Do you believe a professed believer can lose their salvation?

Run_to_da_hills

I decided to start a fresh thread on this subject with a new pole as it is over five years since the previous thread.

Transferred from the thread on favourite Parables.

antiskeptic wrote: »

The first parable wasn't proof of your doctrine (if it was then you wouldn't need 'further proof'). A better term would be 'evidence submitted in argument...'

And so we examine this latest evidence and wonder how you suppose every branch a Christian? A word on the word 'abide' suggests further argumentation is required on your part.


"Meno" passages:

Passages using the Greek word "meno" are often misinterpreted due to misunderstanding the translation of this word. The word "meno" means simply "to live, to abide, to dwell". A command such "abide in me" is often misunderstood to mean "continue to remain in me just as you have been" when it may simply mean "Live in me starting now and continuing on indefinitely." The issue here is whether a person who has been "living" in Christ can stop living in Christ and live a lifestyle of sin and lose his salvation. John says NO!

1 John 3:6 "No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him." According to the second part of this verse, no one who lives a lifestyle of sin was ever a real Christian. He had never known Christ. He had never been born of God. Furthermore, according to the first part of this verse, of those who do "live in him" (are born of God - are real Christians) not one of them lives a lifestyle of sin. Why is that? John explains a few verses later in 1John 3:9



"No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God's seed remains ("meno") in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God."


The word "cannot" is the greek word "dunamai" where we get the English "dynamite" and it refers to ability. Those who have been born of God have lost the ability to live a lifestyle of sin because God's seed (the Holy Spirit) lives in them. The word "remain" is the word "meno" which in 1John 3:6 is translated "lives" and means the same thing here.
"Living in Christ" is not so much a condition for salvation as it is a description of a saved person. Are there any verses which indicate that a person who has been living in Christ and who then stops living in Christ and loses his salvation status? Let us continue to consider other verses with this in mind.



John 15:5-6 "I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains ("lives") in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. If anyone does not remain ("live") in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned."


"If anyone does not live in me": This is not to say that such a man ever lived in Christ to begin with. But those who are real Christians will inevitably produce fruit, not by their own efforts, but simply because Christ produces such through them.



John 15:2 "He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit" Here he doesn't use "live, abide or dwell", but simply says "in". I believe he's speaking of those who associate with the visible church, who have a surface knowledge of Christ, but who have not established a living relationship with Christ as is evident of their fruitlessness.
Notice from verse 5 that it is inevitable that branches that have a living relationship with the vine produce fruit. How does a branch produce fruit? It simply allows a passage way for nutrients to flow through it from the vine to the fruit. Why do some branches not produce fruit? Because they are only attached on the surface, but have not opened up inwardly to the Lord. These are nominal Christians.

http://www.bcbsr.com/topics/etsec.html

I find the OSAS teaching so repulsive that I cannot even listen to an OSAS preacher in a Church when it comes to this topic. Everything they preach is tainted by this poisonous OSAS doctrine. Additionally, because they do not believe the Christian is in a real Spiritual battle against temptation and evil spirits until the day they die. .

"Be of sober spirit, be on the alert. Your adversary, the devil, prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour" 1st Peter 5 vs 8. This verse was written for saved believers warning them that the could loose their salvation if they were not careful.

I don't buy any of that about that these people were not properly saved from to begin with.

Here's another one that debunks OSAS and it could not be any clearer.

"For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,(Holy Spirit) they are again entangled therein, and overcome, (Backslide) the latter end is worse with them than the beginning". 2 Peter 2:20 Peter is addressing spirit filled believers.

lmaopml

NO.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I decided to start a fresh thread on this subject with a new pole as it is over five years since the previous thread.

Transferred from the thread on favourite Parables.



I find the OSAS teaching so repulsive that I cannot even listen to an OSAS preacher in a Church when it comes to this topic. Everything they preach is tainted by this poisonous OSAS doctrine. Additionally, because they do not believe the Christian is in a real Spiritual battle against temptation and evil spirits until the day they die. .

"Be of sober spirit, be on the alert. Your adversary, the devil, prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour" 1st Peter 5 vs 8. This verse was written for saved believers warning them that the could loose their salvation if they were not careful.

I don't buy any of that about that these people were not properly saved from to begin with.

Here's another one that debunks OSAS and it could not be any clearer.

"For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,(Holy Spirit) they are again entangled therein, and overcome, (Backslide) the latter end is worse with them than the beginning". 2 Peter 2:20 Peter is addressing spirit filled believers.

Well, as a Catholic I believe that our journey out of Egypt foreshadowed our current exodus and it is lifelong, it's about growth, it's about watering the tiny seeds of the Spirit within, in the wilderness of life. That 'Faith' means 'Faithfulness' even in our dry periods, even when the world closes in that we cast our net with Christ and for Christ, knowing where we sustain this wilderness and from whom we get our daily bread.

Sometimes I think that trials are sent and we should thank God for them ( as contrary as this may seem ) - it's difficult sometimes to understand misery in life or the inflicted, and to understand 'why?' Just ask 'Job'..lol...

- it's still better to see his face in the inflicted, the poor, the downtrodden, the unbeliever, the person who tries....we can be the living body of Christ, we can be his eyes and also his touch, his mercy, his comfort to those without comfort - that's our calling, our united calling.

Do we even begin to think how lucky we are sometimes to have an opinion and express it on the 'internet'? If we decide to use it for the benefit of the poor in Spirit well it's existence is merited - He desired it, it came into being - we use it to bring hope - nothing more, and nothing less.

antiskeptic

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I find the OSAS teaching so repulsive that I cannot even listen to an OSAS preacher in a Church when it comes to this topic. Everything they preach is tainted by this poisonous OSAS doctrine.

It'd be interesting to unpack why you find it so detestable. I find it a glorious thing - and not for the reason you likely find it detestable (easy, cheap grace)

Additionally, because they do not believe the Christian is in a real Spiritual battle against temptation and evil spirits until the day they die.

The two ideas aren't intrinsically related: I believe I'm in a spiritual battle against temptation and evil spirits until the day I die and also don't reckon I can lose my salvation.

"Be of sober spirit, be on the alert. Your adversary, the devil, prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour" 1st Peter 5 vs 8. This verse was written for saved believers warning them that the could loose their salvation if they were not careful.

I don't see anything in there about salvation.

I don't buy any of that about that these people were not properly saved from to begin with.

Neither need I.

Here's another one that debunks OSAS and it could not be any clearer.

"For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,(Holy Spirit) they are again entangled therein, and overcome, (Backslide) the latter end is worse with them than the beginning". 2 Peter 2:20 Peter is addressing spirit filled believers.

Before addressing yet another 'proof verse' of the position, could you respond to the counters made for each of the last three you've put forth?

It'd be worth noting at this point that there are indeed verses which, if taken in isolation, could be construed as meaning a saved person could lose their salvation. But that has to be measured against verses and argument that indicate the opposite.

It's somewhat strange that God took the time over half the book of Romans to show how salvation is gained and how it is for ever. Yet only utilses isolated verses hither and thiter to support the equally vital doctrine of how to retain a saved-but-not-quite-yet salvation.


That is the greatest argument against the doctrine of loss of salvation: God doesn't give it airing time commensurate with it's importance.

SonOfAdam

It might be worth noting that Paul in his letters uses the term adoption to describe the change of status we undergo at salvation. His audience would have known the full weight that word carried: in effect the adoptee started a new life and all debts owed were cancelled as a consequence of the extinction of his old persona (Institutes, Justinian).

Interestingly, a father could disown his natural son; but this was not an option with his adopted son. Once someone was adopted the bonds could not be broken.

Not so repulsive when you consider it's really less about us and more about HIm

J C

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I find the OSAS teaching so repulsive that I cannot even listen to an OSAS preacher in a Church when it comes to this topic. ...
Here's another one that debunks OSAS and it could not be any clearer.

"For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,(Holy Spirit) they are again entangled therein, and overcome, (Backslide) the latter end is worse with them than the beginning". 2 Peter 2:20 Peter is addressing spirit filled believers.

OK lets look at the full context:-

2 Peter 17-22
These people are springs without water and mists driven by a storm. Blackest darkness is reserved for them. 18 For they mouth empty, boastful words and, by appealing to the lustful desires of the flesh, they entice people who are just escaping from those who live in error. 19 They promise them freedom, while they themselves are slaves of depravity—for “people are slaves to whatever has mastered them.” 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. 22 Of them the proverbs are true: “A dog returns to its vomit,”[g] and, “A sow that is washed returns to her wallowing in the mud.”

Peter is clearly referring to un-Saved (e.g. Salvation by works) type people who have known of Jesus Christ with their heads ... but have not believed on Him (and Him alone) with their hearts to Save them. The comparison with a dog and a sow reverting to their natural state, implies that these people have never been Saved, because if they were, they would be forever changed into a new Creation of God - which would preclude them from going back to their un-saved natural state.

... and why do you find OSAS so repulsive?
... if we cannot earn Salvation through our own merits ... then we also cannot lose Salvation through any lack of merit on our part.

It is logical that because we don't possess sufficient merit for Salvation, before we are Saved ... we cannot subsequently lose Savation through any lack of merit after we are Saved. We can never posess sufficient merit to be Saved ... and only Jesus Christ can Save us as un-deserving sinners ... which we continue to be both before and after we are Saved.

Of course, as Saved Christians we should live temperate lives and engage in good works because we are Saved ... and not as a means of sustaining or achieving our Salvation (which is a free un-merited gift from Jesus Christ to all sinners, who call on Him to Save them).
Equally, Saved Christians don't have a monopoly on living morally upright lives ... many un-saved people, of all religions and none, live morally upright lives (as well as the opposite in some cases).

Run_to_da_hills

NO.

J C wrote: »

... and why do you find OSAS so repulsive?
..

Because the doctrine gives believers a total false concept of security, a "get out of Jail card" making them immune to any possible or future sins caused by human nature due to backsliding or falling away from grace. Scripture clearly shows in numerous examples that I have explained in this andmy previous thread that Christians can sin, and that they may receive the due punishment for those deeds if left unchecked.

I have created a poll with two two choices instead of three like the previous thread on this subject.

antiskeptic

RTDH wrote:

Because the doctrine gives believers a total false concept of security, a "get out of Jail card" making them immune to any possible or future sins caused by human nature due to backsliding or falling away from grace.

The point of the thread would be to argue your case by the various means at your disposal. Whether the concept is false or not remains to be seen.

The OSAS position doesn't say a Christian is immune from sin now or in the future. He will sin. It's just that his sin doesn't result in his damnation.

The argument given for Paul (in Romans 6) to the very objection you make isn't yours. Your argument goes "a reason you shouldn't sin now that you've been saved is that you might lose your salvation if you do". His argument is that sinning in incongruous thing for a Christian to be doing. It is not in keeping with what the Christian has been made. It is not fitting. It is spitting in the face of a monunmental love.

Yet there will be natural consequences for a Christian sinning. Sin brings trouble by it's very nature. And God will discipline those who do sin.

But in his start-to-finish dissection of salvation and how it is wrought, Paul doesn't include the loss of it. It's only by plucking out a verse here and there that a 'case' for the loss of salvation can be made. Which is no case at all - since by verse plucking you can make the Bible say just about anything you want. If you don't believe me, head over the the A&A forum.

The Bible shows in numerous examples that I have explained that Christians can sin, and that they may receive the due punishment for those deeds if left unchecked.

I recall three cases which were challenged and haven't yet seen a response. It's not sufficient to launch evidence and suppose that merely by so doing your position is made. You need to follow up the counters made.

I have created a poll with two two choices instead of three like the previous thread on this subject.

What does it matter how many poll this way or that?

Run_to_da_hills

NO.

antiskeptic wrote: »

The point of the thread would be to argue your case by the various means at your disposal. Whether the concept is false or not remains to be seen.

The OSAS position doesn't say a Christian is immune from sin now or in the future. He will sin. It's just that his sin doesn't result in his damnation.

So a Christian who has backslided and gets aquainted with his old friends, again has a few beers and goes out on the town, meets up with a married woman and has sex that night, gets struck by a bus the following morning. Is he going to get away with it just because he gave his life to the lord several years previous?

It certainly dose not make sense and I would not like a God that shows favouritism when it comes to transgression. Christians will be more judged for their sin than the unsaved if they fall away because they should be fully conscious of their wrong doings after being enlightened.

The Lord specifically states. "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord". Romans 6:23.

"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" James. 1 vs 14/15.

SonOfAdam

Why are the poll results hidden ?

Also, no-one said that sin for the believer didn't have consequences but loss of salvation isn't one of them.

Run_to_da_hills

NO.

SonOfAdam wrote: »

Why are the poll results hidden ?

Also, no-one said that sin for the believer didn't have consequences but loss of salvation isn't one of them.

My Bible certainly states it, if it wasn't so whats the point of so many scriptures referring to the importance of not falling away? .

Bed time stories??

" If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell" Mark 9:42-50 Our lord was addressing believers.

Taking the mark of the beast is also the unpardonable irrespective of salvation status.

SonOfAdam

Jesus is using hyperbole here. He is not suggesting you chop your hand off ,cut your feet off, or guage your eye out. He is saying be careful of the things you do, where you go and what you look at or desire because sin has the capacity to destroy you. It has a habit of sneaking up on you and robbing you of the life[peace,joy etc.] that Jesus has given. He is not saying you lose your salvation, rather He is warning you of the seriousness of sin.

Run_to_da_hills

NO.

SonOfAdam wrote: »

Jesus is using hyperbole here. He is not suggesting you chop your hand off ,cut your feet off, or guage your eye out. He is saying be careful of the things you do, where you go and what you look at or desire because sin has the capacity to destroy you. It has a habit of sneaking up on you and robbing you of the life[peace,joy etc.] that Jesus has given. He is not saying you lose your salvation, rather He is warning you of the seriousness of sin.

There you said it, because sin has the capacity to destroy you

"For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries".Hebrews 10:26-27

J C

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Because the doctrine gives believers a total false concept of security, a "get out of Jail card" making them immune to any possible or future sins caused by human nature due to backsliding or falling away from grace. Scripture clearly shows in numerous examples that I have explained in this andmy previous thread that Christians can sin, and that they may receive the due punishment for those deeds if left unchecked.

I have created a poll with two two choices instead of three like the previous thread on this subject.

Firstly, I think your poll has set the wrong question ... a 'professed believer' may not be Saved, in the first place ... if you want a meaningful answer, you need to ask if a Saved Christian can lose their Salvation.
Secondly, Christians aren't immune from the effects of sins committed after they are Saved ... they suffer all of the temporal punishments for their sins (which can be severe, up to and including physical death) ...
... and their eternal Heavenly reward will be negatively affected by sins wilfully committed and it will be positively affected by good works ... for which their reward will be great.

... but whatever they do or don't do after they are Saved ... their Salvation is guaranteed.

... and Salvation is indeed a 'get out of jail free card' ... actually the very best 'get out of jail card' in the universe!!!!:)

... but I don't know why, as a sinner, you have a problem with this 'get out of jail card' ... it can get you 'out of jail' ... just like it did for me ... and every other sinner who is a Saved Christian.

J C

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

So a Christian who has backslided and gets aquainted with his old friends, again has a few beers and goes out on the town, meets up with a married woman and has sex that night, gets struck by a bus the following morning. Is he going to get away with it just because he gave his life to the lord several years previous?

Yes ...
... but his Heavenly reward will be adversely affected by his behaviour.
... also just think of the temporal punishments that would have awaited him ... if the bus hadn't run over him ... he could have broken up with his wife, got a dose of VD, got beaten up by the woman's jealous husband ... and ended up losing his home, his health and the friendship and respect of his children ... and possibly his friends!!!

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

It certainly dose not make sense and I would not like a God that shows favouritism when it comes to transgression. Christians will be more judged for their sin than the unsaved if they fall away because they should be fully conscious of their wrong doings after being enlightened.

... so you want God to show favouritism to the un-Saved ... and adversity towards the Saved!!!!
... God will indeed punish the Saved for sins they commit after they are Saved ... but He will not remove their Salvation.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The Lord specifically states. "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord". Romans 6:23.

All very true. A gift is an unearned and unmerited benefit ... and this is the situation with Salvation.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

"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" James. 1 vs 14/15.

Yes, the wages of sin is indeed death.
... and the free gift from God is Salvation ... for those who humbly ask for it.

keano_afc

I dont believe its possible to lose your salvation, because:

1. Which sin is the one sin and breaks the bond between you and God? As we are constantly sinning, when does God say "right, thats the straw that broke the camels back. Salvation taken back"

2. Once lost, how do we get it back? Is there an infinite amount of times we can lose/gain salvation?

3. John 10:28. "I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand".

I just dont believe losing salvation is a valid doctrine, as there is a lack of reference to it in scripture. If my salvation is genuine, my fruit will prove this. If I say I am saved yet dont evidence it, then the salvation in not genuine.

J C

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

There you said it, because sin has the capacity to destroy you

"For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries".Hebrews 10:26-27

This is a warning to those who deliberately refuse Salvation ... after receiving the knowledge of the truth that Jesus exits and can Save them.
... no amount of sacrifice (good works) can now remit sin ... and if people persist in refusing to believe on Jesus Christ to Save them and forgive their sins ... then God's judgement is all that remains for them.

J C

SonOfAdam wrote: »

Why are the poll results hidden ?

... yes indeed ... why are the results hidden RTDH? ... could we all please have the results?

J C

keano_afc wrote: »

I dont believe its possible to lose your salvation, because:

1. Which sin is the one sin and breaks the bond between you and God? As we are constantly sinning, when does God say "right, thats the straw that broke the camels back. Salvation taken back"

2. Once lost, how do we get it back? Is there an infinite amount of times we can lose/gain salvation?

3. John 10:28. "I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand".

I just dont believe losing salvation is a valid doctrine, as there is a lack of reference to it in scripture. If my salvation is genuine, my fruit will prove this. If I say I am saved yet dont evidence it, then the salvation in not genuine.

I agree 100%.

One of the best summaries of why OSAS is valid that I have seen.

Thanks.

J C

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

My Bible certainly states it, if it wasn't so whats the point of so many scriptures referring to the importance of not falling away? .

Bed time stories??

" If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell" Mark 9:42-50 Our lord was addressing believers.

Jesus was addressing the un-Saved in this verse ... everybody was un-Saved before Jesus was crucified and died for our sins. Indeed, nobody could be Saved before the Atonement of Jesus Christ's death.
Nothing to do with OSAS ... which only applies to the Church era of God's Grace ... which hadn't started when Jesus was talking at Capernaum in Mk 9:42.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Taking the mark of the beast is also the unpardonable irrespective of salvation status.

The Mark of the Beast will only become an issue after the Rapture of the Church ... and then there will be no Saved Christians on Earth ... and Salvation will only be by martyrdom ... as the Church era of grace will have ended.
So the choice for all the un-Saved then, will be salvation through death for refusing the Mark ... or eternal damnation for taking the Mark.

Again, nothing to do with OSAS ... which only applies to the Church era ... which will have ended when the Mark is introduced ... after the Rapture.

philologos

Can a mod alter the poll?

Personally, I don't believe that one can lose their salvation, meaning I fall into the once saved always saved camp with antiskeptic and keano_afc.

Run_to_da_hills

NO.

J C wrote: »

Jesus was addressing the un-Saved in this verse ... everybody was un-Saved before Jesus was crucified and died for our sins. Indeed, nobody could be Saved before the Atonement of Jesus Christ's death..

If these Gospel parables applied to the pre crucifixion era what would be the sense of them now? Bed time stories? Certainly not. I take them as stern warnings that we can lose our salvation like any other person on this planet if we stray away from the narrow path of righteousness.

J C wrote: »

The Mark of the Beast will only become an issue after the Rapture of the Church ... and then there will be no Saved Christians on Earth ... and Salvation will only be by martyrdom ... as the Church era of grace will have ended.
So the choice for all the un-Saved then, will be salvation through death for refusing the Mark ... or eternal damnation for taking the Mark.

Again, nothing to do with OSAS ... which only applies to the Church era ... which will have ended when the Mark is introduced ... after the Rapture.

The Mark of the Beast is closer than we think and I also believe that this will be the ultimate test on humanity before the return of Christ.

I do not believe any pre tribulation "rapture" or any rapture for that matter. The word itself dose not even appear in scripture. To me it seems to be just another relatively recent invented doctrine that has now been widely promoted by American mainstream Evangelical television.

There are numerous Gospels that support a post tribulation (end of age) resurrection of the dead and that the godly and ungodly shal live side by side until the very end.

Wheat and tares parable is perhaps one in particular that reveals the fallacy of any rapture theology (a thread in itself for discussion)

SonOfAdam

Run.. wrote:

There you said it, because sin has the capacity to destroy you

Absolutely, and without saving grace to the extreme. As J C said, in regard to your scenario, that sin could have wreaked havoc in his life; relationship with his wife, and all others involved possibly damaged beyond repair - that's the destructive power sin has in our lives. The fact that you and I will die shows the power that sin still has over us - none of us are immune - but it doesn't have the last word. For the believer there are fates worse than death.

J C

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

If these Gospel parables applied to the pre crucifixion era what would be the sense of them now? Bed time stories? Certainly not. I take them as stern warnings that we can lose our salvation like any other person on this planet if we stray away from the narrow path of righteousness.

The point I made, was in relation to who Jesus was talking to ... you said he was addressing 'believers' ... and I pointed out that they were un-Saved.
... and these verses are still important for the un-Saved.
They aren't addressed to the Saved ... but they warn the un-Saved that they will remain un-Saved (and stumbling towards Hell) if they continue to wallow in their sin.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The Mark of the Beast is closer than we think.

It would have happened long ago ... if Satan had his way ... but it is the removal of the Holy Spirit and His Church at the Rapture, that will allow the AC to implement his Mark System.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

... and I also believe that this will be the ultimate test on humanity before the return of Christ.

It will be, indeed.:eek:

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I do not believe any pre tribulation "rapture" or any rapture for that matter. The word itself dose not even appear in scripture. To me it seems to be just another relatively recent invented doctrine that has now been widely promoted by American mainstream Evangelical television.

... there are two returns by Jesus described in the Bible ... the First Coming occurs during a period of relative normality (people will be buying and selling, marrying and generally living normal lives) ... this is the pre-trib Rapture ... when Christ returns alone , just like He ascended to Heaven alone, to snatch His church away before the Antichrist is allowed to arise and implement his diabolical system ... and it will occur without warning at a time when people are completely 'smug' with themselves, as they proclaim an era of 'peace and safety'.
The First Coming has been iminent since Christ's Ascension ... and will be at a time known only by God.

The Second Coming occurs at the War of Armageddon (during a period of Hell on Earth when the World is on the point of total destruction with everybody at their wits end) ... when Christ returns with His Saved People to destroy the Anti-Christ and to judge the damned.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

There are numerous Gospels that support a post tribulation (end of age) resurrection of the dead and that the godly and ungodly shal live side by side until the very end.

Wheat and tares parable is perhaps one in particular that reveals the fallacy of any rapture theology (a thread in itself for discussion)

The 'Wheat and Tares' (Saved and un-Saved) live side by side during the Church era ... but not during the Tribulation era (everybody alive on Earth at that time, will be un-Saved).

Onesimus

NO.

Why did you decide to make the poll hidden? does not make sense to me why people hide polls

Run_to_da_hills

NO.

Onesimus wrote: »

Why did you decide to make the poll hidden? does not make sense to me why people hide polls

The thread tools wont allow me to change original settings.

OSAS is a False Docterine.

YES = Attabear, Onesimus, PDN, Run_to_da_hills

NO = J C, keano_afc, philologos, SonOfAdam

totus tuus

NO.

I also voted yes!

PDN

NO.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The thread tools wont allow me to change original settings.

OSAS is a False Docterine.

YES = Attabear, Onesimus, PDN, Run_to_da_hills

NO = J C, keano_afc, philologos, SonOfAdam

For the sake of accuracy, I would point out that the question was not whether OSAS is a false doctrine. It was Do you believe a professed believer can lose their salvation?

Run_to_da_hills

NO.

PDN wrote: »

For the sake of accuracy, I would point out that the question was not whether OSAS is a false doctrine. It was Do you believe a professed believer can lose their salvation?

Is there any way you could alter the poll and thread title?

also make the results public as requested by a number of posters.

Cheers.

philologos

I think much of this is semantics.

Given the foreknowledge of God, God knows who will ultimately be saved.

What does being saved mean? - That one will ultimately be spared God's wrath and condemnation, but instead be shown God's grace through Jesus Christ, and that instead of eternal condemnation, one will live eternally.

If one is not ultimately saved, can we say that they are saved at all?

I agree that people can believe for a time and then stop believing, but ultimately if that person no longer believes, God has known from the beginning that they wouldn't be saved because God knows past, present and future in respect to these realities.

John 6:63-64 wrote:

It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.)

J C

PDN wrote: »

For the sake of accuracy, I would point out that the question was not whether OSAS is a false doctrine. It was Do you believe a professed believer can lose their salvation?

... fair point ... but ... if a 'professed believer' isn't Saved ... they have no Salvation to lose, in the first place ... and if they are Saved ... they can't lose their Savation.

Like I said earlier, the wrong question has been asked in the poll.

J C

philologos wrote: »

I think much of this is semantics.

Given the foreknowledge of God, God knows who will ultimately be saved.

What does being saved mean? - That one will ultimately be spared God's wrath and condemnation, but instead be shown God's grace through Jesus Christ, and that instead of eternal condemnation, one will live eternally.

If one is not ultimately saved, can we say that they are saved at all?

I agree that people can believe for a time and then stop believing, but ultimately if that person no longer believes, God has known from the beginning that they wouldn't be saved because God knows past, present and future in respect to these realities.

If you believe on the Lord Jesus Christ ... and repent of your sins ... you are permanently and eternally Saved.
If you merely believe that Jesus exists / existed, or something like that, you aren't Saved ... and you may indeed stop believing that Jesus exists, in the future, like philologos says!!!

Run_to_da_hills

NO.

J C wrote: »

If you believe on the Lord Jesus Christ ... and repent of your sins ... you are permanently and eternally Saved.

Meaningless are the stern warnings specifically addressed to the believer

“But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved”,
“make your calling and election sure”,
“be diligent to be found in Christ without spot or blemish”.
"Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour"

J C

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Meaningless are the stern warnings specifically addressed to the believer

“But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved”,
“make your calling and election sure”,
“be diligent to be found in Christ without spot or blemish”.
"Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour"

... none of which contradicts OSAS.

lmaopml

NO.

From a Catholic perspective, we would believe that we are..


...and it sounds odd to my Catholic ears...


'Saved', being 'Saved' and will be 'Saved'....we're on that journey.

We call it the perseverance of the Saints, but we dare not call ourselves a Saint, like the first Martyrs - until at the end of the journey till we are in fact at the end proclaimed such - it's a relationship, not a contract in the 'English' sense of the word - it's a lifelong journey, the Holy Spirit teaches us so many things on the way set out, if we don't let pride rule our hearts.

philologos

Run_to_da_hills: Just curious, do you believe in predestination?

Run_to_da_hills

NO.

philologos wrote: »

Run_to_da_hills: Just curious, do you believe in predestination?

No.

J C

wrote:

Originally Posted by philologos
Run_to_da_hills: Just curious, do you believe in predestination?

Run_to_da_hills
No.

Neither do I.
God knows who will be Saved ... and who won't ... but He doesn't decide who will be Saved ... and who won't
... we decide ... using our sovereign free will.
... just like Adam and Eve ... but in reverse!!:)

Run_to_da_hills

NO.

J C wrote: »

Neither do I.
God knows who will be Saved ... and who won't ... but He doesn't decide who will be Saved ... and who won't
... we decide ... using our sovereign free will.
... just like Adam and Eve ... but in reverse!!:)

But its on this same pretext that I believe that someone can also loose their salvation.

You decide to be saved, you then backslide and fall back into the world, its your choice not Gods.

This is a common OSAS quote which seems to be twisted, It basically states that no one else can take your salvation away from you (Martyrdom) however there is nothing in it that states that you can loose it yourself through falling away..

"My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand". John 10:29

lmaopml

NO.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

But its on this same pretext that I believe that someone can also loose their salvation.

You decide to be saved, you then backslide and fall back into the world, its your choice not Gods.

This is a common OSAS quote which seems to be twisted, It basically states that no one else can take your salvation away from you however there is nothing in it that states that you can loose it yourself through falling away..

"My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand". John 10:29

God has foreknowledge; of course. Does that undermine our free will?

Thomas Aquinas, was given to us at the proper time.

Surely the whole of Scripture is about a Father who is bringing up his children to have 'free will', the whole of the OT, the Kings, the prophets the Psalms etc. are all an education for our adulthood in Christ..our understanding in the Holy Spirit, the flood of life.

I think a lot of talk is mere semantics...and I'm quite sure that others know it too. Such a pity - we should be united, and pray most sincerely to be.

J C

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

But its on this same pretext that I believe that someone can also loose their salvation.

You decide to be saved, you then backslide and fall back into the world, its your choice not Gods.

This is a common OSAS quote which seems to be twisted, It basically states that no one else can take your salvation away from you (Martyrdom) however there is nothing in it that states that you can loose it yourself through falling away..

"My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand". John 10:29

The decision to be Saved is freely taken ... and irreversible.
It's the reverse of the Fall ... which was also freely entered into ... and was irreversible.

Many other decisions in life are also irreversible ... even where we have second thoughts.

... I also don't know any reason why anybody would have second thoughts about going to Heaven
... and repudiating their Salvation ... even if it was possible (which it isn't).

The spiritual realm involves the eternal ... which can be confusing for us, as people living in time and place, with finite physical lives.
... we are eternally Saved ... or eternally lost ... and that is why the decision to be Saved is irreversible.
... it's also something that Satan will do all in His power to prevent us from realising ... because every Saved person is one more opponent for him ... and a reminder of his permanent fall from grace!!!

Gumbi

How can one call something free will if God already knows what you're going to do?

J C

lmaopml wrote: »

I think a lot of talk is mere semantics...and I'm quite sure that others know it too. Such a pity - we should be united, and pray most sincerely to be.

The only unity worth having is unity under the truth.

Some talk is mere semantics ... but the truth is vital to everyones' eternal destiny ... and eternity is a very long time!!!:)

J C

Gumbi wrote: »

How can one call something free will if God already knows what you're going to do?

Knowing something doesn't interfere with the exercise of somebody's free will.
God is omniscient ... but the fact that He knows what we are going to do doesn't mean that He forces us to do or not do something.

Run_to_da_hills

NO.

Poll Update

YES
Attabear, Fanny Cradock, georgieporgy, Onesimus, PDN, Run_to_da_hills, totus tuus

NO.
J C, keano_afc, kulluh, Neewbie_noob, philologos, SonOfAdam, The Sky, zarquon

Gumbi

J C wrote: »

Gumbi wrote: »

How can one call something free will if God already knows what you're going to do?

Knowing something doesn't interfere with the exercise of somebody's free will.
God is omniscient ... but the fact that He knows what we are going to do doesn't mean that He forces us to do or not do something.

It makes it meaningless, though, IMHO.

J C

lmaopml wrote: »

From a Catholic perspective, we would believe that we are..


...and it sounds odd to my Catholic ears...


'Saved', being 'Saved' and will be 'Saved'....we're on that journey.

We call it the perseverance of the Saints, but we dare not call ourselves a Saint, like the first Martyrs - until at the end of the journey till we are in fact at the end proclaimed such - it's a relationship, not a contract in the 'English' sense of the word - it's a lifelong journey, the Holy Spirit teaches us so many things on the way set out, if we don't let pride rule our hearts.

We are either Saved ... or we are lost.
God is a God of Law and Love ... so our decision to be Saved is legally binding between us and God ... and it definitively seals our loving relationship with Him.
Its akin to Marriage ... which is the permanent legal binding of a loving relationship ... however, being Saved isn't just for life ... it's forever.

Gumbi

Is being saved always possible; does it transcend any previous transgression?

J C

Gumbi wrote: »

It makes it meaningless, though, IMHO.

How does it make it meaningless?

The thousands of people who are freely Saved each day ... and the even greater numbers who freely go to their deaths un-Saved are proof that free will exists ... and has eternal consequences.

J C

Gumbi wrote: »

Is being saved always possible; does it transcend any previous transgression?

Absolutely ... Jesus Christ came to Save sinners.

The debate on OSAS isn't about past transgressions ... what is causing RTDH such 'anxt' is the fact that Salvation transcends future transgressions as well.:eek:

Gumbi

J C wrote: »

Gumbi wrote: »

It makes it meaningless, though, IMHO.

How does it make it meaningless?

The thousands of people who are freely Saved each day ... and the even greater numbers who freely go to their deaths un-Saved are proof that free will exists.

I don't understand how you inferred proof of free will from the statement that many die saved, though many more unsaved.

J C

Gumbi wrote: »

I don't understand how you inferred proof of free will from the statement that many die saved, though many more unsaved.

It certainly doesn't infer a lack of free will.:)