Can Salvation be lost??

[ed12]

Hi Guys,
Thieves steal. That is what a thief is. If something wasn't stolen, then the word would not be used. Is God a liar?
Seducers seduce, that is what a seducer does. Is Jesus a liar?
Why discern if discernment is not required?
Why Satan if Satan can not deceive ?
Why have the word 'deceive' No one can deceive someone who does not believe. Only a believer is capable of being deceived.
Are you saying scripture is wrong. There is no deceiver. No Satan.

Rev 3:4 Thou hast a few names even in Sardia which have not defiled their garments ; and they shall walk with me in white; for they are worthy. 5 He that overcometh the same shall be clothed in white rainment and I will not blot out his name from the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.
Matthew 7: Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction and many there be which go in thereat; 14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

Jesus is the Word. The Word is scripture. This is the narrow way. How many add to scripture, support the Word with carnal writings. This is the broad path, not the narrow path. One can not mix the Word with the world. We are meant to be Holy, separated.
IF there are thieves, (Jesus said, those who come before me are theives and robbers) ie Buddha etc, then the thieving is not only worldly wealth but spiritual treasures as well. Satan is a deceiver. There is a Satan.
One can lose one's salvation. Seek it with fear and trembling.
love in Jesus
ed

 

[feedm3]

People like freedom don't get it. They want to pull verses out of a passage, take them out of context. Then try to cut us down when we look at context and do not look at it their way.

Lol your the only one here giving off a rude attitude because I don't believe your doctrine. Explain the context then, break it down word for word. Or don't, I have heard your attempt, who did I cut down here? I have been polite to all who do the same with me. I havent even spoke with you in some time and your sound like your still mad.

 

[feedm3]

God does not take away the gift He offers. Nowhere does scripture suggest this.

Hebrews 10:26: "For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins".................... "Knowledge of the truth" - my husband is not saved. I have shared truth with him practically all the time. He rejects it. He has been given knowledge of the truth but chooses his works in his church instead. He rejects it, even when I share a scripture with him. Just like you could witness to someone telling them about Jesus and they may mock the truth. They remain living their sinful lives when they have knowledge that they are sinners and need to be forgiven. Before anyone shared this truth with them they did not have knowledge of it. "no longer remains a sacrifice for sins" - To a person who rejects after knowledge of the truth, Jesus died in vain to them as they cannot be saved any other way, only through faith in what He did on the cross. They mock the truth, so there is no other way to be saved (there is no sacrifice for their sins as they don't believe)

Katy, I repect the fact that your at least showing support for what you believe instead of getting all rude about it. I will explain to you why I believe what I do, including Hebrews. But if your just going to getting mad, or ignoring passages, we might as well not waste each other's time.

Your example above concerning your husband would be fine, except for the fact he is writing the church, NOT those who refuse to obey the truth, these have already obeyed.

He is warning Christians, not to be deceived into going back to the law of Moses. Yet by the time you get to vs 25, he is exhorting the all ready assembling Christians not to forsake the assmebly.

God does not take away our salvation, we reject it by living in sin.

A person who has not heard the Gospel message does not have knowledge of the truth yet. They are sinners still but no one has witnessed to them yet.

Yet this can not apply to what is stated to Christians in Gal or Heb, because these were members of the Lord's church. They were Christians.

Hebrews 10:29: "Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace?" - insulted grace/rejected and mocked grace... trample the son of God/reject or mock Jesus. This verse is making clear that it will be worse punishment for people who were told the truth but rejected it! This is directed at those who are not saved.

Wrong, insulted and rejected are two different things. They did not reject it, they received it in vain - I Cor 6:1.

Because they thought the grace of God would allow them to sin, just as many still teach just not so plain of speech.


Now let me show you Hebrews:

1. 10 Called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec. 11 Of whom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing.
12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat
They were already Christians for some time, long enough that they ought have been teachers, not needing someone to re-teach them the truth. So This shows they were Christians.

2. Sometimes they received praises:
9 But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak. 10 For God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labour of love, which ye have shewed toward his name, in that ye have ministered to the saints, and do minister. 11 And we desire that every one of you do shew the same diligence to the full assurance of hope unto the end: 12 That ye be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises

Encouraging them to continue following, not to go back into bondage, shows again these are Christians.3. Do you think in chapter 10, the audience changed? From those who knew the truth and would not obey it from those who already did obey?????

Of course not, it is the sames audiance from the begining, and they are warned willfull sin will not be forgiven unless repented of (remote context) and confessed (stopped).

As I said, God offered them salvation, they may have accepted, and he warns them if they live in sin, they will reject it by doing despite unto the Spirit of Grace.

The message is clear, the audiance is clear, people just want to twist this up because it does not agree with their doctrine.

Same with the Gal church, the audience was the church, the warning was falling from Grace, Rev - aduicace the seven churches, warning - repent or cease from being God's church.

We can reject salvation, it is clear, even after we may have accepted, just as Gal, heb, Rev, tells us. Dont need anyone trying to find loopholes in the text, just read it, along with the other chapters, and be honest with yourself.

Thanks

 

[jandian]

This is an area i try to stay away from; because I realise that people will believe what they want anyway. I often leave room for possible error. Just in case I'm sealed myself to a lie. To this date the Holy Spirit who is the one I always go through when I'm not sure has not convicted me otherwise. Until such time:

Romans2:25 For circumcision is indeed profitable if you keep the law; but if you are a breaker of the law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision.

 

[Red33]

God does not take away the gift He offers. Nowhere does scripture suggest this.


Katy, I repect the fact that your at least showing support for what you believe instead of getting all rude about it. I will explain to you why I believe what I do, including Hebrews. But if your just going to getting mad, or ignoring passages, we might as well not waste each other's time.

Your example above concerning your husband would be fine, except for the fact he is writing the church, NOT those who refuse to obey the truth, these have already obeyed.

He is warning Christians, not to be deceived into going back to the law of Moses. Yet by the time you get to vs 25, he is exhorting the all ready assembling Christians not to forsake the assmebly.

God does not take away our salvation, we reject it by living in sin.



Yet this can not apply to what is stated to Christians in Gal or Heb, because these were members of the Lord's church. They were Christians.



Wrong, insulted and rejected are two different things. They did not reject it, they received it in vain - I Cor 6:1.

Because they thought the grace of God would allow them to sin, just as many still teach just not so plain of speech.


Now let me show you Hebrews:

1. 10 Called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec. 11 Of whom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing.
12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat
They were already Christians for some time, long enough that they ought have been teachers, not needing someone to re-teach them the truth. So This shows they were Christians.

2. Sometimes they received praises:
9 But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak. 10 For God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labour of love, which ye have shewed toward his name, in that ye have ministered to the saints, and do minister. 11 And we desire that every one of you do shew the same diligence to the full assurance of hope unto the end: 12 That ye be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises

Encouraging them to continue following, not to go back into bondage, shows again these are Christians.3. Do you think in chapter 10, the audience changed? From those who knew the truth and would not obey it from those who already did obey?????

Of course not, it is the sames audiance from the begining, and they are warned willfull sin will not be forgiven unless repented of (remote context) and confessed (stopped).

As I said, God offered them salvation, they may have accepted, and he warns them if they live in sin, they will reject it by doing despite unto the Spirit of Grace.

The message is clear, the audiance is clear, people just want to twist this up because it does not agree with their doctrine.

Same with the Gal church, the audience was the church, the warning was falling from Grace, Rev - aduicace the seven churches, warning - repent or cease from being God's church.

We can reject salvation, it is clear, even after we may have accepted, just as Gal, heb, Rev, tells us. Dont need anyone trying to find loopholes in the text, just read it, along with the other chapters, and be honest with yourself.

Thanks

If any person could ever walk away and lose or forfeit their salvation, God would have to reverse or undo all that He did for them when they fist believed. He would have to un-justify them whom He justified. He would have to call them unclean whom He had cleansed by His own blood and He would have to take away His righteousness that he imputed to them through faith without works. You do at least acknowledge that don't you? And if God did reverse or undo salvation then it would reveal that it was not by grace through faith and that His promise of salvation through faith does not have to be honored by His power nor by His faithfulness to what He promised to those that believe upon His Son. This is why you misunderstand these verses, because you misunderstand what Christ accomplished on the cross once and for all. What He has provided through His death, burial and resurrection puts salvation squarely upon Him as the author of it and the as the author and finisher of our faith when we believe and were saved by grace.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Lol your the only one here giving off a rude attitude because I don't believe your doctrine. Explain the context then, break it down word for word. Or don't, I have heard your attempt, who did I cut down here? I have been polite to all who do the same with me. I havent even spoke with you in some time and your sound like your still mad.

I did not come of with a rude attitude. I just stated the truth, I know, the true hurts.

I rest my case. No attempt to show how I misrepresented that passage, or any even any willingness to discuss it. Now who wants to side with someone that will not back up his claims when he is confronted with them? Any takers?

 

[cenallen]

Everyone of those passages in the other posts have to do with loosing salvation, are you serious? do you even know what they say? And to answer your question, we are cleansed by the blood of Christ, this is not an act that lasts even if we decide to live in darkness. The Bible says the blood of Christ "cleanses", "ES" in the end of th word, shows on going, it continues to cleans us as long as we are walking in the light:[/SIZE]

6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: 7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us

Did you notice the "IF" in that passage? IF means conditional, IF we walk in the light, continue to walk in the light, what IF we do not? Then read those passages you say have nothign to do with loss of salvation, and while your add it, explain what they mean then.

If we choose to not walk in the light, then we choose darkness, and we choose a life separated from God - ISA 59:1-2.

Jesus gives us the ability to made made complete (Col 1:28) and stand before God sinless, as if we never sinned through his blood, we can repent. IF we choose not to, then we are not in the light, and we have walked away from God's grace and done despite to the Spirit of grace, for teaching we can sin willfully - Heb 10:26-f.

though i agree with your overall message in part, it may be helpful to know in context that here john was dealing with a particular heresy brought in by the gnostics - simply put, that not only was man dual in his being (flesh inherently evil while spirit inherently pure) - that the knowable "god" was also duality itself (good and evil/light and darkness).

they also taught that Jesus didn't have a flesh body (as it would have been for them inherently sinful). this is john's specific condemnation on all who denied that Jesus Christ was come in the flesh (antichrist).

they believed that the pure god (source of pure light) was so far away and remote from creation their 'theology' involved emanations from the source (of light). they corrupted the identity of the True God into an evil Demiurge:

The Supreme Father God or Supreme God of Truth is remote from human affairs; he is unknowable and undetectable by human senses. She/he created a series of supernatural but finite beings called Aeons. One of these was Sophia, a virgin, who in turn gave birth to an defective, inferior Creator-God, also known as the Demiurge (Demiurge means "public craftsman" in Greek.) This lower God is sometimes called Yaldabaoth or Ialdabaoth Jaldabaoth -- from Aramaic words meaning "begetter of the Heavens." This is Jehovah, the God of the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament). He is portrayed as the creator of the earth and its life forms. He is viewed by Gnostics as fundamentally evil, jealous, rigid, lacking in compassion, and prone to genocide.
Gnosticism

so we can see how very serious this heresy was.

the warning about sin is there for us all, but this specific heresy was overwhelming the early church and john addressed gnosticism very much.


1 John 1 That which was from the beginning, that which we have heard, that which we have seen with our eyes, that which we did behold, and our hands did handle, concerning the Word of the Life -- 2 and the Life was manifested, and we have seen, and do testify, and declare to you the Life, the age-during, which was with the Father, and was manifested to us -- 3 that which we have seen and heard declare we to you, that ye also may have fellowship with us, and our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ; 4 and these things we write to you, that your joy may be full.

5 And this is the message that we have heard from Him, and announce to you, that God is light, and darkness in Him is not at all; 6 if we may say -- 'we have fellowship with Him,' and in the darkness may walk -- we lie, and do not the truth; 7 and if in the light we may walk, as He is in the light -- we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son doth cleanse us from every sin; 8 if we may say -- 'we have not sin,' ourselves we lead astray, and the truth is not in us; 9 if we may confess our sins, stedfast He is and righteous that He may forgive us the sins, and may cleanse us from every unrighteousness; 10 if we may say -- 'we have not sinned,' a liar we make Him, and His word is not in us.


i think it's important to know this, since without understanding this we can be very hard on each other as genuine believers, not knowing what john was really addressing here.

the gnostic heresy's flip side was licentiousness, since they believed that as the flesh was inherently evil, the best way to deal with it was to sin all the more.

john was explaining that God has no darkness (duality) in Him at all.
and that Jesus was not an emanation from a remote light source, that He had been with the Father from the beginning.

i hope this helps us to be kinder to one another when using this passage. these people were very far away from the beliefs and faith we profess and understand here (i presume). the actual equivalent to this heresy is Luciferianism, the worship of satan as an angel of light.

i don't think that's what the people here are putting forward, do you?

 

[cenallen]

Rev 3:4 Thou hast a few names even in Sardia which have not defiled their garments ; and they shall walk with me in white; for they are worthy. 5 He that overcometh the same shall be clothed in white rainment and I will not blot out his name from the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.
Matthew 7: Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction and many there be which go in thereat; 14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
ed

placing these 2 passages together this way is not rightly handling the scriptures.
you ought not to use the letter to sardis (which does warn of falling away, more precisely being cut off) connecting it to Jesus' instruction in matthew on seeking Him as the only means of salvation for all the world - two different messages.

sardis was notorious for its opulence and wealth, as well as the idolatrous mingling of cybele worship and other things. there was, as always, a remnant there.

not everyone who gathers near the gospel receives it, not all who assemble in Jesus' Name are born again.

these are two different messages, and should be handled individually, with perhaps a little more care?

 

[feedm3]

I did not come of with a rude attitude. I just stated the truth, I know, the true hurts.

I rest my case. No attempt to show how I misrepresented that passage, or any even any willingness to discuss it. Now who wants to side with someone that will not back up his claims when he is confronted with them? Any takers?

EG what in the world are you talking about? "That passage"? Which passage? Lol man, havent we heard enough from each other? What can we say to each other concerning this subject that has not already been said over and over? "Side with someone"?????

Thats the whole problem here, you think this is and has been about "taking sides", it's not, it's about truth. You just like to argue until you feel satisfied, obviously your still not, sorry but I am. Take care man.

 

[feedm3]

though i agree with your overall message in part, it may be helpful to know in context that here john was dealing with a particular heresy brought in by the gnostics - simply put, that not only was man dual in his being (flesh inherently evil while spirit inherently pure) - that the knowable "god" was also duality itself (good and evil/light and darkness).

they also taught that Jesus didn't have a flesh body (as it would have been for them inherently sinful). this is john's specific condemnation on all who denied that Jesus Christ was come in the flesh (antichrist).

they believed that the pure god (source of pure light) was so far away and remote from creation their 'theology' involved emanations from the source (of light). they corrupted the identity of the True God into an evil Demiurge:

The Supreme Father God or Supreme God of Truth is remote from human affairs; he is unknowable and undetectable by human senses. She/he created a series of supernatural but finite beings called Aeons. One of these was Sophia, a virgin, who in turn gave birth to an defective, inferior Creator-God, also known as the Demiurge (Demiurge means "public craftsman" in Greek.) This lower God is sometimes called Yaldabaoth or Ialdabaoth Jaldabaoth -- from Aramaic words meaning "begetter of the Heavens." This is Jehovah, the God of the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament). He is portrayed as the creator of the earth and its life forms. He is viewed by Gnostics as fundamentally evil, jealous, rigid, lacking in compassion, and prone to genocide.
Gnosticism

so we can see how very serious this heresy was.

the warning about sin is there for us all, but this specific heresy was overwhelming the early church and john addressed gnosticism very much.

Yes, in fact the entire Bible has specif context in which it was dealing with certain false doctrines, mistakes, and sins, yet just as you just said "the warning about sin is there for us all".

So the fact that John was dealing with Gnoctics is good know when looking at why soemthing was said, yet it does not at all make it inapplicalble to us all.

Example - The Corintthian church turned the Lord's supper into a feast. We read what they did, why it was a sin, and know it applies to us all, when we partake of the same.

John's message of walking in the light, is meanig to "abide in the doctrine of Christ", and "darkness" still is the unfruitful works of darkness. Sin, Jn 3:19. So just because he was dealing with certain men and certian false doctrines, does not take away the meaning of walkikng in the light vs Darkness, it still means leaving the light to live in sin. So it is applicable to us now and then, it still binds on us all.

1 John 1 That which was from the beginning, that which we have heard, that which we have seen with our eyes, that which we did behold, and our hands did handle, concerning the Word of the Life -- 2 and the Life was manifested, and we have seen, and do testify, and declare to you the Life, the age-during, which was with the Father, and was manifested to us -- 3 that which we have seen and heard declare we to you, that ye also may have fellowship with us, and our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ; 4 and these things we write to you, that your joy may be full.

5 And this is the message that we have heard from Him, and announce to you, that God is light, and darkness in Him is not at all; 6 if we may say -- 'we have fellowship with Him,' and in the darkness may walk -- we lie, and do not the truth; 7 and if in the light we may walk, as He is in the light -- we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son doth cleanse us from every sin; 8 if we may say -- 'we have not sin,' ourselves we lead astray, and the truth is not in us; 9 if we may confess our sins, stedfast He is and righteous that He may forgive us the sins, and may cleanse us from every unrighteousness; 10 if we may say -- 'we have not sinned,' a liar we make Him, and His word is not in us.


i think it's important to know this, since without understanding this we can be very hard on each other as genuine believers, not knowing what john was really addressing here.

the gnostic heresy's flip side was licentiousness, since they believed that as the flesh was inherently evil, the best way to deal with it was to sin all the more.

john was explaining that God has no darkness (duality) in Him at all.
and that Jesus was not an emanation from a remote light source, that He had been with the Father from the beginning.

i hope this helps us to be kinder to one another when using this passage. these people were very far away from the beliefs and faith we profess and understand here (i presume). the actual equivalent to this heresy is Luciferianism, the worship of satan as an angel of light.

I think the info your provided was great up until you said, these people are not teaching Gnosticism (paraphrase) and implying I should not be using John to show we must walk in the light in order to be saved (continue).

This is where I think you err. Just because they dont believe in Gnosticism does not mean John's words of walking in the light do not apply.

You need to use the remote context of scripture to define what the "light" is, and what "darkness" is. And then notice John's message to those who believed in a false view.

The false view itself was "darkness", the light is the truth. Any false doctrine is darkness, OSAS is darkness, John's message to them not to fall into this darkness, would apply to any doctrine that is not from the light. So it is applicable, and John's words fit to describe any position of false belief that deceives people.

If we used this kind of logic with all scripture, just about nothing would apply to us. "let your light shine before men"...."love your enemies" "neighbors" etc was written to Jews in the first century under the Law of Moses. Their enemies were the Gentiles, neighbors - the Samaritans in which they hated, so does this apply to us?

Of course, we understand the Bible by command, example, and necessary inference, to understand what applies to us.

As I said it is good to know the immediate context, the physical recipients, why it was stated, what was happening at that time, etc, but it is dangerous to make it not apply unless we meet the exact same scenario. Walking in the light means walking in the doctrines of Christ, and by doing so the blood of Christ "cleanses us" (continues to cleanse according to grammar rules) "IF" we are in the light.

 

[feedm3]

If any person could ever walk away and lose or forfeit their salvation, God would have to reverse or undo all that He did for them when they fist believed. He would have to un-justify them whom He justified. He would have to call them unclean whom He had cleansed by His own blood and He would have to take away His righteousness that he imputed to them through faith without works.

NO he would not have to "undo" anything, YOU did it. We all have to stand in judgment. Then those who are accepted will be, those who are not will not be. You "unjustify" yourself, You make yourslef "unclean" YOU YOU YOU, ME ME ME, I, , WE WE WE Get it?

Explain the meaning of this teaching given by our Lord if you will (or any others who believe OSAS):
Notice who "THAT SERVANT IS":

42 And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season?
43 Blessed is that servant,(that does his Lord's will) whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing. 44 Of a truth I say unto you, that he will make him ruler over all that he hath.

45 But and if that servant(Same servant, but different choice) say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken(willfull sin Heb 10:26);
46 The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers(Heb 5:9 ).
47 Andthat servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes

1. vs. 43 and 45 are the same servant but making different choices, so the "he was never saved" argument goes down the toilet.

2. The servant believed he had a Lord, but thought he was not returning soon, so he lived in willful sin.

3. HE was not chastised here on earth, but was not punished until His Lord's return, then was he cast his portion "WITH THE UNBELIEVERS".

QUEST: WHY WAS HE CAST THE SAME PORTION WITH THE UNBELIEVERS UPON HIS LORD'S RETURN??????
what is the message here you think?

Do you all think I like what this says? Do you think I like believing that I can lose my salvation???? No, I dont. I would love to be able to believe we are all going to be saved after believing no matter what we do, but I cant because of what I read.

I know you will all find loopholes, and twisting and redefining of words to make this seem to say anything other than what it does say, but all I can say is while your trying to find a way, look at what your doing in order NOT to abide in the doctrine of Christ - WALK IN THE LIGHT.

Notice the last verse - 47
"That servant" all servants, even you and me;

Which KNEW HIS LORDS WILL BUT DID NOT DO IT.....SHALL BE BEATEN WITH MANY STRIPES

Remote context support:
Matt 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven

This is so plain it's hard for me to fathom why anyone would fight so hard against this. I hope you all really are looking at your where your heart is on this matter.

 

[cenallen]

Yes, in fact the entire Bible has specif context in which it was dealing with certain false doctrines, mistakes, and sins, yet just as you just said "the warning about sin is there for us all".

So the fact that John was dealing with Gnoctics is good know when looking at why soemthing was said, yet it does not at all make it inapplicalble to us all.

and i did say the same, to a degree.
this particular passage, however, has been misused.

Example - The Corintthian church turned the Lord's supper into a feast. We read what they did, why it was a sin, and know it applies to us all, when we partake of the same.

yes, this is true.

John's message of walking in the light, is meanig to "abide in the doctrine of Christ"

actually, i just told you what that particular message was specifically about. the early church would have been well aware of the teaching of Dualism.
that is very specifically what that passage is refuting.
you yourself have added meaning to "abide in the doctrine of Christ".

i simply suggested you use more caution when cut & pasting one passage to another, yet here you are doing it again. this usually indicates a preoccupation with or a need to advance a favorite teaching.
i assume yours is about repentance from sin, and/or no eternal assurance. ironically john himself teaches assurance.

1 John does indeed address repentance (confession), but to the gnostics specifically, he was telling them that they were sinning indeed with their "spirits/minds", not just their "evil" flesh. and that since God is Light and not Dualist in nature (good and evil), confession of sins on the ground of the shed blood and advocacy of Christ cleansed them `from all unrighteousness (which is not evil flesh/material in nature).

and "darkness" still is the unfruitful works of darkness. Sin, Jn 3:19. So just because he was dealing with certain men and certian false doctrines, does not take away the meaning of walkikng in the light vs Darkness, it still means leaving the light to live in sin. So it is applicable to us now and then, it still binds on us all.

I think the info your provided was great up until you said, these people are not teaching Gnosticism (paraphrase) and implying I should not be using John to show we must walk in the light in order to be saved (continue).

This is where I think you err. Just because they dont believe in Gnosticism does not mean John's words of walking in the light do not apply.

You need to use the remote context of scripture to define what the "light" is, and what "darkness" is. And then notice John's message to those who believed in a false view.

The false view itself was "darkness", the light is the truth. Any false doctrine is darkness, OSAS is darkness, John's message to them not to fall into this darkness, would apply to any doctrine that is not from the light.

no, john does not say that in those passages at all. you have added them in and appear to be in the habit of doing so. i'm not interested in changing your mind, but merely hoping you will allow the scriptures to speak on their own and know the contexts.

so you suppose to be the expert on all false doctrine? i can already see you don't know everything, so again i simply suggest proceeding with caution.

if your message to christians is that they are hell-bound for any sin after conversion you will be including yourself in that. i know no one who doesn't confess their sin and repent (have a change of heart about what they've done and desire the strength to not repeat it. yet most of us do, for a time.

perhaps you are the exception.

So it is applicable, and John's words fit to describe any position of false belief that deceives people.

you want to apply the passages to almost everything but what he is actually saying for some reason.

If we used this kind of logic with all scripture, just about nothing would apply to us. "let your light shine before men"...."love your enemies" "neighbors" etc was written to Jews in the first century under the Law of Moses. Their enemies were the Gentiles, neighbors - the Samaritans in which they hated, so does this apply to us?

this is a little silly and un-needed. i`m not using logic, i was placing the passages in precise context - counter-gnosticism. no one here seems to be teaching that man`s flesh and all material things in the world are inherently evil and so we ought to sin all the more.


but of course not.
i agreed with you in principle in the first post.
what i suggested was that you reassess your use of those passages.
perhaps a little study into gnosticism will clarify much of what was delivered to counter their heresies.

just as paul dealt harshly with those who taught the believers had to be circumcised, we understand that this is rarely demanded except by extreme cults, yet it applies universally as a warning against salvation by keeping the law.

As I said it is good to know the immediate context, the physical recipients, why it was stated, what was happening at that time, etc, but it is dangerous to make it not apply unless we meet the exact same scenario. Walking in the light means walking in the doctrines of Christ, and by doing so the blood of Christ "cleanses us" (continues to cleanse according to grammar rules) "IF" we are in the light.

i`m sorry.
you`ll need to go back and re-read the passage.
the condition for walking in the Light (a counter-gnostic phrase) is confession of sins - not `walking in the doctrines of Christ`. john does not say that. you are mixing john and paul.
the very thing i suggested you be careful not to do.

 

[Grandpa]

What an odd thing to try and place scriptures in such a way that it would cause a person to have faith that they could somehow lose their salvation. What's even more odd is trying to persuade other people to have this same faith.

The Bible says the Lord is the Author and Finisher of our Salvation. Jesus Says that no one can take you from His Hand. Jesus says He will never leave you nor forsake you. We are inheriting a Kingdom that cannot be shaken.

A person must have faith in the Lord Jesus first and foremost. From this faith all sorts of blessings can flow. Wisdom, understanding and the gift of the Holy Spirit being among these blessings.

I will keep you folks who think you can lose your salvation in my prayers. I'm sad that you have such a low opinion of my Lord and Saviour and His ability to guide you in the paths of Righteousness, and keep you saved.

 

[feedm3]

actually, i just told you what that particular message was specifically about. the early church would have been well aware of the teaching of Dualism.
that is very specifically what that passage is refuting.
you yourself have added meaning to "abide in the doctrine of Christ".

Wrong, the Bible tells us what the light is. It is Christ, it is His word, no doubt John filled with the same Spirit wrote according to the same meaning the Bible gives us, and according to the same meaning he used the word in his other writtings, and not what commentators say.

i simply suggested you use more caution when cut & pasting one passage to another, yet here you are doing it again. this usually indicates a preoccupation with or a need to advance a favorite teaching.

i assume yours is about repentance from sin, and/or no eternal assurance. ironically john himself teaches assurance.

No I believe we can have full confidence and "know we have eternal life", we know this by the word, and "IF" we abide by the word. But yes repetnace is essential.

I Jn 5:13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God

I agree we should use caution, but where I used John was not misuing the passage, nor it's meaning.

1 John does indeed address repentance (confession), but to the gnostics specifically, he was telling them that they were sinning indeed with their "spirits/minds", not just their "evil" flesh. and that since God is Light and not Dualist in nature (good and evil), confession of sins on the ground of the shed blood and advocacy of Christ cleansed them `from all unrighteousness (which is not evil flesh/material in nature).

Yes I understand he was refuting the teachings of those who believed they had secrete knowlege concering our Lord, yet still, that does not remove it's meaning and apply to all doctrines that do not come from Christ.

no, john does not say that in those passages at all. you have added them in and appear to be in the habit of doing so. i'm not interested in changing your mind, but merely hoping you will allow the scriptures to speak on their own and know the contexts.

I do, that's why I can know when a doctrine is false. If you really believe what I am teaching is wrong, you should be interested in changing my mind so I don't deceive. I did not add anything, John wrote Jn chapter 1, and 3 in which both light and darkness is explained, the same John wrote 1 2 3 Jn, so John did in fact say it. So I need to add nothing, He said it, it's there.

so you suppose to be the expert on all false doctrine? i can already see you don't know everything, so again i simply suggest proceeding with caution.

Do you suppose yourself to be an expert of epistles? Just because you read/were taught that these were the true meanings? I already know I dont "know everything" otherwise I would not need the word of God. However God has given us "all things that pertain to life and godlieness" ALL things, so I know I can know truth, and what is false, by reading the word of God.

II Pet 1:3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue

Anyway why are you becoming defensive and a little insulting, I was glad to hear someone who had something relevant to say. No need in going in that direction, we can discuss in a Christian manner - correct?

if your message to christians is that they are hell-bound for any sin after conversion you will be including yourself in that.

Of course I include myself, look at my sig James 3:1, that is a warning to me. I have always said I am included. I dont teach one who sins after conversion is "hellbound" I teach one who sins after conversion needs to repent (Acts 8 simon the sorcerer) and confess (Rom 10:9), I teach this because the Bible teaches me this. So yes it applies to me.

i know no one who doesn't confess their sin and repent (have a change of heart about what they've done and desire the strength to not repeat it. yet most of us do, for a time.

perhaps you are the exception.

It's funny everytime I repeat these passages it always gets turned into "what about you" "do you sin" this is either because I come off this way (dont know how I always say "we need to..." I use that self inclusive word for a reason) or because people are hoping to damage my character because they dont like the message. Samething the Jews did to Jerimaiah, so I am not offended.

I am no exception, again, if I sin, I repent (a change of mind that leads to an action- the action is stopping) and confess, and God is faithful and just to forgive. Not meaning I can go sin with the attitude I will repent later, but repentacne is sincere and done lamenting our sins against God - "blessed are those who mourn they shall be comforted" - Mourn our sins toward Him.

you want to apply the passages to almost everything but what he is actually saying for some reason.

Give me an example, that is an accrustion, show me what passages I applied wrongly, and then show me why. Just saying it proves nothing, and does not help me see the error you believe I am in.

this is a little silly and un-needed. i`m not using logic, i was placing the passages in precise context - counter-gnosticism. no one here seems to be teaching that man`s flesh and all material things in the world are inherently evil and so we ought to sin all the more.

Yes but some may be walking in darkness, the same darkness John wrote about in the book of John, and the same darkness that covers truth. There are two greek words for darkness, he used the same one in all places. darkness - a hiding - to cover.

but of course not.

i agreed with you in principle in the first post.
what i suggested was that you reassess your use of those passages.
perhaps a little study into gnosticism will clarify much of what was delivered to counter their heresies.

I have had a long study of Gnostism, I knew what you were saying, I also know that "IF we walk in the light" is a conditional statement - IF, walk in the light IS CHRIST no matter what you may feel it is.

just as paul dealt harshly with those who taught the believers had to be circumcised, we understand that this is rarely demanded except by extreme cults, yet it applies universally as a warning against salvation by keeping the law.

Yes and the Gal church who allowed false teachers to deceive them into thinking they did not have to obey the truth, because they were covinced they had to keep part of the Law of Moses in order to be a Christian, was sinful in doing so. This caused them (if they did nto repent) to fall from grace". Christ "would become of no effect to them".

So we should ask ourselves, was it a sin for them to abide in the Law of Moses? YES
Would they Fall from Grace? YES
IMPORTANT: does this only apply to that sin, or any unrepentant sin? ANY - HEB 10:25-f.

Yes I know the context of Hebrews as well, I know they were also already Christians, some needed again to be retaught the basic princples of the gospel, because of returning to the Law of Moses.

Yet this stil does not remove "if we sin willfully", "sin" used in general sense, not "if we return to the law" but if "we sin" willfully, unrepentant, leave God, turn our backs on him, like the prodigal son, we are "dead" if we return we are "alive", returning is repenting.

i`m sorry.

you`ll need to go back and re-read the passage.
the condition for walking in the Light (a counter-gnostic phrase) is confession of sins - not `walking in the doctrines of Christ`. john does not say that. you are mixing john and paul.
the very thing i suggested you be careful not to do

You need to slow down on your accusation, and do a little research first, repectfully. For one who is such an expert on John, you would think this one was memorize, unless your expertise resides more on scholars than the actual text.

II Jn 1:9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son

Jn 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved

Jn 12:46 I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness

5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. 6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: 7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin

How do we walk in the light? By living as Children of the light - obeying the blessed Gospel from which the light now shines - Paul did say that one.

Why Christ was in the world, he was the light, and he told his disciples to "believe the light" while they have it.

Jn 12:36 While ye have light, believe in the light, that ye may be the children of light. These things spake Jesus, and departed, and did hide himself from them

4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them

Now He has left this world, and light shines through his word, because his word is the "power unto salvation":

Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek

If Christ is the light, and believing the light meant following him, and now he is Gone, and gospel is the power fo God unto salvation, and the gospel is the doctrine of Chirst (yes more than the death burial and ressurection, which covers all) I can correctly conclude that walking in the light is walking by, abiding in, living by, the gospel of our savior, the doctrine of Christ.

 

[cenallen]

Wrong, the Bible tells us what the light is. It is Christ, it is His word, no doubt John filled with the same Spirit wrote according to the same meaning the Bible gives us, and according to the same meaning he used the word in his other writtings, and not what commentators say.





No I believe we can have full confidence and "know we have eternal life", we know this by the word, and "IF" we abide by the word. But yes repetnace is essential.

I Jn 5:13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God

I agree we should use caution, but where I used John was not misuing the passage, nor it's meaning.



Yes I understand he was refuting the teachings of those who believed they had secrete knowlege concering our Lord, yet still, that does not remove it's meaning and apply to all doctrines that do not come from Christ.





I do, that's why I can know when a doctrine is false. If you really believe what I am teaching is wrong, you should be interested in changing my mind so I don't deceive. I did not add anything, John wrote Jn chapter 1, and 3 in which both light and darkness is explained, the same John wrote 1 2 3 Jn, so John did in fact say it. So I need to add nothing, He said it, it's there.



Do you suppose yourself to be an expert of epistles? Just because you read/were taught that these were the true meanings? I already know I dont "know everything" otherwise I would not need the word of God. However God has given us "all things that pertain to life and godlieness" ALL things, so I know I can know truth, and what is false, by reading the word of God.

II Pet 1:3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue

Anyway why are you becoming defensive and a little insulting, I was glad to hear someone who had something relevant to say. No need in going in that direction, we can discuss in a Christian manner - correct?


Of course I include myself, look at my sig James 3:1, that is a warning to me. I have always said I am included. I dont teach one who sins after conversion is "hellbound" I teach one who sins after conversion needs to repent (Acts 8 simon the sorcerer) and confess (Rom 10:9), I teach this because the Bible teaches me this. So yes it applies to me.



It's funny everytime I repeat these passages it always gets turned into "what about you" "do you sin" this is either because I come off this way (dont know how I always say "we need to..." I use that self inclusive word for a reason) or because people are hoping to damage my character because they dont like the message. Samething the Jews did to Jerimaiah, so I am not offended.

I am no exception, again, if I sin, I repent (a change of mind that leads to an action- the action is stopping) and confess, and God is faithful and just to forgive. Not meaning I can go sin with the attitude I will repent later, but repentacne is sincere and done lamenting our sins against God - "blessed are those who mourn they shall be comforted" - Mourn our sins toward Him.







Give me an example, that is an accrustion, show me what passages I applied wrongly, and then show me why. Just saying it proves nothing, and does not help me see the error you believe I am in.




Yes but some may be walking in darkness, the same darkness John wrote about in the book of John, and the same darkness that covers truth. There are two greek words for darkness, he used the same one in all places. darkness - a hiding - to cover.



I have had a long study of Gnostism, I knew what you were saying, I also know that "IF we walk in the light" is a conditional statement - IF, walk in the light IS CHRIST no matter what you may feel it is.



Yes and the Gal church who allowed false teachers to deceive them into thinking they did not have to obey the truth, because they were covinced they had to keep part of the Law of Moses in order to be a Christian, was sinful in doing so. This caused them (if they did nto repent) to fall from grace". Christ "would become of no effect to them".

So we should ask ourselves, was it a sin for them to abide in the Law of Moses? YES
Would they Fall from Grace? YES
IMPORTANT: does this only apply to that sin, or any unrepentant sin? ANY - HEB 10:25-f.

Yes I know the context of Hebrews as well, I know they were also already Christians, some needed again to be retaught the basic princples of the gospel, because of returning to the Law of Moses.

Yet this stil does not remove "if we sin willfully", "sin" used in general sense, not "if we return to the law" but if "we sin" willfully, unrepentant, leave God, turn our backs on him, like the prodigal son, we are "dead" if we return we are "alive", returning is repenting.





You need to slow down on your accusation, and do a little research first, repectfully. For one who is such an expert on John, you would think this one was memorize, unless your expertise resides more on scholars than the actual text.

II Jn 1:9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son

Jn 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved

Jn 12:46 I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness

5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. 6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: 7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin

How do we walk in the light? By living as Children of the light - obeying the blessed Gospel from which the light now shines - Paul did say that one.

Why Christ was in the world, he was the light, and he told his disciples to "believe the light" while they have it.

Jn 12:36 While ye have light, believe in the light, that ye may be the children of light. These things spake Jesus, and departed, and did hide himself from them

4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them

Now He has left this world, and light shines through his word, because his word is the "power unto salvation":

Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek

If Christ is the light, and believing the light meant following him, and now he is Gone, and gospel is the power fo God unto salvation, and the gospel is the doctrine of Chirst (yes more than the death burial and ressurection, which covers all) I can correctly conclude that walking in the light is walking by, abiding in, living by, the gospel of our savior, the doctrine of Christ.

very well, i do not have much to argue with there. i agree in principle, but object to the splicing of passages from one book to another (proof-texting). let each passage speak for itself. if you wish to use john to warn against sin, use him, then move to the next book. in one paragraph you go from the synoptic gospel to 2 john to 1 john, cherry-picking as they say.

knowing what john was writing about in the book - see his letter to the elect lady and her children - is crucial, primarily for combatting gnosticism!

my initial and ongoing concern is that we not flog each other about hell. we are eternally secure as long as we are continuing. and even here, i do not dare judge a man i do not know well, nor will see next year. God is at work.

all the christians i fellowship with are very aware when they sin and are repentant.
they are also aware, that john in 1 john makes a continuing clear statement that if we at any time claim to be without sin we are lying to ourselves. we`re never completely free from sin.

this is not in any way in contradiction to all the rest of scripture which instructs us to not abide or continue in sinful lives, minding the flesh, flesh warring against spirit, fleeing from immorality and so on. this struggle continues until we finish the race.

this too is the work of the Spirit. He is powerful to deliver the sons to glory.

blessings to you.

 

[feedm3]

very well, i do not have much to argue with there. i agree in principle, but object to the splicing of passages from one book to another (proof-texting). let each passage speak for itself. if you wish to use john to warn against sin, use him, then move to the next book. in one paragraph you go from the synoptic gospel to 2 john to 1 john, cherry-picking as they say.

knowing what john was writing about in the book - see his letter to the elect lady and her children - is crucial, primarily for combatting gnosticism!

my initial and ongoing concern is that we not flog each other about hell. we are eternally secure as long as we are continuing. and even here, i do not dare judge a man i do not know well, nor will see next year. God is at work.

all the christians i fellowship with are very aware when they sin and are repentant.
they are also aware, that john in 1 john makes a continuing clear statement that if we at any time claim to be without sin we are lying to ourselves. we`re never completely free from sin.

this is not in any way in contradiction to all the rest of scripture which instructs us to not abide or continue in sinful lives, minding the flesh, flesh warring against spirit, fleeing from immorality and so on. this struggle continues until we finish the race.

this too is the work of the Spirit. He is powerful to deliver the sons to glory.

blessings to you.

Well put, I appreiate your input on this matter, and agree, none can say they are without sin, only Jesus was as far as I can tell - Rom 3:23.

Take care

 

[tribesman]

Sin is a condition that leads to death. To be healed of the condition we need Jesus who is the only cure. Jesus is a gift freely given, but we only have the gift if we receive it; which by the way is something we have to do. We are saved by grace..that I totally believe that. But if we dont choose to accept the the gift that God is offering, how can that grace benefit us?

Firstly, I've showed that as natural men we cannot receive it by ourselves at any stretch (Matt.19:24-26, John 6:28-29,44, Eph.2:1-3, 1Cor.12:14), so we cannot take it, it has to be given to us (Matt.19:11, Mark 4:11, Luke 8:10). Once you see this, you should understand that salvation is wholly of God and we have actually no "part to play" in it, because it is not of us, it is of God alone. This is a principle we must hold on to throughout reading all scripture. Secondly, you say that you "totally believe" we are saved by grace, yet you also say that we can go out of that grace. That has to mean that you either believe that grace is earned and have to be maintained by us continually earning and "choosing" it else we go out on it. Or it means that the grace spoken of here is not really saving in itself at all, it just gives us the chance to work a little better on getting saved, if lucky enough. I can't agree with this since it is unscriptural.

Thats my view, so I am waiting on your explanation of what bible means when :
1. He will blot out the from the book of life (Rev 3:5)
2. In James when they talk about wandering form the truth and saving that soul from hell (James 5:19-20)
3. When Paul talk about the possibility of himself becoming a castaway. (I Cor 9:27)

Rev.3:5: This verse does not suggest a possibility of the loss of salvation, for those who are saved. Those who are saved, the Elect, have their names written in the book of life from the foundation of the world and it will remain there (Rev.13:8,17:8). Just as their election and salvation was likewise secured from the foundation of the world by the will of God and not their merit (John 17:4, Rom.9:11, Eph.1.4, Heb.4:3). However, scripture does indeed use terms such being cut off and falling away, but this always refers to the tare, goats or weed. Jude said that such souls had "crept in unawares", souls that God had "of old" ordained to condemnation (Jude v.4). These people were professing believers, they thought that they both did great things for God and experienced great things of God, but they NEVER belonged to Him. They were never saved (Matt.7:21-23). Those who "overcome" do so solely on the ground of the "blood of the lamb" (Rev.7:14,12:11) - not because of anything they add to this work.

James 5:19-20: The greek word used here does not mean convert as in convert to save, but convert as to turn someone from an erring or heretic belief to a correct belief. Another example of this is found in Gal.6:1-2. To think that a work of man can save another man's soul from hell is a very unsystematical interpretation of this scripture. If one is systematically interpreting this scripture with the knowledge that only the work of Christ is what makes the difference between heaven and hell for a sinner it is impossible to think that what is spoken of here should have anything to do with salvation being in the hands of men.

1Cor 9:27: The word "castaway" must not explicitly be referring to salvation here. Paul was concerned about becoming ineffective in his ministry, that his service would be rejected at the judgment seat. Paul was not worried that he could be lost. A contextual interpretation makes this plain since in the same epistle he taught that Christ preserves the believer (1Cor.1:7-9). His concern was about falling short of God’s calling for his life. He mentions running a race and winning the prize. To confuse this passage with salvation must stem from a misunderstanding of the gospel. Salvation is not a reward for faithful and excellent service. The Bible is clear on that salvation is by the free and unmerited grace and mercy of God. Anything that is merited or rewarded is not saving grace (Rom.11:6). But once we are saved we are called to serve Christ and doing so well means a "reward". If a believer on the other hand is not doing this well, he will be chastened by God (Heb.12:6-8, 1Cor.11:31-32). But even if his service was not acceptable, he shall still be saved, even if it has to be by fire (1Cor.3:11-15).

I don't interpret scripture. The word of God is to be revealed, not based on our brilliant understanding thereof. If that was the case, the unredeemed would be able to read and understand...

We are not to lean to our own understanding (and we can not know all things). However, the enlightenment of the Word of God is external as well as internal, equally affecting heart and mind/intellect. If we do not see this, we have a problem. The unsaved cannot "read and understand" because the Word of God is foolishness to them, but that does not mean it is impossible for the saved to read and understand. We have to have due respect for the revelation of the Holy Spirit in the Word - and not to put or seek that somewhere else. That's why letting scripture interpret scripture is so very important. The Holy Spirit would not reveal anything that is contrary to scripture, nor to its historical facts.

This is an area i try to stay away from; because I realise that people will believe what they want anyway. I often leave room for possible error. Just in case I'm sealed myself to a lie. To this date the Holy Spirit who is the one I always go through when I'm not sure has not convicted me otherwise. Until such time:

Romans2:25 For circumcision is indeed profitable if you keep the law; but if you are a breaker of the law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision.

I agree with you that (most) people will believe what they want to believe anyway, however I see no problem with wanting to believe that which is true, but I do see a big problem with people "choosing" to believe something because of their own (or others') mere preference or "feelings" about that something. Usually such people have a very hard time seeing scripture objectively. So, if they are in error it is usually very hard for them to be convinced of it unless they have a certain subjective feeling or (internal) experience. If one has an all too fixed idea of how the Holy Spirit works and directs, one can easily fall prey to a self-centered and subjective approach to scripture reading/interpretation that is certain to take one off base. The question is only how much.

Finally I add that I don't strictly believe in what is sometimes called OSAS (once saved always saved) but I believe in what is known as the perseverance of the Saints (P of TULIP). If you want to know more about that (or something else) just ask.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

EG what in the world are you talking about? "That passage"? Which passage? Lol man, havent we heard enough from each other? What can we say to each other concerning this subject that has not already been said over and over? "Side with someone"?????

Thats the whole problem here, you think this is and has been about "taking sides", it's not, it's about truth. You just like to argue until you feel satisfied, obviously your still not, sorry but I am. Take care man.

You don't get it do you? You posted in an open chat room a part of a passage, and said this proves that we can lose salvation. I took the passage apart. to prove that it does not say what your saying. Then you do not respond to it. And when confronted, you think it is a me against you issue. I know the HS will never convince you of your works based Gospel will get you no where. So I am no longer trying to convince you. I am, however, Going to show ALL THE OTHER PEOPLE IN THE ROOM, who read your post how you took it out of context, and show them what was truely being said.

if you do not wish to show how I was wrong or mistranslated it or whatever, thats fine. Everyone who reads and still has questions concerning this doctrine can see that. I do it for them. done trying to do it for you! My origional response was not even directed to or at you, It was a response to what SOMEONE else said.

 

[Cobus]

What about these people, you deside whetehr they had salvation or not.... 2 Peter 2:20 to 22....
For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
2Pe 2:21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
2Pe 2:22 But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.

Looks like the Bible does talk about a group that were washed but returned to the mire!

And there is another place where God says that some went so bad that they CANNOT be saved again! Got to go watch my son play rugby... God bless

 

[eternally-gratefull]

What about these people, you deside whetehr they had salvation or not.... 2 Peter 2:20 to 22....
For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
2Pe 2:21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
2Pe 2:22 But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.

Looks like the Bible does talk about a group that were washed but returned to the mire!

And there is another place where God says that some went so bad that they CANNOT be saved again! Got to go watch my son play rugby... God bless

1. No where in this passage does it say they were washed. Having knowledge of truth, and accepting truth in a way you had faith in it is NOT THE SAME.

2. It says they escaped. You escape by finding Gods people and having fellowship with them, and learning the knowledge of truth, yet again, this does not prove you ever had faith in it.

3. A dog, He is saying something here. A dog who would become a christian would become a new creature in Christ right? Does not scripture say this? Peter makes it clear. They came in as a dog, they acted like something else. But as their true nature (that of a dog) he returned to his own vomit. what he really LIKED. She spit on the gospel of Christ, which would have washed her. But she did not trust it, so she did what came natural to her.

remember in John. A person born of God can not do this, why? they have been born of God. What did John say of those who left? THEY NEVER WERE OF US. for if they WERE OF US, they NEVER WOULD HAVE LEFT.

people can twist a passage all they want, it does not make it right.