Define A Christian

[Chuckt]

Why Lordship Salvation Is Not Biblical

RON SHEA

“In this view, eternal salvation is not dependent on the performance of a work, but only the promise of future works. In the minds of those determined to adhere to salvation by works, this distinction supposedly allows the works of the law to be somehow added to the equation of salvation without annulling the doctrine of grace. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans would disagree. ‘For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise is of none effect.’ The …expression ‘saving repentance’ is nothing more than a specific form or expression of Bilateral Contract Salvation… ‘a promise for a promise.’ The lost sinner ‘promises’ future obedience in exchange for God’s ‘promise’ of eternal life. This errant understanding of the term ‘repentance’ is the most common and pervasive form of ‘Lordship Salvation’ taught within Christendom throughout the world.” (Ron Shea, Repentance and Salvation in Scripture, Confusion Over Repentance, p.3)

J. VERNON MAGEE

(Jesus) is not putting down a condition of salvation but stating the position of those who are saved. Lordship advocates, however, consider Luke 9:23-24 an evangelistic passage meant for the unsaved. Lordship advocates believe “take up his cross daily” is a condition that must be committed to for the reception of salvation. If this is a salvation invitation, the sinner is being asked to be willing to die for Jesus in order to be saved. “If this characterizes saving faith and is made a condition for salvation, as Lordship proponents insist, one must decide to place faith in Jesus as Savior and Lord through surrender everyday without fail. Such an expectation is not found elsewhere in the Bible and makes both salvation and assurance impossible. (In Defense of the Gospel, page 87)

LOU MARTUNEAC

Conditioning salvation upon man’s “unconditional surrender,” his commitment to or promises of obedience, is not the gospel. This is the point upon which some who reject Lordship Salvation consider it the first cousin of Roman Catholicism’s sacramental works salvation. When repentance is defined as “turning from sin” its basic nature is changed from what occurs in the heart and mind to an action. A commitment to certain behavior expected of a Christian turns the gospel of grace on its head. Salvation then is no longer “the gift of God” but instead a works based message that frustrates grace (Eph. 2:8-9, Gal 2:21) (page 145, In Defense of the Gospel)

To them (Lordship advocates), the kind of faith that “does not save” is any faith that does not meet their Lordship definition of saving faith. (page 152, In Defense of the Gospel)

Lordship Salvation, according to John MacArthur’s definition of saving faith, is a barter system (page 155, In Defense of the Gospel)

Those who teach Lordship Salvation frontload faith with commitments to do the good works (Eph. 2:10)… (Page 167, In Defense of the Gospel)

Does the Lord call on the lost for a wholehearted commitment to obedient Christian living before He grants the gift of eternal life? (page 257, In Defense of the Gospel)

As Lou accurately says, Lordship salvation frontloads faith with a commitment to do good works. It becomes a barter system in which the non-believer commits to forsake all their sins, commits to carry their cross and die daily, and commits to fully surrender and to have complete obedience in order to be saved. The gospel of Jesus Christ is no longer the free gift that God offers but is a costly gift that the unconverted sinner is unable to purchase. What sinner can commit to do things that are possible only by having the Spirit of God dwell in them? When people preach a Lordship Salvation gospel, they are not preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ; they are preaching a different gospel that frustrates the grace of God.

http://www.preachingjesuschrist.com/why-lordship-salvation-is-not-biblical.html

 

[Grace777x70]

Lordship Salvation is basically a "back-loaded" false gospel of works-based performance. We need to keep the true "good news" ( gospel ) of the grace of Christ free from the legalistic focus of either "requirements" driven ( front-loading - as in mutual fund fees ) or "results" driven ( back-loading )

Legalism in it's most vivid and raw form is attempting to make oneself acceptable in the sight of a Holy God through human effort.

Legalism - in the biblical sense = is any attitude or belief that human merit through self-effort can produce, prove, or preserve for one-self an acceptable standing before God.


God takes no pleasure in the legs ( strength ) of man. It is all by grace through faith that we are saved...and not of ourselves. This is not only for "going to heaven' but for everything in this life as well.

Psalm 147:10-11 (NASB)
[SUP]10 [/SUP] He does not delight in the strength of the horse; He does not take pleasure in the legs of a man. ( doing things with his own strength )
[SUP]11 [/SUP] The LORD favors those who fear Him, Those who wait for His lovingkindness. ( grace in Hebrew )

As we teach the true gospel of the grace of Christ. His life in us will transform us to walk in the love that is in us to a hurt and dying world.

Whenever our assurance of salvation rests upon our "performance " rather then upon the "promises" of Jesus - we are in error and it is not the gospel that Paul preached.

The pure gospel is that we " are saved by grace through faith " alone - no additives - no GMO's - no insecticides - no pesticides.

Our "security" is the basis of our "maturity" ( manifesting the good works that is already in us in Christ ) .

Resting in God's unconditional free grace through faith in Jesus alone toward His children will indeed contribute to that sense of security which will produce fruit - good works working out of the love of God inside of us and reflected in our lives toward others.

John 20:31 (NASB)
[SUP]31 [/SUP] but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name.

1 John 5:13 (NASB)
[SUP]13 [/SUP] These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life.


We walk in Christ in the very same manner we came to Him - it's all grace by faith alone from start to finish.

Colossians 2:6 (NASB)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Therefore as you have received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in Him,

 

[ForthAngel]

Lordship Salvation is basically a "back-loaded" false gospel of works-based performance. We need to keep the true "good news" ( gospel ) of the grace of Christ free from the legalistic focus of either "requirements" driven ( front-loading - as in mutual fund fees ) or "results" driven ( back-loading )

Legalism in it's most vivid and raw form is attempting to make oneself acceptable in the sight of a Holy God through human effort.

Legalism - in the biblical sense = is any attitude or belief that human merit through self-effort can produce, prove, or preserve for one-self an acceptable standing before God.

Lordship salvation isn't legalism or woks-justification. You guys are both liars and misrepresenting it. Address the points 1-9 that I posted on the previous page rather than this diversion and long talk. Show me what is legalistic about this view. Address the points one at a time and show me. Also go back and address my own posts with my own view using scripture to back up my points and go point by point showing me legalism anywhere in my posts. Neither of you can address my posts directly which shows that you have no defense. You have to resort to personal attacks or criticism of a pastor in my sig box. It's ridiculous.

Address my post directly and SHOW me where any works-justification or legalism is present or stop lying on me. I don't want to hear from 500 other hyper grace leaders about what they think, I wanna see directly from those who are claiming this is legalism just EXACTY HOW it is legalism. Address them point by point and prove it or stop lying.

The Distinctives of Lordship Salvation
There are many articles of faith that are fundamental to all evangelical teaching. For example, there is agreement among all believers on the following truths: (1) Christ's death purchased eternal salvation; (2) the saved are justified by grace through faith in Christ alone; (3) sinners cannot earn divine favor; (4) God requires no preparatory works or pre-salvation reformation; (5) eternal life is a gift of God; (6) believers are saved before their faith ever produces any righteous works; and (7) Christians can and do sin, sometimes horribly.

What, then, are the distinctives of lordship salvation? What does Scripture teach that is embraced by those who affirm lordship salvation but rejected by proponents of "easy-believism"? The following are nine distinctives of a biblical understanding of salvation and the gospel.

First, Scripture teaches that the gospel calls sinners to faith joined in oneness with repentance (Acts 2:38; 17:30; 20:21; 2 Peter 3:9). Repentance is a turning from sin (Acts 3:19; Luke 24:47) that consists not of a human work but of a divinely bestowed grace (Acts 11:18; 2 Timothy 2:25). It is a change of heart, but genuine repentance will effect a change of behavior as well (Luke 3:8; Acts 26:18-20). In contrast, easy-believism teaches that repentance is simply a synonym for faith and that no turning from sin is required for salvation.

Second, Scripture teaches that salvation is all God's work. Those who believe are saved utterly apart from any effort on their own (Titus 3:5). Even faith is a gift of God, not a work of man (Ephesians 2:1-5, 8). Real faith therefore cannot be defective or short-lived but endures forever (Philippians 1:6; cf. Hebrews 11). In contrast, easy-believism teaches that faith might not last and that a true Christian can completely cease believing.

Third, Scripture teaches that the object of faith is Christ Himself, not a creed or a promise (John 3:16). Faith therefore involves personal commitment to Christ (2 Corinthians 5:15). In other words, all true believers follow Jesus (John 10:27-28). In contrast, easy-believism teaches that saving faith is simply being convinced or giving credence to the truth of the gospel and does not include a personal commitment to the person of Christ.

Fourth, Scripture teaches that real faith inevitably produces a changed life (2 Corinthians 5:17). Salvation includes a transformation of the inner person (Galatians 2:20). The nature of the Christian is new and different (Romans 6:6). The unbroken pattern of sin and enmity with God will not continue when a person is born again (1 John 3:9-10). Those with genuine faith follow Christ (John 10:27), love their brothers (1 John 3:14), obey God's commandments (1 John 2:3; John 15:14), do the will of God (Matthew 12:50), abide in God's Word (John 8:31), keep God's Word (John 17:6), do good works (Ephesians 2:10), and continue in the faith (Colossians 1:21-23; Hebrews 3:14). In contrast, easy-believism teaches that although some spiritual fruit is inevitable, that fruit might not be visible to others and Christians can even lapse into a state of permanent spiritual barrenness.

Fifth, Scripture teaches that God's gift of eternal life includes all that pertains to life and godliness (2 Peter 1:3; Romans 8:32), not just a ticket to heaven. In contrast, according to easy-believism, only the judicial aspects of salvation (e.g., justification, adoption, and positional sanctification) are guaranteed for believers in this life; practical sanctification and growth in grace require a post-conversion act of dedication.

Sixth, Scripture teaches that Jesus is Lord of all, and the faith He demands involves unconditional surrender (Romans 6:17-18; 10:9-10). In other words, Christ does not bestow eternal life on those whose hearts remain set against Him (James 4:6). Surrender to Jesus' lordship is not an addendum to the biblical terms of salvation; the summons to submission is at the heart of the gospel invitation throughout Scripture. In contrast, easy-believism teaches that submission to Christ's supreme authority is not germane to the saving transaction.

Seventh, Scripture teaches that those who truly believe will love Christ (1 Peter 1:8-9; Romans 8:28-30; 1 Corinthians 16:22). They will therefore long to obey Him (John 14:15, 23). In contrast, easy-believism teaches that Christians may fall into a state of lifelong carnality.

Eighth, Scripture teaches that behavior is an important test of faith. Obedience is evidence that one's faith is real (1 John 2:3). On the other hand, the person who remains utterly unwilling to obey Christ does not evidence true faith (1 John 2:4). In contrast, easy-believism teaches that disobedience and prolonged sin are no reason to doubt the reality of one's faith.

Ninth, Scripture teaches that genuine believers may stumble and fall, but they will persevere in the faith (1 Corinthians 1:8). Those who later turn completely away from the Lord show that they were never truly born again (1 John 2:19). In contrast, easy-believism teaches that a true believer may utterly forsake Christ and come to the point of not believing.

Most Christians recognize that these nine distinctives are not new or radical ideas. The preponderance of Bible-believing Christians over the centuries have held these to be basic tenets of orthodoxy. In fact, no major orthodox movement in the history of Christianity has ever taught that sinners can spurn the lordship of Christ yet lay claim to Him as Savior.

An Introduction to Lordship Salvation

 

[Crustyone]

I noted that the OP used Webster's dictionary as a guideline. Concerning Christ and His followers, I can see where this would be a very inaccurate guide. The dictionary is sold to the general public and contains the general public's perception of Christians. Even among Christians it is somewhat different. All the more among the unsaved. Even saying that it is a person who follows the biblical teachings can't be accurate, as there are many different interpretations used.

 

[Crustyone]

FourthAngel, I don't recommend that you call people liars (You guys are both liars and misrepresenting it.) when that may not be the case and probably, in this case, isn't. They may be saying what they truly believe which is not a lie and you have just made yourself into liar yourself telling a falsehood about others. A lie is intentional misrepresentation of the truth.

 

[Grace777x70]

There already has been posts put up to show about this topic ( posts #121 ) ..that shows where the teaching is wrong. Post # 122 gives the scriptures to show that it is by grace through faith only in the finished work of Christ that we are saved.

I personally am not the least bit interested in going over all the points especially after giving scripture already on salvation through faith alone in Christ as this will just become a useless endeavor.

This is like the "speaking in tongues " debate ( one believes they are for today and someone else believes they are not ) where it will go back and forth endlessly so I'm leaving it where it is. I will leave 2 websites that look at both sides and we can let the people decide for themselves what they want to believe.

We can of course just agree to disagree too brother...it's ok if people have different views. Bless you!

Lordship Salvation, A Biblical Evaluation and Response

Ph. D. Dissertation by Charles C. Bing, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1991

GraceLife 2016 - Dissertation

A Study of the Lordship Salvation Controversy

Lordship Salvation: Is it Biblical? - Part 1

Lordship salvation isn't legalism or woks-justification. You guys are both liars and misrepresenting it. Address the points 1-9 that I posted on the previous page rather than this diversion and long talk. Show me what is legalistic about this view.

 

[PeterJens]

To me now the argument is more complicated.
Paul believed the relationship with God was reconned as righteousness, not obedience to the law which is looked at as self righteousness or works.

The fruit of a right relationship with God is love and obedience to the commands, but it is the fruit and not the deciding factor.
Paul is saying the Jews failed because they wanted to establish themselves as worthy without knowing God.
He said this because he knew he kept the law and did not know God, so regarded himself as blameless yet a sinner.
How could this come about? Because though Paul followed the law, those he persecuted as blasphemers, worthy of death, were actually telling the truth and following God, while he though obeying what he saw as the law was killing Gods followers.

Now this creates a theological dilemma for christians here. They believe that Paul was not blameless under the law, but Paul says he was. He did not though impute Jesus's righteousness to himself but faith in Christ was reconned as his righteousness. Because of this faith, he became a slave to righteousness, and not sin, walking in the spirit.

The law does have relevance because it declares Gods nature and intent. So Paul is saying behave like this and not that, but not as a set of laws but as an attitude of mind, a way of reacting to provocation and sin in non-believers lives.

Morality is not ignored, but rather it is a tool to understand how we are react and gain balances in our lives.
Jesus said the sabbath was made for man and not man for the sabbath. It is important to find rest in your life and not push too hard, to know Gods love working in you and through you.

So I do not hold to imputed righteousness or future forgiven sin, but rather faith in Jesus, and through this a real understanding of love and righteousness as it works out in our lives.

 

[Ariel82]

Truthfully I don't care if people call me Christian or not as long as God calls me His child.

To me Christians are my brothers and sisters in Christ who do the will of our Father in Heaven. We are "in Christ" because we know our sins have been covered by the blood shed in the cross, we have put to death the old fleshy desires and have been born again with the Holy Spirit leading and guiding us to show the world His love and His ways.

We are to see the world through His eyes and respond with love and patience even to those who ridicule and hate us.

 

[Chuckt]

There already has been posts put up to show about this topic ( posts #121 ) ..that shows where the teaching is wrong. Post # 122 gives the scriptures to show that it is by grace through faith only in the finished work of Christ that we are saved.

I personally am not the least bit interested in going over all the points especially after giving scripture already on salvation through faith alone in Christ as this will just become a useless endeavor.

This is like the "speaking in tongues " debate ( one believes they are for today and someone else believes they are not ) where it will go back and forth endlessly so I'm leaving it where it is. I will leave 2 websites that look at both sides and we can let the people decide for themselves what they want to believe.

We can of course just agree to disagree too brother...it's ok if people have different views. Bless you!

Lordship Salvation, A Biblical Evaluation and Response

Ph. D. Dissertation by Charles C. Bing, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1991

GraceLife 2016 - Dissertation

A Study of the Lordship Salvation Controversy

Lordship Salvation: Is it Biblical? - Part 1

I suggest the following books for people:


RELIGION vs JESUS Do vs Done: Explanation of scripture the "religious" use to deny salvation by grace alone by Preston Greene


"In Defense of the Gospel"Nov 3, 2011 by Lou Martuneac


So Great Salvation: What It Means to Believe in Jesus Christ, July 1, 1997 by Charles C. Ryrie

 

[Grace777x70]

Thanks...one book that I have just read was from a guy that was in the Lordship Salvation camp for years and how it affected him. He wrote an excellent book about the difference between back-loading the gospel of grace verses free grace by faith alone in the finished work of Christ. But everyone can read the reviews and come to their own conclusions.

The book = THE GOSPEL (un) CUT by Jeremy White.

I suggest the following books for people:


RELIGION vs JESUS Do vs Done: Explanation of scripture the "religious" use to deny salvation by grace alone by Preston Greene


"In Defense of the Gospel"Nov 3, 2011 by Lou Martuneac


So Great Salvation: What It Means to Believe in Jesus Christ, July 1, 1997 by Charles C. Ryrie

 

[Chuckt]

What Is Wrong with Lordship Salvation?
Andy Woods
Dr. Andy Woods
Sugar Land Bible Church

What Is Wrong with Lordship Salvation?

I think this is an excellent article.

 

[Chuckt]

One of the other Kindle books I bought tonight is "Five Views on Sanctification" by Melvin E. Dieter (which includes other authors) and I'm going to check out my Systematic Theology books as well. I wish to be well versed.

I was tired this weekend so I didn't deal with last heresy posted here. I'm an individual dealing with heresy developed by false radio industry and I don't wish to swing the opposite way and get information from the Free Grace society which has battled this doctrine because I wish to remain Biblical.

 

[pottersclay]

​Judas was thought to be Christian too....wasn't he?

 

[Chuckt]

Eighth, Scripture teaches that behavior is an important test of faith. Obedience is evidence that one's faith is real (1 John 2:3). On the other hand, the person who remains utterly unwilling to obey Christ does not evidence true faith (1 John 2:4). In contrast, easy-believism teaches that disobedience and prolonged sin are no reason to doubt the reality of one's faith.

Here are some questions for those who believe that you can lose your salvation.

Why were the apostles sure that they would go to Heaven, even though they still had time to sin (2 Timothy 4:18, 1 Peter 5:1, 2 John 2-3)?

Why did the apostles want the believers to whom they wrote to be sure of their future in Heaven (Romans 5:9, 1 Corinthians 1:8, Philippians 3:20-21, 1 Peter 1:3-5, 5:4, 1 John 5:13, 2 John 2-3)?

Critics of eternal security argue that salvation depends on our present faith and our present behavior. Why, then, do the scriptures refer to people having salvation, or something associated with salvation, in the present because of a past faith or a past justification (Luke 7:50, Acts 19:2, Romans 5:1)? How is this possible if there isn't a moment of faith in the past that results in our future salvation?

Why do the scriptures say that salvation is a free gift of God's grace (Romans 3:24, 5:17, 6:23, Revelation 22:17)? If attaining salvation through works would contradict grace (Romans 4:4, 11:6), then how can maintaining salvation through works be consistent with grace? If I give you a car, and tell you that it's a "free gift", but then I send you monthly bills for it thereafter, was the car really a "free gift"?

Why does Paul write, "where there is no law, neither is there violation...For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law, but under grace" (Romans 4:15, 6:14), as well as emphasizing elsewhere that once a person becomes a Christian he is no longer under any law of works (Romans 5:13, 10:4, 1 Corinthians 6:12, Galatians 3:11-25)?

What is the "liberty" to which Paul and James refer (Galatians 2:4, Galatians 5:1, James 2:12)? If Christians are still in bondage to a law of works, and the sting of eternal death still remains in some sins, then how can a Christian have "liberty", and how can "all things be lawful" to him (1 Corinthians 6:12)? Don't Paul's and James' comments in these passages require that the Christian be free from all bondage of the law, not just some?

If some "really bad" sins cause the loss of salvation, while other sins don't, as critics of eternal security tend to believe, then why do Paul and James say that a person would have to maintain a law of works perfectly in order to be saved by it, and that any violation of any aspect of that law makes a person guilty of violating the entire law (Galatians 3:10, James 2:8-10)?

If perfection is the standard that must be met in order to be righteous before God, as we know it is (Matthew 5:48), then how can anybody hope to attain to that standard through their own behavior (Romans 3:23)? If Christ's perfect righteousness is imputed to us through faith (Romans 3:21-22, 4:5-6, 2 Corinthians 5:21, Philippians 3:9), then why would we need our own imperfect righteousness to be added to His perfect righteousness in order to have eternal life?

If assuring believers of their future in Heaven is wrong, because it encourages them to sin, as critics of eternal security suggest, then why did Jesus and the apostles repeatedly assure believers of their future in Heaven (Matthew 26:29, Luke 23:39-43, John 11:25, Romans 5:9, 1 Corinthians 1:8, Philippians 3:20-21, 1 Peter 1:3-5, 5:4, 1 John 5:13, 2 John 2-3)? Aren't there motivations for keeping our faith, and for not sinning, aside from loss of salvation (Proverbs 22:5, John 14:23-24, Acts 17:31, Romans 5:5, 1 Corinthians 3:11-15, 2 Corinthians 5:14-17)?

If passages like 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and Galatians 5:19-21 are lists of sins that cause the loss of salvation, as many critics of eternal security claim, then why do we see examples in scripture of people committing those sins, yet remaining saved (1 Corinthians 3:1-3, 11:17-32)? Don't the examples of people committing these sins, yet remaining saved, necessitate that we acknowledge that passages like 1 Corinthians 6 and Galatians 5 are not about how Christians can lose salvation? Instead, aren't they telling believers not to behave like the unregenerate, who prove that they won't inherit eternal life by continually living in sin (1 Corinthians 6:11-12)? In other words, aren't the unregenerate the ones who will not inherit eternal life, as opposed to believers who sometimes commit one of these sins not inheriting eternal life?

Doesn't the man in 1 Corinthians 3:11-15, whose works are entirely bad, yet he's saved, prove that what's at stake as far as the Christian's behavior is concerned is rewards in Heaven, not entrance to Heaven?

When passages like Ephesians 1:7 and Colossians 2:13-14 place no limits on which sins are forgiven, and tell us instead that Christ's sacrifice covered all sins, on what basis can the critic of eternal security maintain that those who have trusted Christ are actually only forgiven of past sins and some future sins that "aren't real bad", while the "really bad" future sins remain uncovered?

-Pastor Kevin

 

[vic1980]

New Creation in Christ

[video=youtube;gwsJG9G48wc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwsJG9G48wc[/video]

Shalom

 

[crossnote]

1 Peter 1:23 KJVS
[23] Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

 

[Chuckt]

New Creation in Christ



Shalom

I have a relative is in hospice with end stage dimentia. He had been running from church his whole life.

So I'm telling him that he needs to trust Jesus to go to heaven and he says, "I know" and he also nodded his head which another relative and I think means "yes" to my question about whether he will trust Jesus. I said we are going to heaven and we want to see him in heaven and he nodded. Is that acknowledging Jesus before men? Does that count?

Matthew 10:32 ¶ Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.


John 6:37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

The passage that John is quoting is for people under the law and Christians are not under the law.



Are Christians under the Law?


https://carm.org/are-christians-under-the-law

 

[PeterJens]

I have a relative is in hospice with end stage dimentia.

Amen to sharing your heart with this man. In all honesty that is all we can do, and whether someone understands or not is not in our gift to comprehend. My mother who has early stage dementia will say yes, ok to keep you happy, when she neither understands or has even properly heard the question. To make sure she understands you need to have her repeat the idea back to you. Now any concept beyond a simple one step is too much for her.

So unfortunately explaining the gospel or almost anything to someone in end stage dementia is probably meaningless other than the immediate emotional need. One woman I met in hospital wanted people to come over and just be beside her and hold her hand. My daughter had a cold at the time. I talked a little to her asking her about her life, where she came from or anything with any meaning. She had nothing, only an immediate need for someone to reassure her, which people did all the time. But the need could never be met because there was no memory or real interaction, or rest just this recurring need.

What you are meeting is not the person but the remains of a personality that has long disappeared.

 

[Grace777x70]

The New Covenant does not start until Jesus died and rose from the dead. Judas was never born again and sealed with the Holy Spirit. Nobody in scripture was called a "Christian" until in Antioch, years after Jesus went to the Father.

​Judas was thought to be Christian too....wasn't he?

 

[ForthAngel]

Here are some questions for those who believe that you can lose your salvation.

You really need to stop quoting me because you are misrepresenting me again. The view I proposed teaches eternal security which just goes to show you are too ignorant to even read my posts, much less respond against them with any intelligent defense.

This is what my view teaches:

[SUP]8 [/SUP]For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— [SUP]9 [/SUP]not by works, so that no one can boast. [SUP]10 [/SUP]For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

This is what yours teaches:

4 For certain individuals whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.


Stop quoting me unless you can show me the respect enough to even understand my view. Sick of being misrepresented by you and others.