Loss of salvation???

[brightfame52]

Yeah, your next tangent will be "not really saved" because you didn't walk the tightrope.


Calvies and armies are the same.......All RELIGION is the same. Play them out, and they all say the same thing.

Kroogz, your assertion that "all religion is the same" proves that you completely missed the core legal reality of my argument. You are trying to equate a conditional system based on human effort with an unconditional system based entirely on a finished legal substitution. They are completely opposite realities.

Let’s look at why your "never really saved" accusation completely fails against my position:

1. Arminianism is a tightrope; High Calvinism is an accomplished rescue.

In the Arminian system, salvation is a potential reality that the sinner must activate by faith and maintain by their own fickle obedience. If they stumble off the tightrope, they are lost. The focus is entirely on the creature's performance.

In my position, salvation is an accomplished legal fact. Hebrews 10:14 does not say Christ made us "savable" if we walk a straight line; it says, “For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.” The focus is entirely on the Creator's perfection.

2. The difference regarding those who "fall away."

You claim both systems play out the same way, but their foundations are completely different:

• The Arminian says: "That person was legally saved by the blood of Christ, but their subsequent actions overthrew the cross and sent them to hell." (This makes the blood of Christ a failure).
  
  
• The High Calvinist says: "That person was never legally represented by Christ on the cross, because everyone Christ died for was permanently perfected forever."

When a counterfeit professor exposes themselves by final apostasy, it doesn't mean they "lost" a salvation they once possessed. It proves they were never legally redeemed at the cross. As 1 John 2:19 explicitly states: “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us.”


3. The Anchor is the Cross, not the Walk.

You accuse me of turning around and forcing people to walk a tightrope to prove they are elect. But my post explicitly stated the exact opposite: Your eternal security does not depend on your fickle ability to hold onto God. Yet the Legal Righteous shall hold on his way Job 17:9 Rom 5:19

The vitally alive person does not look to their own walking ability for assurance; they look exclusively to the Surety-ship obedience of Jesus Christ. If Christ fulfilled the law for His sheep, bore their curse, and legally reconciled them while they were still active enemies (Rom. 5:10), their final preservation is a legal necessity.

So no, they are not the same. One religion puts the final weight of salvation on the shifting sands of human will. My theology places it on the unmoveable rock of Christ's accomplished blood-work. One relies on a creature's performance; the other bows to a sovereign Savior who successfully saved every single soul He died for.

---

 

[Burn1986]

You guys have officially fallen off the edge of … (I don’t even know what it is)

 

[Freed18]

Personally, I believe that Jesus set rituals/sacraments before people as a means of weeding out the tares from the wheat, much like the Lord's Supper. We all know that there's a certain religious denomination who truly believes that Jesus physically sits in the Eucharist and that the way to keep Jesus living inside of them is to ingest it. That's why the Bible says that there are people who think they are Christians, but are not. We will be judged by our faith first and our works second.

Baptism, in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, was commanded for the remission of sins. (Acts 2:38, 22:16)

 

[Freed18]

And John 1:33, Luke 11:13

There is a different baptism after salvation and the baptism of water.

I agree, and Peter called it the gift of the Holy Ghost...in Acts 2:38..."Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."

This is usually done by the laying on of hands (which seems to be absent from today’s church)
“Then they laid their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit." Acts 8:17

It can be, under special circumstances, like validating the preacher.

When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied." — Acts 19:6

A perfect example.

BTW, I believe salvation will be determined on the day of the resurrection of mankind.
Some to eternal life, and others to eternal damnation.

 

[Kroogz]

Kroogz, your assertion that "all religion is the same" proves that you completely missed the core legal reality of my argument. You are trying to equate a conditional system based on human effort with an unconditional system based entirely on a finished legal substitution. They are completely opposite realities.

Let’s look at why your "never really saved" accusation completely fails against my position:

1. Arminianism is a tightrope; High Calvinism is an accomplished rescue.

In the Arminian system, salvation is a potential reality that the sinner must activate by faith and maintain by their own fickle obedience. If they stumble off the tightrope, they are lost. The focus is entirely on the creature's performance.

In my position, salvation is an accomplished legal fact. Hebrews 10:14 does not say Christ made us "savable" if we walk a straight line; it says, “For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.” The focus is entirely on the Creator's perfection.

2. The difference regarding those who "fall away."

You claim both systems play out the same way, but their foundations are completely different:

• The Arminian says: "That person was legally saved by the blood of Christ, but their subsequent actions overthrew the cross and sent them to hell." (This makes the blood of Christ a failure).
  
  
• The High Calvinist says: "That person was never legally represented by Christ on the cross, because everyone Christ died for was permanently perfected forever."

When a counterfeit professor exposes themselves by final apostasy, it doesn't mean they "lost" a salvation they once possessed. It proves they were never legally redeemed at the cross. As 1 John 2:19 explicitly states: “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us.”


3. The Anchor is the Cross, not the Walk.

You accuse me of turning around and forcing people to walk a tightrope to prove they are elect. But my post explicitly stated the exact opposite: Your eternal security does not depend on your fickle ability to hold onto God. Yet the Legal Righteous shall hold on his way Job 17:9 Rom 5:19

The vitally alive person does not look to their own walking ability for assurance; they look exclusively to the Surety-ship obedience of Jesus Christ. If Christ fulfilled the law for His sheep, bore their curse, and legally reconciled them while they were still active enemies (Rom. 5:10), their final preservation is a legal necessity.

So no, they are not the same. One religion puts the final weight of salvation on the shifting sands of human will. My theology places it on the unmoveable rock of Christ's accomplished blood-work. One relies on a creature's performance; the other bows to a sovereign Savior who successfully saved every single soul He died for.

---

AI Is your new god.

 

[Kroogz]

Kroogz, your assertion that "all religion is the same" proves that you completely missed the core legal reality of my argument. You are trying to equate a conditional system based on human effort with an unconditional system based entirely on a finished legal substitution. They are completely opposite realities.

Let’s look at why your "never really saved" accusation completely fails against my position:

1. Arminianism is a tightrope; High Calvinism is an accomplished rescue.

In the Arminian system, salvation is a potential reality that the sinner must activate by faith and maintain by their own fickle obedience. If they stumble off the tightrope, they are lost. The focus is entirely on the creature's performance.

In my position, salvation is an accomplished legal fact. Hebrews 10:14 does not say Christ made us "savable" if we walk a straight line; it says, “For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.” The focus is entirely on the Creator's perfection.

2. The difference regarding those who "fall away."

You claim both systems play out the same way, but their foundations are completely different:

• The Arminian says: "That person was legally saved by the blood of Christ, but their subsequent actions overthrew the cross and sent them to hell." (This makes the blood of Christ a failure).
  
  
• The High Calvinist says: "That person was never legally represented by Christ on the cross, because everyone Christ died for was permanently perfected forever."

When a counterfeit professor exposes themselves by final apostasy, it doesn't mean they "lost" a salvation they once possessed. It proves they were never legally redeemed at the cross. As 1 John 2:19 explicitly states: “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us.”


3. The Anchor is the Cross, not the Walk.

You accuse me of turning around and forcing people to walk a tightrope to prove they are elect. But my post explicitly stated the exact opposite: Your eternal security does not depend on your fickle ability to hold onto God. Yet the Legal Righteous shall hold on his way Job 17:9 Rom 5:19

The vitally alive person does not look to their own walking ability for assurance; they look exclusively to the Surety-ship obedience of Jesus Christ. If Christ fulfilled the law for His sheep, bore their curse, and legally reconciled them while they were still active enemies (Rom. 5:10), their final preservation is a legal necessity.

So no, they are not the same. One religion puts the final weight of salvation on the shifting sands of human will. My theology places it on the unmoveable rock of Christ's accomplished blood-work. One relies on a creature's performance; the other bows to a sovereign Savior who successfully saved every single soul He died for.

---

AI is your new god. Very fitting for calvies. Cold, arbitrary and impersonal.

 

[HealthAndHappiness]

Can a once truly saved believer backslide too much and lose the gift of salvation? If so do they need to repent and ask for forgiveness through Christ again? Thoughts are welcome and scripture too!

Does the truly saved believer believe in Christ or in self?

 

[Burn1986]

I agree, and Peter called it the gift of the Holy Ghost...in Acts 2:38..."Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."

It can be, under special circumstances, like validating the preacher.

A perfect example.

BTW, I believe salvation will be determined on the day of the resurrection of mankind.
Some to eternal life, and others to eternal damnation.

I wasn’t talking about salvation in this instance. The baptism of the Holy Spirit in this instance is after salvation (it doesn’t always happen like that).

There is also laying on of hands for healing. Not sure why this has disappeared from the church, along with teaching and administering the baptism of the Holy Spirit?

 

[Freed18]

I wasn’t talking about salvation in this instance. The baptism of the Holy Spirit in this instance is after salvation (it doesn’t always happen like that).

The gift of the Holy Ghost is only given to the truly repentant; and salvation, at the Lord's return.

There is also laying on of hands for healing.

Yes.

Not sure why this has disappeared from the church,

I'm not sure it has.

along with teaching and administering the baptism of the Holy Spirit?

I feel the gift of the Holy Ghost is God's prerogative.
Unless there is some mighty example or event, (like Cornelius andthe first Gentiles), the gift will be given naturally, after water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of past sins.

 

[Burn1986]

The gift of the Holy Ghost is only given to the truly repentant; and salvation, at the Lord's return.

Yes.

I'm not sure it has.

I feel the gift of the Holy Ghost is God's prerogative.
Unless there is some mighty example or event, (like Cornelius andthe first Gentiles), the gift will be given naturally, after water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of past sins.

I’ve seen it occur in a variety of ways - for me, I had determined that I was going to receive it when brothers laid hands and prayed over me whether I ever talked in tongues or not. They did and I did (although it was at a men’s morning prayer group).

I think it’s amusing how experiences are discounted and argued against. “Oh that didn’t happen to you. Let me tell you what happened to you.” Lol

 

[Freed18]

I’ve seen it occur in a variety of ways - for me, I had determined that I was going to receive it when brothers laid hands and prayed over me whether I ever talked in tongues or not. They did and I did (although it was at a men’s morning prayer group).

I think it’s amusing how experiences are discounted and argued against. “Oh that didn’t happen to you. Let me tell you what happened to you.” Lol

Well, keep growing in grace and knowledge !