Once saved always saved?

[FreeGrace2]

Just passing through for now. Will respond later. Another non-OSAS passage which speaks of conditional security.

I will show that the passage does NOT teach conditional security.

In fact, "conditional security" ONLY refers to whether a person ever believed and received the free gift of eternal life.

The condition for never perishing is being given eternal life, according to Jesus' own words in John 10:28.

There IS NOT nor CAN THERE BE any passage that teaches that salvation can be lost. Period.

Colossians 1:

"Reconciled in Christ
19For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell, 20and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross.

21And you, who once were alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now He has reconciled 22in the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy, and blameless, and above reproach in His sight— 23if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.

The condition expressed in v.23 (if you continue in the faith) refers back to v.22. God "has reconciled believers in the body of Christ's flesh to PRESENT YOU (the believer) holy, and blameless and above reproach in His sight."

iow, it is ONLY those believers who DO "continue in the faith" that WILL BE "presented holy and blameless in His sight".

Obviously, those believers who don't "continue in the faith" CANNOT BE "presented holy and blameless in His sight".

The verses says nothing about losing salvation.

 

[XavierJesusLovesIndia]

As I said, dear Free Grace, you are basing your doctrine on your personal misunderstanding of one verse, then ignoring dozens that go against it. That's not really a sound method of Biblical Exegesis, sorry. We have to read what the whole Bible says on a particular subject before confidently proclaiming that "Jesus teaches X" or "Bible teaches X: as a whole, not in part.

I can virtually endlessly quote verses that go against your view - not against the Bible, but only your interpretation of it.

"The True Vine
15 “I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. 2 Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit He prunes, that it may bear more fruit. 3 You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you. 4 Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in Me.

5 “I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing. 6 If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned."

And this is echoed by St. Paul the Apostle in Romans 11:

"19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in.” 20 Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either. 22 Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off. "

Notice how it clearly says unbelief cuts off from Christ, even after having first believed. In fact, other verses say it is worse to back after knowing Christ to unbelief; proving apostasy is worse than simple ignorance of Christ. But look at this verse and you see it clearly - because of unbelief the Jews who disbelieved were broken off; hence, if even Gentiles disbelieve in Christ, and apostatize from the Faith, because there is no partiality with God, they also will be cut off from Christ the Vine.

Please answer my question if you know the answer: who was the first post-Biblical Pastor/Theologian, who taught your version of OSAS that people who remain apostates till death can still be saved? It certainly wasn't John Calvin.

I strongly suspect it was invented near the time of the 1960s, but I haven't researched that particular historical issue yet.

Be back later to answer both your post and the others who replied to me. God Bless.

 

[ForestGreenCook]

FreeGrace2 said:
You keep using "adopted children of God". However, the Bible never uses that phrase.

Like I said, the Bible NEVER uses that term. Use biblical terms.

Do you know when the adoption occurs? Please explain.

In our society today, we still use the same example in the way we adopt a child.

First, we go to the adoption agency, then we choose a child that we want to adopt (notice; the child does not choose the one who adopts them), we then pay the legal fees for the ones we adopt. The last phase of the adoption procedure is when we bring the child home.

God choose his elect (Eph 1:4). God gave them to Jesus Christ to finish the adoption process (Eph 1:5) & Jesus paid the adoption price by his death on the cross (John 6:39). The last phase of our adoption will be when Jesus returns to gather his elect from the uttermost part of the earth (Mark 13:27).


My prayer for you is the same prayer that Paul prayed, for the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Jacob) in Romans 10:1-3, that you, by the revelation of the Holy Spirit within you, would see and understand the beauty of the righteousness of God. It is the most secure, and comforting doctrine, compared to all of the false doctrines that exist in this world.

 

[ForestGreenCook]

And neither trust or faith is a spiritual issue.

I do not know WHY you flat out deny that FACT.

Spiritual issues have to do with spiritual life. Like being filled with the Spirit (Eph 5:18). Like NOT grieving the Spirit (Eph 4:30). Like NOT quenching the Spirit (1 Thess 5:19).

Thinks like that.

But will you understand that?

I do understand these scriptures, and very much believe in them, but the problem you have is that you want these verses of scripture to be understood by the unregenerate person, in which he will not, and even. cannot understand spiritual things. and you know the scriptures that I have given you that harmonizes with this truth.

 

[ForestGreenCook]

Huh? How can it be a "biblical term" when the Bible NEVER uses that term?

Your comment to "adopted child of God". Having predestinated us unto "the adoption of children" (Eph 1:5) What does your version of the bible say?

 

[CorrectiveLens]

There are people who have been baptized with water and believe that Jesus is Lord and Savior and think that they are going to be saved.
These are the people who argue that a person can change their mind and stop believing. There are 3 things that need to happen for a person to be saved: 1) You need to be baptized in the name of the Father, who chooses you before the foundation of the world and grants you the repentance needed to turn to Him for forgiveness of sins through Jesus Christ.
2) You need to be baptized in the name of the Son, who erases your sins when you believe in His name.
3) You need to be baptized in the name of the Holy Spirit, who fills your heart with divine love so that you will be able to fulfill the Spirit of the Law and be perfected with Love.
Here is simple truth discovered in my research: 1) The heart of man mentioned in scripture is not the beating muscle organ located in our chest. The heart of a man is the unique spirit or consciousness that each unique body of a person possesses. It refers to the motivation of this consciousness which is what is wrong with humans. The natural man is born with a heart that is motivated by self-interest at the expense of others and is prone to sinning. You are baptized (not water) in the name of the Father when you are chosen by Him before the foundation of the world to receive the repentance necessary to turn to Him for forgiveness. You are baptized ( not water ) in the name of the Son when you accept Jesus as the Christ and as your Lord for the forgiveness of sin. We are still unacceptable to enter heaven because of our motivation. We are baptized ( not water ) in the name of the Holy Spirit when we receive the Spirit of the Father that is given to His Son when He was glorified to distribute to people who the Father chooses to be born again. When we receive the Spirit of the Father and of the Son in our hearts, their Spirits and ours become One and they are able to communicate with us and change our motivation by filling us with divine love so that we can fulfill the Spirit of the Law as described by Jesus which is to love God totally and everyone else as yourself second. The Spirit of the Law does not replace the Letter of the Law. The letter of the law was designed to explain how people should behave towards God and man. If you concentrate on obeying the letter of the law without love in your heart, you will fail. If you have God's love in your heart, your motivation will change to an acceptable level to enter heaven because we have been perfected.

To say that a person who is saved can loose their salvation is simply stating that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit have failed. This is the argument of people who do not understand that when a person gets really saved, they are born again by the will of God who never fails and become new creatures who won't fail either.

 

[ForestGreenCook]

Initially, yes. But Jesus sent His apostles to "all the world" to preach the gospel. So don't try to kid me. I know the Bible

Your comment; "I know the bible" By your admission of that fact, may be your downfall.

When I was 50 years old, I thought, within myself, that I was smart enough to figure out the, seemingly, contradictory scriptures. Because of my pride, I studied very hard for 12 years without any revelation. I, finally, confessed to God, that I was not smart enough, and, after a short time, the hard studying that I had done, paid off, when the Holy Spirit within me, began to gradually reveal some truths to my understanding.

Looking back, I realised if he had revealed these truths to me while I still had my prideful attitude, I would have taken credit for it, instead of giving God credit.

I came to understand that an adopted child of God has to deny himself (his entelect) before the Holy Spirit within us will reveal the understanding of the scriptures to us. Luke 9:23 - And he said unto them all, if any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.

Yes, Jesus sent his apostles into all of the world to preach to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Jacob), because God's elect are as many as the grains of sand in the seashore, and are of every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people.

 

[FreeGrace2]

As I said, dear Free Grace, you are basing your doctrine on your personal misunderstanding of one verse

Dear XJLI, you are basing your doctrine on a misunderstanding lots of verses. ps: which single verse am I misunderstanding?

then ignoring dozens that go against it.

I guess you mean all the verses you CLAIM mean opposite of the "one verse" I use.

That's not really a sound method of Biblical Exegesis, sorry.

The best study method is found in Acts 17:11, where the Bereans "searched the Scriptures daily to see if what XJLI says is true". And I have found that what you claim is not found in Scripture.

We have to read what the whole Bible says on a particular subject before confidently proclaiming that "Jesus teaches X" or "Bible teaches X: as a whole, not in part.

Since I use the Berean study method, I'm way ahead of you on that. I've done that, and you have come up short. Very short.

[QUOTRE]I can virtually endlessly quote verses that go against your view - not against the Bible, but only your interpretation of it.[/QUOTE]
The truth is opposite of what you claim.

"The True Vine
15 “I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. 2 Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit He prunes, that it may bear more fruit. 3 You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you. 4 Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in Me.

5 “I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing. 6 If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned."

It really doesn't take much discernment to easily understand what Jesus was talking about in John 15. When He spoke of "abiding", He was talking about fellowship. And those who will bear fruit must be in fellowship with Him. Those believers who are not in fellowship cannot bear fruit. Real simple.

btw, "burned in the fire" in this agricultural metaphor refers to being discarded from use. To the Jews during Jesus' time, such an idea would have been horrible, since they were so proud of being God's chosen people for service. To be discarded from service would shock them.

Once again, nothing about losing salvation. And how silly anyway. Those who claim salvation can be lost simply strongly disagree with the very clear words of John 10:28, where Jesus said that recipients of eternal life shall never perish.

But you have to reject those clear words to hold to your own opinion.

And this is echoed by St. Paul the Apostle in Romans 11:

"19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in.” 20 Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either. 22 Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off. "

Same concept as in John 15:1-6.

Notice how it clearly says unbelief cuts off from Christ, even after having first believed.

Jesus didn't lie in John 10:28. Your opinion cannot be true given what He said.

In fact, other verses say it is worse to back after knowing Christ to unbelief; proving apostasy is worse than simple ignorance of Christ.

You just don't have any idea what Peter was talking about. Believers who return to "the world" will have a worse life until their death. It has nothing to do with eternity, as you wrongly opine.

Please answer my question if you know the answer: who was the first post-Biblical Pastor/Theologian, who taught your version of OSAS that people who remain apostates till death can still be saved? It certainly wasn't John Calvin.

I don't know or care. Because Jesus beat all of them to it. But you just dismiss or flatout reject what Jesus taught.

I strongly suspect it was invented near the time of the 1960s, but I haven't researched that particular historical issue yet.

Ha. Jesus taught it so clearly that anyone who thinks salvation can be lost only proves how little of Scripture they understand.

 

[FreeGrace2]

In our society today, we still use the same example in the way we adopt a child.

First, we go to the adoption agency, then we choose a child that we want to adopt (notice; the child does not choose the one who adopts them), we then pay the legal fees for the ones we adopt. The last phase of the adoption procedure is when we bring the child home.

So you think biblical adoption is the same as adoption in this century. Then please explain Rom 8:23 - Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies.

God choose his elect (Eph 1:4).

You are stuttering. Same as saying God chose His chosen, or God elected His elect.

So you don't move the needle when you speak like that. Actually, the verse says "God chose believers...to be holy and blameless". Election is to service even though you reject that, and have NO verses that SAY that election is to salvation.

God gave them to Jesus Christ to finish the adoption process (Eph 1:5)

OK, review Rom 8:23 and explain it.

& Jesus paid the adoption price by his death on the cross (John 6:39).

Nope. There is no mention of any "adoption price" in the Bible. That is in fact foreign to the Bible.

In fact, Jesus paid the sin debt, and for everyone. So that God's perfect justice would be satisfied (propitiated) and free to save those who believe.

The last phase of our adoption will be when Jesus returns to gather his elect from the uttermost part of the earth (Mark 13:27).

Their are no phases to adoption. Our adoption is future, according to Rom 8:23.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I do understand these scriptures, and very much believe in them, but the problem you have is that you want these verses of scripture to be understood by the unregenerate person, in which he will not, and even.

Rather, you WANT or DEMAND that the gospel cannot be understood by unregenerate people, which is really just nonsense.

cannot understand spiritual things.

I agree. Unbelievers cannot understand spiritual things, and I explained what "spiritual things" refers to. Which you have not responded to.

Regardless, the gospel is a trust issue, something that everyone can understand, and then decide whether to believe God's promise or not.

and you know the scriptures that I have given you that harmonizes with this truth.

None of your verses are being understood properly.

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2 said:
Huh? How can it be a "biblical term" when the Bible NEVER uses that term?

Your comment to "adopted child of God". Having predestinated us unto "the adoption of children" (Eph 1:5) What does your version of the bible say?

OK, now apply this verse to Rom 8:23 and tell me WHEN we are adopted.

 

[FreeGrace2]

There are people who have been baptized with water and believe that Jesus is Lord and Savior and think that they are going to be saved.

Those who believe tht Jesus is Lord and Savior ARE saved. So those who think they will be saved are rather confused.

 

[XavierJesusLovesIndia]

Ok. Never mind. I found it myself. Not surprising given "Free Grace"'s chosen handle, I suppose. The doctrine is called "Free Grace" theology and traces to Charles Stanley in 1990.

"
Free grace theology[edit source]
Free grace theology says that anyone who believes in Jesus Christ will go to heaven regardless of any future actions—including future sin, unbelief, or apostasy—though Christians who sin or abandon the faith will face God's discipline.[17]

Free Grace doctrine views the person's character and life after receiving the gift of salvation as independent from the gift itself, or in other words, it asserts that justification (that is, being declared righteous before God on account of Christ) does not necessarily result in sanctification (that is, a progressively more righteous life). Charles Stanley, pastor of Atlanta's megachurch First Baptist and a television evangelist, has written that the doctrine of eternal security of the believer persuaded him years ago to leave his familial Pentecostalism and become a Southern Baptist. He sums up his deep conviction that salvation is by faith alone in Christ alone when he claims, "Even if a believer for all practical purposes becomes an unbeliever, his salvation is not in jeopardy… believers who lose or abandon their faith will retain their salvation."[18] For example, Stanley writes:

Look at that verse [John 3:18] and answer this question: According to Jesus, what must a person do to keep from being judged for sin? Must he stop doing something? Must he promise to stop doing something? Must he have never done something? The answer is so simple that many stumble all over it without ever seeing it. All Jesus requires is that the individual "believe in" Him.​

— Charles Stanley[18] (p. 67).​

In a chapter entitled "For Those Who Stop Believing", he says, "The Bible clearly teaches that God's love for His people is of such magnitude that even those who walk away from the faith have not the slightest chance of slipping from His hand (p. 74)." A little later, Stanley also writes: "You and I are not saved because we have an enduring faith. We are saved because at a moment in time we expressed faith in our enduring Lord" (p. 80).

The doctrine sees the work of salvation as wholly monergistic, which is to say that God alone performs it and man has no part in the process beyond receiving it, and therefore, proponents argue that man cannot undo what they believe God has done." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_security#Free_grace_theology

References:

1. Stanley, Charles. Eternal Security: Can You Be Sure? Nashville: Oliver Nelson, 1990. ISBN 978-0-8407-9095-8 pp.1-5

 

[FreeGrace2]

Your comment; "I know the bible" By your admission of that fact, may be your downfall.

Your comments are hilarious.

When I was 50 years old, I thought, within myself, that I was smart enough to figure out the, seemingly, contradictory scriptures.

Well, given your erroneous conclusions of a number of verses, I can see how you would think there are contradictory verses.

I've NEVER EVER thought that. The whole Bible is easily understood to be harmonious.

Because of my pride, I studied very hard for 12 years without any revelation. I, finally, confessed to God, that I was not smart enough, and, after a short time, the hard studying that I had done, paid off, when the Holy Spirit within me, began to gradually reveal some truths to my understanding.

God has given ALL believers the SAME revelation. It is called the Bible. The issue is how to understand it. And you aren't.

Yes, Jesus sent his apostles into all of the world to preach to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Jacob), because God's elect are as many as the grains of sand in the seashore, and are of every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people.

Wow. Just totally confused.

Your views about "adopted children" and "lost sheep of Israel" are far from the truth. Keep studying.

Maybe change the books you have been reading.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Ok. Never mind. I found it myself. Not surprising given "Free Grace"'s chosen handle, I suppose. The doctrine is called "Free Grace" theology and traces to Charles Stanley in 1990.

"
Free grace theology[edit source]
Free grace theology says that anyone who believes in Jesus Christ will go to heaven regardless of any future actions—including future sin, unbelief, or apostasy—though Christians who sin or abandon the faith will face God's discipline.[17]

Free Grace doctrine views the person's character and life after receiving the gift of salvation as independent from the gift itself, or in other words, it asserts that justification (that is, being declared righteous before God on account of Christ) does not necessarily result in sanctification (that is, a progressively more righteous life). Charles Stanley, pastor of Atlanta's megachurch First Baptist and a television evangelist, has written that the doctrine of eternal security of the believer persuaded him years ago to leave his familial Pentecostalism and become a Southern Baptist. He sums up his deep conviction that salvation is by faith alone in Christ alone when he claims, "Even if a believer for all practical purposes becomes an unbeliever, his salvation is not in jeopardy… believers who lose or abandon their faith will retain their salvation."[18] For example, Stanley writes:

Look at that verse [John 3:18] and answer this question: According to Jesus, what must a person do to keep from being judged for sin? Must he stop doing something? Must he promise to stop doing something? Must he have never done something? The answer is so simple that many stumble all over it without ever seeing it. All Jesus requires is that the individual "believe in" Him.​

— Charles Stanley[18] (p. 67).​

In a chapter entitled "For Those Who Stop Believing", he says, "The Bible clearly teaches that God's love for His people is of such magnitude that even those who walk away from the faith have not the slightest chance of slipping from His hand (p. 74)." A little later, Stanley also writes: "You and I are not saved because we have an enduring faith. We are saved because at a moment in time we expressed faith in our enduring Lord" (p. 80).

The doctrine sees the work of salvation as wholly monergistic, which is to say that God alone performs it and man has no part in the process beyond receiving it, and therefore, proponents argue that man cannot undo what they believe God has done." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_security#Free_grace_theology

Well, good for you. So what?

My understanding on the issue of security isn't based on Stanley's teaching. Rather, it comes straight from Jesus Christ. As I've shown all along.

Have I ever quoted Stanley? No. Please get over your hang-ups.

 

[wattie]

Regarding the 'fiery expectation of judgment that will consume the adversaries ' from Hebrews 10:26-31.

First again.. context of sacrifices in this chapter is mainly animal sacrifice, being the system of service in the OT that failed as people started to believe that doing the rituals actually saved them eternally. They became self righteous in their pursuit of keeping mosaic and levitical laws.

So Hebrews into Judaism.. like Galatians .. get saved.. but they are following the letter of the law and not following by the Holy Spirit.

So.. they are trampling Jesus under their feet by counting His sacrifice as nothing. He has delivered them from bandage to the law.. but they are going back to it.

They know the truth and are veering from it... this is worse than not knowing or never having believed.

The fiery expectation of judgment... is a wretched life of continual rebuke and admonishing from Jesus. Or He may even remove them from.the planet thru death to stop them continuing in sin.

So 'the latter end is worse than the beginning'

The other thing .. which I don't really agree with is saying the passage is about Hebrews who haven't converted and they are being rebuked for sticking to Judaism in spite of the obviousness of what Jesus has done on the cross. Clearly revealed to them.

In either case though... neither is about losing eternal salvation.

 

[ForestGreenCook]

OK, now apply this verse to Rom 8:23 and tell me WHEN we are adopted.

I do not want to think of you, as having a very low I Q, but the thought runs through my mind, when you come up with question, or maybe you just don't read my posts to the end of them.

I told you that the adoption process over time comes in phases.

OK, review Rom 8:23 and explain it.

After you explain Eph 1:5, and, also tell me what is rendition of "the remnant". I answer most all of your questions, while you pick and choose and just ignore the ones that you can not explain.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Ok. Never mind. I found it myself. Not surprising given "Free Grace"'s chosen handle, I suppose. The doctrine is called "Free Grace" theology and traces to Charles Stanley in 1990.

"
Free grace theology[edit source]
Free grace theology says that anyone who believes in Jesus Christ will go to heaven regardless of any future actions—including future sin, unbelief, or apostasy—though Christians who sin or abandon the faith will face God's discipline.[17]

This statement from their theology is based on Romans 8-
38 For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers,
39 neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

See? The statement is biblically correct.

There is NOTHING in the future that will result in loss of salvation. That is what the verse means. How could it mean there are exceptions though, since NO exceptions are given.

Please don't read into verses what isn't there.

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2 said:
OK, now apply this verse to Rom 8:23 and tell me WHEN we are adopted.

I do not want to think of you, as having a very low I Q, but the thought runs through my mind, when you come up with question, or maybe you just don't read my posts to the end of them.

Speaking of IQ's though, did you at least read Rom 8:23?

I told you that the adoption process over time comes in phases.

And I refuted your "phase theory" with Rom 8:23. I asked a straightforward question and all you do is punt. You repeatedly FAIL to answer my questions.

The TRUTH always has an answer to every question.

After you explain Eph 1:5, and, also tell me what is rendition of "the remnant".

I did address that. Don't you read my posts?

As to Eph 1:5 - he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will—

It says believers are predestined for adoption. The verse doesn't tell us when it will occur.

Now, back to Rom 8:23. Are you able to understand the verse and tell me WHEN the believer receives adoption? Or not?

I answer most all of your questions, while you pick and choose and just ignore the ones that you can not explain.

Nonsense. When are you going to address Rom 8:23 then?

 

[ForestGreenCook]

Rather, you WANT or DEMAND that the gospel cannot be understood by unregenerate people, which is really just nonsense.

I thought I was stubborn, but you take the cake, of being stubborn and prideful, and unable to understand scripture. Your Beareans mythed is not working very well for you, when you misquote scriptures.