Loss of salvation.

[Bladerunner]

Confession: sometimes I wonder if I really am born again, because I recognize that I am incapable of loving others as God would have me do. I have no doubt that God knows me, and called me out of the world, and the worldly way I was living prior to my conversion. I heard and recognized His voice, and eventually submitted to accept the gospel, my need of Jesus Christ, and the covering of His righteous blood in payment for my sins, that I may be reconciled to God, and attain to life ever after. Scripture says those who are His hear Him, and recognize Him. If it were not for that, I might think myself doomed to destruction, because beside seeing His goodness and grace, to look at myself, what I predominantly see in myself is failure to live according to His standards.

​

Loving other Christians is what you are talking about, YES?

 

[Nehemiah6]

There are sins that aren't serious?

If you have heard the terms "mortal" and "venial" then there are different categories of sins. This is Catholic theology.

MORTAL -- [FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]leads to Hell
VENIAL -- does not lead to Hell[/FONT]

 

[UnderGrace]

I highly doubt this is taught anymore, not that it changes much for the RC church, so many strange teachings that develop when people are not given access to a Bible.

If you have heard the terms "mortal" and "venial" then there are different categories of sins. This is Catholic theology.

MORTAL -- leads to Hell
VENIAL -- does not lead to Hell

 

[mailmandan]

I highly doubt this is taught anymore, not that it changes much for the RC church, so many strange teachings that develop when people are not given access to a Bible.

Venial and mortal sin

 

[UnderGrace]

My goodness, some things never go away. Having knowledge of the Catholic curriculum up here in Ontario where we have entire fully funded RC school system I have not seen it in the books.

Not surprised though that it is still there in writing.

I knew someone would call me on it...I am thrilled it was you a former RC like myself.

I always check my sources and was a bit lazy on that one.

Venial and mortal sin

 

[Didymous]

I knew the terms, I thought maybe the reference was to when Jesus was talking with Pontius Pilate.

 

[fredoheaven]

Romans 8:38-39: For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord"

That would include us, as created beings. But notice too how we're on the weaker end. If angels and powers can't separate us, then what makes anyone think that we ourselves could even do it?

Very true, Katy, not even works or loss salvationist is able to separate us from Christ or from the love of God. No one is able to unkept that is keep by the Father's hand. The assurances written in the Bible keeps us keeping on doing service to God and in the ministry. God bless.

 

[LW97]

Ralph,

You have to get over this infatuation that if people have doctrinally different views to you it does not mean they have no regard for holiness.

The church does not have a dangerous infatuation with Gnosticism.

Those who keep accusing others of Gnosticism are the ones infatuated by it. They spend so much time accusing others of walking in it just because they have a difference of opinion.

There is not one person that I have seen on this forum promote "We can do all we want as it does not matter any more"

Got Questions

Gnosticism was perhaps the most dangerous heresy that threatened the early church during the first three centuries. Influenced by such philosophers as Plato, Gnosticism is based on two false premises. First, it espouses a dualism regarding spirit and matter. Gnostics assert that matter is inherently evil and spirit is good. As a result of this presupposition, Gnostics believe anything done in the body, even the grossest sin, has no meaning because real life exists in the spirit realm only.

Second, Gnostics claim to possess an elevated knowledge, a “higher truth” known only to a certain few. Gnosticism comes from the Greek word gnosis which means “to know.” Gnostics claim to possess a higher knowledge, not from the Bible, but acquired on some mystical higher plane of existence. Gnostics see themselves as a privileged class elevated above everybody else by their higher, deeper knowledge of God.

You are being disingenuous to people by accusing them off having no regard for sanctification.
You are being disingenuous to the church as a whole.
You lump all denomination into one basket.

Romans 11:29 is an important verse.

 

[bible_teacher]

It never ceases to amaze me how in John 13:34, Jesus said, "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another." Certainly Christians do have differences of opinions on some things, but on the most important thing - following Jesus in obedience & love - why do we always scrap and act unloving?

If I disagree with you, I shall say so, and I will explain why, giving biblical references. And I shall do all that in the love of God and with respect. Those that cannot (will not) subscribe to that makes me think they should recontact Jesus and renew their relationship with Him. Please do not bother to reply with any disagreements on this. The facts are in, my mind is totally made up, and I choose to love you in Christ Jesus -no matter what you might feel towards me or others.

 

[LW97]

It never ceases to amaze me how in John 13:34, Jesus said, "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another." Certainly Christians do have differences of opinions on some things, but on the most important thing - following Jesus in obedience & love - why do we always scrap and act unloving?

If I disagree with you, I shall say so, and I will explain why, giving biblical references. And I shall do all that in the love of God and with respect. Those that cannot (will not) subscribe to that makes me think they should recontact Jesus and renew their relationship with Him. Please do not bother to reply with any disagreements on this. The facts are in, my mind is totally made up, and I choose to love you in Christ Jesus -no matter what you might feel towards me or others.

That is true.

 

[Ralph-]

Romans 11:29 is an important verse.

It is, if the subject of this thread was about God letting the Jews still be able to come to Jesus all these centuries after rejecting him and killing him.

 

[Ralph-]

...not even works or loss salvationist is able to separate us from Christ or from the love of God. No one is able to unkept that is keep by the Father's hand.

God is the one who eventually will turn the ex-believer over to his decision to go back to unbelief.

Paul warned the saved Galatians that they were making themselves sons of the slave woman, Hagar (the old covenant), by going back to unbelief and reliance on the law for justification. And he made it clear to them that slaves have no part in the inheritance. Only sons of the free woman, Sarah (the new covenant), are heirs in line for the inheritance.

Did the Galatians come back to their senses? We don't know. We just know what will happen to them when Jesus comes back if they didn't--they won't be inheriting the kingdom of God.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

Did the Galatians come back to their senses? We don't know. We just know what will happen to them when Jesus comes back if they didn't.

Probably. Their law-keeping attempt was imposed upon them by pharisees from Judea. Once they received word of the Jerusalem council's decision they most likely rejoiced as is written in Acts.

 

[Ralph-]

There is not one person that I have seen on this forum promote "We can do all we want as it does not matter any more"

There are those here who openly and unabashedly say the believer can go back to unbelief and all the sin they want to do and they are still saved. This is the new 'once saved always saved' in the church today. It's called 'Hypergrace', or 'Freegrace' theology.

One person in particular directly addressed the issue of the spirit being clean and not able to be defiled which made it so it didn't matter what you did on the outside in the flesh. That is the belief that is Gnostic, as you point out in your own quote:

Gnosticism is based on two false premises. First, it espouses a dualism regarding spirit and matter. Gnostics assert that matter is inherently evil and spirit is good. As a result of this presupposition, Gnostics believe anything done in the body, even the grossest sin, has no meaning because real life exists in the spirit realm only.

You are being disingenuous to people by accusing them off having no regard for sanctification.
You are being disingenuous to the church as a whole.
You lump all denomination into one basket.

I don't see traditional 'once saved always saved' saying anything remotely similar to the teaching that one can sin all they want and they are still saved. In fact, it teaches that if you do that you haven't even been saved all along.

But even hardcore traditional 'once saved always saved' believers are being influenced away from their beliefs and over to the new 'once saved always saved' I described above. What I'm seeing more and more in the church among 'once saved always saved' people is this horrible corruption between the two opposing views of 'once saved always saved'.

 

[Metternich]

There are those here who openly and unabashedly say the believer can go back to unbelief and all the sin they want to do and they are still saved. This is the new 'once saved always saved' in the church today. It's called 'Hypergrace', or 'Freegrace' theology.

One person in particular directly addressed the issue of the spirit being clean and not able to be defiled which made it so it didn't matter what you did on the outside in the flesh. That is the belief that is Gnostic, as you point out in your own quote:




I don't see traditional 'once saved always saved' saying anything remotely similar to the teaching that one can sin all they want and they are still saved. In fact, it teaches that if you do that you haven't even been saved all along.

But even hardcore traditional 'once saved always saved' believers are being influenced away from their beliefs and over to the new 'once saved always saved' I described above. What I'm seeing more and more in the church among 'once saved always saved' people is this horrible corruption between the two opposing views of 'once saved always saved'.

A verse to remind these Free Grace people is 1 Co 6:9

9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor sexual perverts, 10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

A verse to remind these Free Grace people is 1 Co 6:9

9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor sexual perverts, 10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

yes we should see it, thank you fo sharing and helping prove our point.

we were some of them but what happened?

we were washed, we were justified, we were sanctified in the name of christ.

So it came with a price, the price? The cross. Not your goodness or how great you are!

 

[Ralph-]

yes we should see it, thank you fo sharing and helping prove our point.

we were some of them but what happened?

we were washed, we were justified, we were sanctified in the name of christ.

So it came with a price, the price? The cross. Not your goodness or how great you are!

What point? That you don't have to live a new life after being born again to be saved?


Sometimes you say that the person who is not living a new life after being born again was never saved to begin with. Other times you talk about how the person who thinks they have to live a new life after being born again is trying to save themselves through works.


This is an example of how the old and the new 'once saved always saved' arguments are being horribly mixed together in the church. One time the old is being defended, the next time the new is being defended, not realizing they are diametrically and utterly opposed to each other.

Either you have to live a new changed and changing life in Christ after being born again (or you are not really born again), or you don't have to live a new changed and changing life in Christ after being born again because what you do doesn't matter to salvation.


My hope is that through our discussions people in the church are going to recognize the stark difference between the two 'once saved always saved' arguments and decide which they're going to believe. At least in the traditional 'once saved always saved' argument growth in personal holiness is necessary, or else you show yourself to be an unbeliever. I agree with that much of that argument.

 

[Ralph-]

The Galatians show us the fallacy of both the old and the new 'once saved always saved' arguments:


If the traditional view of 'once saved always saved' was true, they would have never fallen away from justification in Christ to begin with (to do so would show them to have never been justified to begin with).


If the new view of 'once saved always saved' was true, they would not be warned by Paul that to go back to the law for justification and away from justification in Christ makes them slaves that have no part in the inheritance (but it is argued that them doing that has no affect whatsoever on them continuing to possess the eternal inheritance).

 

[eternally-gratefull]

What point? That you don't have to live a new life after being born again to be saved?

1. i never said that
2. I have yet to hear anyone else in CC say this.
3.the only people i even here these words from are people like you who refuse to humble yourself and see what ithers are actually saying.

Sometimes you say that the person who is not living a new life after being born again was never saved to begin with. Other times you talk about how the person who thinks they have to live a new life after being born again is trying to save themselves through works.


This is an example of how the old and the new 'once saved always saved' arguments are being horribly mixed together in the church. One time the old is being defended, the next time the new is being defended, not realizing they are diametrically and utterly opposed to each other.

Either you have to live a new changed and changing life in Christ after being born again (or you are not really born again), or you don't have to live a new changed and changing life in Christ after being born again because what you do doesn't matter to salvation.


My hope is that through our discussions people in the church are going to recognize the stark difference between the two 'once saved always saved' arguments and decide which they're going to believe. At least in the traditional 'once saved always saved' argument growth in personal holiness is necessary, or else you show yourself to be an unbeliever. I agree with that much of that argument.

this is an example if how you PROVE you have not listened to a word i have said.

Humble yourself, be slow to speak, and start listening, then come back when you can stop telling people what they believe, yet have no idea of what they believe.

 

[Nehemiah6]

The Galatians show us the fallacy of both the old and the new 'once saved always saved' arguments:

If the traditional view of 'once saved always saved' was true, they would have never fallen away from justification in Christ to begin with (to do so would show them to have never been justified to begin with).

You might want to study Galatians properly from start to finish. The did not "fall away', but Paul says"You have fallen from grace" or he could have said "You have departed from grace". They were being seduced into thinking that even though they were saved by grace through saved, they must ALSO be saved by the works of the law (e.g. circumcision). But the Galatians had not become apostate or "fallen away". Here is how Paul ends his epistle:

Brethren, the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit. Amen.