Once saved always saved is a false doctrine..

wolfsbane · 09-03-2008 6:12pm

Those that believe "once saved always saved" is a false docterine.

Run_to_da_hills said:

I was expecting that answer.which makes those three parables out to be NONSENSE .

No they don't - they warn that not all who profess faith are genuine. This removes a possible stigma on the gospel - that God is unable to keep most of those who come to Him, or that the Cross is a massive failure, or that God is ultimately captive to man's will.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfsbane
Matthew 7:21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’.

No there is no contradicrtion what so ever. Many saved will endure to the end and many "saved" will fall away from grace and be danmed as simple as that.

You completely ignore what Christ says: "I never knew you" Not , "I knew you for a while, until you fell away".

Such will be many of these greedy Gospel prerachers and television evangelists.

You think any of them were ever saved? They are like Judas, thieves from the beginning. But you must believe Judas was also truly saved?

This is also discussed Romans 16 vs 17.18 "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple". Romans 16 vs 17,18

Indeed - false brethren, as Paul calls them elsewhere. Not fallen, FALSE.2 Corinthians 11:26 in journeys often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils of my own countrymen, in perils of the Gentiles, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren;

Galatians 2:4 And this occurred because of false brethren secretly brought in (who came in by stealth to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage),

Or savage wolves:
Acts 20:29 For I know this, that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock.

These parables preach of "falling away from grace" a choice made by man and not god. a person makes the choice to follow Christ or not. Jesus preaches more about Hell than Heaven in the Bible. A book which you dismiss as important because you have this "Get out of Jail card" in your back pocket. A card which gives you amnesty to all your actions of the future no matter how bad they get. I certainly dont buy that.

I am just perplexed that you can accuse me of dismissing the Bible, or continuing to say I believe I have an amnesty for sin. Do you not bother to read my posts? Did you not hear me say that those who practice sin never were Christians? Did you not check the Bible passages I gave you?

I begin to suspect you don't want to hear what the Bible says, but are committed to some half-baked American 'fundamentalist' who is ignorant both of history and Bible. How ironic that this ability to fall from grace is a key Roman Catholic doctrine, as Noel rightly points out, but is promoted by those who cry loudest about the errors of Rome!

But here is a further chance to prove your submission to Scripture:

Answer this - JC and I have asked you about it several times and you ignored it - does Hebrews 6:4-6 teach it is IMPOSSIBLE for those who fall away to return again?

Run_to_da_hills · 11-03-2008 11:00pm

Not sure.

wolfsbane wrote: »

You completely ignore what Christ says: "I never knew you" Not , "I knew you for a while, until you fell away".

Once again typical of OSAS preachers, You quote scripture but ommitting the most important part of the verse. "And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity" Matthew 7vs23.
Backsliders are those who have fallen back into their iniquity and Our lord dose not want to know them (Unless they repent.)

wolfsbane wrote: »

I am just perplexed that you can accuse me of dismissing the Bible, or continuing to say I believe I have an amnesty for sin. Do you not bother to read my posts? Did you not hear me say that those who practice sin never were Christians? Did you not check the Bible passages I gave you??

Any one who believes in the lie of OSAS believes they have a full amnesty from future sin and backlsliding. I have backslidden several time since my convert back in January of 1986. I went for almost 10 years without entering a Church or opening a Bible(Except a Catholic Church for weddings and funerals) . Certain circumstances have got me to turn back to god including an almost fatal car accident in 1996, However I believe those that were once enlightened or "Saved" and are living in sin and do not answer gods whispers to repent and are living a double life are back on the wide road and are only fooling themselves by playing the church game. God detests double mindedness. "A double minded man is unstable in all his ways" James 1vs8. also "So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth".Revelation 3vs 16

wolfsbane wrote: »

I begin to suspect you don't want to hear what the Bible says, but are committed to some half-baked American 'fundamentalist' who is ignorant both of history and Bible. How ironic that this ability to fall from grace is a key Roman Catholic doctrine, as Noel rightly points out, but is promoted by those who cry loudest about the errors of Rome!??

It is infact the American 'fundamentalist' Baptist movement that I hold responsible for dwelling on Calvinst Docterine of "perseverence of the saints" the likes of Billy Graham and others leading millions into believe in this dirty lie of the Devil.

wolfsbane wrote: »

But here is a further chance to prove your submission to Scripture:

Answer this - JC and I have asked you about it several times and you ignored it - does Hebrews 6:4-6 teach it is IMPOSSIBLE for those who fall away to return again?

There you go again, Quoting your little bit of scripture without the body of the text included. .

"For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame. Note: The word for enlightened also means imbued (permeated) with saving knowledge. The word for tasted also means partook of, enjoyed, experienced. So that proves these people were real born-again Christians. The word for if here does NOT mean if. It means and, also, even, indeed, but. The NASB has the correct translation here: and then have fallen away The if is not justifiable. It makes it look like if you ever fall away then you can never get back. That is not true. and then have fallen away means that they are and still in the fallen away state. The Greek word for fall away means to deviate from the right path, turn aside, wander, to error, to fall away from the true faith. But one can get out of the fallen away state by no longer being deviated from the right path, and no longer not having faith, by turning back to God. Then God's goodness leads them to repentance (Romams 2:4).

This Scripture clearly indicates that a person may become a partaker of the Holy Spirit, obviously a true born-again Christian, and yet fall away and be lost.

J C · 12-03-2008 12:05am

Those that believe "once saved always saved" is a false docterine.

wrote:

Originally Posted by wolfsbane
You completely ignore what Christ says: "I never knew you" Not , "I knew you for a while, until you fell away".

Run_to_da_hills
Once again typical of OSAS preachers, You quote scripture but ommitting the most important part of the verse. "And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity" Matthew 7vs23.
Backsliders are those who have fallen back into their iniquity and Our lord dose not want to know them (Unless they repent.)

.....the MOST IMPORTANT part of this verse....... in deciding the validity of the OSAS position .......is the phrase by Jesus Christ "I never knew you" in relation to workers of iniquity....

i.e. Jesus confirms that He NEVER knew these people ......and they therefore NEVER were saved!!!:cool:

wrote:

Run_to_da_hills
Any one who believes in the lie of OSAS believes they have a full amnesty from future sin and backlsliding.

We both appear to believe that the Saved should continue to avoid sin......(because it hastens physical death and out of love and respect for God. in my case)......and in your case for these reasons, as well as avoiding perdition).......so there isn't much 'licence' to sin or backslide in either of our positions!!!!

wrote:

Run_to_da_hills
I have backslidden several time since my convert back in January of 1986. I went for almost 10 years without entering a Church or opening a Bible(Except a Catholic Church for weddings and funerals) . Certain circumstances have got me to turn back to god including an almost fatal car accident in 1996, However I believe those that were once enlightened or "Saved" and are living in sin and do not answer gods whispers to repent and are living a double life are back on the wide road and are only fooling themselves by playing the church game. God detests double mindedness. "A double minded man is unstable in all his ways" James 1vs8. also "So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth".Revelation 3vs 16

.....sounds like your life has been a bit of a 'roller coaster'.......
.......you say that you didn't fellowship with Christians for the first 10 years after you were 'converted'........so are you SURE that you have been saved???

wrote:

Originally Posted by wolfsbane

Answer this - JC and I have asked you about it several times and you ignored it - does Hebrews 6:4-6 teach it is IMPOSSIBLE for those who fall away to return again?

Run_to_da_hills
There you go again, Quoting your little bit of scripture without the body of the text included.

"For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame. Note: The word for enlightened also means imbued (permeated) with saving knowledge. The word for tasted also means partook of, enjoyed, experienced. So that proves these people were real born-again Christians. The word for if here does NOT mean if. It means and, also, even, indeed, but. The NASB has the correct translation here: and then have fallen away The if is not justifiable. It makes it look like if you ever fall away then you can never get back. That is not true. and then have fallen away means that they are and still in the fallen away state. The Greek word for fall away means to deviate from the right path, turn aside, wander, to error, to fall away from the true faith. But one can get out of the fallen away state by no longer being deviated from the right path, and no longer not having faith, by turning back to God. Then God's goodness leads them to repentance (Romams 2:4).

.....so WHAT are you saying????

The question that you were asked is DOES the word 'impossible' ........which I have highlighted in your posting above indicate that it is impossible for a Saved Christian who 'falls away' to be renewed again to repentance?
......or is this verse referring to people who were enlightened by the Holy Spirit and the Word of God to the FULL reality of Salvation......but who 'fell away' before they were saved and REFUSED salvation (in full knowledge of what they were rejecting)???

......this passage of Scripture CLEARLY confirms the terrible reality that there ARE some people for whom it is 'impossible' to renew again to repenntance!!!!

.......so WHO are these people????

......are they Saved Christians who have repudiated their salvation......or are they unsaved people who have refused salvation(in full knowledge of what they were rejecting)?

Run_to_da_hills · 12-03-2008 12:38am

Not sure.

J C wrote: »

.
...sounds like your life has been a bit of a 'roller coaster'.......
.......you say that you didn't fellowship with Christians for the first 10 years after you were 'converted'........so are you SURE that you have been saved???

Yes I know the date and time of my conversion, I have backslid a few times I.E. got drunk, took extacy pills and dope, neglected Bible study and church and admitt all this and repented of them. Unlike those holier than thou type that cannot admit that they have any flaws in their life. It is these type of OSAS hypocrits that I cannot stand in a church, they look down on those that have fallen and threat them as if they have never been saved.

J C · 12-03-2008 4:25pm

Those that believe "once saved always saved" is a false docterine.

wrote:

Run to da hills
Yes I know the date and time of my conversion, I have backslid a few times I.E. got drunk, took extacy pills and dope, neglected Bible study and church and admit all this and repented of them.

I have to say to you that these are not the ‘fruits’ one would expect in a newly Saved Christian.

While we remain capable of sin after we are Saved, the sinful dimension to our lives tends to be brought under control after we are Saved and our spiritual ‘fruits’ tend to be of God and for God.

Why do you call your enlightenment experience in 1986 your ‘conversion’?
……were you ‘converted’ from one religion to another religion in 1986…….or were you ‘Saved in Jesus Christ’ then???

wrote:

Run to da hills
Any one who believes in the lie of OSAS believes they have a full amnesty from future sin and backlsliding……….

...... those holier than thou type that cannot admit that they have any flaws in their life. It is these type of OSAS hypocrits that I cannot stand in a church, they look down on those that have fallen and threat them as if they have never been saved.

…….so WHICH is it…….
……are OSAS people openly sinning and backsliding with impunity …….. because they believe that the have a full amnesty from future sin……
……….or are they hypocrites proclaiming themselves to be sinless…..while leading inwardly sinful lives?????

I can confirm that they are NEITHER……
…… Saved Christians try to avoid sin and backsliding......because it hastens physical death and out of love and respect for the God who saved them.
They are ALSO acutely aware that they are sinners undeserving of God’s mercy….who have been saved through NO MERIT of their own…….

......so there is no room for smugness or being ‘holier than thou’ for any Saved sinner .

wrote:

Run to da hills
It is these type of OSAS hypocrits that I cannot stand in a church, they look down on those that have fallen and threat them as if they have never been saved.

IF they deny that they are sinners….then they ARE hypocrites.

The saved should have sympathy and compassion for the unsaved……and they should help them onto the 'narrow path' that leads to Salvation.

Run_to_da_hills · 12-03-2008 7:12pm

Not sure.

J C wrote: »

I have to say to you that these are not the ‘fruits’ one would expect in a newly Saved Christian..

No they are not and they are no different to any professed Christian telling a lie or looking at a woman with adultary in his heart.It was the process of backsliding that got me back to the way I would have been before I was saved, Ie Dog returning to his Vomit, something OSAS people totally dismiss like other many other important scriptures. Peter Denied Christ three times, is that something of the spirit? (According to OSAS Peter was probably never saved)

J C wrote: »

Why do you call your enlightenment experience in 1986 your ‘conversion’?
……were you ‘converted’ from one religion to another religion in 1986…….or were you ‘Saved in Jesus Christ’ then???.

I call it an enlightment because I came to know the truth at that moment. I found out the truth that you are saved only by accepting and following Christ through the scriptures and not by any means of unconditional salvation.

wolfsbane · 12-03-2008 8:48pm

Those that believe "once saved always saved" is a false docterine.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Once again typical of OSAS preachers, You quote scripture but ommitting the most important part of the verse. "And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity" Matthew 7vs23.
Backsliders are those who have fallen back into their iniquity and Our lord dose not want to know them (Unless they repent.)
Any one who believes in the lie of OSAS believes they have a full amnesty from future sin and backlsliding. I have backslidden several time since my convert back in January of 1986. I went for almost 10 years without entering a Church or opening a Bible(Except a Catholic Church for weddings and funerals) . Certain circumstances have got me to turn back to god including an almost fatal car accident in 1996, However I believe those that were once enlightened or "Saved" and are living in sin and do not answer gods whispers to repent and are living a double life are back on the wide road and are only fooling themselves by playing the church game. God detests double mindedness. "A double minded man is unstable in all his ways" James 1vs8. also "So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth".Revelation 3vs 16
It is infact the American 'fundamentalist' Baptist movement that I hold responsible for dwelling on Calvinst Docterine of "perseverence of the saints" the likes of Billy Graham and others leading millions into believe in this dirty lie of the Devil.

There you go again, Quoting your little bit of scripture without the body of the text included. .

"For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame. Note: The word for enlightened also means imbued (permeated) with saving knowledge. The word for tasted also means partook of, enjoyed, experienced. So that proves these people were real born-again Christians. The word for if here does NOT mean if. It means and, also, even, indeed, but. The NASB has the correct translation here: and then have fallen away The if is not justifiable. It makes it look like if you ever fall away then you can never get back. That is not true. and then have fallen away means that they are and still in the fallen away state. The Greek word for fall away means to deviate from the right path, turn aside, wander, to error, to fall away from the true faith. But one can get out of the fallen away state by no longer being deviated from the right path, and no longer not having faith, by turning back to God. Then God's goodness leads them to repentance (Romams 2:4).

This Scripture clearly indicates that a person may become a partaker of the Holy Spirit, obviously a true born-again Christian, and yet fall away and be lost.

Dear Brother

You have a real problem - either you abandon the English language and make NEVER to mean USED TO, BUT NO LONGER DO; and IMPOSSIBLE to mean SOMETIMES POSSIBLE - or you abandon your Christians can fall away and be lost, or fall away and be restored theology. You can't have both.

I encourage you to keep good English and gain good theology.

:):)

wolfsbane · 15-03-2008 8:59pm

Those that believe "once saved always saved" is a false docterine.

Run_to_da_hills said:

It is infact the American 'fundamentalist' Baptist movement that I hold responsible for dwelling on Calvinst Docterine of "perseverence of the saints" the likes of Billy Graham and others leading millions into believe in this dirty lie of the Devil.

BTW, just to point out that American fundamentalists generally hate Calvinism. Two friends of mine were expelled from Bob Jones University many years ago for coming to Calvinist beliefs.

Run_to_da_hills · 17-03-2008 10:35am

Not sure.

wolfsbane wrote: »

Run_to_da_hills said:

BTW, just to point out that American fundamentalists generally hate Calvinism. Two friends of mine were expelled from Bob Jones University many years ago for coming to Calvinist beliefs.

That’s kind of strange because most of these same Churches that would reject Calvanism would still holds on to one of their five points i.e. "Preservation of the Saints".

Fred Phelps of the Westboro Baptist Church also holds to it.

http://www.westborobaptistchurch.com/cgi-bin/perlfect/searchwbc/search.pl?q=tulip&showurl=%2Fwritten%2Fwbcinfo%2Ftulip.html

wolfsbane · 22-03-2008 6:19pm

Those that believe "once saved always saved" is a false docterine.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

That’s kind of strange because most of these same Churches that would reject Calvanism would still holds on to one of their five points i.e. "Preservation of the Saints".

Fred Phelps of the Westboro Baptist Church also holds to it. http://www.westborobaptistchurch.com/cgi-bin/perlfect/searchwbc/search.pl?q=tulip&showurl=%2Fwritten%2Fwbcinfo%2Ftulip.html

You are utterly mistaken about them holding on to the Preservation of the Saints. They hold to the error that a Christian can live anyway he pleases and still go to heaven. Calvinism teaches that the Christian will overcome in his war with sin - when he falls, he rises again/when he sins, he repents. The only exception is when God disciplines him by death, so that he is taken out of his sin before he has time to repent. In both cases he is preserved by God from sin and its wages.

As to Phelps, he is just a nutter, by all appearances. He has latched on to Calvinism as a system to cover his theological requirements, but he has invented his own empire. I would say he is to Calvinism what the Pope is to Trinitarianism.

Run_to_da_hills · 23-03-2008 2:48pm

Not sure.

wolfsbane wrote: »

They hold to the error that a Christian can live anyway he pleases and still go to heaven.

This is exactly what OSAS believes in, I certainly don't believe in this. I believe that a born-again Christian will be more scrutinized by his lifestyle than the unsaved and will suffer a greater loss than the unsaved should they not take up their calling.

Fred Phelps is just an OSAS nutter gone to extreems.

wolfsbane · 23-03-2008 6:52pm

Those that believe "once saved always saved" is a false docterine.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

This is exactly what OSAS believes in, I certainly don't believe in this. I believe that a born-again Christian will be more scrutinized by his lifestyle than the unsaved and will suffer a greater loss than the unsaved should they not take up their calling.

Fred Phelps is just an OSAS nutter gone to extreems.

I'm glad you now see the OSAS of Fundamentalism is NOT Calvinism.

wolfsbane · 23-03-2008 7:02pm

Those that believe "once saved always saved" is a false docterine.

Just found this site that helpfully discusses the OSAS error, and shows the historic Reformed view:
http://fundyreformed.wordpress.com/2007/08/27/man-centered-christianity-part-4/

J C · 01-04-2008 9:04pm

Those that believe "once saved always saved" is a false docterine.

wolfsbane wrote: »

Just found this site that helpfully discusses the OSAS error, and shows the historic Reformed view:
http://fundyreformed.wordpress.com/2007/08/27/man-centered-christianity-part-4/

The following quote from the above link caught my eye:
“I suddenly saw that someone could use all the language of evangelical Christianity, and yet the center was fundamentally the self, my need of salvation. And God is auxiliary to that….I also saw that quite a lot of evangelical Christianity can easily slip, can become centered in me and my need of salvation, and not in the glory of God.” — quoted in Tim Stafford, “God’s Missionary to Us”, Christianity Today, Dec. 9, 1996.

YES we DO have a need for salvation........and NO it is NOT selfish for us to cry out in faith to God to save us......in fact it is a requirement of our Salvation that we do so!!!!!

The glorious omnipotence of God is obvious and a given......and everyone who HUMBLES themselves to repent of their self-centred sinful natures, to believe on Jesus Christ WILL be Saved......and by this humbling of themselves they place God at the centre of their lives......and NOT as an auxillary to anything!!!!

Our receipt of Salvation actually TOTALLY DEPENDS on the Glorious Omnipotence of God......and our belief and acknowledgement thereof!!!

I also read the following link on OSAS from the link that was provided above....
http://fundyreformed.wordpress.com/2006/02/11/once-saved-always-saved/

.....and I came across the following statement!!!!
"Can a Christian fall away? Yes. Can someone who is truly regenerate, elect of God, an eternal Christian, fall away? No, clearly not."

......so there are apparently 'Temporary Christians' and there are 'Eternal Christians'.........

.........anyway Jesus Christ saves ALL who repent and believe on Him .............

.........and the Saved show the fruits of their Salvation in the lives that they lead.......

........they are still sinners in sinful bodies.........and they may fall a thousand times......and repent a thousand times......and they will be forgiven a thousand times.........by a loving and just God who died that everybody who believes on Him might be saved.

We are saved by GRACE and NOT by WORKS.........but being Saved does NOT licence us to sin........we will suffer the full temporal consequences if we do so.......

No man can judge the saved state of any other person......this is strictly a matter between each person and God.

......and could I also remind everyone that although the Local Church can judge (and sanction) openly sinful behaviour amongst it's members......
......Churches are obviously completely powerless to detect .....and therefore to judge (or sanction) the secret sins of their members ......sins which are an equal abomination to God !!!!:)

.......and the ONLY differences between the Saved and the Unsaved is that the Saved are indwelt by the Holy Spirit.....and they are SAVED from Eternal Perdition!!!!

BOTH the Saved and the Unsaved are sinners fully deserving of Hell.......and they BOTH may love and care for their fellow man.....and lead outwardly righteous lives. The ONLY difference between them is that the Saved have asked in faith .....and received in reality, the power of God in their lives here on Earth and the salvation of God in the next life.
......and the Saved lead much more righteous lives and have much greater spiritual and theological discernment as a result!!!!

wolfsbane · 02-04-2008 8:48pm

Those that believe "once saved always saved" is a false docterine.

JC said:

.....and I came across the following statement!!!!
"Can a Christian fall away? Yes. Can someone who is truly regenerate, elect of God, an eternal Christian, fall away? No, clearly not."

......so there are apparently 'Temporary Christians' and there are 'Eternal Christians'.........

No, my brother, you have misunderstood him - albeit he is at fault for not making himself clearer on the spot. He does clarify himself later in the article:
In other words, we should not conclude like some Arminians that all professing believers who fall away have in fact lost their salvation. Rather we should conclude that they were only professing but not possessing faith.

By Can a Christian fall away?, he means Can a PROFESSING Christian fall away? His point being that even one who speaks about a conversion experience, about being baptised, being a faithful church member for years, a pastor or evangelist even - they may only have rejoiced in the good news temporarily, but the root of the matter was never in them.

J C · 02-04-2008 9:38pm

Those that believe "once saved always saved" is a false docterine.

wolfsbane wrote: »

JC said:

No, my brother, you have misunderstood him - albeit he is at fault for not making himself clearer on the spot. He does clarify himself later in the article:
In other words, we should not conclude like some Arminians that all professing believers who fall away have in fact lost their salvation. Rather we should conclude that they were only professing but not possessing faith.

By Can a Christian fall away?, he means Can a PROFESSING Christian fall away? His point being that even one who speaks about a conversion experience, about being baptised, being a faithful church member for years, a pastor or evangelist even - they may only have rejoiced in the good news temporarily, but the root of the matter was never in them.

Hadn't seen this clarification.......it makes sense now with this distinction between a Professing (or Nominal Christian) and a Possessing (or Saved Christian).

Thanks for highlighting this very important clarification and distinction, Wolfsbane.

Breadsons · 19-01-2018 9:08pm

Not sure.

Once Saved always saved is a doctrine of the Devil.

My own testimony: I was born again in 1986...backslid badly for thirty years, my mind was given over to reprobate, my life fell apart, I committed the most vilest of sins. Jesus forgave me when I turned to him. I believe I would have been damned to Hellfire had I died in my sins.

"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". 2 Peter 2:20

antiskeptic · 20-01-2018 11:52am

Breadsons wrote: »

Once Saved always saved is a doctrine of the Devil.

My own testimony: I was born again in 1986...backslid badly for thirty years, my mind was given over to reprobate, my life fell apart, I committed the most vilest of sins. Jesus forgave me when I turned to him. I believe I would have been damned to Hellfire had I died in my sins.

"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". 2 Peter 2:20

Given a Christian sins every day, won't they always die on their sins ( let's suppose they unexpectedly get hit by a bus and don't get a chance to turn to the Lord for forgiveness for that mornings sin).

Breadsons · 24-01-2018 8:20pm

Not sure.

antiskeptic wrote: »

Given a Christian sins every day, won't they always die on their sins ( let's suppose they unexpectedly get hit by a bus and don't get a chance to turn to the Lord for forgiveness for that mornings sin).

I think its a matter of nipping it in the bud and keeping a close relationship with God. You should know in your conscience if you step out of line.

Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed

Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

God will also not let you be tempted beyond your ability.

antiskeptic · 24-01-2018 9:01pm

Breadsons wrote: »

I think its a matter of nipping it in the bud and keeping a close relationship with God. You should know in your conscience if you step out of line.

Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed

Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

God will also not let you be tempted beyond your ability.

Yes I know. But that doesn't deal with the problem outlined.

I take it that you're not proposing a Christian can avoid possessing a multitude of unreported - to - Lord sins obvious and not so obvious. What about the sin we have a hard time identifying as sin? Stuff that's personality led, embedded? The stuff that sanctification is supposed to help us bring front and centre then overcome?

Not tempted beyond that which we can bear doesn't mean we'll bear up to that limit. We can wade into sin earlier than that

ouxbbkqtswdfaw · 25-01-2018 9:01pm

antiskeptic wrote:

Not tempted beyond that which we can bear doesn't mean we'll bear up to that limit. We can wade into sin earlier than that

You only have to confess the sins you are aware of.

antiskeptic · 26-01-2018 12:49am

dojmx16b58h7af wrote: »

You only have to confess the sins you are aware of.

Or else?

pauldla · 26-01-2018 8:11am

antiskeptic wrote: »

Or else?

"Or else!" would presumably be the response in this reading of Christianity.

antiskeptic · 26-01-2018 11:23am

pauldla wrote: »

"Or else!" would presumably be the response in this reading of Christianity.

Given Owen's turn-r-burn approach, you may well be right. But let's see.

Breadsons · 26-01-2018 11:01pm

Not sure.

dojmx16b58h7af wrote: »

You only have to confess the sins you are aware of.

The word Sin comes from the Greek "to miss the mark" God will forgive you no matter how deep you go down the pit as he did with myself.

ouxbbkqtswdfaw · 27-01-2018 12:54pm

antiskeptic wrote:

Or else?

You cannot enter the Kingdom of God if you are in sin.

ouxbbkqtswdfaw · 27-01-2018 12:55pm

Breadsons wrote:

The word Sin comes from the Greek "to miss the mark" God will forgive you no matter how deep you go down the pit as he did with myself.

Yes, but you asked Him to take you out of the pit.

antiskeptic · 27-01-2018 3:31pm

dojmx16b58h7af wrote: »

You cannot enter the Kingdom of God if you are in sin.

Hence my question. A person has unrepented of sin on their account and is run over by a bus before they've an opportunity to confess.

I take it this is where purgo come in?

ouxbbkqtswdfaw · 27-01-2018 3:32pm

antiskeptic wrote:

I take it this is where purgo come in?

Yes, where they will stay until they have paid the last penny.

antiskeptic · 27-01-2018 3:43pm

dojmx16b58h7af wrote: »

Yes, where they will stay until they have paid the last penny.

Purgo fits the general "salvation depends on you following the rules" modus operendi of Catholicism.

Which renders it essentially identical to all the other world religions. "Follow these rules and you shall have a happy afterlife outcome"

At least this much can be said for salvation by Grace: it's not only unique, but it doesn't "smell" of religion.

It's classy too. Kind of befitting any God an unbeliever might consider taking a punt on.

Not so, rule following = salvation religions. Dime a dozen those!

kelly1 · 31-01-2018 6:19pm

Not sure.

OSAS is clearly a false doctrine because it means you can't loose salvation even if you want to. It means God would deny us the freedom to reject him.

antiskeptic · 31-01-2018 7:02pm

kelly1 wrote: »

OSAS is clearly a false doctrine because it means you can't loose salvation even if you want to. It means God would deny us the freedom to reject him.

Salvation means bring born again. A new creation. Peace with God were there once was enmity. Etc.

Your argument fails because it ignores this transformation. Once transformed the person is unable to reject God. The equipment to do so has been, by their own choice, removed from them.

It's not restricting choice to say that a person who jumps from a building has to hit the ground. Once jumped always jumped.

kelly1 · 31-01-2018 7:55pm

Not sure.

antiskeptic wrote: »

Salvation means bring born again. A new creation. Peace with God were there once was enmity. Etc.

Your argument fails because it ignores this transformation. Once transformed the person is unable to reject God. The equipment to do so has been, by their own choice, removed from them.

The implication is that our freedom has been removed. We no longer have a choice to reject God, meaning that God has revoked our free will. I don't accept that.

http://www.isawthelightministries.com/alwayssaved.html

antiskeptic · 31-01-2018 8:11pm

kelly1 wrote: »

The implication is that our freedom has been removed. We no longer have a choice to reject God, meaning that God has revoked our free will. I don't accept that.

http://www.isawthelightministries.com/alwayssaved.html

The free will which enabled a choice for / against God is redundant once the choice is made. Will people have the ability to reject God in heaven? Clearly not. The argument then, is over timing.

As I say, there's little point is constantly revisiting the choice once made. This isn't an Irish referendum.

Your rejecting fundamental transformation. Not born again. Not a new creation. Just the same old person - able to ever do the same old things.

Doesn't stack up

kelly1 · 31-01-2018 8:49pm

Not sure.

antiskeptic wrote: »

The free will which enabled a choice for / against God is redundant once the choice is made

Can you back that claim using scripture? You're claiming we lose free will, it seems. I.e. that it's a one-way door, a choice that we become locked into.

I do all things for the sake of the gospel, so that I may become a fellow partaker of it. Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but only one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may win. Everyone who competes in the games exercises self-control in all things. They then do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. Therefore I run in such a way, as not without aim; I box in such a way, as not beating the air; but I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified.
1 Corinthians 9:27

So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling; (Philippians 2:12)

But the Spirit says expressly that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons, through the hypocrisy of men who speak lies, branded in their own conscience as with a hot iron;
1 Timothy 4:1-2

J C · 31-01-2018 9:41pm

Those that believe "once saved always saved" is a false docterine.

dojmx16b58h7af wrote: »

You cannot enter the Kingdom of God if you are in sin.

True ... but then Jesus Christ came to Save sinners.

... and here is how you are Saved ... now and forever.:)

Acts 16:28-31 King James Version (KJV)
28 But Paul cried with a loud voice, saying, Do thyself no harm: for we are all here.

29 Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas,

30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?

31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

J C · 31-01-2018 9:44pm

Those that believe "once saved always saved" is a false docterine.

kelly1 wrote: »

Can you back that claim using scripture? You're claiming we lose free will, it seems. I.e. that it's a one-way door, a choice that we become locked into.

It's an eternal legal contract between yourself and Jesus Christ ... that nobody can break.

antiskeptic · 01-02-2018 10:35am

kelly1 wrote: »

Can you back that claim using scripture? You're claiming we lose free will, it seems. I.e. that it's a one-way door, a choice that we become locked into.

Firstly, I'd repeat what I said above so that you might deal with the points raised. They are:

Will people have the ability to reject God in heaven? Clearly not. The argument then, is over timing.

As I say, there's little point is constantly revisiting the choice once made. This isn't an Irish referendum.

Your rejecting fundamental transformation. Not born again. Not a new creation. Just the same old person - able to ever do the same old things.

-

I do all things for the sake of the gospel, so that I may become a fellow partaker of it. Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but only one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may win. Everyone who competes in the games exercises self-control in all things. They then do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. Therefore I run in such a way, as not without aim; I box in such a way, as not beating the air; but I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified.
1 Corinthians 9:27

One of the reasons for querying the position from a logical/rational point of view is that the scriptural arguments have already been done to death. You can easily read up on what reformed theologians have said about the likes of the above and draw your conclusions. The same goes for other supposed loss-of-salvation verses.

I'll leave aside the translational nuances which shape the above verse to more strengthen the following view. And that view is that Paul is talking about the prize of heavenly reward - for there are degrees of heavenly reward for work done whilst in the body. Reward additional to basic (lets call it) salvation.

What point preaching to others about the reward one can gain for partaking of the race (to subdue the flesh) and miss out oneself?

The trouble here is that salvation isn't mentioned.

kelly1 · 01-02-2018 11:32am

Not sure.

Antiskeptic, I think this is the essential point I need to deal with:

antiskeptic wrote: »

Your rejecting fundamental transformation. Not born again. Not a new creation. Just the same old person - able to ever do the same old things.

I think a bit of nuance is required here.

Yes, there is transformation in the soul of a person who comes to Christ and this is brought about by the presence of the Holy Spirit in that person's soul. This makes us a member of the mystical body of Christ. But this is not necessarily a permanent state of affairs.

We still retain free will. It is still possible to sin gravely and thereby cut ourselves off from the Body of Christ.

If OSAS is true, then it means:

1) It is no longer possible for us to sin, or
2) No matter what sins we commit, we cannot forfeit our salvation.

Would you accept this?

antiskeptic · 01-02-2018 1:03pm

kelly1 wrote: »

Antiskeptic, I think this is the essential point I need to deal with:

I think a bit of nuance is required here.

Yes, there is transformation in the soul of a person who comes to Christ and this is brought about by the presence of the Holy Spirit in that person's soul. This makes us a member of the mystical body of Christ. But this is not necessarily a permanent state of affairs.

We still retain free will. It is still possible to sin gravely and thereby cut ourselves off from the Body of Christ.

If OSAS is true, then it means:

1) It is no longer possible for us to sin, or
2) No matter what sins we commit, we cannot forfeit our salvation.

Would you accept this?

Of course I'd plump for 2. We do, of course, keep sinning.

There are any number of elements dealing with this

1. Paul's dealing with the most natural objection to osas in Romans. "Doesn"the this mean we can go on sinning - now that it is by Grace and not by law abiding?"

His answer is to point out their being tranformed: transferred from the Kingdom of darkness into the Kingdom of light. He argues about the incongruity of supposing we can go on merrily sinning. It is an appeal to reason. Not loss of salvation. "To sin is to fight against your own side. It's nuts!" Look for that tone romans 6.

2. The picture used of being born from above is adoption into sonship. The new relationship
cannot be ignored. Once a son always a son. It isn't like a marriage, which can be dissolved. You can disown your son but he remains a son. Unless you suppose the sons of God in Hell then this is where you must reside.

3. Grave sins. Problematic this given the equating looking at a woman lustfully with the "grave" sin of adultery. It means you can have no assurance, no firm hope. You are left dangling on a string. The inevitable result is working for your salvation (or retention of same). It's worry. Fear. This is incongruent with a God of perfect love and kindness.

You wouldn't dream of dealing with your own child this way - unless a bit sick in the head. And our love for them isn't perfect like his is for his children.

4. Revisiting our choice. If sin can lose us our salvation then being born again merely shifts us from division 2 (certainly lost) to division 1 (possibly lost). You appear to hold that we now have to work at avoiding being relegated from the first division. We must strive for the prize now.

Ockhams Razor springs to mind. God could simply have placed everyone in league 1 and set them at avoiding relegation. Nothing is achieved by making it a two step process.

Thoughts on it for the moment.

kelly1 · 01-02-2018 1:20pm

Not sure.

antiskeptic wrote: »

Of course I'd plump for 2. We do, of course, keep sinning.

You realize the implications of this? It means we can sin as much as we like without impunity! So for instance, I could leave my wife and live with another woman and still enter heaven.

I don't know where you get the idea that as soon as we're saved, we loose the freedom to rebel against God. God never takes away our freedom!

Hebrews 10:26: "For if we sin willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins."

2 Pet 2:20 If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and are overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning. 21 It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them.

This is just one example of why Jesus left us a teaching authority on earth, i.e the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. It alone has the divinely appointed authority to interpret scripture. We wouldn't be having this discussion if people accepted the teachings of the Church.

2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths

antiskeptic · 01-02-2018 2:16pm

kelly1 wrote: »

You realize the implications of this? It means we can sin as much as we like without impunity! So for instance, I could leave my wife and live with another woman and still enter heaven.

1. You raise the very same objection that Paul addresses in Romans 6. It's a very natural and understandable objection to make

2. In his dealing with the objection, Paul adds theological flesh to the rebirthed, but as yet, uneducated Christian. A person who hasn't the Spirit would think precisely as you think*: they are driven by the flesh and now have a carte blanche to sin, yet still enter heaven. Lotto territory!

The person with the Spirit however, is driven by new motivations. Yes they have to battle with the mortal flesh, but now they are equipped for that battle in a way the person who hasn't been born again and who hasn't gotten these new motivations isn't. Paul exhorts: educating them as to this reality and exhorting them to engage in the battle

*I'm not supposing that by raising this objection you are not born again. Paul deals with the objection being raised by people who are born again.

3. There are rewards in heaven (crowns) for deeds done whilst still in the body but born again. A person who carries on sinning merrily will miss out on crowns.

4. The person is under new management - and if they suppose they can go on sinning away then there are consequences to be had which a person who hasn't the spirit won't experience. If you've once experienced the presence of God then you will notice, in a way the person without the spirit won't, the absence of God. You will be miserable in a way the person without the spirit won't be.

It's not that there is no cost to carrying on sinning. There are. It's just that the cost isn't loss of salvation.

I don't know where you get the idea that as soon as we're saved, we loose the freedom to rebel against God. God never takes away our freedom!

I'm not saying we can't sin. Sin is rebellion. I'm merely saying you can't lose your salvation, once had.

I'd reiterate the point which you didn't address: God, you presumably agree, takes away our freedom to sin in heaven. In which case, we seem to be arguing about the timing of not being able to lose your salvation.

Hebrews 10:26: "For if we sin willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins."

Which means all would perish. All sin is wilful, is it not?

2 Pet 2:20 If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and are overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning. 21 It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them.

Again, you ought to have no problem finding argument which see's this in context. General problem: you have Romans which is a beginning to end treatise on salvation by grace. The loss of salvation argument consists of verses here and there.

Do you suppose that God would take the trouble to lay out the theology of salvation by grace (and deal with natural objections to it) and then not equally attend to an equally important issue? The loss of salvation?

This is just one example of why Jesus left us a teaching authority on earth, i.e the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. It alone has the divinely appointed authority to interpret scripture. We wouldn't be having this discussion if people accepted the teachings of the Church.

The trouble with this thinking is that it relies on your belief that this is what Jesus did. That the authority says the Bible/history gives it authority is circular reasoning. Your belief alone, is what gives the idea purchase, for you.

That you consider yourself to have interpreted scripture sufficient accurately to allow the rest of scripture to be interpreted for you is somewhat self-confounding an idea.

In any case, if you grant yourself the right to interpret scripture and draw conclusions (such as the Church is the church established by God) then you must allow me the same space.

kelly1 · 01-02-2018 2:47pm

Not sure.

antiskeptic wrote: »

The person with the Spirit however, is driven by new motivations. Yes they have to battle with the mortal flesh, but now they are equipped for that battle in a way the person who hasn't been born again and who hasn't gotten these new motivations isn't. Paul exhorts: educating them as to this reality and exhorting them to engage in the battle

I agree with that.

antiskeptic wrote: »

It's not that there is no cost to carrying on sinning. There are. It's just that the cost isn't loss of salvation.....
I'm not saying we can't sin. Sin is rebellion. I'm merely saying you can't lose your salvation, once had.

This just makes no sense. If I've been saved (past tense) and I continue to sin through adultery etc, I can't expect to be welcomed into heaven. Paul says this is 1 Cor 6:9.

antiskeptic wrote: »

I'd reiterate the point which you didn't address: God, you presumably agree, takes away our freedom to sin in heaven. In which case, we seem to be arguing about the timing of not being able to lose your salvation.

I don't think God ever takes away our freedom. Anyone who makes it to heaven has already made up their minds to abandon sin. I think the overwhelming grace of being in the visible presence of God would make sin impossible.

antiskeptic wrote: »

Do you suppose that God would take the trouble to lay out the theology of salvation by grace (and deal with natural objections to it) and then not equally attend to an equally important issue? The loss of salvation?

By "attend to", you mean ensure that we can never lose salvation? It's a dangerous doctrine that gives us a false sense of security.

antiskeptic · 01-02-2018 3:56pm

kelly1 wrote: »

I agree with that.

To be honest kelly, there is little point in progressing. The salvation by works mode of salvation is as embedded in you as is salvation by grace in me. You read works everywhere, whereas I read grace everywhere.

I think that if salvation by grace is looked for, then it will be revealed. You could say the same about salvation by works.

The question then is motivation. I've none to go looking for what you hold to be the case. Not so much because salvation by grace is easier (although it can only be easier than a salvation that is uncertain), but because once satisfied that your theology stitches together, you don't need to upend it for something you don't believe is to be found.

Hope that makes sense.

Auntie

kelly1 · 01-02-2018 5:55pm

Not sure.

antiskeptic wrote: »

To be honest kelly, there is little point in progressing. The salvation by works mode of salvation is as embedded in you as is salvation by grace in me. You read works everywhere, whereas I read grace everywhere.

I said nothing about salvation by works, which is a misrepresentation of Catholic doctrine.

J C · 01-02-2018 9:20pm

Those that believe "once saved always saved" is a false docterine.

kelly1 wrote: »

You realize the implications of this? It means we can sin as much as we like without impunity! So for instance, I could leave my wife and live with another woman and still enter heaven.

You could also sin without impunity under non-OSAS theology ... and then have a deathbed conversion and be saved.
... so forgiving sin (whenever this occurs) is always an undeserved gift from Jesus Christ.
OSAS just cuts to the chase ... and says that you are forgiven all your past and future sins, when you are Saved.

Non-OSAS just keeps people having to ask for forgiveness over and over again ... and never really knowing if they are Saved ... which is a bit of an insult to a God who died that we might live ... and came to Save sinners, in one act of perfect atonement for all sin.
... I can see how a church could us such an interpretation to garner enormous power and wealth to itself ... by making an industry out of forgiving sin.

kelly1 wrote: »

I don't know where you get the idea that as soon as we're saved, we loose the freedom to rebel against God. God never takes away our freedom!

Hebrews 10:26: "For if we sin willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins."

2 Pet 2:20 If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and are overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning. 21 It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them.

These people know God ... but they haven't believed on Him to Save them ... and therefore are un-Saved ... with all that follows from that ... they are indeed in a spiritual mess allright, in many ways worse off than people who have never known God.

kelly1 wrote: »

This is just one example of why Jesus left us a teaching authority on earth, i.e the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. It alone has the divinely appointed authority to interpret scripture. We wouldn't be having this discussion if people accepted the teachings of the Church.

It is just one church among many ... and in so far that it denies the sufficiency of belief on Jesus Christ for salvation, it is in error.

kelly1 wrote: »

2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths

This scripture is being fulfilled around us every day !!!

Breadsons · 01-02-2018 9:31pm

Not sure.

antiskeptic wrote: »

I'm not saying we can't sin. Sin is rebellion. I'm merely saying you can't lose your salvation, once had.

.

Very Dangerous comment.

Those saved will be judged far more than those unsaved and will be cast into the lake of fire along with the unbelievers if they fall from grace.

“For if we sin willfully (knowingly, purposefully, deliberately) after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries" Hebrews 10:26

antiskeptic · 02-02-2018 12:05pm

kelly1 wrote: »

I said nothing about salvation by works, which is a misrepresentation of Catholic doctrine.

Anything that you have to do or not do, which in anyway contributes to your salvation constitutes a works salvation. Whether your doing/not doing is assisted by the Spirit is irrelevant. Once any element of your own doing/not doing is involved in your salvation then it is a works one.

By that definition, is yours a works salvation?

antiskeptic · 02-02-2018 12:07pm

Breadsons wrote: »

Very Dangerous comment.

Those saved will be judged far more than those unsaved and will be cast into the lake of fire along with the unbelievers if they fall from grace.

“For if we sin willfully (knowingly, purposefully, deliberately) after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries" Hebrews 10:26

I see your Hebrews 10:26 and raise the first half of Romans

I'd also point out that your verse makes certain all the saved will be damned. It's an If/then statement. If we sin then we perish. And sin we will.

Once Saved, Surely Lost.

I presume this isn't what you meant. Shows the dangers of quote mining

kelly1 · 02-02-2018 7:14pm

Not sure.

antiskeptic wrote: »

Anything that you have to do or not do, which in anyway contributes to your salvation constitutes a works salvation. Whether your doing/not doing is assisted by the Spirit is irrelevant. Once any element of your own doing/not doing is involved in your salvation then it is a works one.

By that definition, is yours a works salvation?

By your definition, the mere act of turning to Christ for salvation is works!

Here is what I'm talking about:

Matthew 25:44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ 45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’ 46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

Are you going to tell me it not possible to ignore the poor once you've been "saved"?

Once saved always saved is a false doctrine..

Comments