I know what predestination is but I'm not talking about that now. You thought I was joking about survivorship bias but I'm not. The same person that you believe is a Christian today you would say was never a Christian if they leave the church. Likewise, I could very well be an "elect" and you just don't know it (while god does). Practically speaking you have no definition of what a Christian is.
I'm saying there are people who genuinely think they believe, and then walk away from the faith at a later point.
That's the whole point of christianity, to be ULTIMATELY saved and spend eternity with God.
Then what is the point of attending a protestant worship service?
So then the same as protestantism?
Yeah. the same, just not past tense. It'd be a constant work in progress. And it's something that can be lost. The church offers sacraments and other things meant to guide you to that life. I'm still waiting for them to answer what the point of church is if you're already "saved". It seems like it serves no purpose if you take that theological view into account. They offer baptism and communion, which is kinda pointless if it's all "symbolic". .
Do you have assuredness that should you die you will go to heaven? Seems like you made a comment that it wasn't a given, or you didn't want to presume... That's what I was referring to when I mentioned the apparent distinction between orthodoxy and protestantism. I think it is very important to Protestants to know that they are going to heaven and not hell. It's like their main selling point, or main guiding principle. But it doesn't sound like orthodoxy has quite the same emphasis at least.
From an Orthodox Church of America web page:
There are Protestants that have this perspective as well. I don't think "once saved, always saved" is necessarily a majority view.
You are right. I don't think it's a majority view among protestants. It's theologically unsound. I keep asking the question, if it's "saved" past tense, what is the point of attending a protestant church?
I think they would argue that if you don't "want" to praise God and have fellowship with the saints then you're not really saved anyways or something along those lines. "Fruits of the Spirit"
I will wait for them to answer. I'm not sure the saints have much to do with it since the two protestants sounding off in here do not seem to regard them at all, which is weird too. My brother, an ardent baptist, subscribed me to a magazine called "voice of the martyrs" which is about protestant missionaries and others who also have given their life while spreading the gospel. It seems pretty short sighted to ignore those who did so before the time of print. I can respect the sacrifices protestant missionaries have made but they do not seem to share the same respect for those non protestants who did so before them. *shrugs
You can respect the work of people who suffered or ministered for the Lord without deifying or calling them a "saint" outside the general meaning of "saint" that just means Christian. God will reward them - it's not for us to judge them or put them on a pedestal.
The Calvinistic view is that it's even God that gives you faith. It's nothing we do it's all God's grace. Hard concept to accept but it's Biblical.
So in Calvinism the loving God gives some people faith but the loving God also predestines people to hell.
It's not Calvinism that says it, it's what the Bible says. People like Calvin and Luther had to fix up the mess that the Catholics and Orthodox Churches had descended into. Your church needs to return to the Bible's teachings.
It's an idea sprung from Calvin and as is usual with protestant denoms it takes one or two scriptural passages out of context to draw a incorrect conclusion which is once again, why even many protestant churches reject both it and your previous sola scriptura claims.
Setting aside that the passage is more complex than you might initially believe, what do you think it makes of the plain readings in the rest of the Bible where God is imploring his wayward Israel to come back to him? Is that all a joke or a manner of speaking? Why would he ask them repeatedly to repent and turn away from their sins they never had a choice? Really strange.
The logical conclusion of his argument is that God is responsible when people reject him. I don't see how anyone can take this nonsense seriously. It's probably a part of why a lot of people reject christianity, because these are the kind of goofy ideas misguided people spread to others in public. And this is coming from the guy who gets all bent ouf of shape if we don't believe the earth is a wildly spinning ball, lol. It makes me cringe and chuckle at the same time listening to it.
So you are telling me God doesn't know ahead of time what is going to happen. Clearly he does.