Not By Works

[BillG]

I've got to ask. Why is it considered a legalistic gospel to suggest one can give salvation up? Mind you, they do not lose it through some action of their own (in terms of acquisition), and falling short of God's perfect standard. They simply reject it, turn away from God. When you really think about it, this isn't legalistic and I do not see the correlation. To suggest that abandonment is legalistic as opposed to free will, is a poor argument.

No one is losing salvation on the basis of merit. If they were then it would be legalistic and salvation would be a wage due. We know this isn't the case, we are saved by grace through faith. I am just suggesting that a person parting away from salvation of their own volition is not a works-based legalistic gospel nor do I see that leap in logic as being true.

One side says that a person can reject the free gift and the other says that if a person rejects it they weren't genuine believers to begin with. Neither side is legalistic in their view of salvation. One considers free will and the others are bound by their definition of a believer ("one who believes"). So it seems to me, in some ways, both parties are on the same side that salvation is by grace through faith. Only one believes the possibility to reject the gift. This doesn't seem to me to be heresy, or merit any hostility.

I think the issue not a legalistic Gospel is that someone one give it up.
The legalism is that we must do something to keep it, AKa works.
Such works can be don’t do this and don’t do that, or continual belief is a work.

To me works do not save. Works will be judged and works that are worthless will be burned up.
But also I would say that continual belief is not a work, but at times belief is hard and we just want to give up when it’s hard.
We may shrink back but truly in our heart we call out to God for help (my experience)

This is why we need to be very careful in judging.

Either side of the equation could be considered heresy but to me it doesn’t merit hostility.

Hostility raises barriers, love breaks them down.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

That doesn't make sense under the concept that God permits men to depart from the faith. Consider if a person can depart from the faith then God's power to keep is not put in question. He didn't fail anyone. He left the exit unlocked. "You don't want this? There's the door." The option is available.

Regardless of whether or not this is true (God permitting departure), there is no correlation to Legalism and departure. It isn't a works-based gospel to express that a person can reject the Lord and forfeit their salvation. Again, nothing is being earned. A person would be willingly forsaking God.

So your answer to this is to say that a true believer won't depart, nor can they (as that would make them a false believer). A convenient excuse, and in some ways, circular reasoning by definition. My issue isn't with this doctrine of eternal security, but the accusation that a person suggesting that a believer can forsake salvation has a works-based gospel and another faith. This is wrong, and cult-like. Just because someone disagrees on this matter does not mean they believe a false gospel. The foundation is Christ, on both sides of the argument. The option to reject does not merit heretical accusations from the OSAS proponents.

To me, this does not make sense, It says God GIVES you ETERNAL life, knowing it will not be eternal. He seals you with the spirit. Knowing he will have to unseal you. He perfects you forever, and starts to sanctify you, then has to unperfect you. He says you are completely justified, then has to unjustified you. And the many more issues which comes with it.

The issue here is the omniscience and integrity of God. Not whether some man who claims to have faith can some how leave and deny God (became against christ)

and again, John said they would never depart if they were truly of us, Not me, I am just agreeing with John.

There is only one gospel. Not two, either the eternal security proponents are right, or the salvation can be lost are right, they both can not be right, that would make multiple gospels. And Gal 1 null and void.

 

[PeterJens]

The option to reject does not merit heretical accusations from the OSAS proponents.

For me the strange thing is I am fairly into the we are chosen, we do not chose.
There is also are true reality, when you understand how love works, you know walking away
will do more harm than good. And as you walk deeper the less you actually desire these other
things.

One member described this as sickly sweet. People know Holywood ideas of love and commitment
but the cross, pain and suffering, push through, facing humiliation, hatred, bitterness, rejection is
not sickly sweet. What I have come to see is people use a lot of defensive statements in regard
to things in their life when they get too close to something important, and make the issue absurd
so it can be avoided rather than face what is actually going on.

When the attacks come justified on the logic you are describing, there is something else happening.
After being lost in praise in the Lord, and then starting to come out and realise others are apparently
experiencing something similar, but they are expressing something very different has thrown me off.

Until I came to see though we have a similar background, it does not mean what is going on in the
heart is the same.

It is hard to be told one is not saved, all ones experiences are false and empty, and one is outside
the Kingdom, when ones life has been transformed through walking with Jesus. It suggests to me
some believers need to justify their positions by making other believers evil and lost.

It became even more confusing when the morph into a language where they say it is unspiritual to
do this, when this is exactly what they do, day in and day out. For me the fruit of their failure is
this continual belief in the value of repeating the same idea when it is shown to be false and empty.

It is like talking to the flat earthers. Everyone was a conspirator when you showed them they were
factually wrong.

Scripture clearly declares we are in a life of love, and it is the dynamic of love that is our heart beat.
But if people have failed to grasp this or walk in it, ofcourse they create another gospel, because that
is what they have.

God bless you Ben for following your logic, and I apologize for being so hard on you in the past,
but I found there was little else I could say. I hope you can accept my apology. God bless you brother.

 

[PeterJens]

To me, this does not make sense, It says God GIVES you ETERNAL life, knowing it will not be eternal. He seals you with the spirit. Knowing he will have to unseal you. He perfects you forever, and starts to sanctify you, then has to unperfect you. He says you are completely justified, then has to unjustified you. And the many more issues which comes with it.

The issue here is the omniscience and integrity of God. Not whether some man who claims to have faith can some how leave and deny God (became against christ)

and again, John said they would never depart if they were truly of us, Not me, I am just agreeing with John.

There is only one gospel. Not two, either the eternal security proponents are right, or the salvation can be lost are right, they both can not be right, that would make multiple gospels. And Gal 1 null and void.

Now here is where I see there is a problem.
I am not here on earth to decide who God is and how He works.
I am here to listen and learn, and follow.

So Gods knowledge, presence, work in my life, how he intends to work it through etc.
are theories I can speculate upon, but He is my Lord, and I am called just to follow.

I go rock climbing, and have climbed in situations if I fell I may have died. I was prepared
for the risk, but it was real. It relied on me making the right choices and going where others
may fear to tread. By knowing this, and my ability, I know I will probably survive.

Jesus empowers us and calls us to follow, as free agents following Him. No where does it say
He takes over, and we are just passive participants. It is all the other way around. He has
shown us a path, and we have to walk it, choosing to do what needs to be done.

My son was on a chair as a child. He started to fall, so I lept and caught him. He was empowered
to do what needed to be done, but I supervised him. How can you analyse and describe this intimate
relationship of care, learning and security?

It appears we equally have this in Christ. Why should God be any different, with the principles He
has created in nature and laid down in the examples we read in scripture, like how David grew up to
defeat Goliath. He learnt through example, was trained and got skills to kill lions. God used this, but
God was not using him like a puppet.

It strikes me as odd that such a disfunctional view of faith has come about, without any good foundation
and is so abusive and dismissive of others.

 

[TruthTalk]

I've got to ask. Why is it considered a legalistic gospel to suggest one can give salvation up? Mind you, they do not lose it through some action of their own (in terms of acquisition), and falling short of God's perfect standard. They simply reject it, turn away from God. When you really think about it, this isn't legalistic and I do not see the correlation. To suggest that abandonment is legalistic as opposed to free will, is a poor argument.

No one is losing salvation on the basis of merit. If they were then it would be legalistic and salvation would be a wage due. We know this isn't the case, we are saved by grace through faith. I am just suggesting that a person parting away from salvation of their own volition is not a works-based legalistic gospel nor do I see that leap in logic as being true.

One side says that a person can reject the free gift and the other says that if a person rejects it they weren't genuine believers to begin with. Neither side is legalistic in their view of salvation. One considers free will and the others are bound by their definition of a believer ("one who believes"). So it seems to me, in some ways, both parties are on the same side that salvation is by grace through faith. Only one believes the possibility to reject the gift. This doesn't seem to me to be heresy, or merit any hostility.

Hi PennEd, Legalism within Christianity regarding the salvation of the believer, just add anything to what Jesus has already done to secure our eternal salvation; or, God's grace, plus my wonderful works, (you name them). Legalism is a faith killer it will leave you in constant fear of, have I done enough to please God. Sometimes within a Church body their are legalist's like Phart who like to make people think they will lose their inheritance, eternal life, but the Church's teaching remain's true to the bible.

Phart's teaching will lead you to doubting your own salvation. He is totally leaving out the believers "Sanctification." which is our becoming more and more like Christ. God will bring us safely to our promised redemption by "His Power" Phart say's no it is by "keep believing" Phart say's his believing is not a work and I say thats not the point. You are trusting in something you do as opposed to trusting fully in God for everything; form faith to faith you have nothing to boast about only the Cross the Jesus.

About our "Sanctification", it is a life long pursuit of holiness and service to God. Phart has a partial gospel that can never save. A half of a gospel is a whole lie. If you follow a counterfeit gospel you are following a counterfeit Christ. Legalism is anything you add to the Gospel; Grace Plus nothing, True Gospel. Your sanctification is the process whereby we can become more like Jesus Christ. You need to read phart's words more closely and hold them up to the light of scripture; Phart's gospel is a counterfeit.

 

[dcontroversal]

NOPE. I had to fast from drinking and eating all day because I had an ultra sound done at 4 p.m. I came home and ate like a horse..lol

I went to a steak house in Penrith Australia and ate like a bush pig last night.....excellent Ribeye, fries, garlic herb Turkish bread, steamed carrots, corn, broccoli and an ice cold coke hahaha

 

[dcontroversal]

"For this is the will of God, even your sanctification," 1Thessalonians4:3

Really Phart, 'God does it all, you don't do anything to be saved' doctrines.'

Our sanctification is a life long pursuit of holiness and service to our Loving Father; the only "strange doctrines," (your words), are the ones that you are trying promote. False doctrine's, false gospel = false salvation. And who is Phart to tell the Church that they are wrong, did God make you the judge over the Church, "The Body of Christ."

You must have missed the class on our; "Sanctification."

And the bible is clear....if we believe not (after belief is the indication) HE ABIDES FAITHFUL BECAUSE HE CANNOT DENY HIMSELF <---HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS HAS BEEN IMPUTED UNTO THE BELIEVER and he BEGINS, FINISHES AND COMPLETES THE WORK OF FAITH HE BEGAN IN US.....the street organ player and his dancing monkey must play and dance for their coins on the street in their mind......!!!!!

 

[joefizz]

Now here is where I see there is a problem.
I am not here on earth to decide who God is and how He works.
I am here to listen and learn, and follow.

So Gods knowledge, presence, work in my life, how he intends to work it through etc.
are theories I can speculate upon, but He is my Lord, and I am called just to follow.

I go rock climbing, and have climbed in situations if I fell I may have died. I was prepared
for the risk, but it was real. It relied on me making the right choices and going where others
may fear to tread. By knowing this, and my ability, I know I will probably survive.

Jesus empowers us and calls us to follow, as free agents following Him. No where does it say
He takes over, and we are just passive participants. It is all the other way around. He has
shown us a path, and we have to walk it, choosing to do what needs to be done.

My son was on a chair as a child. He started to fall, so I lept and caught him. He was empowered
to do what needed to be done, but I supervised him. How can you analyse and describe this intimate
relationship of care, learning and security?

It appears we equally have this in Christ. Why should God be any different, with the principles He
has created in nature and laid down in the examples we read in scripture, like how David grew up to
defeat Goliath. He learnt through example, was trained and got skills to kill lions. God used this, but
God was not using him like a puppet.

It strikes me as odd that such a disfunctional view of faith has come about, without any good foundation
and is so abusive and dismissive of others.

first lasagna now bologna,so God can't take people over huh?
Have you read of Balaam by chance?
God can work through anyone,even taking them over for a time,he doesn't always do so but he can if need be,we have our own lives and choices,but once giving our lives to God,he may do with us as he sees fit,and the biggest bologna was that David was "trained" to fight lions,and bears,and even goliath ,rrightttttt,wasn't he A sheperd as in sheep herder,when he killed both the lion and bear for the sake of one lamb,and wasn't he a simple sheep herder and harpist when he came into saul's service of a more positional role?
where is this "training" you speak of,what I saw of David starting out was a loyal shepherd,calming harp player,and devout and zealous servant of God,where do you find that he was any different before he defeated Goliath?

 

[dcontroversal]

So according to your "keep believing", to be saved false doctrine, a believer could potentially lose their eternal salvation 10 times in one day, if they stopped believing 10 times in one day. And to what degree does our unbelief have to be.

Can we lose our eternal salvation by not believing just a little bit; or does it have to be like the unbelief of doubting Thomas. And who say's that God will alway's be doing our believing, other than you, nobody, why because this is just more twisting and misinterpreting the bible to suit your counterfeit Christ.

And whom is it that is able to, "present us before His glorious presence without fault and with great joy," "God is able" - not your foolish "if I stop believing I will lose my eternal salvation." Your fake gospel has no good news only gloom and doom for anyone who buys into your fake Christ, for according to you there is no security of the believer and your god is to weak to keep his children saved and sealed for the day of our redemption.

"To Him who is able to keep you from stumbling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy." Jude1:24

True Gospel

I know....his fallacy means a person can be saved lost saved lost saved lost saved lost saved lost saved lost saved lost 999999999999999 plus 1 times in their lifespan....it is not only a false view, but reeks of a complete rejection of context and the inspired verbiage of the bible.......!

 

[dcontroversal]

Sorry kind of ate them all already had some syrup and ice-cream with them

Sounds like "Stralian" pancakes.....

 

[stonesoffire]

Again, going back to symbolism.

In being drawn initially, is it a once only thing? I don't believe it is.

If we believe that He chooses according to foreknowledge, and I do, then He draws until the ground is properly prepared. Through life experience leading to repentance. Then on good ground of our heart, the seed or the Word takes root and one is converted. Sealed. The process of salvation that leads to being Sons is begun. And He doesn't fail for it's His mission to save.

Until conversion, we may have experiences, testify to them, yet not a completion of repentance.

After, we are owned.

My however in this is the whosoevers. For His commission to the chosen is to win the world. Sonship.

Symbols...is how I roll. So did Jesus.

 

[dcontroversal]

Quote: Just "keep believing" in his power to do that. (You put the spot light on you and not God, counterfeit gospel).

Okay and thank you for your honest response. You place the ability to keep a Christian saved on "keep believing." I believe it is God who keeps the Christian saved and secure; and it is the Holy Spirit who has sealed each true born again believer for the day of redemption and that seal can never be broken. If you walk away from God's everlasting salvation you were never truly saved at all.

God is a God of second chances, and you give the believer only one chance at salvation; If you were to preach this doom and gloom false gospel, of a God who has no power to save, and you leave our redemption up to, "if you keep believing" the entire congregation would stand up and leave.

The exhortations and warnings in the bible to fight the good fight and work out your salvation with fear and trembling are not about your, "keep believing false gospel." The encouragement and warnings and comfort of the scriptures is to keep God's children safe and away from counterfeit gospels like your's. It is all earthly wisdom that you speak and has not the power to save, But God Can.

Amen....many will say in that day, "Have we not done"..............

 

[dcontroversal]

Sorry BenFTW, the issue is not, "encouragement to continue believing", I've already stated that Christian's have the encouragement and comfort of the scriptures.

God keeps us saved until the day of our redemption, the gospel is not if we, "keep believing" - to keep believing is what a born again Christian will do. Phart has made "Keep believing" is the power to save; it is not, God is the power to save and keep us saved.

Phart is leaving out a critical part of the believers life and that is our, "Sanctification" which is a life long pursuit of Holiness and serving God. Believing what God has promised to those who believe is part of our sanctification. His gospel is I will finish what God has started by "Keep believing" if you do not you will "lose your eternal salvation"

The issue is not, encouraging believers to keep believing, the issue is; "losing your eternal salvation." I say God will keep all those Whom He has saved for the day of our redemption and He will not lose one little Child; and Pfart say's no if you do not "keep believing" you have lost your eternal salvation. False gospel, false Christ, and his "keep believing" nonsense will only lead you down a path of insecurity, rob you your "Joy in the Lord", and it will never save your soul. But be my quest and follow Phart's "keep believing" fake gospel, if you will.

Amen.....verb tense <---a present continuing result from a PAST COMPLETED ACTION!

 

[joefizz]

first lasagna now bologna,so God can't take people over huh?
Have you read of Balaam by chance?
God can work through anyone,even taking them over for a time,he doesn't always do so but he can if need be,we have our own lives and choices,but once giving our lives to God,he may do with us as he sees fit,and the biggest bologna was that David was "trained" to fight lions,and bears,and even goliath ,rrightttttt,wasn't he A sheperd as in sheep herder,when he killed both the lion and bear for the sake of one lamb,and wasn't he a simple sheep herder and harpist when he came into saul's service of a more positional role?
where is this "training" you speak of,what I saw of David starting out was a loyal shepherd,calming harp player,and devout and zealous servant of God,where do you find that he was any different before he defeated Goliath?

and yes peter I get what you are trying to say with David becoming Saul's armour bearer that he had most likely some degree of training but certainly not enough training to take on Goliath,somebody with military explain please about how long it takes to just wield a weapon let alone use it and that a person in war doesn't ideally strike out on their own to do something,and most certainly against such a powerful and trained foe as Goliath that David was unexperienced except for in one area,Faith,he even told saul he couldn't use the equipment Saul gave him so he was not only a youth but inexperienced with even a blade,yet somehow you think he defeated Goliath by his own strength.

 

[stonesoffire]

I think the issue not a legalistic Gospel is that someone one give it up.
The legalism is that we must do something to keep it, AKa works.
Such works can be don’t do this and don’t do that, or continual belief is a work.

To me works do not save. Works will be judged and works that are worthless will be burned up.
But also I would say that continual belief is not a work, but at times belief is hard and we just want to give up when it’s hard.
We may shrink back but truly in our heart we call out to God for help (my experience)

This is why we need to be very careful in judging.

Either side of the equation could be considered heresy but to me it doesn’t merit hostility.

Hostility raises barriers, love breaks them down.

Just the one comment here Bill. We love Him because He first loved us, and then? He sheds abroad in our heart, love for God, by the indwelling Holy Spirit. We say yes. I believe. Our work.

Now I know you know these things. Just don't let your compassion rule your truth.

 

[FlSnookman7]

I have just one question to those saying someone could "forsake" their own salvation...could you? I mean let's stop using some imagined person doing some imagined thing and ask ourselves this question. Now that we know God, now that He communicates with us and does things in our lives could we ever, at any point, deny that He is??

 

[TruthTalk]

Excuse me TruthTalk, but there is no need for belittling. I am not trying to give you a "I've gotcha" bible verse. I am asking you to reconcile that verse with your doctrine, so that I may learn. You don't need to feel sorry for me, you should feel encouraged that your fellow brethren are seeking out the truth of God's word. I hold to no legalistic doctrine of salvation, as you suggest. We are saved by grace through faith.

Thank you BenFTW, sometimes I over react to something that is not there like I did here, please accept my apology, I will use my better senses next time.......

 

[Ariel82]

Believing in God is not a work we do, it's a blessing God allows our hearts to rejoice in His presence.
.a work is when we do good for others and remind them of God's love.

 

[dcontroversal]

True but as I have said accepting Jesus and asking God to save one's soul is not about"exact words" .

Amen.....Lord remember me in your kingdom....

 

[dcontroversal]

To me, this does not make sense, It says God GIVES you ETERNAL life, knowing it will not be eternal. He seals you with the spirit. Knowing he will have to unseal you. He perfects you forever, and starts to sanctify you, then has to unperfect you. He says you are completely justified, then has to unjustified you. And the many more issues which comes with it.

The issue here is the omniscience and integrity of God. Not whether some man who claims to have faith can some how leave and deny God (became against christ)

and again, John said they would never depart if they were truly of us, Not me, I am just agreeing with John.

There is only one gospel. Not two, either the eternal security proponents are right, or the salvation can be lost are right, they both can not be right, that would make multiple gospels. And Gal 1 null and void.

Amen...the verbiage bears out for sure......saved, sealed, justified, and sanctified eternally in Christ.....