Is Eternal Security Conditional or Unconditional?

[Grace777x70]

No, I'm not going to answer your question. If you don't know what living after the flesh is, you've got a real problem, and I can't help you. Also, this idiotic fixation that have on slander is just annoying. IMO you think anyone who disagrees with you and doesn't validate your beliefs is slandering you. That IMO is just passive aggressive slander on your part.

I was giving you real life scenarios which some Christians don't usually equate to "living after the flesh".

I was showing you that these 2 groups of people are living after the flesh so that's why I say it is possible to live after the flesh and go to be with the Lord because salvation is based on Him alone.

Do these types of people living after the flesh go to heaven in your version of salvation in Christ? You should be able to answer this one real quick.

My answer is a definite YES!..they are going to be with the Lord despite their failures and He will open His arms and love on them forever and a day! Our loving Lord is not looking for ways to keep people out of being with Him. He loves us deeply.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

its the chicken and the egg. which came first?....The Truth is .....God created them both, one, through the other.

there is a difference, in saying " you tell people to go sin all they want because of Grace"

and ommiting the vast amounts of obedience scripture, to support a doctrine as the truth.

If a doctrine, ANY doctrine tries to say Jesus ways, words, teachings is not correct, or will not SAVE anyone. the doctrine is false.

there is a huge difference. if I say " Gods Grace has saved me, all I need to do is believe I'm saved, rest, don't DO anything"

and saying," I'm saved By Grace, and Grace teaches us to obey the Lord and He commands obedience and in fact warns of Hell for the disobedient"

One doctrine is complete and true, the other omits the truth, and will never lead to obedience. if I preach Grace alone, which has truth, BUT do not teach what Grace is in full, the hearer of this, will be lead AWAY from obedience."

A person doesn't have to say " don't obey"....to be saying " don't obey"

sorry to butt in on yall.....Just thought it may add a thought.

And it's a good thought. Stated another way, there's what I call front-door anti-nomianism (go sin all you want) and back door anti-nomianism (salvation's not affected by what you do). They're both licenses to sin; it's just that one is more honest than the other. The other says, "I don't care who you bring home with you, just use the back door."

I posted something earlier that said gnostic-type, libertine anti-nomianism is not socially acceptable in our Christian-influenced culture, so the anti-nomianism we see today is Sandemanian anti-nomianism,

Here it is again:

“Anything goes” antinomianism could be also expressed as libertine antinomianism if one is speaking of the variety that says the Christian cannot really sin regardless of what they do. This was common among some of the Gnostics.

The kind of Antinomianism we see more of in our day (beginning with the “Free Grace” movement of Zane Hodges et al. and morphing just a bit in the newer form as seen in teachers such as Joseph Prince) is essentially Sandemanian Antinomianism (a heresy associated with an eighteenth century movement) rather than libertine Antinomianism.

Sandemanianism did not directly say that anything goes in the sense that anything was approved of but just said that everyone was OK who gave mental assent to the gospel. Thus, those who made a profession could live as they pleased even though the leaders did not necessarily endorse this behavior. It is still “anything goes” as regards salvation even if the teachers and leaders profess not to endorse sin.

Joseph Prince has embraced this by espousing unconditional security without the need for the perseverance of the saints. This semi-Calvinist view is an unorthodox one that gives comfort to those who have never evidenced a changed life (Prince even asserts that repentance does not involve a turning from sin). I have spoken to a homosexual follower of Prince who acknowledged what the Bible said about his lifestyle. He was not concerned, however, because he was sure God saw it as no big deal in spite of what the Bible said.

One of the chief characteristics of the new Antinomianism as it has developed in the 21st century is that it insists that we must never speak of do’s and don’ts and can never use words such as “should” or “ought.” All of life must be subjective spontaneity and those who offer any word of exhortation (such as those found in the NT) are presenting a “legalistic ministration of death.”​

 

[InSpiritInTruth]

This is something I've notice in the Hyper grace and OSAS group->>>>

We don't preach against sin

That saying right there speaks volumes for those who truly understand.

 

[Grace777x70]

I think what may be happening is that when some people see someone say that sin does not affect a true believer's eternal security and so they equate that with they are telling people "Go ahead and sin all you want" ( which of course grace believers are saying the exact opposite of that )

Paul was accused of the very same things and frankly if no one accuses us of saying that - then we have not preached the gospel that Paul preached.

We are a new creation in Christ now. We can trust the Holy Spirit in us, we can trust the life of Christ on the inside of us, we can trust the love of God that is poured into our hearts by the Holy Spirit....we can trust the Lord with every aspect of living this life as we have died and our real life now is hidden in Christ in God our Father.

The true Christian life is one of astounding adventure with Him living in and through us to a hurt and dying world and to our fellow brethren.

 

[tooldtocare]

BTw it's the word
"security"
that does not exist
It's a man made word

Simple Definition of security
· : the state of being protected or safe from harm
· : things done to make people or places safe
· : the area in a place (such as an airport) where people are checked to make sure they are not carrying weapons or other illegal materials

Full Definition of security

plural securities
1. 1: the quality or state of being secure: asa : freedom from danger : safetyb : freedom from fear or anxietyc : freedom from the prospect of being laid off <job security>
2. 2a : something given, deposited, or pledged to make certain the fulfillment of an obligationb : surety
3. 3: an instrument of investment in the form of a document (as a stock certificate or bond) providing evidence of its ownership
4. 4a : something that secures : protectionb (1) : measures taken to guard against espionage or sabotage, crime, attack, or escape (2): an organization or department whose task is security

No matter how you frame it; the term “security” does not exists in the real world because there is no need for such a thing.

An umbrella does not secure you from getting wet in a rainy day. The only thing I can assure you of is your end will come. May we be friends on the way -

 

[Grace777x70]

This is something I've notice in the Hyper grace and OSAS group->>>>



That saying right there speaks volumes for those who truly understand.

Context, context, context...we preach Christ like Paul did when he went into a place. See Acts 13:16-42 for a word-for-word account of the true gospel being preached. Peter has a word-for-word account of the true gospel being preached too in Acts10:34-48

Here is the full post:

I agree we really need to preach the true gospel of the grace of Christ because in "it" is the power to save alone. We don't preach against sin - we preach Christ and the sin thing falls off in His light and it brings those ones deceived from out of the dark ( lol ) into liberty in Christ.

( there are times for taking certain ones aside to deal with because of their behavior - but we don't beat all the rest of the sheep to get to that one wayward sheep )

When I hear stuff like you said about preachers or people saying if you don't come to this church you will not make it and other things of that nature.

That is just pure spiritual manipulation and is actually witchcraft which is a work of the flesh. Witchcraft at it's roots is the "mixing of things together to get a desired result".......which is exactly what those types of preachers and people themselves are engaging in.

 

[jasonj]

And it's a good thought. Stated another way, there's what I call front-door anti-nomianism (go sin all you want) and back door anti-nomianism (salvation's not affected by what you do). They're both licenses to sin; it's just that one is more honest than the other. The other says, "I don't care who you bring home with you, just use the back door."

I posted something earlier that said gnostic-type, libertine anti-nomianism is not socially acceptable in our Christian-influenced culture, so the anti-nomianism we see today is Sandemanian anti-nomianism,

Here it is again:

“Anything goes” antinomianism could be also expressed as libertine antinomianism if one is speaking of the variety that says the Christian cannot really sin regardless of what they do. This was common among some of the Gnostics.

The kind of Antinomianism we see more of in our day (beginning with the “Free Grace” movement of Zane Hodges et al. and morphing just a bit in the newer form as seen in teachers such as Joseph Prince) is essentially Sandemanian Antinomianism (a heresy associated with an eighteenth century movement) rather than libertine Antinomianism.

Sandemanianism did not directly say that anything goes in the sense that anything was approved of but just said that everyone was OK who gave mental assent to the gospel. Thus, those who made a profession could live as they pleased even though the leaders did not necessarily endorse this behavior. It is still “anything goes” as regards salvation even if the teachers and leaders profess not to endorse sin.

Joseph Prince has embraced this by espousing unconditional security without the need for the perseverance of the saints. This semi-Calvinist view is an unorthodox one that gives comfort to those who have never evidenced a changed life (Prince even asserts that repentance does not involve a turning from sin). I have spoken to a homosexual follower of Prince who acknowledged what the Bible said about his lifestyle. He was not concerned, however, because he was sure God saw it as no big deal in spite of what the Bible said.

One of the chief characteristics of the new Antinomianism as it has developed in the 21st century is that it insists that we must never speak of do’s and don’ts and can never use words such as “should” or “ought.” All of life must be subjective spontaneity and those who offer any word of exhortation (such as those found in the NT) are presenting a “legalistic ministration of death.”​

yes there is good seed in there. the answer to the debate. is that Grace is not opposed to obedience, but out provision for obedience. Without the Grace that is in Jesus Christ ( not paul who revealed the grace of new birth through the atonement) that has its purpose. but it nor anything else in all creation, even the Law, is a validation for adjusting the words of Jesus to support or "prove" a different doctrine that the One HE himself has laid in front of our eyes. once we hear paul, if we shrink back from Jesus, were dangerously close to accepting a false doctrine. the recognition is simple.


Jesus makes clear, there is a hell for those who follow disobedience. or " if you eat of this fruit, you WILL surely die"

to cling to pauls words as the gospel of "grace", without adding Jesus truth equals " you will NOT surely die."

the only thing that saves us is to FIX our eyes upon the author of our salvation, and also the PERFECTION of our faith. we are saved by Faith, but faith In Jesus is the Faith that saves. all other scripture directly submits and finds its order as a subject in service of the King. There is ONE King, One way, One complete truth. and Our LIFE is only found in Him. if grace leads us to Jesus its good, if it keeps us from Jesus, it is spoken and twisted by the serpent. Gracve needs to be true as taguth By The Lord Jesus. to learn it Go to Jesus is the answer fo all mankind, there is no difference in race, age, gender, iq, or any other limit man thinks.

what Jesus teaches is the full and immovable truth, if we work too hard, we miss the benefit of Grace and rest from the law. if we refuse to follow Jesus, Grace is of no saving effect and is held in a deceptive thought, restraining the effects and Life Given in true and complete Grace. Grace we receive, and Grace we are to obey.

 

[Grace777x70]

No, I'm not going to answer your question. If you don't know what living after the flesh is, you've got a real problem, and I can't help you. Also, this idiotic fixation that have on slander is just annoying. IMO you think anyone who disagrees with you and doesn't validate your beliefs is slandering you. That IMO is just passive aggressive slander on your part.

I was giving you real life scenarios which some Christians don't usually equate to "living after the flesh".

I was showing you that these 2 groups of people are living after the flesh so that's why I say it is possible to live after the flesh and go to be with the Lord because salvation is based on Him alone.

Do these types of people living after the flesh go to heaven in your version of salvation in Christ? You should be able to answer this one real quick.


I'm trying to understand your doctrine so I'm using real life examples so that we know what each other is talking about when we discuss things like "living after the flesh".

I think it's a legitimate request that could help to clarify things and create a healthy discussion for all of us.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

Jesus makes clear, there is a hell for those who follow disobedience. or " if you eat of this fruit, you WILL surely die"

to cling to pauls words as the gospel of "grace", without adding Jesus truth equals " you will NOT surely die."

I think they think that Paul's grace immunizes them from Jesus' truth. It's the only explanation. His words and warnings are too clear. And the spirit bears witness.

 

[Grace777x70]

This video below should help to clear up the mis-percepetions of this myth about antinomian. It is a common thing as Paul himself was accused of the very same thing - 4x times in Romans alone.

Here is an article that addresses that myth for anyone interested.

https://escapetoreality.org/2014/09/...e-lawlessness/


[video=vimeo;11804054]https://vimeo.com/11804054[/video]

 

[Oncefallen]

Since it seems this thread has originated more reported posts in the past couple of days than any other thread in recent history, with reports coming from two separate factions reporting each others posts back and forth it is now closed.

If these two factions don't figure out how to discuss their differing doctrinal opinions in a civil fashion (since they've been at each others throats for months) we will be forced to start removing users.

If you think that this warning doesn't apply to you...................THINK AGAIN.