Once Saved Always saved....Read this

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

phil36

Senior Member
Feb 12, 2009
8,276
2,126
113
Matthew 7:21 is not refering to those who are Born Again.

John 6:39New International Version (NIV)

39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day.



The Bible says that he that endures to the end shall be saved. Again we can still walk away from Gods grace. Consider Matt.13 the parable if the sower...

20 The seed falling on rocky ground refers to someone who hears the word and at once receives it with joy.21 But since they have no root, they last only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they quickly fall away.

He fell away when persecution came. You have to first be saved to fall away.


There is only one person in that parable that is truly born again, and its not the one you say is and the walks away. many deceive themselves. and never where part of the invisible church.

The visible church has the wheat and the tares..the tares fall away and never where.. the invisible church are those who truly are in Christ.

Remember Jesus said:

John 6:39New International Version (NIV)

39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day.
 
Nov 22, 2015
20,436
1,431
0
Hebrews 6 is a different Greek word entirely for "fallen away" in Matt 13 about the sower....Hebrews 6 is a different matter...and it is written to the Hebrews to tell of them not going to the temple for sacrifices once they know that Jesus is the Way...in essence they reject Jesus...here is a short teaching ( 22 minutes ) if you are interested in this.:)...on Hebrews 6...taken in context with the other scriptures around it....it is NOT about one losing salvation in Christ and going to hell..


[video=youtube;ymCgHPu7Nz4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymCgHPu7Nz4[/video]




The word "fall away"..means to be "offended"....the people are offended because of the trouble that came with the word as satan comes immediately to try to steal it....this is the ways of the word of the kingdom and how it operates......it does not mean they are going to hell...that is not in that scripture...it's something that teachers made up to "legitimize" their belief that one can lose salvation

here is the greek word...[FONT="Gentium" !important][I]skandalon[/I][/FONT][/SIZE] ([URL="http://www.crossbooks.com/book.asp?pub=0&book=68&sec=00071047#offense"]OFFENSE[/URL], No. 1), signifies "to put a snare or stumblingblock in the way,"

Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old Testament and New Testament Words.



So in Hebrews it says...

For it is impossible, in the case of those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, to restore them again to repentance, since they are crucifying once again the Son of God to their own harm and holding him up to contempt.

This means those who have been offended? Or am I not understanding you?
 
Feb 24, 2015
13,204
168
0
Who's advocating this "works-to-keep-salvation" gospel?
Also, who's advocating this "license to sin" gospel?

The answer is: No one.
It's been said and said again that this is a strawman argument.
Why do we pursue this strawman?
Both sides of the argument are right that some aspects of their positions could be interpreted as described.

If you hold because you know Christ you will obey His commands as the desire to prove you know Christ you try and obey His commands without the power. What all the people arguing this case is we obey His commands because we know Christ and are empowered by the Holy Spirit, love and the word to follow.

The hyper grace group believe all sin is already forgiven so is not an issue. They condemn as evil conviction of your conscience, conviction of sin because it is making you feel you are not forgiven. The problem with this approach is people could very well be sinning and the conviction is 100% accurate and true and from God. So the whole process then becomes a license for sin by removing the conscience or even looking at the law or precepts at all, which one contributor suggested.

It is therefore a valid question to say this appears to be a license of sin. Now some argue because they are not bound to righteousness, as in the law, without condemnation, they are now free to walk in righteousness. The idea springs from the law creates condemnation and so failure, while the Spirit promotes acceptance which promotes righteousness.

Unfortunately many of us are not convinced this is the effect on people, rather without preaching about sin and righteousness and just acceptance, people stay in sin and are oblivious to its effects.

In fact some have testified to this themselves in their lives and came out of the grace camp for this reason.

Equally many in the grace camp came out of personal legalism so see this as the road to salvation, and everyone holding a different position as evil. To quote Budman "One drop of poison in a glass of water poisons the whole glass."

The problem is simple, it is very personal and both parties have people who miss Jesus, and both positions have their merits but not at the extreme. But if you polarise you end up with a destructive mess.
 
Last edited:
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Alright. I didn't see it at first, but now I see it. I concede.
I'm still not sure who Nikki was attempting to "call-out"...but he's definitely had ample time to clarify and answer questions posed by others. He's displayed his unwillingness to attempt to understand or discuss on reasonable terms.

Most troubling post:



For, Nikki84, at this point had still not sufficiently answered.

Maybe Nikki thought he/she answered previously:



Nikki seems to think that someone is attempting to 'take-away' from the Gospel of Christ.

Nikki clarified later:



Nikki's problem is that he/she has not defined this "grace only crowd"--it looks an awful lot like he/she's accusing folks in this thread or here at CC.

So I understand your frustration with Nikki and am beginning to understand your frustration with HeRose.
My frustration with HeRose is his consistant trying to call everyone gnostic, or Augustine, Or Calvine (trying to put people in a bubble) and not trying to find out what people really believe, He uses words of men not inspired to prove himself right.

He and peterjens (another person I confronted deepy) have no problem calling people our for doing the very things they do on a daily basis..

As for Nikki, My frustration with him was I asked him a few questions, and he got angry.. and acted like HeRose,,So I pushed to show the room what his real issue was.

Maybe not my smartest move, but it got the job done..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
This seems to be the tipping point -- the point in which the conversation took a turn which took over 24 hours to recover:



This is the sort of comment that is appalling to me. It's not helpful to most people. It's more likely that the comment will cause trouble and division rather than agreement and unity. It is possible to instruct without being cryptic, sarcastic, and condescending.
I agree,

2 wrongs do not make a right..
 
Feb 24, 2015
13,204
168
0
I am sorry for any of the problems I have caused. I am sorry i disrupted the room. Please forgive me. I'm a child trying to learn
You need to learn to wear guantlets especially when dealing with EG.

Some people have a way of turning a point into something completely different because they have no answer to a simple argument. I have continually pointed out assumptions are everything. If you choose the assumption right you come to the right conclusions.

So if you say we are all forgiven of our sin, forever no matter how we behave through a one time step of faith, that is very different from a step of faith into walking in righteousness because Jesus has redeemed and set you free. Sin is not longer an issue because you do not sin.

Now in this discussion your theology of original sin becomes important and what being born again actually is, as far as we believe. It has been shone a lot of people follow a truly gnostic idea we are given a new personal spirit which is perfect pure and holy. In this view we have arrived and just need to discover how to walk in it rather than the flesh. In some believers this has led to the words, it is not me sinning, it is my flesh.

Now a number agree 100% with this theology. But many of us would regard this as a heresy, and a different faith.

Rather than defending the theology these believers say we are legalists and evil, stopping people walking in the Kingdom by saying you can walk in righteousness, which is impossible without free will and being set free from original sin.

Now on the original sin argument it turns out some believe sex and desire is part of original sin, and desire for another is part of the fall. Now it appears the majority of christians do not believe this and are not aware this is the teaching of the reformed church, Luther, Calvin and Augustine.

Now it also appears the early church Fathers believed in free will, and the ability to walk in righteousness. Now without this belief saying it is Jesus's promise to make this possible would not be a possible position to hold. Now some here are unaware of this problem or why it supports or brings down various arguments. I think it is important enough for people to make themselves aware and draw their own conclusions because a lot hangs on which teachers you then listen to and which you call apostate.
 
P

psalm6819

Guest
You need to learn to wear guantlets especially when dealing with EG.

Some people have a way of turning a point into something completely different because they have no answer to a simple argument. I have continually pointed out assumptions are everything. If you choose the assumption right you come to the right conclusions.

So if you say we are all forgiven of our sin, forever no matter how we behave through a one time step of faith, that is very different from a step of faith into walking in righteousness because Jesus has redeemed and set you free. Sin is not longer an issue because you do not sin.

Now in this discussion your theology of original sin becomes important and what being born again actually is, as far as we believe. It has been shone a lot of people follow a truly gnostic idea we are given a new personal spirit which is perfect pure and holy. In this view we have arrived and just need to discover how to walk in it rather than the flesh. In some believers this has led to the words, it is not me sinning, it is my flesh.

Now a number agree 100% with this theology. But many of us would regard this as a heresy, and a different faith.

Rather than defending the theology these believers say we are legalists and evil, stopping people walking in the Kingdom by saying you can walk in righteousness, which is impossible without free will and being set free from original sin.

Now on the original sin argument it turns out some believe sex and desire is part of original sin, and desire for another is part of the fall. Now it appears the majority of christians do not believe this and are not aware this is the teaching of the reformed church, Luther, Calvin and Augustine.

Now it also appears the early church Fathers believed in free will, and the ability to walk in righteousness. Now without this belief saying it is Jesus's promise to make this possible would not be a possible position to hold. Now some here are unaware of this problem or why it supports or brings down various arguments. I think it is important enough for people to make themselves aware and draw their own conclusions because a lot hangs on which teachers you then listen to and which you call apostate.
really? I"d say earplugs when listening to you would be more appropriate
 
C

Chuckt

Guest
Both sides of the argument are right that some aspects of their positions could be interpreted as described.

If you hold because you know Christ you will obey His commands as the desire to prove you know Christ you try and obey His commands without the power. What all the people arguing this case is we obey His commands because we know Christ and are empowered by the Holy Spirit, love and the word to follow.
I disagree. Maybe the person is only good because they are afraid of getting caught being bad. You look with the eyes but God looks on the heart.

You are looking at outward appearances but God looks on the heart. I love my neighbor's estimation of herself. She was righteous because she cut her grass but she was a sinner like you and me.

John 7:24 Stop judging by mere appearances, but instead judge correctly."
 
C

Chuckt

Guest
You need to learn to wear guantlets especially when dealing with EG.

Some people have a way of turning a point into something completely different because they have no answer to a simple argument. I have continually pointed out assumptions are everything. If you choose the assumption right you come to the right conclusions.

So if you say we are all forgiven of our sin, forever no matter how we behave through a one time step of faith, that is very different from a step of faith into walking in righteousness because Jesus has redeemed and set you free. Sin is not longer an issue because you do not sin.

Now in this discussion your theology of original sin becomes important and what being born again actually is, as far as we believe. It has been shone a lot of people follow a truly gnostic idea we are given a new personal spirit which is perfect pure and holy. In this view we have arrived and just need to discover how to walk in it rather than the flesh. In some believers this has led to the words, it is not me sinning, it is my flesh.

Now a number agree 100% with this theology. But many of us would regard this as a heresy, and a different faith.
Unless you've had time to step in a number of churches that believe what you are teaching is wrong, you have no idea how many more people believe that over here in America.

For those who don't believe they still sin, come live with me and I'll point out your sins.
 
C

Chuckt

Guest
And as far as the Eternal Salvation doctrine being a fantasy, Ephesians 2:8-9 makes it absolutely clear that there is no possible alternative other than Grace by Faith ALONE (the following study of Ephesians 2:8-9 is also from Richard Coombes):
"For it is BY GRACE you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God--NOT BY WORKS, so that no one can boast" (Eph. 2:8-9). "This means that there is nothing we humans can do to either gain or loose our salvation. Let's dig a little deeper into the Greek text of this passage:

"The word "by Grace" is *xaris*, Strongs #5485, and means "something unearned" or "something undeserved." In other words, Grace is a gift from God--an unmerited gift, i.e., it can't be earned. It is NEVER used as a transactional term in which something is exchanged for something else in return, i.e., works for Grace. A gift is not a gift if you have to earn it. If you have to earn it then it becomes "works," and Eph. 2:8-9 just said that this Grace given by God does not come by works.

"The word "saved" is *sesohsmenoi* which is a verb that is called a Perfect Participle verb and is in the Passive voice, neuter in gender and is in the second person plural (see an analytical Greek Testament to confirm this, i.e., The Analytical Greek Testmament by Barbara & Timothy Friberg) The main root of this word is *Sohdzoh* Strong's #4982 and means "to be saved or to KEEP SAFE." As is noted above "saved" is a Perfect Participle which means this is in the imperative sense. The Perfect Participle means this verb is in a PRESENT state, resulting from a past action with a PERMANENT RESULT. This means it is an action for which there is NO ESCAPE. You cannot jump out of the condition of a perfect participle! (see New Testament Greek for Beginners" by Dr. J. Gresham Machen, Pub. by Macmillan Press, Copyright 1923).

"Therefore the very first phrase of Ephesians 2:8 is telling us that "it is by an UNDESERVED or UNEARNED gift (which was an action by God himself in a point of time past) that has produced a present state of salvation that is incapable of being changed." This means that the state of salvation cannot be changed by you or by God, no matter what. It is a never-ending process. The phrase actually should be translated as:

For by an unearned and undeserved gift are you being saved (or kept safe) and incapable of being changed from that state . . . forever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever, etc., etc., etc., into eternal infinity.


"Let's continue analyzing verse 8:

"The word "through" is *dia* and means "through the agency of." It carries the idea of agency.

""Faith" is *Pisteuoh*, Strong's #4100 and means "To think to be true, to be mentally persuaded of, to credit or place confidence. RELIANCE." It is a mental attitude, NOT A HEART feeling. The word connotes mental persuasion, not emotion.

""And NOT of yourselves", is *Doh-ron* of God. Doh-ron is Strong's #1435 and means "a gift, a present, Something that is not earned."

"And Verse 9:

"Not of Works." The word "works" is *ergon*, Strong's #2041 and means "business, employment, that with which anyone is occupied of any product whatever, an act or a deed, or A THING DONE."

"Should boast" is *Kauxaysaytai*, Strong's #2744 and means "glory or boast, brag or testimony to, exult, etc."

"If we put all of this together we have:

For (a word, by the way, that introduces "reason") by grace you are having been saved (or kept safe), you are being saved and you will forever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever (a continuous never-ending process for which it is impossible to change or jump out of) keep on being saved through the agency of mental reliance (or mental persuasion) and that not of yourselves; it is the GIFT OF GOD, NOT OF DEEDS or things done, lest any man should boast (or brag).


"Therefore, Salvation is not attained by anything we can do, period! Salvation is also an ongoing process by which no one who enters into it can get out of it in terms of actual salvation. Christians often live under something other than "grace," but the Christian life is SUPPOSED to be lived by Grace THROUGH Faith, and not just for the sake of our salvation either, but our entire WALK with God. See the entire book of Galations where Paul warns about mixing works with faith where it regards salvation. There is no faith plus anything. It's all faith or there is no salvation.

"There are those who try to incorporate works into their program, but this doesn't mean they aren't saved--they have merely fallen from God's grace. God operates his blessings on a grace only basis. You can fall from God's grace by operating under the basis of a mix of works plus faith but it won't get you anywhere---sort of like puting your car's transmission into neutral. It doesn't mean a loss of salvation but it does mean a loss of fellowship with God.

Without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him" (Heb. 11:6).

However, you said above that Revelation 3:5 means that our name CAN be blotted out of the book of Life. We know that scripture does not contradict scripture. So who is taking scripture out of context here? Ephesians 2:8-9 happens to be a scripture that cannot be taken out of context because of it's grammatical structure, therefore it is crystal clear in it's meaning. Therefore, Rev 3:5, which is not clear, has to mean something else and it shouldn't be relied on to support (or deny) a bible doctrine when other scriptures are much clearer.

You mention in one of your writings that you have children. If your children believed that there were no consequences to their actions, would they still remain obedient to you? Just a thought.

Whether my children obey me or not does not negate the fact that they are still my children. However, you make obedience a "work" for salvation and this isn't how God operates according to Scripture. All true believers have been washed in the blood of Jesus and when God looks on us, even though we still sin (and will until the day we die, or the rapture), we are still justified in his sight because of Christ's blood and the fact that he died in our place and already paid the penalty of sin for us.

http://www.endtime-prophets.com/duduman2.html

I shared this with my last pastor and he said it was sound.
 
C

Chuckt

Guest
The initial message of Jesus Christ found in Mark 1:15 was this. He said, "Repent." Then he said, "and believe." That is not in the aorist tense – aorist means that at a specific point in time, do it – it is in the present imperative. Present tense means repent and keep on repenting. The imperative mood means it is a command. Believe and keep on believing. That was God’s message. It is not a one-time repentance. It is the one time, initial coming to know Christ and repenting of our sin, but it is also a daily living in light of the fact that we choose the wrong things and we daily have to repent and change our behavior for Him.



The second false confession is where we are going to start this time. Three times he says, "If we say." Verse 8 says, "If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves, and the truth is not in us." What is he saying here? Well, first of all, the "we have" there is in the present tense. We are in the state of having no sin. In other words, we have reached that place. Spirituality is an attainment. We finally arrived and we don’t have to deal with sin anymore. John goes on to say if we say that, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.

The word "deceiving" is the word planao. We get the word "planet" from it. The idea is, if we are saying this, that we don’t have to deal with sin anymore, we are like a planet wandering around. There is no direction in our life. Have you ever noticed people who have problems in their life and they don’t want to have to deal with personal sin? It is almost as if they have come beyond that. Something else is the matter but not sin. You can’t get them to sit down and realize that sin is the problem. These people never seem to come to any solutions. They never come to any answers. Why? Because they are deceiving themselves by saying they don’t have any sin. We have got to understand that sin still is in the life of a believer. A believer has to deal with sin.


The Believer and Sin - Part 1
1 John 1:8-10
by Dr. Wayne A. Barber

This is also from another file of mine:
Sinless Perfection - I John 3:9
 
Feb 22, 2016
350
12
0
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.
How we live our lives has no bearing on how
we keep our salvation because WE don't keep our selves....
WE are Kept by GOD....that is part of the good news....
Saved by our Lord Jesus Christ,
kept by our Lord Jesus Christ.

How we live our lives BEFORE being saved
proved our need of a Saviour....
how we live our lives AFTER being saved
is part of, the sanctification process,
and though it may have a bearing on rewards,
it has no bearing on salvation, because who
The Lord saves, He keeps.

How you and the Lord
relate to each other is personal, but
He knows them that are His, and once you are a
son or daughter of the Living God, He promises
to never leave you or forsake you.....

He's not the kind of God who saves and then loses,
and He's not the kind of Father
who adopts and then rejects.
Praise the Lord, He loves us, He saved us,
He proved it.
That's Good news!

Our salvation is dependent upon our abiding in Christ where there is perfect safety.
Our salvation is DEPENDENT upon Jesus Christ
and His finished work upon the cross, and His
resurrection from the grave.

Salvation is by grace, through faith IN CHRIST,
not by our own efforts to abide. Again, the abiding
will follow salvation, that is sanctification.

The day I stop learning is the day I start to die, spiritually. Am I humble enough to be teachable? God, please help me to stay open to Your Truth. Am I willing to admit when I am wrong? God, save me from my ego, and the egos of those who refuse to admit to any fault. Am I loving? God, please keep me mindful of having a compassionate and contrite heart, for great is Your goodness, and we all fall short of Your Glory.
Ahem, Amen, :) Love!
'And be ye kind to one another, tenderhearted,
forgiving one another, even as God
for Christ's sake has forgiven you.'
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Eph.4:32~~~
 
Feb 24, 2015
13,204
168
0
Lets look at the response to my points

"really? I'd say earplugs when listening to you would be more appropriate"

"You are looking at outward appearances but God looks on the heart."

"For those who don't believe they still sin, come live with me and I'll point out your sins."

This is not a response. This is I am not listening, so just denial of truth or the points being raised.
The other is just wrong. I am saying the transformation of the heart, the cleansing of the soul, the washing so the outward reflects in ward person is where we need to be. Walking in righteousness.

But these responses just talk of one issue, unbelief. It is not even a theological response so I conclude there really is none.

And if you are aware of sin that is so prevalent, repent, get yourself sorted and walk in the Spirit.
Do you think God is mocked by your attitudes? If there is no defence, then you need to get yourself sorted. This is not minor issues, or so small point about theology, this is the walk with Jesus and total compromise.
 
C

coby

Guest
Once saved always saved can be true. Doubt is just as dangerous as not listening to warnings. Just make your election sure and pray for those you are sure of that they're not saved. Keeps the focus off yourself.
 
C

coby

Guest
You can have eternal security for your whole family that isn't even saved if you wake up and do warfare for them.
 

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
25,316
13,277
113
58
What "new" and "different" gospel would that be?
Exactly! Why won't he answer the question? In post #346, I asked Nikki84 this question: "So what do YOU believe the gospel of Christ is and what do YOU believe it means to believe the gospel?" (Romans 1:16). Still no answer. I'm beginning to wonder. :rolleyes:
 
Nov 22, 2015
20,436
1,431
0
Brethren - there is an all out attack on the gospel of the grace of Christ. Thank you all for "contending for the faith"

.....
our enemy would love to water down the pure grace of God to have people "rely" on themselves for their salvation. It means we have fallen from grace and the enemy loves it when we rely on our own self-righteousness/holiness
.

Then we are left with scripture quoting ( mostly out of context ) people that have no power to change us in real terms as we are holding to " having a form of godliness but denying the power "

Let us remember satan's messengers come with a message of "righteousness"..but it is the self-righteousness and not depending wholly on Christ's righteousness by faith in His grace alone.

Jesus did it all!..Let's believe and receive His grace and gift of righteousness. He is awesome and mighty to save! We love Him!


2 Corinthians 11:14-15 (KJV)
[SUP]14 [/SUP] And do not marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
[SUP]15 [/SUP] Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be
transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works. ( notice - it is THEIR works )

Remember these ones above are not saying "Sin all you want.."...they are saying to relying on your own self-effort/righteousness/holiness instead of Christ's righteousness only.
 
Last edited: