Question(s) to those who believe salvation can be lost

[preacher4truth]

Yes.

Good, you answered yes.

One of your problems is you want simple answers while you erect straw men. You also think you have a simple dismissal of something you don't fully grasp (perseverance of the saints/osas)

My suggestion to you is to go and spend lot's of time reading and understanding "perseverance of the saints" then you'll truly understand OSAS and realize you had it all wrong.

Let me know when you've done some extensive reading on the subject.

 

[Jackson123]

Good, you answered yes.

One of your problems is you want simple answers while you erect straw men. You also think you have a simple dismissal of something you don't fully grasp (perseverance of the saints/osas)

My suggestion to you is to go and spend lot's of time reading an
“But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.”

King James Version (KJV)
d understanding "perseverance of the saints" then you'll truly understand OSAS and realize you had it all wrong.

Let me know when you've done some extensive reading on the subject.

Thank for your advice, I did read and I believe Osas not biblical, now your turn to answer my question not say I am elect straw man before you give me definition of straw man and explain why I am fit with your accusation

 

[Epiales]

How about those who believe for a while, then fall away?
JLB

My guess if you are trying to use one verse against another verse? Matthews version and Luke's version? They are the same. I explained it in another post early.

Mat 13:5 Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth: and forthwith they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth:

Mat 13:6 And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away.

This is a different kind of heart and person. If two people owned fields, those fields would be separated by rocks so that the fields could be separated from one another. There will be some earth on these stones but not much, so when the seed is thrown out there liberally, some of the seed will land on these stony dividers. So when it’s sown, and the sun comes out, it kills what had sprouted because there is no depth in their growth.

A plant will grow roots, and when the roots hit something hard like a rock, the roots are actually pushing the plant upwards. So the plant above ground looks really healthy. The issue is that the roots can’t go any further, so they are unable to get to the nutrients and soil that they need to grow properly. So, on the outside they look great, but on the inside they are not. Doesn’t this sound just like the description Christ told the Pharisees? To see this a bit further, let’s look at the Greek for deepness (they had no deepness).

bath'-os

From the same as G901; profundity, that is, (by implication) extent; (figuratively) mystery: - deep (-ness, things), depth.

These people had no insight or great depth of knowledge or thought. That is exactly what profundity means. This means that they heard the Word of God, got excited about it, and for a little while was on fire, but without a deep insight or a depth of knowledge, they never got the Word deeply ingrained in their heart. They have the nutrients they do need, but they don’t get them because their heart is not into getting them, and when the trials and tribulations come, they give up.

How many times have we seen someone claim to come to the Lord and they have all the outward signs that they are just on fire for the Lord. They witness, share their testimony and appear to just be loving life now. Then when something happens in their life, they whither up and don’t stay with the Lord.

They hear it, have knowledge of it, but not a deep rooted knowledge, or they would have stayed with the Lord. These people never allowed what knowledge they had to take them into saving faith. They have made an OUTWARD decision, but never made an INWARD commitment. They are excited, but when things don’t go their way, trials come, tribulation arises, they expect God to be the Genie in the book they can rub, and He’s going to just make it all better. They think that, well, I’ve been doing this and doing that, so why is THIS happening? Why is THAT happening? Don’t you love me Jesus? Then they leave, without ever coming to the saving faith in Christ Jesus.

Jesus explains this in verse 21:

Mat 13:21 Yet hath he not root in himself, but dureth for a while: for when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he is offended.

In Luke:

Luk 8:13 They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away.

Same thing as I explained in Matthew. I am not sure why people think 'believe' means that they have actually accepted Christ as Lord and Savior. The demons believe and tremble, but they do not know HIM! The one in Matthew and the one in Luke are the same thing; thus do not mean something different.

"They hear it, have knowledge of it, but not a deep rooted knowledge, or they would have stayed with the Lord. These people never allowed what knowledge they had to take them into saving faith. They have made an OUTWARD decision, but never made an INWARD commitment. They are excited, but when things don’t go their way, trials come, tribulation arises, they expect God to be the Genie in the book they can rub, and He’s going to just make it all better. They think that, well, I’ve been doing this and doing that, so why is THIS happening? Why is THAT happening? Don’t you love me Jesus? Then they leave, without ever coming to the saving faith in Christ Jesus."

 

[Sagart]

NOTE: This thread is NOT about debating OSAS vs non-OSAS.

Now that we got that out of the way, lets dive into it:

When i attend, I attend a pentecostal service. And as many of you probably know, I disagree with some of the stuff they teach, but I will not bring this up because I dont want to cause strife and division, because im not a pastor, im just a regular guy.

However, I have often heard people who say you can lose your salvation quote Hebrews 6:4-6 and Hebrews 10:26 as a proof text.

Now lets assume for argument's sake that those verses mean exactly the way those who believe in conditional security believe they mean: WHY do so many pentecostals and others who believe you can lose your salvation ALSO believe you can GET IT BACK?
Because Hebrews 6:4-6 specifically says its IMPOSSIBLE to renew them again to repentance? So why all this talk for example about David losing his salvation, then REPENTING and getting it back? Which would go against Hebrews 6:4-6?

For those who just want TL;DR here it is: Why do you believe that you can get your salvation BACK after you lost it, in light of verses that you use to prove salvation can be lost, which say its IMPOSSIBLE to renew them again to repentance (hebr 6:4-6) and no sacrifice remains and they have trampled the blood of Jesus (hebr 10:26ff)?

The doctrine of OSAS first appears in Christian literature in the 16th century. It is a doctrine derived from the, at that time, new and unbiblical doctrine that God is absolutely sovereign—and therefore no man can do anything at all to gain or lose his salvation. The Jewish people have NEVER believed that God is absolutely sovereign, and have always believed that God surrendered part of his sovereignty when he created man and gave him a free will. The Church, for 1,500 years, also universally taught that God surrendered part of his sovereignty when he created man and gave him a free will, but in the early part of the 16th century when the Church was in a state of severe spiritual darkness and ignorance, new and nearly fatal doctrines were conceived that did immense and irreparable damage to fledging Church inspired by Martin Luther and his teaching of salvation by grace through faith apart from the works of the Law. For the first time in the history of the Church, men began to teach that no saved persons could lose their salvation, and brand new, imaginative and self contradictory interpretation of the five warning passages of Hebrews (2:1-4; 3:7-4:13; 5:11-6:12; 10:19-39; 12:14-29) were launched from the pulpit and the printing press.

Hebrews 6:4-8 presented a very real challenge to the preachers and teachers of this new doctrine because this passage of Scripture gives us the most detailed description of what it means to be saved that we find anywhere in the Bible, and the end of these saved persons who subsequently fall away from the Christian faith is eternal damnation in the fires of hell. Many of these preachers and teachers have argued that unsaved people have actually been “enlightened, and 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,” while others of them have argued that such an interpretation is obviously ridiculous, and that the persons written of were saved but did not lose their salvation. Others of them have argued that both interpretations are obviously ridiculous, and that the passage is hypothetical. Yet others of them have argued on behalf of other interpretations in order to escape from what was so very obvious to the entire Church for 1,500 years—and is still so very obvious to the very large majority of the Church today. That is that Hebrews 6:4-8, along with the other four warning passages in Hebrews, are real and genuine warnings to Christians of the danger of falling from grace and losing their salvation.

However, can a person lose his salvation and regain it? There is only one passage anywhere in the Bible that seems to some to cast serious doubt upon that possibility—and that passage is Hebrews 6:4-6,

Hebrews 6:4. For it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who have once been enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit,
5. and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come,
6. and then have fallen away, since on their own they are crucifying again the Son of God and are holding him up to contempt. (NRSV, 1989)

However, it is important to note that it is impossible for the Church to restore again to repentance those who have lost their salvation—but God’s grace and mercy are more than adequate for Him to restore such persons. Furthermore, we need to draw a distinction between the goings on in some Pentecostal churches and reality. Christians do NOT bounce back and forth between being saved and lost, and they are lost ONLY in the case of falling from grace—and such persons are in EXTREME danger of dying in that condition.

 

[preacher4truth]

Thank for your advice, I did read and I believe Osas not biblical,

I highly doubt it.

You read what? If you've concluded it is not biblical you haven't read it and/or you don't understand Scripture. This is much of your problem as seen on here. You know what the Bible says (in places) but you struggle with what it means. Thus, you're dangerous with the Bible.

Tell me, what did you read?

What did it say?

What are the "unbiblical" points?

 

[Jackson123]

I highly doubt it.

You read what? If you've concluded it is not biblical you haven't read it and/or you don't understand Scripture. This is much of your problem as seen on here. You know what the Bible says (in places) but you struggle with what it means. Thus, you're dangerous with the Bible.

Tell me, what did you read?

What did it say?

What are the "unbiblical" points?

Friend, I am going to babptis church for more than 22 years, so I hear calvinist teaching about one save always save.

After I compare with the bible about the story of Adam. Before sin, Adam was live, God Said If you Eat that fruit, you die.

It mean Adam lost his life.

Live mean have relationship with God

After sin physically Adam live but spiritually he is die

So It is posible lose his life or salvation.

 

[preacher4truth]

Friend, I am going to babptis church for more than 22 years, so I hear calvinist teaching about one save always save.

Calvinist teaching? Highly doubtful that is accurate and that you're getting the entire picture.

Is it a Reformed Baptist church or some sort of Independent Baptist church, like BBFI affiliated?

 

[preacher4truth]

After I compare with the bible about the story of Adam. Before sin, Adam was live, God Said If you Eat that fruit, you die.

It mean Adam lost his life.

Live mean have relationship with God

After sin physically Adam live but spiritually he is die

So It is posible lose his life or salvation.

Let me show you your mistake and false assumptions in the above.

Adam was not "saved" prior to the fall. No, he wasn't. You need to listen.

Why? Saved is to be delivered, or rescued from danger, out of the market of sin technically as seen in the NT especially. Formerly then Adam was without sin and needed no rescue or salvation, so, he was not "saved." That is your basic error right there, assuming something that is not the case. You do this often my friend.

Once Adam sinned, then he needed saved, thus God allowed the fall of mankind into sin.

Adam was then lost after he sinned. The protoevangelium is seen in Genesis 3:14-15 and we see a type of salvation given to Adam in God clothing he and Eve. Now that Adam had sinned, he needed to be saved. He was then not saved prior to this. Please see and accept your mistake here brother.

 

[Jackson123]

Calvinist teaching? Highly doubtful that is accurate and that you're getting the entire picture.

Is it a Reformed Baptist church or some sort of Independent Baptist church, like BBFI affiliated?

It is first baptist church, I know there are some baptist church that believe in free Will, but most of them are reform.

You say I am not genting the entire picture, It may, but to my knoledge, Adam lose his life after sin, not in the sense of physicall but start spirituall life, God give some time to repent, If not repent a man Will lose both spirituall and physicall life

Sin separate man from God. Adam start without sin. And become sin

We are Adam ofspring and potentially lose our life as long as we physically life.

Till we physically die, there is potential lose our salvation.

If we die in Christ, then we never lose our salvation.

The promise Jesus Will not let the soul that the Father give to Him to harm is after we die in Christ

Devil can No longer attack us when we physically die in Christ.

 

[preacher4truth]

It is first baptist church, I know there are some baptist church that believe in free Will, but most of them are reform.

Sorry, but the above is not correct.

See, you do this, you make false assumption after false assumption and think you're stating facts. You do this all the time brother! People show you this, but you're so stubborn you won't slow down to see this is why you come to erroneous conclusions.

Most Baptists believe the false gospel of free will, so it is not "some" as you use it to make it seem they are few in number. It is not even close to being true that most are reformed. Completely false.

Anyhow, since you are in First Baptist Church, do you have a website for this? Is it a Southern Baptist church plant? What is its affiliation?

You say I am not genting the entire picture, It may, but to my knoledge, Adam lose his life after sin, not in the sense of physicall but start spirituall life, God give some time to repent, If not repent a man Will lose both spirituall and physicall life

Sin separate man from God. Adam start without sin. And become sin

We are Adam ofspring and potentially lose our life as long as we physically life.

Till we physically die, there is potential lose our salvation.

If we die in Christ, then we never lose our salvation.

The promise Jesus Will not let the soul that the Father give to Him to harm is after we die in Christ

Devil can No longer attack us when we physically die in Christ.

I addressed the above error in my last post.

You are correct, you are not getting the entire picture. Your false assumption about Baptist churches is one clue as to why.

 

[Jackson123]

Let me show you your mistake and false assumptions in the above.

Adam was not "saved" prior to the fall. No, he wasn't. You need to listen.

Why? Saved is to be delivered, or rescued from danger, out of the market of sin technically as seen in the NT especially. Formerly then Adam was without sin and needed no rescue or salvation, so, he was not "saved." That is your basic error right there, assuming something that is not the case. You do this often my friend.

Once Adam sinned, then he needed saved, thus God allowed the fall of mankind into sin.

Adam was then lost after he sinned. The protoevangelium is seen in Genesis 3:14-15 and we see a type of salvation given to Adam in God clothing he and Eve. Now that Adam had sinned, he needed to be saved. He was then not saved prior to this. Please see and accept your mistake here brother.

Save can be verb or noun

Example

Noun-(sports) The act of preventing the opposition from scoring.
Example- "The golie made a brilliant save".

Save not always verb, to save.

Another Example

He is in the save hand.

Not because he was not save.

 

[preacher4truth]

Save can be verb or noun

Example

Noun-(sports) The act of preventing the opposition from scoring.
Example- "The golie made a brilliant save". Save not always verb, to save.

Secular word usage means nothing and the above is a very poor example.

Another Example

He is in the save hand.

Not because he was not save.

Lolzzzz...

You base everything you believe on your false assumptions. This is why no one can get anywhere with you -- you believe you over evidence to the contrary.

The above is senseless banter and means nothing Biblically.

It is you rewriting the narrative.

No, it is not because of your struggle to convey it in English, you're simply writing the narrative how you want it to be, forcing Adam to be saved prior to needing salvation and the fall.

Nope, sorry, you're still in error.

Adam was not saved prior to the fall. You have to make him to be saved prior to the fall to support your error and are distorting the truth. You will not listen to reason or Scripture, you listen to you.

Your secular word usage proves nothing. Scripture shows you to be in error -- Adam didn't need to be saved until after the inevitable fall. You are in serious error, rejecting Biblical evidence while rewriting the narrative.

No need to go any further, you won't listen to Biblical truth.

 

[Jackson123]

Sorry, but the above is not correct.

See, you do this, you make false assumption after false assumption and think you're stating facts. You do this all the time brother! People show you this, but you're so stubborn you won't slow down to see this is why you come to erroneous conclusions.

Most Baptists believe the false gospel of free will, so it is not "some" as you use it to make it seem they are few in number. It is not even close to being true that most are reformed. Completely false.

Anyhow, since you are in First Baptist Church, do you have a website for this? Is it a Southern Baptist church plant? What is its affiliation?



I addressed the above error in my last post.

You are correct, you are not getting the entire picture. Your false assumption about Baptist churches is one clue as to why.

Read this article brother

Calvinists once dominated Baptist church life in America.
In a 1793 survey, early Baptist historian John Asplund estimated that there were 1,032 Baptist churches in America. Out of those, 956 were Calvinist congregations. These were “Particular Baptists,” for they believed in a definite atonement (or “particular redemption”), that Christ had died to save the elect decisively. “General Baptists,” who believed that Christ had died indefinitely for the sins of anyone who would choose him, accounted for a tiny fraction of the whole. Even some of those, Asplund noted, believed in certain Calvinist tenets such as “perseverance in grace.”

This is the link

https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/calvinism-is-not-new-to-baptists

 

[Jackson123]

Secular word usage means nothing.



Lolzzzz...

You base everything you believe on your false assumptions. This is why no one can get anywhere with you -- you believe you over evidence to the contrary.

The above is senseless banter and means nothing Biblically.

It is you rewriting the narrative.

No, it is not because of your struggle to convey it in English, you're simply writing the narrative how you want it to be, forcing Adam to be saved prior to needing salvation and the fall.

Nope, sorry, you're still in error.

Adam was not saved prior to the fall. You have to make him to be saved prior to the fall to support your error and are distorting the truth. You will not listen to reason or Scripture, you listen to you.

Your secular word usage proves nothing. Scripture shows you to be in error -- Adam didn't need to be saved until after the inevitable fall. You are in serious error, rejecting Biblical evidence while rewriting the narrative.

No need to go any further, you won't listen to Biblical truth.

Every body make his believe base of their assumption.

I think It happen to you and every body else

Even aristolele say deductive Logic is base oN premise

This is the Example of deductive Logic from aristotele

Horse is animal

There for the head of the horse is the head If animal

You have to have assumption or Pre believe that horse is animal, before you make conclution that the head of the horse is the head of animal

 

[preacher4truth]

Read this article brother

I don't need to read it, I live here.

Calvinists once dominated Baptist church life in America.

Did you see the word "once?"

This means it is no longer the case. That means your comment that most are Reformed is, well, wrong. Imagine that, jackson, you're wrong.

And you're using the above argument to try to prove yourself correct, right?

Come on man, you need to think deeper and give legitimate arguments.

You don't comprehend what you are reading. You make a statement, are shown it is false, then you Google for something to support you.

Why do you Google for support? Because you don't know what you're talking about, made an assumption, and are looking for proof to back you up. The link shows you to be incorrect, not correct.

Lol. Come on man, you're wrong on several issues. Please stop with your nonsense and accept that you're incorrect for once!

 

[preacher4truth]

Every body make his believe base of their assumption.

Another false assumption. You're full of them.

I think It happen to you and every body else

Even aristolele say deductive Logic is base oN premise

This is the Example of deductive Logic from aristotele

Horse is animal

There for the head of the horse is the head If animal

You have to have assumption or Pre believe that horse is animal, before you make conclution that the head of the horse is the head of animal

LOL!!!! Come on man, that argument is ridiculous.

Stick to where I've shown your error in assuming Adam was "saved" prior to the fall. Your assumption is false and you've rewritten the narrative to fit your assumption. You've twisted the meaning of Scripture and what salvation is.

You've made a foundational error, face facts and accept you're wrong.

 

[preacher4truth]

Jackson, I'm done here.

You are incapable of receiving correction even when it is so glaringly obvious that you're wrong.

Have a good day.

 

[Hevosmies]

I believe its helpful to DIFFERENTIATE between Once saved alwas saved and perseverance of the saints!

Because in TODAY's christianity, OSAS means repeat this prayer after me and live as you please.
Whereas perseverance of the saints is FAITH and REPENTANCE, walking in newness of life, a new creature, a changed life and the SAINTS (the ones redeemed by the blood of Jesus) WILL persevere, because its God working in them.

Thats the difference.

 

[Epiales]

I don't need to read it, I live here.



Did you see the word "once?"

This means it is no longer the case. That means your comment that most are Reformed is, well, wrong. Imagine that, jackson, you're wrong.

And you're using the above argument to try to prove yourself correct, right?

Come on man, you need to think deeper and give legitimate arguments.

You don't comprehend what you are reading. You make a statement, are shown it is false, then you Google for something to support you.

Why do you Google for support? Because you don't know what you're talking about, made an assumption, and are looking for proof to back you up. The link shows you to be incorrect, not correct.

Lol. Come on man, you're wrong on several issues. Please stop with your nonsense and accept that you're incorrect for once!

LOLOLOLOL! I"m eating popcorn now

Really surprised anyone has the patience that you have been showing here LOL I believe the difference is, is that you are really trying to show the error out of love, while the other wants to banter on about things they have no idea about; but vainly puffed up knowledge of their carnal thinking. We cannot read the Word in our carnal minds and try to 'assume' what any of it means based on ENGLISH DICTIONARY... really? English dictionary cannot define ANY WORD in the Word of God. It wasn't even written in ENGLISH...

Kudos to you for having this much patience. I quit a LONG time ago lol.

Yes we can have some understanding of the Bible, of course, reading it, English, Chinese, or whatever, but to get to the deeper meaning (meat)... sometimes we must go beyond ourselves to get it.

 

[preacher4truth]

I believe its helpful to DIFFERENTIATE between Once saved alwas saved and perseverance of the saints!

Because in TODAY's christianity, OSAS means repeat this prayer after me and live as you please.
Whereas perseverance of the saints is FAITH and REPENTANCE, walking in newness of life, a new creature, a changed life and the SAINTS (the ones redeemed by the blood of Jesus) WILL persevere, because its God working in them.

Thats the difference.

Yep. This is why I've made attempt to get jackson123 to study it out so he knows what he's talking about.

But, to no avail. Let him carry on in the ignorance of assumption.