Once Saved Always saved....Read this

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

John is talking about the two natures. One, the flesh, with it's sin and sinful desires, verses the new nature we have via Christ, which does not sin, nor can sin. Our salvation, and how we are judged, is based on our new nature in Christ. That's why we can never lose our salvation, nor can we ever come into condemnation again, despite the fact the old nature still sins, and desires to do nothing but.

...

BUT, yet again, how we live our lives has no bearing on whether or not we keep our salvation. That matter was settled at the cross. Our salvation is based entirely on the finished work of Jesus. We are holy, righteous, and sinless because that is what He is, and what His nature in us proclaims. It's imputed, imputed, imputed.

You're just channeling the gnostic dualism that views everything as being determined by nature. The spirit man can't sin, but the old man can. Guess what? This dissociative separation only exists in the mind. Man is a whole comprised of old man and new spirit, and GOD holds the whole man accountable for what he does with the body.

The gnostics did not believe this. They believed that they were saved by their spiritual nature, just as you do; and that the conduct of the body was irrelevant to salvation, just as you do (and even said so in your post).

Budman: how we live our lives has no bearing on whether or not we keep our salvation ... We are holy, righteous, and sinless because that is what He is, and what His nature in us proclaims

Gnostics (per Irenaeus): [the gnostics] hold that they shall be entirely and undoubtedly saved, not by means of conduct, but because they are spiritual by nature... it is impossible that spiritual substance (by which they mean themselves) should ever come under the power of corruption [of sin], whatever the sort of actions in which they indulged.​

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

What you see is based and biased by your limited viewpoint.

Aye -- as is true with all of us.
I'd argue that what I see (and what Blain sees) is seen by many.
Many have spoken up about this issue (of being gentle when using corrections) and many steer-clear of BDF for this very reason. Some have left CC altogether for this issue alone.

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

Go to HeRoseFromTheDead's page, (or PeterJens) and just start reading.....

We're discussing this thread -- not two individual's postings which are spread out across the entire forum.

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

We're discussing this thread -- not two individual's postings which are spread out across the entire forum.

Maybe herein lies part of the issue; people are making accusations based on things said in previous threads.

 

[Budman]

You're just channeling the gnostic dualism that views everything as being determined by nature. The spirit man can't sin, but the old man can. Guess what? This dissociative separation only exists in the mind. Man is a whole comprised of old man and new spirit, and GOD holds the whole man accountable for what he does with the body.

The gnostics did not believe this. They believed that they were saved by their spiritual nature, just as you do; and that the conduct of the body was irrelevant to salvation, just as you do (and even said so in your post).

Budman: how we live our lives has no bearing on whether or not we keep our salvation ... We are holy, righteous, and sinless because that is what He is, and what His nature in us proclaims

Gnostics (per Irenaeus): [the gnostics] hold that they shall be entirely and undoubtedly saved, not by means of conduct, but because they are spiritual by nature... it is impossible that spiritual substance (by which they mean themselves) should ever come under the power of corruption [of sin], whatever the sort of actions in which they indulged.​

Then once again, please tell me why you still sin?

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

Willful blindness is no excuse for ignorance.

Then what's your excuse, Budman?
You've said I missed something, but you haven't shared what I missed!

Is this what Christians are called to do--to say a person is in error but not show them their error?

 

[FreeNChrist]

Aye -- as is true with all of us.
I'd argue that what I see (and what Blain sees) is seen by many.
Many have spoken up about this issue (of being gentle when using corrections) and many steer-clear of BDF for this very reason. Some have left CC altogether for this issue alone.

Having been on many forums over the years I can assure you that CC is extremely tame by comparison. Many should steer clear of BDF.

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

Then once again, please tell me why you still sin?

Once again, why are you going after the strawman?

 

[Budman]

Then what's your excuse, Budman?
You've said I missed something, but you haven't shared what I missed!

Is this what Christians are called to do--to say a person is in error but not show them their error?

Once again, go to the pages of the people I listed, and read.....

I'm not doing the work for you.

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

Having been on many forums over the years I can assure you that CC is extremely tame by comparison. Many should steer clear of BDF.

"Bible Discussion Forum" on a "Christian Website" should be inviting and friendly.
Instead, it is quite the opposite. And you pride yourself in this?!

 

[Budman]

Once again, why are you going after the strawman?

It's not a strawman. He states one must abstain from sin, or lose salvation. That is anti-gospel.

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

Once again, go to the pages of the people I listed, and read.....

I'm not doing the work for you.

Once again, what people have said in other various threads is irrelevant to this thread.
You have stated that people in this thread are preaching a false gospel -- I don't see it.

 

[Budman]

Once again, what people have said in other various threads is irrelevant to this thread.
You have stated that people in this thread are preaching a false gospel -- I don't see it.

Read what they've said on other OSAS/works for salvation threads. Which is absolutely relevant to this discussion of ours.

 

[Blain]

Like I said, it is easy to judge from the sidelines, and yes you have been on the sidelines in this thread, and in the many other threads many of us here have been engaged in with these same folks.

Then tell me, how many hearts were changed in your engaging? and explain how I was at the sidelines

 

[Budman]

"Bible Discussion Forum" on a "Christian Website" should be inviting and friendly.
Instead, it is quite the opposite. And you pride yourself in this?!

It's rather obvious that your idea of "friendly" and "inviting" is to not challenge false doctrine.

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

It's not a strawman. He states one must abstain from sin, or lose salvation. That is anti-gospel.

I'm not sure if he said that or not -- he definitely didn't say it in the post you quoted.
What he said was: Your belief is very similar to the gnostics' belief, in you view yourself as a spiritual being and not a fleshy being.

"Strawman" is putting words into his mouth and attempting to start an argument where there is none.

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

Read what they've said on other OSAS/works for salvation threads. Which is absolutely relevant to this discussion of ours.

I was not a part of those discussions.
This is a new thread and a new discussion with new people present.
I will not be pulled into your previous bickerings.
There is enough here for us to move forward without dwelling on the past.

 

[Blain]

There is only one correct interpretation of the gospel. If all interpretations of the gospel were valid, then our salvation is dependent on whatever we want it to be.

is your interpretation the true one? Are you not wrong in some of your views and beliefs?

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

It's rather obvious that your idea of "friendly" and "inviting" is to not challenge false doctrine.

Obvious? Well, you're wrong--so, I guess it's not so obvious.

I think it's fine to challenge false doctrine and I think we can display a Christian love while doing so!

 

[Budman]

I'm not sure if he said that or not -- he definitely didn't say it in the post you quoted.
What he said was: Your belief is very similar to the gnostics' belief, in you view yourself as a spiritual being and not a fleshy being.

I was answering your post - to me.

And we do indeed have a new spiritual nature; Christ's nature. And we have that new nature while we still inhabit our flesh.

Our old nature, is sinful, and desires nothing but to sin. Our new nature in Christ, does not, nor can sin. It explains perfectly the paradox of why we still sin, yet are declared holy, sinless, and righteous by God - without any condemnation.