Loss of salvation???

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Were You? I'm sorry. I was mistaken. My Bad. I thought I was tracking with the conversation.

In my view, Paul is concerned with a group of Hebrews who are starting to question Paul's doctrine. They seem to be having second thoughts, especially concerning whether the Messiah would be an angel, a theophany, or a man. Paul argues that it is fitting that the Messiah should be a man for the reasons he presents. In chapter 3, Paul appeals to the brethren to encourage those among them that are weak in faith 'that there not be in any one of you and evil and unbelieving heart that falls way from the living God.'

Hebrews 3:12-14

One could certainly argue, from this passage, that some believers fall away. If that is your point, then I agree with it.
Thanks. Yes, looking back I think you responded to @Toknow about the conditional clause in Heb3:14. So that's where I was.

At the moment I see no reason from the language to suggest the author sees the potential of not holding fast/adhering until the end as a possibility. As was discussed a bit earlier in this thread, the conditional language is stated in an intensified form. This is not a mild writing.

In the context of living the life of faith, the end of Heb3 is one of the clearest parallels of [continued] faith and obedience in the Text.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Toknow
Anyone who knows the scriptures knows the Law was never abolished. Jesus Himself said that, wo what Jesus are you following?

That's not to say we are beholden to live it nor follow it given that we are dead to the Law, but if the Law had been abolished, then even Paul's words make no sense for him to say we are dead to what is abolished. That clearly shows to us that the Law was still in force in Paul's ministry days, which is long after the cross.

Do you ever think about the things you write before writing them?

MM
So Jesus did not abolish the Law...


However, we are not beholden to live it or follow it.....

YOUR words.

So you do not believe that we are to obey Jesus?


Do YOU ever think about the things YOU write before writing them??
 
I used to say (tongue-in-cheek) that God violates our will to save us. :} And I can see why you would disagree with that. But I am trying to take seriously and make sense of various NT metaphors like "born again", "circumcision of the heart." "proven faith' indwelling Spirit and other phrases, which speak of an irreversible transformative process. Would you like to share your thoughts on those?
Not at the moment. Maybe as they come up in Scripture.

I know what you mean about our will. But I do think He leaves the decisions to us. I do also think it's interesting when people says He doesn't coerce, but I will try to at least turn that into a discussion about Him strongly persuading. If we even remotely still consider Him in the 'unbelieving' state, I don't know how things like hell, the second death, His wrath and fury, judgment, etc.. can not be considered as some effort at strongly persuading at least, even a threat, which is part of coercion.
 
You speak as if you never sin. You speak as if you are perfect in love and obedience. Good for you. You are unique among the brethren. I suppose only you and Jesus will be in heaven.
She sins as if she never sins... is more like it. :coffee:
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeIsHere
Nice fruit!

You are supposed to eat it.
Not, throw it.

A little mutual admiration society is forming in our camp, perhaps?

.
You should take your own advice.

And you have A CAMP?
That explains a lot.

No further comment.
 
Thanks. Yes, looking back I think you responded to @Toknow about the conditional clause in Heb3:14. So that's where I was.

At the moment I see no reason from the language to suggest the author sees the potential of not holding fast/adhering until the end as a possibility. As was discussed a bit earlier in this thread, the conditional language is stated in an intensified form. This is not a mild writing.

In the context of living the life of faith, the end of Heb3 is one of the clearest parallels of [continued] faith and obedience in the Text.
I agree, there is a possibility of falling away, for some believers, which is why Paul wrote the letter in the first place. However, since Paul speaks favorably about those he calls "brothers," the possibility doesn't apply to them. We know from the parable of the sower that, indeed, some believers fall away, but others persevere to the end.

In his letters, Paul explains why some fall away while others do not. Contrary to what we might expect, the reason for perseverance is not innate human strength of character, willpower, tenacity, or resiliency. The basis for perseverance is God-given qualities and attributes.

Do you think that the conditional statements are meant to apply to everyone?
 
I don't get it.
Here's how I've experienced posting:

You post the very same wrods to different Christians and they understand the words in a different way.
Why? Because they have different theological beliefs.

If I know you're belief system the reply will be more suited to it.

I might be wrong.
But at times someone will sound reformed,,,but then they deny it.
It can be confusing.
 
I agree, there is a possibility of falling away, for some believers, which is why Paul wrote the letter in the first place. However, since Paul speaks favorably about those he calls "brothers," the possibility doesn't apply to them. We know from the parable of the sower that, indeed, some believers fall away, but others persevere to the end.

In his letters, Paul explains why some fall away while others do not. Contrary to what we might expect, the reason for perseverance is not innate human strength of character, willpower, tenacity, or resiliency. The basis for perseverance is God-given qualities and attributes.

Do you think that the conditional statements are meant to apply to everyone?
You've just proved my point in my previous post to you.

You say above that some believers fall away
but others persevere to the end.

Then you said that Paul explains why some fall away...
which indeed he does.

You belief that those that DO NOT fall away are kept till the end by God given qualities and attributes.
This is totally confusing unless one knows that you're reformed in your soteriology.

IOW,,, The question will arise: WHY does God give to some these qualites and not to others?

Easy to answer if we know your theology.


BTW,,,,those on the other side of the isle DO NOT believe that we are saved by our own strength of character, willpower , tenacity or resiliency. We believe we're kept by God's power, Isn't this what you believe?

The difference is that you believe you cannot escape God's power...
I believe God gave me free will and that I can leave Him any time I want to.
 
Not at the moment. Maybe as they come up in Scripture.

I know what you mean about our will. But I do think He leaves the decisions to us. I do also think it's interesting when people says He doesn't coerce, but I will try to at least turn that into a discussion about Him strongly persuading. If we even remotely still consider Him in the 'unbelieving' state, I don't know how things like hell, the second death, His wrath and fury, judgment, etc.. can not be considered as some effort at strongly persuading at least, even a threat, which is part of coercion.
The fact that he leaves the decisions to us is indisputable. The underlying assumption of our freedom is that our choices must be MY choices. That is, they are free choices if I am allowed to manifest my inner self through those choices. I choose what I want, and my wants reflect my dreams, hopes, aspirations, goals, tastes, etc.

Assuming Paul is correct, we are being saved through Sanctification By the Spirit of God. If I understand this correctly, a major aspect of HS sanctification is that I have been given the Spirit of Christ, who cried, ABBA Father. Some preachers will point out that Abba is a term of endearment, but that explanation completely misses the point. Jesus cried "ABBA Father when he was praying in the garden, "Not my will but yours be done." Those who are being sacrificed by the Spirit have that same attitude. Salvation isn't the ability to choose what I want; it is the ability to pray that God's will be done, even in the midst of intolerable suffering.

So, everyone has freedom, but not all are willing to pick up their cross and follow Jesus.

Does that make sense?
 
Those who are born again are already united in the death of Christ and in His resurrection also. This is God's doing, not ours. Do you not understand that It is of God that you are in Christ Jesus? (1 Corinthians 1:30). Do you not know that believers are dead to sin because of what God has done, not because of what we do? (Colossians 3:3).

Your verses:

1 Corinthians 1:30
30But by His doing you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption, 31so that, just as it is written, “LET HIM WHO BOASTS, BOAST IN THE LORD.”


Paul said that he preached Christ and Him curcified.

Do you notice that in the above verse it states that we are IN CHRIST?

Do you believe that we must be IN CHRIST in order to be saved?
You speak as if you never sin. You speak as if you are perfect in love and obedience. Good for you. You are unique among the brethren. I suppose only you and Jesus will be in heaven.
Silly statements.

Please show where I give the impression that I never sin.
Where did I state that?
Thanks.
 
You've just proved my point in my previous post to you.

You say above that some believers fall away
but others persevere to the end.

Then you said that Paul explains why some fall away...
which indeed he does.

You belief that those that DO NOT fall away are kept till the end by God given qualities and attributes.
This is totally confusing unless one knows that you're reformed in your soteriology.
I still don't see how it is confusing, but I'll take your word for it. If I have confused you, I'm sorry. It was not my intent.
IOW,,, The question will arise: WHY does God give to some these qualites and not to others?
The answer is a major theme of the Bible, which is found in Genesis chapter one. God created this world and the people in it to tell stories that reveal is glory. Every lifetime, yours and mine, is like a story that God is writing.
BTW,,,,those on the other side of the isle DO NOT believe that we are saved by our own strength of character, willpower , tenacity or resiliency. We believe we're kept by God's power, Isn't this what you believe?
I'm not sure what you mean by "kept" If God is saving me, wouldn't he go as far as keeping me from falling away?

The difference is that you believe you cannot escape God's power...
Why would I want to?
I believe God gave me free will and that I can leave Him any time I want to.
Why would you want to? This is a serious question.

Many people would describe their conversion experience as if one day I they wanted 'x' but the next day they wanted Jesus. Motivations change.

What is freedom of the will if not the freedom to do what I want? Unless my choices manifest my dreams, hopes, desires, and preferences, they aren't really my choices. So what if God is able to transform my dreams, give me new hopes, change my thinking, renew my mind etc.? Wont my choices also change? If God has changed my motives such that I always choose him, why would I fall away?
 
Not according to Paul. He believed in determinism and he argued that Divine determinism did not render God unjust. Romans 9:14-18
Paul did not teach determinism.
Paul taught free will.


Your verses:
Romans 9:14-18
14What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be!

15For He says to Moses, “I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION.”

16So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.

17For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE I RAISED YOU UP, TO DEMONSTRATE MY POWER IN YOU, AND THAT MY NAME MIGHT BE PROCLAIMED THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EARTH.”

18So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.

Roger, If God created everything,,,that includes evil too.
But then the reformed like to smooth out the edges and say that God did not create evil.
Very prominent reformed understand that if they say that God created everything...
then by necessity God created evil too.

Paul's IF's would not be necessary IF God made believers persevere of HIS will and not the free will of the person.


You skipped Romans 9:13 thanks. Maybe you realize that it IS speaking about two nations and not two individuals.
God does not hate anyone.....in fact, Jesus taught that God loves the whole world, but that's a different topic.

Romans 9:14
14What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be!

is addressing the problem of Israel not having accepted Jesus as the awaited Messiah.
They felt that God owed all of Israel salvation just due to their being Jewish.
And if God did not save the Jewss,,,then God was considered unrighteous by them.
The jews believed they were all saved through Abraham.
But Paul said othewise:

Romans 2:28-29
28For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh.
29But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.


Paul is teaching that it is just for God to reject ANY descendant of Isaac...God is not breaking His promise by rejecting those that are hindering the fulfillment of the promise.....the unbelieving Jews.


Romans 9:15
15For He says to Moses, “I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION.”

Paul is speaking to the JEWS. They know to what Paul was referring...
it was not referring to the idea that God would have mercy on some and not on all.
God loves His creation and gives to each one of us the opportunity to become saved.
1 Tim 2:4 God wishes that all men be saved.

In Romans 9:15 Paul is referring to the time of Moses.
The Israelites had built a golden calf while Moses was on Mt. Sinai.
God had mercy on them and did not kill all of them.

This is not referring to individuals.



I'll just jump to Romans 9:30 which destroys any reformed idea of Romans 9:14-18

Here is

Romans 9:30-32
30What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith;

31but Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law.

32Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as though it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone,


We can note that Paul explaines exactly how an individual is saved....
Gentiles were able to attain righteousness BY FAITH (not by predestination)

Israel, OTOH, even though they pursued righteousness did not achieve it because they did not pursue it BY FAITH.

FAITH saves man.