, or is it 100% the work of the Spirit?

---

I don't even think Paul knew exactly how it worked with the way he wrote some of his letters. It is both.

---

Both I can work with. We cooperate. If we can cooperate, we can also choose not to. If we can't choose not to, then it isn't cooperation.

---

I am happy to land there. I think either of us are kidding ourselves if we think we can ultimately spell out how it works.

Where we disagree still is that if the Lord is a GOOD Shepherd he will not ultimately let his sheep go too far. I do not like the description necessarily of OSAS and obviously prefer the Perseverance of the Saints. It does boil down to the same result.

I am all ears if you have some other way in which to ascribe the Lord being a good shepherd while also allowing his sheep to be consumed by the enemy.

Was he a good shepherd when He allowed the Assyrians to disperse the northern kingdom and exiled Judah?

My pastor is a shepherd himself. He teaches and uses the imagery often.

The Banned said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

The Banned said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

The Banned said:

---

Let's keep it simple. Do you play any role in the good works you did today, or is it 100% the work of the Spirit?

---

I don't even think Paul knew exactly how it worked with the way he wrote some of his letters. It is both.

---

Both I can work with. We cooperate. If we can cooperate, we can also choose not to. If we can't choose not to, then it isn't cooperation.

---

I am happy to land there. I think either of us are kidding ourselves if we think we can ultimately spell out how it works.

Where we disagree still is that if the Lord is a GOOD Shepherd he will not ultimately let his sheep go too far. I do not like the description necessarily of OSAS and obviously prefer the Perseverance of the Saints. It does boil down to the same result.

I am all ears if you have some other way in which to ascribe the Lord being a good shepherd while also allowing his sheep to be consumed by the enemy.

---

Because we aren't literal sheep and. Jesus' parables and analogies are just parables and analogies.

---

I guess except for the whole flesh and blood one, yeah?

The Banned said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

The Banned said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

The Banned said:

---

Let's keep it simple. Do you play any role in the good works you did today, or is it 100% the work of the Spirit?

---

I don't even think Paul knew exactly how it worked with the way he wrote some of his letters. It is both.

---

Both I can work with. We cooperate. If we can cooperate, we can also choose not to. If we can't choose not to, then it isn't cooperation.

---

I am happy to land there. I think either of us are kidding ourselves if we think we can ultimately spell out how it works.

Where we disagree still is that if the Lord is a GOOD Shepherd he will not ultimately let his sheep go too far. I do not like the description necessarily of OSAS and obviously prefer the Perseverance of the Saints. It does boil down to the same result.

I am all ears if you have some other way in which to ascribe the Lord being a good shepherd while also allowing his sheep to be consumed by the enemy.

---

Because we aren't literal sheep and. Jesus' parables and analogies are just parables and analogies. But even if we want to make ourselves sound as close to sheep and Him a Shepherd, if you've ever raised livestock, you know some run and run and run and never get caught. That's why we invented fences

God gives us free will to reject Him, even after coming to know Him. Hence all the warnings against falling away from the faith in the NT.

---

Is that your interpretation though? I am going to need something specifically passed down by the apostles in order for it to be something I can learn from.

Quote:

---

You quote a bible that your denomination did not participate in forming or preserving,

---

Major eye roll

Not so silent lurker and could do without the occasional sheep stealing- but have learned much from these types of discussions. Carry on!

Cynic said:

---

Quote:

---

You quote a bible that your denomination did not participate in forming or preserving,

---

Major eye roll

---

Jack Nicholson scene from A Few Good Men came to mind.

Cynic said:

---

Quote:

---

You quote a bible that your denomination did not participate in forming or preserving,

---

Major eye roll

---

I believe the last time a Bible came out where they didn't consult either the Catholic or Orthodox preserved sources was The Message.

That's your legacy.

one MEEN Ag said:

---

Cynic said:

---

Quote:

---

You quote a bible that your denomination did not participate in forming or preserving,

---

Major eye roll

---

I believe the last time a Bible came out where they didn't consult either the Catholic or Orthodox preserved sources was The Message.

That's your legacy.

---

Okay

Thunderstruck xx said:

---

I feel like I am a good enough Christian and person to not need to spend time at church every week. I think it's been over 20 years since I've been to a church for just the weekly service.

---

To worship in a temple and before an altar the way the people of God have done since Abraham erected an altar for sacrifice to show obedience to God. To keep Christ commanded to partake of his body and blood. To humble yourself before the body and blood. To remind yourself of Christ sacrifice and our commissioning to be send forth.

Go to the church as if you were going to Calvary, and behave yourself before the altar as before the throne of God, in company with the holy angels.

-St. Leonard of Port Maurice pic.twitter.com/4NYT6LqSqm

— Pascal (@KnowsPascal) April 19, 2026