Can Anyone Really Be 100% Sure They Will Go To Heaven When They Die?

[quote=Exporter]When I read the original question I thought - this is not a question a Catholic would ask. So I looked at the profile and sure enough, this is what I saw. "Religion:
Fundamental Independent Baptist .

I expect that after a few more posts this poster, 1st john 5:13, will present the Baptist doctrines of “Are You Saved Brother”.
[/quote]

wait until you get to the understanding of John chapter 3

Maggie

[quote=1John 5:13]Let’s prayerfully see what God’s Holy Word say’s

11 Timothy 3:16
[/quote]

Hi 1John 5:13
Was Job certain?
Was Paul certain? ( His conscience was clear because He always chose the narrow path.)
Consider this, if you have any doubts, you should believe your self.
To doubt is to sin. What is causing doubt? Can you remove it? If you can remove it, why dont you? Often we want to cling to something we like and fool ourselves it doesnt matter.
Walk in love
edwinG

In my opinion, the Parable of the Pharisee and the Publican nastily condemns being “sure” that one is Heaven-bound. See Luke 18:9-14.

In that Parable, the Pharisee is a solid citizen. He fasts twice a week. He tithes. He goes to the temple to pray. Tax collectors, on the other hand, were animals. They collected taxes by armed robbery. If you didn’t give in to his gang of thugs asking for everything of value which you had, your sons were murdered, your wife and daughters were raped, and you were savagely beaten, and after looting, your home would be burned. Rome-licensed tax collectors were the Devil’s children, so to speak.

In the Parable, the Tax Collector’s only “redeeming social value” is that he clearly does not believe trhat He is saved, and so he begs for mercy.

The Pharisee, on the other hand, clearly believes that he IS saved.

Jesus declares the Pharisee “unjustified” – still damned – and the tax collector “justified” – saved.

Many see the Pharisee’s words in the Parable – 'O God, I thank you that I am not like the rest of humanity–greedy, dishonest, adulterous–or even like this tax collector. ’ – and conclude that he is damned because of hate.

Not so. One is not damned because he says, “O God, I thank you…that I am not like sexual serial killer Ted Bundy.” The individual whgo says that prayer isn’t even giving credit to himself for being good, but rather to God! A great prayer!

The problem in the Parable is the very pure difference between the Pharisee and the Publican – the Pharisee believes that He has been saved and is definitely Heaven-bound; the Publican clearly does NOT believe that he is Heaven-bound. (Otherwise, why ask for “mercy”?)

In my opinion, the purpose of this Parable is to condemn believing “once saved, always saved.”

What an interesting thread. Great answers provided. Those who have answered have much more patience than I do. May God bless you for your patience and wisdom in answering this thread.

Since the original poster has not responded to the questions asked of him over 24 hours ago, I assume this thread was a hit and run attempt to save us poor misguided Catholics.

[quote=BibleReader]In my opinion, the Parable of the Pharisee and the Publican nastily condemns being “sure” that one is Heaven-bound. See Luke 18:9-14.

In that Parable, the Pharisee is a solid citizen. He fasts twice a week. He tithes. He goes to the temple to pray. Tax collectors, on the other hand, were animals. They collected taxes by armed robbery. If you didn’t give in to his gang of thugs asking for everything of value which you had, your sons were murdered, your wife and daughters were raped, and you were savagely beaten, and after looting, your home would be burned. Rome-licensed tax collectors were the Devil’s children, so to speak.

In the Parable, the Tax Collector’s only “redeeming social value” is that he clearly does not believe trhat He is saved, and so he begs for mercy.

The Pharisee, on the other hand, clearly believes that he IS saved.

Jesus declares the Pharisee “unjustified” – still damned – and the tax collector “justified” – saved.

Many see the Pharisee’s words in the Parable – 'O God, I thank you that I am not like the rest of humanity–greedy, dishonest, adulterous–or even like this tax collector. ’ – and conclude that he is damned because of hate.

Not so. One is not damned because he says, “O God, I thank you…that I am not like sexual serial killer Ted Bundy.” The individual whgo says that prayer isn’t even giving credit to himself for being good, but rather to God! A great prayer!

The problem in the Parable is the very pure difference between the Pharisee and the Publican – the Pharisee believes that He has been saved and is definitely Heaven-bound; the Publican clearly does NOT believe that he is Heaven-bound. (Otherwise, why ask for “mercy”?)

In my opinion, the purpose of this Parable is to condemn believing “once saved, always saved.”
[/quote]

BR I almost agree with you. Like you I see the parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector as a lesson that goes against the presumption that one is eternally saved. I see the difference between the two as being the presumption of the Pharisee and the pride that goes with it.

However, I disagree with your comment about the tax collector. As far as I am aware the tax-collectors did not behave in the manner that you claim. It is true that they cheated people by using false weights and measures, but they were not armed robbers and they did not go around demanding money.

Maggie

[quote=MaggieOH]BR I almost agree with you. Like you I see the parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector as a lesson that goes against the presumption that one is eternally saved. I see the difference between the two as being the presumption of the Pharisee and the pride that goes with it.

However, I disagree with your comment about the tax collector. As far as I am aware the tax-collectors did not behave in the manner that you claim. It is true that they cheated people by using false weights and measures, but they were not armed robbers and they did not go around demanding money.

Maggie
[/quote]

[quote=geezerbob]Since the original poster has not responded to the questions asked of him over 24 hours ago, I assume this thread was a hit and run attempt to save us poor misguided Catholics.
[/quote]

Does that mean that we need to let the thread die? Here is a golden opportunity to debunk the notion that Scripture interprets Scripture as well as OSAS. :yup:

Maggie

[quote=MaggieOH]but wait there is more:

“You must keep to what you have been taught and know to be true; remember who your teachers were, and how, ever since a child, you have known the holy Scriptures - from these you can learn the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.” (2 Tim 3:14-15)

:hmmm: Now here is the tricky part. Why did the Bereans examine the Scripture? What precisely were they checking? Since they were in the Diaspora, what manuscripts did they use? Were they in Greek or Hebrew?

Well, what they were checking were the manuscripts of the prophets sayings. They were checking out Isaiah, Jeremiah, Zachariah, Ezekiel and all the other references that pointed to the coming of the Messiah. They were not doing this because Scripture was their sole authority, but because they wanted to see the words of the prophets for themselves so that they could compare and contrast what was being taught to them.

Maggie
[/quote]

Maggie, you hit on an important point without explicitly mentioning it. Here we have Paul saying “you have known the scriptures since your youth”. We also have the Bereans searching the prophets. What do these two passages have in common? What Scripture did Timothy know since his youth? Where are the Books of the Prophets? Of course, the Old Testament.

If *sola scriptura *advocates want to use 2 Tim 3:15 as a proof-text, they are really attempting to prove that the Old Testament is the sole rule of faith, and I don’t really think they want to be doing that.

[quote=MaggieOH]Does that mean that we need to let the thread die? Here is a golden opportunity to debunk the notion that Scripture interprets Scripture as well as OSAS. :yup:

Maggie
[/quote]

Unless the original poster responds, I don’t see the need to continue posting just to agree with ourselves.

[quote=mtr01]If *sola scriptura *advocates want to use 2 Tim 3:15 as a proof-text, they are really attempting to prove that the Old Testament is the sole rule of faith, and I don’t really think they want to be doing that.
[/quote]

One who makes this argument misses the point of 2 Tim 3:16-17, which says:

"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. "
–2 Tim 3:16-17

The thrust of the passage is the origin and resultant nature of Scripture, not the extent of the canon! It’s saying that that which is God-breathed is able, by its very nature, to give us the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. That’s evident where it says “which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.” (2 Tim 3:15).

It also says that Scripture is able to make the man of God “thoroughly equipped for every good work.”

Do you agree that the New Testament is God-breathed?

I assume you would agree with me that yes, the New Testament is God-breathed ( theopneustos in the Greek).

When you raise the argument that 2 Tim 3:16-17 is only referring to the Old Testament, are you saying that the Old Testament is adequate for the promises in 2 Timothy 3, but the New Testament isn’t?

If you agree with me that the promises of the passage apply to the Old Testament and the New Testament…your argument is irrelevant.

God bless,
c0ach

[quote=c0achmcguirk]One who makes this argument misses the point of 2 Tim 3:16-17, which says:

"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. "
–2 Tim 3:16-17

The thrust of the passage is the origin and resultant nature of Scripture, not the extent of the canon! It’s saying that that which is God-breathed is able, by its very nature, to give us the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. That’s evident where it says “which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.” (2 Tim 3:15).

It also says that Scripture is able to make the man of God “thoroughly equipped for every good work.”

Do you agree that the New Testament is God-breathed?

I assume you would agree with me that yes, the New Testament is God-breathed ( theopneustos in the Greek).

When you raise the argument that 2 Tim 3:16-17 is only referring to the Old Testament, are you saying that the Old Testament is adequate for the promises in 2 Timothy 3, but the New Testament isn’t?

If you agree with me that the promises of the passage apply to the Old Testament and the New Testament…your argument is irrelevant.

God bless,
c0ach
[/quote]

I am not sure that I understand your point here. However, if someone uses 2Tim 3:16-17 to claim that Scripture is the sole rule of faith, is it not true that when Paul wrote his letter to Timothy, that which is now recognized as the Scripture of the New Testament did not exist?

The passage does not say anything about Scripture being the sole rule of faith. What it says is that Scripture is a good source for instruction.

Maggie

[quote=c0achmcguirk]One who makes this argument misses the point of 2 Tim 3:16-17, which says:

"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. "
–2 Tim 3:16-17

The thrust of the passage is the origin and resultant nature of Scripture, not the extent of the canon! It’s saying that that which is God-breathed is able, by its very nature, to give us the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. That’s evident where it says “which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.” (2 Tim 3:15).
[/quote]

I think that’s a very interesting way of removing the context of the verse. St. Paul is specifically talking about the Scriptures Timothy has known since his youth. Claiming that he is referring to all Scripture that may one day come to be is reading something into the text that is not there.

[quote=c0achmcguirk]It also says that Scripture is able to make the man of God “thoroughly equipped for every good work.”
[/quote]

Remember, it says Scripture is profitable, not sufficient to accomplish the “promises”. Furthermore, it does not say that Scripture alone makes one thoroughly equipped. I could go on a camping trip and have all my equipment except a canteen. Adding the canteen would make me thoroughly equipped. However, taking a canteen alone wouldn’t thoroughly equip me.

[quote=c0achmcguirk]Do you agree that the New Testament is God-breathed?

I assume you would agree with me that yes, the New Testament is God-breathed ( theopneustos in the Greek).
[/quote]

of course

[quote=c0achmcguirk]When you raise the argument that 2 Tim 3:16-17 is only referring to the Old Testament, are you saying that the Old Testament is adequate for the promises in 2 Timothy 3, but the New Testament isn’t?
[/quote]

Since the New Testament didn’t exist at the time, the question is pure speculation. The only Scriptures being referred to in the passage is the Old Testament. This is what Paul was referring to as profitable.

[quote=c0achmcguirk]If you agree with me that the promises of the passage apply to the Old Testament and the New Testament…your argument is irrelevant.

God bless,
c0ach
[/quote]

Not really, beyond the realm of speculation, all St. Paul was referring to was the Scriptures Timothy knew since his youth, the Old Testament. Furthermore, as Maggie has posted, nowhere is the suggestion that Scripture is the sole rule of faith.

[quote=1John 5:13] In Acts 17: 10,11 Paul and Silas go to the synagogue. The Jews searched the Scriptures to see whether those things were so.
They didn’t take Paul and Silas word for it, that Jesus was the Christ, they went to the only authority, the Scriptures.
[/quote]

Of course they Took Paul’s word for it. They are commended for receiving the word with eagerness, not for searching the scriptures, although they did that too. All they found in the Scriptures was that Paul’s interpretation of them was plausible, if they ignored what a sola Scripturist would call contradictions.

For example how can you, or anyone, use the Old Testament Scripture to prove that Jesus could forgive sins and give others the power to do so. Only God does so in the OT.

Prove that Jesus was, or could be God from the OT, when Num 23:19 clearly says that “God is not a man.” The Jews wanted to stone Jesus because “being a man you make yourself God.” (Jn 10:33)

Jesus condemns divorce and contradicts Dt 24:1. Jesus says all foods are clean and contradicts Lv 7:19. The apostles say circumcision is not necessary and contradict Josh 5:2.

It was exactly the “bible only” folks who rejected Jesus because of these things, and Jesus had to condemn them in Jn 5:39.

The Bereans couldn’t have closed their minds to everything outside the Scriptures, or they would have never accepted the apostles interpretations, and like the Pharisees, would have pulled up the verses I mentioned above, to reject their teaching.

So we must go to the authority, *and is profitable for doctrine… *

That is correct, and the authority is the Church. Authority is the power to make and enforce final decisions (look it up), and NO writing can do that. Authorities are always persons with intelect and free will. Whenever the Scriptures mention authority it is always in connection with persons. The Scriptures are not an authority, they are authoritative, which means produced by an authority, but they must be interpreted and the final interpreter is the authority. Sola Scriptuists are self proclaimed authorities.

[quote=c0achmcguirk]One who makes this argument misses the point of 2 Tim 3:16-17, which says:

"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. "
–2 Tim 3:16-17

The thrust of the passage is the origin and resultant nature of Scripture, not the extent of the canon! It’s saying that that which is God-breathed is able, by its very nature, to give us the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. That’s evident where it says “which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.” (2 Tim 3:15).

It also says that Scripture is able to make the man of God “thoroughly equipped for every good work.”

Do you agree that the New Testament is God-breathed?

I assume you would agree with me that yes, the New Testament is God-breathed ( theopneustos in the Greek).

When you raise the argument that 2 Tim 3:16-17 is only referring to the Old Testament, are you saying that the Old Testament is adequate for the promises in 2 Timothy 3, but the New Testament isn’t?

If you agree with me that the promises of the passage apply to the Old Testament and the New Testament…your argument is irrelevant.

God bless,
c0ach
[/quote]

No Catholic denies that Scripture is “God Breathed.” We simply assert that it is not the sole authority (oral tradition and the living Magisterium are as well) AND that Scripture means what the Church says it means, not what the individual members of the Church (or in the case of Protestants, “ecclesial communities”) think or say it means. And this passage, contextually, IS only speaking of the OT as it existed at the time Paul wrote. One can easliy assert both the OT and the NT are adequate for the promise, but that the NT isn’t what is being spoken of here. The NT is authoritative because it was written by Apostles or their close associates AND because the Church in Her infallibility through Tradition and the Magisterium declared and set the canon.

[quote=MaggieOH]BR I almost agree with you. Like you I see the parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector as a lesson that goes against the presumption that one is eternally saved. I see the difference between the two as being the presumption of the Pharisee and the pride that goes with it.

However, I disagree with your comment about the tax collector. As far as I am aware the tax-collectors did not behave in the manner that you claim. It is true that they cheated people by using false weights and measures, but they were not armed robbers and they did not go around demanding money.

Maggie
[/quote]

Hi, Maggie.

That description of a tax collector I heard from a rabbi who taught me at St. Joe’s University about 30 years ago. He said that the Jews hated the Romans, and by Jesus’ time simply stopped paying taxes. The Romans struck back with tax collectors unregulated by the law, expressly entitled to get whatever they could. I’ll consult Josephus on this later. Perhaps that is where the rabbi got the description.

[quote=BibleReader]Hi, Maggie.

That description of a tax collector I heard from a rabbi who taught me at St. Joe’s University about 30 years ago. He said that the Jews hated the Romans, and by Jesus’ time simply stopped paying taxes. The Romans struck back with tax collectors unregulated by the law, expressly entitled to get whatever they could. I’ll consult Josephus on this later. Perhaps that is where the rabbi got the description.
[/quote]

that explains the difference:). It seemed so inconsistent with what is written in the Scripture, because there is indication that the taxes were collected.

The way that I heard it is that the tax collectors paid the money up front to the Romans and that they added a little extra when collecting the taxes. Certainly in the case of Levi and Zaccheus there is no mention of other crimes such as robbery and rape. The Scripture says that Levi (Matthew) was sitting at his booth when Jesus called him and that he left everything where it was.

I always thought that the tax collectors were hated because they were seen to be consorting with the Romans, not because of that kind of behaviour.

Maggie

according to …

"8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith–and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God– 9not by works, so that no one can boast. "
Ephesians 2:8-9

9That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. 11As the Scripture says, “Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame.”a]
Romans 10:9-13

…we can be sure when we have faith in Jesus Christ. and thats it.

[quote=bloodwater]according to …

"8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith–and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God– 9not by works, so that no one can boast. "
Ephesians 2:8-9

9That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. 11As the Scripture says, “Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame.”a]
Romans 10:9-13

…we can be sure when we have faith in Jesus Christ. and thats it.
[/quote]

Catholics and Protestants alike that we are redeemed because of the Sacrifice on the Cross.

However, it takes more than saying one has faith in Jesus Christ to be “saved”, because even the demons knew who Jesus was.

Maggie

[quote=1John 5:13]Let’s prayerfully see what God’s Holy Word say’s

11 Timothy 3:16
[/quote]

Okay Let’s…

We are saved by grace that shows itself by our love in action whan we
do those things that Jesus said would let our light so shine before men
that they may see our good works and glorify the Father in heaven. (Oh
SNAP! You forgot about that passage of the NT didn’t you? Poor
preacher-man…) Here: Look at this and a couple more verses that you
apparently haven’t noticed in that Bible of yours…

Matthew 5:16 So let your light shine before men, that they may see your
good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven.

2nd Peter 1:10-11 Wherefore, brethren, labour the more, that by good
works you may make sure your calling and election. For doing these
things, you shall not sin at any time. 11 For so an entrance shall be
ministered to you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord
and Saviour Jesus Christ

1st Peter 2:12 Having your conversation good among the Gentiles: that
whereas they speak against you as evildoers, they may, by the good
works, which they shall behold in you, glorify God in the day of
visitation.

Pax vobiscum,

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.