License to Sin

[Aaron56]

Nicodemus thought that re-entering his mother's womb was an absurd idea. And we're debating about the need for being "born again again."

Right?! Although to be fair he said that’s not his position.

 

[Delvianna]

Do you know what spit you out from a cultural pov meant to the believers?
Also, did the Jews know the scriptures or know Christ? And what was accounted to them for their belief? I know both the Bible and the One who wrote it. You make assumptions based upon presuppositions that are not compatible with God’s character.

Where are my assumptions? Because so far, I've backed up every statement and shown how your interpretations of wording is inaccurate. And you haven't even bothered to counter my last message showing how your understanding is incorrect. So how is that "assumptions"?? Making a generic statement, doesn't make it accurate. So far, the only thing you've shown is your inaccurate understanding that you can't adequately defend. But if this back and forth is just going to continue with just attack statements, then I'll just move on because this is a waste of time.

 

[Delvianna]

Nicodemus thought that re-entering his mother's womb was an absurd idea. And we're debating about the need for being "born again again."

No one is arguing that.

 

[Aaron56]

Where are my assumptions? Because so far, I've backed up every statement and shown how your interpretations of wording is inaccurate. And you haven't even bothered to counter my last message showing how your understanding is incorrect. So how is that "assumptions"?? Making a generic statement, doesn't make it accurate. So far, the only thing you've shown is your inaccurate understanding that you can't adequately defend. But if this back and forth is just going to continue with just attack statements, then I'll just move on because this is a waste of time.

I can’t help you. Keep digging. Where we don’t agree God will show you.

 

[Delvianna]

I can’t help you. Keep digging. Where we don’t agree God will show you.

Same to you brother.

 

[Mem]

No one is arguing that.

Ok, then your position must be that if you fall away, then lost forever and ever with no hope of redemption unless you can figure out a way to crucify Jesus again, and I don't think anyone can argue that will happen since it is impossible to crucify Him again and it would be shameful to even try. It would one look like an idiot in broad daylight.

 

[Mem]

So, the takeaway from the lesson is, always believe that His grace is sufficient to save, especially when you find that your faith is wavering because of your own(ed) insufficiency.

 

[Inquisitor]

I don't really want to go down another road that veers off from the OP, unless you want to elaborate and draw it back to the topic of this thread.

So to summarize my stance:
1) Once saved, Always saved is biblically incorrect as you can lose salvation by living in sin.
2) If you lose salvation from living in sin, you cannot be "saved" again. Hell is where you will be.

I think everyone sins and sin is not the reason for losing salvation on it's own.

If we define how we are saved, in the first place, then we will understand how someone could lose their salvation.

Romans 10:9-10
That if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead,
you will be saved; for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses,
resulting in salvation.

Seems straight forward that a Christian that no longer believes in Jesus is no longer saved.

So how does sin play a part in this process of someone falling from grace?

Sin is deceitful which means that if you sow to the desires of the flesh as a Christian. Then slowly over time
you will lose sight of the reason for your salvation. The usual and well worn path for falling away from Jesus
is starting to miss fellowship, praying less, missing church, not reading the scripture.

Eventually the former Christian no longer would confess the name of Jesus and certainly will not trust in the Lord
for their salvation. They simply no longer believe in Jesus and that's game over.

There are other ways to fall from grace.

 

[Delvianna]

Ok, then your position must be that if you fall away, then lost forever and ever with no hope of redemption

Yes.

unless you can figure out a way to crucify Jesus again

No. Please see post #27

 

[Delvianna]

I think everyone sins and sin is not the reason for losing salvation on it's own.

If we define how we are saved, in the first place, then we will understand how someone could lose their salvation.

Romans 10:9-10
That if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead,
you will be saved; for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses,
resulting in salvation.

Seems straight forward that a Christian that no longer believes in Jesus is no longer saved.

So how does sin play a part in this process of someone falling from grace?

Sin is deceitful which means that if you sow to the desires of the flesh as a Christian. Then slowly over time
you will lose sight of the reason for your salvation. The usual and well worn path for falling away from Jesus
is starting to miss fellowship, praying less, missing church, not reading the scripture.

Eventually the former Christian no longer would confess the name of Jesus and certainly will not trust in the Lord
for their salvation. They simply no longer believe in Jesus and that's game over.

There are other ways to fall from grace.

Hebrews 6, please see post #25 To answer your question about how sins plays a part.

But I do agree with the rest of your assessment. That's a good example of another way someone can fall away from grace.

 

[Mem]

Yes.

No. Please see post #27

Thank you. I'm determined to find the kink in the fabric that needs to be unraveled and smoothed out. I can't see it as well as I can 'feel' for it. I fully appreciate your longsuffering.

 

[Inquisitor]

Check this out! The guy being spoken of in this video is teaching one can live in willful disobedience and still be saved in direct opposition to what the Lord teaches in the New Testament. Especially the part where he is falsely claiming we can refuse to forgive others and still be saved.

Jesus said if we do not forgive others of their sins, WE shall not be forgiven.

It's amazing the amount of false doctrine being taught out there by those who are agents of darkness portraying themselves as Christians.

Here's the video:

On the subject of water baptism and repentance.

John the Baptist taught repentance and the water baptism.

It appears that early in Christian history that is what Christians believed repent and be water baptized.

Yet, there is another type of baptism that Jesus spoke of.

John the Baptist repeatedly stated that he baptized with water, but the one who was coming after him would
"baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire" (Matthew 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16; John 1:33).

The question then arises.

Did Jesus fulfill the water baptism of John with the Spiritual Baptism of the Holy Spirit?

The water baptism occurs only once in a Christian life.

The Spiritual Baptism is an eternal baptism.

 

[Delvianna]

Thank you. I'm determined to find the kink in the fabric that needs to be unraveled and smoothed out. I can't see it as well as I can 'feel' for it. I fully appreciate your longsuffering.

No worries, if you think of it or have any other questions let me know.

 

[Mem]

I said: "The warning is that if it happens, renewal to repentance is impossible."

Then I ask the question: If genuine believers cannot fall away, then why warn them about the consequences of falling away?

And then I sum up my point: Rather, it's warning that those who knowingly reject the once and for all sacrifice after genuinely sharing in its blessings have nowhere else to turn for repentance because there is no other sacrifice beyond Christ's one sacrifice.

Meaning, there's no going back. If you were saved and fell away, that's it. You cannot become "saved" again.

I'll also repeat what I said about this being "elementary".

Those that return to the law fall are defined as having fallen from grace, that is the context (or subject of the body) of those verses. And the writer wonders at why they must be fed milk (the elementary) again when he'd rather graduate them to solid food. Why would he be concerned with getting solid food to them if "there's no going back"?

 

[Inquisitor]

Hebrews 6, please see post #25 To answer your question about how sins plays a part.

But I do agree with the rest of your assessment. That's a good example of another way someone can fall away from grace.

Hebrews 6 is about sowing to the Spirit and not to the flesh, more precisely, the flesh yields thorns and thistles.

Obviously, the fruit of the Holy Spirit is the opposite of the thorns and thistles.

 

[Cameron143]

If Jesus has said He will never leave us or forsake us, would He also be present in the lake of fire for someone who "lost" salvation?

 

[Inquisitor]

Those that return to the law fall are defined as having fallen from grace, that is the context (or subject of the body) of those verses. And the writer wonders at why they must be fed milk (the elementary) again when he'd rather graduate them to solid food. Why would he be concerned with getting solid food to them if "there's no going back"?

Agree absolutely, because that is the context of what the Hebrews were doing, returning to the law.

I asked AI to see if AI recognizes the embedded context in Hebrews.

The context of the Book of Hebrews is primarily an urgent appeal to Jewish Christians who, under severe persecution,
were tempted to abandon Christ and return to the Law of Moses. The author writes to prove that Jesus and the
New Covenant are far superior.

So Mem your on the winning side.

 

[Inquisitor]

If Jesus has said He will never leave us or forsake us, would He also be present in the lake of fire for someone who "lost" salvation?

Sow to the flesh and you will die.

 

[Cameron143]

Sow to the flesh and you will die.

Doesn't answer my question in the least.

 

[Mem]

Agree absolutely, because that is the context of what the Hebrews were doing, returning to the law.

I asked AI to see if AI recognizes the embedded context in Hebrews.

The context of the Book of Hebrews is primarily an urgent appeal to Jewish Christians who, under severe persecution,
were tempted to abandon Christ and return to the Law of Moses. The author writes to prove that Jesus and the
New Covenant are far superior.

So Mem your on the winning side.

Ahh so, the knot appears to be determining whether the writer's audience actually did not, even if only for a short period, return to the law (because if they did, even for a short period, then they'd be lost forever) in order that we can properly apply the teaching.