Why I now believe that salvation can be lost.

[Rufus]

I have stated before that I am not convinced one way or the other concerning once saved always saved (OSAS) or Perseverance of the Saints (POTS). I am not settled on one side or the other. I don't see any imperative to believe one or the other, Whether OSAS or POTS is true does not affect my relationship with God and my trust in God or my personal experience of salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour.

My point is that the Greek text of Philippians 1:6 does not seem to me to say what some are relying on it to be saying to prove Paul was teaching OSAS or POTS.

The argument that God needs to do EVERYTHING involved in us getting saved in order to get ALL the glory for our salvation; and that God getting ALL the credit is morally superior to the believer getting credit from God for his/her faith in God, is a moralistic fallacy. Clearly, Abraham's faith was reckoned to him by God as righteousness, and Abraham glorified God nonetheless -

Rom. 6:
20 He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God;
21 And being fully persuaded that, what He had promised, He was able also to perform.
22 And therefore it (his faith) was imputed/reckoned/credited to him for righteousness.
23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it (his faith) was imputed/reckoned/credited to him (for righteousness);
24 But for us also, to whom it (our faith) shall be imputed/reckoned/credited (for righteousness), if we believe on Him (God) that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;

It is not immoral to accept the credit God gives us for putting faith in Him.

But faith is also a gracious gift of God (Eph 2:8-9). There is nothing that any saint has that he has not received from God's hand (1Cor 4:7; 1Pet 2:10, etc.). God's elect are not only justified by faith but by grace as well (Rom 3:24). Abraham understood all this and this great truth humbled him, thus he gave all glory to God for his salvation.

And where in scripture does God ever give credit to man for His salvation?

 

[Musicmaster]

Both can be true.

Yes, both are indeed true, but both do not apply to any people at the same time, especially today.

Just as the command to obey the Mosaic Law to the Jews before the cross was true, and was to them, it is not TO us today, even though it is true.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

The Saviour says, you must persevere to the end to be saved. You disagree, and say, if you're justified/saved, you will persevere. You are not teaching what the Lord Jesus Christ did but your own opinion. In Mat 25:31-40, it is evident the sheep persevered in good works of love.

Here's Apostle Paul teach the same doctrine in Romans 2: "6 God “will repay each person according to what they have done.”[a] 7 To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life." (Romans 2:6-7). You can't read that and say works have nothing to do with final salvation, other than by doing violence to the plain sense of the passage. Works don't contribute to initial justification, that's true. But full salvation, including the grace of final perseverance, requires bearing fruit in good works, which God crowns with the grace of perseverance.

"2 Consider it pure joy, my brothers and sisters,[a] whenever you face trials of many kinds, 3 because you know that the testing of your faith produces perseverance ... 12 Blessed is the one who perseveres under trial because, having stood the test, that person will receive the crown of life that the Lord has promised to those who love him." (James 1:2, 12). You must persevere through trials of many kinds and stand the test the Lord puts you through before receiving the crown of life.

 

[Musicmaster]

The Saviour says, you must persevere to the end to be saved. You disagree, and say, if you're justified/saved, you will persevere. You are not teaching what the Lord Jesus Christ did but your own opinion. In Mat 25:31-40, it is evident the sheep persevered in good works of love.

Here's Apostle Paul teach the same doctrine in Romans 2: "6 God “will repay each person according to what they have done.”[a] 7 To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life." (Romans 2:6-7). You can't read that and say works have nothing to do with final salvation, other than by doing violence to the plain sense of the passage. Works don't contribute to initial justification, that's true. But full salvation, including the grace of final perseverance, requires bearing fruit in good works, which God crowns with the grace of perseverance.

"2 Consider it pure joy, my brothers and sisters,[a] whenever you face trials of many kinds, 3 because you know that the testing of your faith produces perseverance ... 12 Blessed is the one who perseveres under trial because, having stood the test, that person will receive the crown of life that the Lord has promised to those who love him." (James 1:2, 12). You must persevere through trials of many kinds and stand the test the Lord puts you through before receiving the crown of life.

Jesus did indeed say to the Jews that they must persevere unto the end to be saved, and that same Jesus told Paul that we are saved by grace, not works and faith. Additionally, that same Jesus also told the ancient Jews that they must obey ALL the Law. Every one of those statements is TRUE, but they are not all to the same people at the same time.

Also, repayment according to what they have done, that is speaking of reward. Forcing salvation into that context is questionable at best for the motives behind trying to force the meaning of Paul's words as touching upon salvation as opposed to reward.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

Because ALL scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, training in righteousness so that the man of God [whether Jew or Greek] may be thoroughly equipped for every good work (2Tim 3:16). And wasn't James concerned about good works, just as Paul was in all his writings, including the text I just quoted? Didn't Paul also write that God created his church in Christ Jesus to do good works (Eph 2:10)? There is no contradiction between Pauline and Jameson theology. What makes the epistle of James different from Paul's is Jame's singular focus on Wisdom, which is the practical application of theological knowledge in our everyday living.

If you're going to try expanding the Kingdom Gospel over into the Gospel of Grace, then why not also expand the Gospel of Law over into all the others? After all, if it's all the same, then you appear to think you have license to subjectively pull all of the things of your choosing under one overarching Gospel narrative. In doing that, you do nothing but introduce confusions into your personal system of theology that cannot be reconciled.

Blessedly, that has no effect upon any others around you and those here. Your personal methods for interpretation remain within mainstream, resting upon which is an appeal to popularity, not necessarily absolute truth; the reality of which the majority has missed as is demonstrated throughout biblical history.

MM

 

[Beckworth]

19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.

Yes, I just posted an answer to Everlasting grace about this verse. If you read verse 18 with verse 19 you will see that the ones who went out from them were the “antichrist.” Not everyone who leaves the faith are called “antichrist.” Some, like Paul says in Galations 5:4 FELL FROM GRACE because they were trying to be saved by keeping the old law of Moses. John gives the cause for the Christians at Ephesus FALLING as because they had left their first love. The “FALLEN AWAY” Christians in Hebrews 6 were described by the Holy Spirit AS having “become entangled in the world AGAIN. They had already been in the world once when the were not saved; then they “escaped” the world when they became Christians, and then they became entangled AGAIN-a second time. Believing they were never saved, is equal to believing they NEVER ESCAPED AT ALL and that is denying and contradicting what the Holy Spirit says. I wonder if that would constitute “speaking against the Holy Spirit” which is the unpardonable sin?? I’m not saying it is —but it seems to me to come close.

 

[rogerg]

Then why did he specifically address his epistle to the Jews if it apples to even the Gentiles much later one after Paul is given the revelation of the mystery that was given to no other man from the Lord?

MM

He didn't address it to the Jews; He addressed it to his spiritual brethren: the saved which are the spiritual Jews, but not because they were of the nation of Israel. Those with faith (see below), have been saved making them his spiritual brethren. Likewise, the twelve tribes represent spiritual Israel- the Israel of God- not the nation of Israel. They were "scattered abroad" because of their beliefs - they were spiritually persecuted as Christians. So, the book of James was addressed primarily to Christians.

[Jas 1:1 KJV]
1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.

[Act 8:4 KJV]
4 Therefore they that were scattered abroad went every where preaching the word.

[Act 11:19 KJV]
19 Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only.
[Act 11:21 KJV]
21 And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number believed, and turned unto the Lord.

[Jas 1:3 KJV]
3 Knowing [this], that the trying of your faith worketh patience.

[Jas 1:6 KJV]
6 But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.

 

[Cameron143]

Jesus did indeed say to the Jews that they must persevere unto the end to be saved, and that same Jesus told Paul that we are saved by grace, not works and faith. Additionally, that same Jesus also told the ancient Jews that they must obey ALL the Law. Every one of those statements is TRUE, but they are not all to the same people at the same time.

Also, repayment according to what they have done, that is speaking of reward. Forcing salvation into that context is questionable at best for the motives behind trying to force the meaning of Paul's words as touching upon salvation as opposed to reward.

MM

There is no commandment to persevere to the end. Comments about perseverance are descriptive, not prescriptive. In other words, those who are truly saved do persevere to the end.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

This verse is used a lot to try to prove that ALL Christians who “FALL AWAY” were never saved in the first place. One of the things I keep saying is that you can’t isolate a verse from its context. So let’s see what this passage is talking about.

Start by looking at verse 18. John says that ANTICHRIST is coming and in fact, MANY “antiChrist have already come. Immediately in verse 19 he says “they”. In English we know that a pronoun such as “they” has to have an antecedent which is the closest noun to the pronoun. The pronoun REFERS BACK to the closest noun which in this case is “antichrist.” So, John is saying that the ones who left them and were never a part of them were the “Antichrist.” Then in verse 22 he tells who the “antichrist are. First he says they are all liars and then he defines them as, “.He is an antichrist who denies the Father and the Son.”

Yes. This is a person who has claimed they had faith in God, and now have denied him in unbelief (the no longer believe)

these people are against Christ. They were never saved.

so those who claim we can believe today and not believe tomorrow and those epoeple fell from grace or lost salvation. are in error

So now my question is, are the John Calvinists

Why are you trying to isolate a group of people I am not a calvinist by the way.. so you just hurt your own argument by trying to attach to everyone that they are calvinist.

saying that the ones who fell away in Hebrews 6

1st off who fell away? The author of Hebrews does nto say anyone fell away, His exact words were "if they fall away" In fact his whole argument, it says it is impossible. if they fall away.. the important words are the next words. "to renew them again to repentance"

So you see, Like in 1 John, The author hewre (many believe is paul. I am not sure) is saying to those who are trying to return to the law. which as a legalistic gospel. teaches one can fall away, and then need to get resaved again by animal sacrifice. is arguing against this self righteous belief,

If a person could fall away (as the law says) they could never be re-saved again.

so those who say you can fall away, and then get re-saved, are proven to be in error.

so a second aspect of it is possible to lose salvation is destroyed (first they believed then they do not believe. second they could fall away because of sin, and then get re-saved again)

were all “antichrists”? The ones who Paul said had FALLEN FROM GRACE in Galations 5:4 were they “antichrists?” Paul did not say that they fell because they were “Antichrist’s” and were never part of them; he says they fell because they were trying to be saved by keeping the old law of Moses.

Those in Gal 5 never actually received grace, They had it in their hands, and before they came to faith, they walked away and returned to what their true faith was, which was the law.

Do people who reject grace. are the for Christ or against him? Answer this question correctly and you will answer your own question

I believe good advice for ALL of us—myself included—is to always keep a verse in its context. Read before the verse and after the verse to get the setting. See who is doing the talking and to whom they are talking and what they are talking about.

Yes, And you definitely need to heed this advise..

I take James 3:1 very seriously. That doesn’t mean I won’t make mistakes; but I am mindful of the seriousness of what we are doing.

3 My brethren, let not many of you become teachers, knowing that we shall receive a stricter judgment.

Amen to this,, I pray you take this to heart. I know I do.

 

[Rufus]

Thanks for your reply, Rufus. I greatly respect your biblical knowledge and understanding, so please see this as a different perspective, not a criticism. I noticed that the thread’s discussion has moved past our posts—my fault for being otherwise occupied - so I’ll keep this brief. Anyway, I think that I view the Bible a little differently than you do. In my opinion, it's a cohesive, fully self-contained book entirely written by God, not man (except for translation errors). I therefore try to find and understand a word’s global biblical meaning and implication if possible, not just by its local context. This seems to add a spiritual dimension to my conclusions. I believe the Bible's foundational message is Christ, so everything in it, in one way or another, relates back to Him. My reply to MM saw “justified” as spiritual justification (made righteous by God) and having been imputed Christ's faith and works that become manifested in our actions but He is the source, rather than in proving (justifying) ourselves to non-Christians through actions like feeding the poor (if I’ve understood your point correctly). Not that such deeds are undesirable, but there's often an underlying spiritual component to most verses of the Bible that are of overriding significance. Yet, your point is valid, and so I will continue to ponder it given that the book of James (in my opinion), is full of many subtle and interesting facets.

Thanks again,
Roger

We're very close not only in our understanding of the Word of God but also in our hermeneutical approach to scripture, which actually accounts for why we agree on so much. What you call "global" meaning, I call the "canonical" approach (all scripture); and what you call "local", I call "epochal" (a particular dispensation). The challenge in rightly understanding any given text in scripture is to see how the pieces (e.g. any given passage) fit into the whole.

I think James fully understood that Faith is a two-sided coin. One side is the heart-felt belief in the Gospel whereby God justifies the sinner; the other side is the inevitable faithfulness that must flow from that kind of faith. Therefore, faith has a theological and practical definition. I see James' focus in his epistle on this latter side of the coin: Faithfulness. And being faithful to God is desiring to do his will. A couple of times in his epistle he exhorts his readers to not deceive themselves. He wants them to understand that since they have professed Christ with their talk, that is but their first step in the walk -- now...they must continue to walk in obedience and faithfulness because of what God has done in them, to them and through them by the Holy Spirit. He's trying to impress the truth upon them that it would be totally incongruous for them to merely talk their faith while not walking it simultaneously -- by not living that faith out day-to day due to what God has already done within them. He didn't want them to misunderstand the true nature of saving faith, which accounts for the warnings about being deceived.

So when James goes on to say (using Abraham as an example) "that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone" (2:24), I see him as saying that such a person (like Abraham) proved his faith, and thus his justification by faith and grace, to the world by his faithful obedience. I do not see James saying that Abraham justified himself by his obedience. Rather, I see Jame's statement as saying how others would see such a faithful person. Others would see a faithful servant of God as justified precisely because he has proven his faith. They would see the Abrahams of the world as qualified, true blue, real deal believers because of their good deeds.

So that's my additional 2 cents worth. Now, I'm up to a nickle.

 

[rogerg]

So that's my additional 2 cents worth. Now, I'm up to a nickle.

Does that include inflation? 😊

 

[Rufus]

That's one opinion. Salvation depending on God's mercy does not preclude God establishing His own criteria concerning to whom of those to whom He has extended mercy, He will grant that mercy. God of is own will granting mercy to someone at one time, does not preclude God of His own will withholding or restoring that same mercy to that person at different times beyond that time. It's not your call to insist that God keeps on granting mercy to whomever He starts granting mercy. It does not depend on man (you), but on the One who shows mercy (God).

Not so if one is truly chosen by God. If and elect child has been given the gifts of grace, faith, repentance, etc., then those gifts are his forever. For it is written:

Rom 11:29
29 for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.
NASB

God is not an Indian giver. He does not give with one hand and take with the other.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

just because we are born again does not mean we can never sin again.

Your right, Not only does it NOT mean we will never sin again, john warns us to not think we would ever arrive at this state. by saying if we (he included himself) say we have no sin (present tense) we are deceived.

so lets not be deceived

That does not mean that we can’t ever tell another lie, or commit adultery, or make a mistake, gossip, hate, or have evil thoughts. Being born again does not make us “perfect” so that we never sin again. We will not be “perfected” until we get to heaven. It does not take away our right to choose every day to live righteously or give in to temptation and satisfy the flesh. There are just too many scriptures that talk about

True. so we should NEVER think we have arrived, and can never be tempted to do these things. Thats why we are under grace not under law. If we are under law If we did any of these things, or even knew to do right but did not do it, we would sin, and at that moment our salvation would be terminated. And remember, The author of Hebrews said we can not go back to being saved. It would be too late to repent. because we would be lost forever. we have fallen away

“having fallen from grace”, “fallen” or “fall away” for anyone to believe that it is impossible to lose your salvation.

It is impossible. We did nto save ourselves. we can not keep ourselves saved, its all a work of the cross.

Why do you want to put yourself and others back under law. why do you reject grace?

We all have to be born again before we can “fall.” We all have to have HAD salvation before we can lose it. It’s impossible to “fall” from a place where you never were.

No we do not, we just have to be climbing the mountain on the way to reaching the top. Not everyone who fell reached their goal. Our goal is salvation. God is working to draw us to himself. It is he who is reaching our. doing everything he can to pull you to the top of that mountain, If you fall before you reach the goal. It does not mean you were ever at the top.

Again, You have to much self in your gospel. remove self from the gospel. don;t make the same mistake the jews made.. You will be lost right along with them

So many scriptures teach that eternal life is CONDITIONAL upon you making sure you don’t “fall” by being faithful (Rev. 2:10), eating the flesh and drinking the blood of Jesus (John 6:54), keeping yourself in the love of God (Jude 1:21), drink the water of life which Jesus gives, (John 4:14), looking to the cross (John 3) and many more.

Eternal life is eternal if God wanted us to think we had conditional life he would tell us. he would definitely not say we had eternal life. and then promise he would never leave nor forsake us..

You can;t leave God. Once your his, your his, you get out of line, he will correct you. You get out of reach, he will bring you home (sin unto death) but he will never lose you. We have the promise not ony from Jesus but the father, that of all the father God gave him, he would never lose one..

No one is considered “faithful” to God if they are not worshipping God and trying to keep his commandments. You would not misunderstand the word “faithful” when it comes to the husband/wife relationship. Would you consider a husband “faithful” if he no longer shared his life with his wife? Jesus taught that there are two masters, He and Satan. He also said, “He who is not for me is against me.” God often portrayed the nation of Israel as a harlot because they were suppose to be married to God but served other gods (idols). He uses that imagery again and again in the Old Testament. So yes, if God’s chosen people the Jews could become “unfaithful” to God, we can, too. Besides, please explain WHY Jesus told the christians in Revelation 2 to be faithful if it was impossible for them to be unfaithful. And why give them a command that didn’t matter because they were going to be saved whether they were faithful or not. You know He would never have done such a MEANINGLESS thing.

lol.. I feel sorry for you.. Keep trying to save yourself

I will look to God the author and finisher of my faith

 

[Jimbone]

I have stated before that I am not convinced one way or the other concerning once saved always saved (OSAS) or Perseverance of the Saints (POTS). I am not settled on one side or the other. I don't see any imperative to believe one or the other, Whether OSAS or POTS is true does not affect my relationship with God and my trust in God or my personal experience of salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour.

My point is that the Greek text of Philippians 1:6 does not seem to me to say what some are relying on it to be saying to prove Paul was teaching OSAS or POTS.

The argument that God needs to do EVERYTHING involved in us getting saved in order to get ALL the glory for our salvation; and that God getting ALL the credit is morally superior to the believer getting credit from God for his/her faith in God, is a moralistic fallacy. Clearly, Abraham's faith was reckoned to him by God as righteousness, and Abraham glorified God nonetheless -

Rom. 6:
20 He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God;
21 And being fully persuaded that, what He had promised, He was able also to perform.
22 And therefore it (his faith) was imputed/reckoned/credited to him for righteousness.
23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it (his faith) was imputed/reckoned/credited to him (for righteousness);
24 But for us also, to whom it (our faith) shall be imputed/reckoned/credited (for righteousness), if we believe on Him (God) that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;

It is not immoral to accept the credit God gives us for putting faith in Him.

While I can appreciate this and I personally hate labels, for example I do believe once God saves us, we are SAVED, I do NOT believe OSAS as most here that argue against it as if we are saved and therefore free to sin as much as we want to now with no worry about condemnation. I despise that just as much and Paul answers this strait up when he says "so should I now sin so grace may abound, BY NO MEANS". So I can understand the argument against this "OSAS". However, no matter what teaching we can lose our salvation IS believing in a works based salvation. There's no way around it rationally or logically. If it's something that we can lose then, #1 we are not "saved" when we're born again, and #2 we can only earn salvation by obeying well enough. That strips away anything that can be called grace and drops the full weight of salvation on our shoulders. There's NO WAY AROUND THIS. None. So while I can agree with your comment here I can also say that regardless of the nice arrangement of words, if you believe salvation can be lost, then everything I said in the first comment holds true. It has to, there's no way around it.

 

[Rufus]

Just one question:
Under the terms of the old covenant what could bring the covenant to an end?

Not sure I'm understanding the question. But...since the OC was conditional and bilateral in nature, making it radically different from the New, I would have to say Israel's disobedience. Both kingdoms broke the OC. But I don't see what that has to do about what epoch in scripture marked the beginning and end of the period called the "last days".

Let me toss out another idea, which is also very closely related to my understanding of the period being between the two advents of Christ: Just as there are two advents, there are two creations. The first creation was of the physical, temporal, visible world; whereas the New Creation is spiritual, eternal and invisible that is inaugurated in God's elect redeemed people and is consummated at our resurrection when the entire universe and this world will be restored to even beyond its former Edenic glory. So what if the "last days" began at the beginning of the New Creation (Christ's life, death, burial and resurrection) and will end at the Parousia which is when we'll be resurrected and the entire universe will be recreated?

 

[Rufus]

[QUOTE="Musicmaster, post: 5361440, member: 305060"]If you're going to try expanding the Kingdom Gospel over into the Gospel of Grace, then why not also expand the Gospel of Law over into all the others? After all, if it's all the same, then you appear to think you have license to subjectively pull all of the things of your choosing under one overarching Gospel narrative. In doing that, you do nothing but introduce confusions into your personal system of theology that cannot be reconciled.

Blessedly, that has no effect upon any others around you and those here. Your personal methods for interpretation remain within mainstream, resting upon which is an appeal to popularity, not necessarily absolute truth; the reality of which the majority has missed as is demonstrated throughout biblical history.

MM [/QUOTE]

Because there is no such animal as the "Gospel of Law". Where is the good news in the a law that could only condemn us, since no one was ever able to keep it perfectly, save for Christ!? And there's nothing "in my personal system of theology" (so-called) that I cannot reconcile. I recognize that there is both Continuity and Discontinuity in scripture, but do you? Man has always been saved by grace through faith -- from the very beginning to the very end.

 

[Magenta]

Yes, it would seem so; however, according to Matthew 7, we can judge a person by their “fruits”; that is the outward things we can see them do and hear them say. So my judgement of unsaved people—and I think I put this in my post—was based on their withdrawing themselves from God, his church, and His people. It was based on them living a life of sin (based on scripture), and on the fact that they would not repent. I’m not reading their hearts but their fruit. Looking at their “fruits”, I can say, if the Bible is true, those people are lost. I can only judge a saved person in the same way. If I know they believe and have repented, confessed Christ and been baptized—those are outward “fruits” that I can see and know then I can judge that they have been saved.

You said only God can know if someone is saved.

And yet, you claim to be able to “ see into the hearts of men” and determine that they were never saved!! Amazing!!

The same principle applies here. So in 1 or 2 or a few posts you are claiming nobody but God can know and you mock those who say they can know but then you turn around and claim you know. If I wasn't on my phone I would get some music for you to sing and dance to while you twist in the wind.

 

[Cameron143]

Not sure I'm understanding the question. But...since the OC was conditional and bilateral in nature, making it radically different from the New, I would have to say Israel's disobedience. Both kingdoms broke the OC. But I don't see what that has to do about what epoch in scripture marked the beginning and end of the period called the "last days".

Let me toss out another idea, which is also very closely related to my understanding of the period being between the two advents of Christ: Just as there are two advents, there are two creations. The first creation was of the physical, temporal, visible world; whereas the New Creation is spiritual, eternal and invisible that is inaugurated in God's elect redeemed people and is consummated at our resurrection when the entire universe and this world will be restored to even beyond its former Edenic glory. So what if the "last days" began at the beginning of the New Creation (Christ's life, death, burial and resurrection) and will end at the Parousia which is when we'll be resurrected and the entire universe will be recreated?

Appreciate the answer. And Israel's disobedience was the reason the old covenant came to an end. But their measure of disobedience wasn't full until they killed Jesus. But God can't simply end the covenant upon Jesus' death. He must still render the sanctions upon Israel for her failure to live up to the stipulations of the covenant. And this is what the book of Revelation is concerned with. Christ indeed came again, this time in glory and judgment, visiting the wrath of God on disobedient Israel. By destroying the temple, God destroyed the place He made His presence known to Israel. In doing so, God severed His ties to corporate Israel and ended the covenant.

 

[Rondonmon]

I believe the Bible is clear enough on this issue.

"If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us" 2 Timothy 2:12 KJV

What part of this Verse do you not understand? I myself am 100 %ly sure that salvation loss is possible.

Of course salvation can be "LOST" but not really, but yes REALLY. Sounds illogical right? Well, the point is Jesus told his disciples in Matt. 24:13 that they must endure until the end for a reason, ones salvation only comes at death. Is there blood applied or not.

Its like watching a pro football game and lets say Miami is ahead 17-0, everyone will say they are winning 17-0 right? But if they lose 27-17, then when they we ahead 17-0 at the half they were LOSING up 17-0 not winning !! No one has salvation or condemnation until they die, that is why Jesus said say not who is saved nor condemned, that is God's alone, no one can know a man's heart.

You can KNOW Jesus, receive Jesus, but then reject Jesus and accept the world and on judgment day Jesus will say, depart from me for I never knew you to those who cast out Demons in his name and preached in his name etc. etc.

Those once saved guys do not understand we are only saved once we pass over in Christ, we can reject Jesus at any moment in time, just like Judas did.

 

[Magenta]

@Rondonmon you said: No one has salvation or condemnation until they die, that is why Jesus said say not who is saved nor condemned, that is God's alone, no one can know a man's heart.

Please see John 3:18