Can a genuine, blood-bought, regenerated believer forfeit their salvation?

[Rapture Bound]

Here's a repost of a recent reply that I made :

Could God have forgiven and saved Judas?

Yes, Judas could have chosen to do otherwise, but God, being omniscient, knew that he wouldn't, and therefore chose him to play the role that he did. God's knowing of a what a person will do [choose] in no way strips that person of their ability to have done otherwise. In other words, God knew that if Judas was placed in the exact circumstances that he was indeed placed in, he would freely choose to betray Jesus. If Judas would have chosen otherwise, God knowing that, would simply have selected a different person [via His "Middle Knowledge" - God's knowledge of counterfactuals - a Molinist perspective on God's omniscience] that would have freely chosen to betray Jesus [so that God's redemptive plan would have been accomplished].

Some argue that it would be impossible, even for God, to know what will happen in an event that never actually takes place. However, that claim is easily disproven by scriptures such as 1 Samuel 23:8-14 :

"And Saul called up all his forces for battle, to go down to Keilah to besiege David and his men.

When David learned that Saul was plotting against him, he said to Abiathar the priest, “Bring the ephod.” David said, “Lord, God of Israel, your servant has heard definitely that Saul plans to come to Keilah and destroy the town on account of me. Will the citizens of Keilah surrender me to him? Will Saul come down, as your servant has heard? Lord, God of Israel, tell your servant.”

And the Lord said, “He will.”

Again David asked, “Will the citizens of Keilah surrender me and my men to Saul?”

And the Lord said, “They will.”

So David and his men, about six hundred in number, left Keilah and kept moving from place to place. When Saul was told that David had escaped from Keilah, he did not go there.

David stayed in the wilderness strongholds and in the hills of the Desert of Ziph. Day after day Saul searched for him, but God did not give David into his hands."

Notice that all of the events that the Lord said could have happened ... never actually did. However, God knew exactly what would have happened if David chose otherwise.

There are many other scriptures showing the reality of God's counterfactual knowledge or "Middle Knowledge" as well, such as : Ezek. 3:6-7; Jer. 38:17-18; Deut.28:51-57 : Matt.23:27-32; Matt.24:43; Luke 16;30-31; Luke 22:67-68.
Hope this helps my friend!

 

[Rapture Bound]

Here's a repost of a recent reply that I made :

Could God have forgiven and saved Judas?

Yes, Judas could have chosen to do otherwise, but God, being omniscient, knew that he wouldn't, and therefore chose him to play the role that he did. God's knowing of a what a person will do [choose] in no way strips that person of their ability to have done otherwise. In other words, God knew that if Judas was placed in the exact circumstances that he was indeed placed in, he would freely choose to betray Jesus. If Judas would have chosen otherwise, God knowing that, would simply have selected a different person [via His "Middle Knowledge" - God's knowledge of counterfactuals - a Molinist perspective on God's omniscience] that would have freely chosen to betray Jesus [so that God's redemptive plan would have been accomplished].

Some argue that it would be impossible, even for God, to know what will happen in an event that never actually takes place. However, that claim is easily disproven by scriptures such as 1 Samuel 23:8-14 :

"And Saul called up all his forces for battle, to go down to Keilah to besiege David and his men.

When David learned that Saul was plotting against him, he said to Abiathar the priest, “Bring the ephod.” David said, “Lord, God of Israel, your servant has heard definitely that Saul plans to come to Keilah and destroy the town on account of me. Will the citizens of Keilah surrender me to him? Will Saul come down, as your servant has heard? Lord, God of Israel, tell your servant.”

And the Lord said, “He will.”

Again David asked, “Will the citizens of Keilah surrender me and my men to Saul?”

And the Lord said, “They will.”

So David and his men, about six hundred in number, left Keilah and kept moving from place to place. When Saul was told that David had escaped from Keilah, he did not go there.

David stayed in the wilderness strongholds and in the hills of the Desert of Ziph. Day after day Saul searched for him, but God did not give David into his hands."

Notice that all of the events that the Lord said could have happened ... never actually did. However, God knew exactly what would have happened if David chose otherwise.

There are many other scriptures showing the reality of God's counterfactual knowledge or "Middle Knowledge" as well, such as : Ezek. 3:6-7; Jer. 38:17-18; Deut.28:51-57 : Matt.23:27-32; Matt.24:43; Luke 16;30-31; Luke 22:67-68.
Hope this helps my friend!

The purpose of this post is to add further clarification to what I said above in my prior post... #421. In other words, what I wrote more specifically pertains the question, "Did Judas ever truly possess free moral agency as it concerned his betrayal of Jesus? ... "could he have done otherwise, and not betrayed Him?

My comment was not primarily addressing the question pertaining to whether or not Judas is in Heaven today, or, if he could have been [should it be the case that he is not] by truly repenting and subsequently placing his faith/trust in Jesus. It appears to me that the pre-ordaining of Judas' betrayal of Jesus, and those aforementioned questions, should be viewed and approached as separate issues ... although they are definitely related to one another.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Here's a repost of a recent reply that I made :

Could God have forgiven and saved Judas?

Yes, Judas could have chosen to do otherwise, but God, being omniscient, knew that he wouldn't, and therefore chose him to play the role that he did. God's knowing of a what a person will do [choose] in no way strips that person of their ability to have done otherwise. In other words, God knew that if Judas was placed in the exact circumstances that he was indeed placed in, he would freely choose to betray Jesus. If Judas would have chosen otherwise, God knowing that, would simply have selected a different person [via His "Middle Knowledge" - God's knowledge of counterfactuals - a Molinist perspective on God's omniscience] that would have freely chosen to betray Jesus [so that God's redemptive plan would have been accomplished].

Some argue that it would be impossible, even for God, to know what will happen in an event that never actually takes place. However, that claim is easily disproven by scriptures such as 1 Samuel 23:8-14 :

"And Saul called up all his forces for battle, to go down to Keilah to besiege David and his men.

When David learned that Saul was plotting against him, he said to Abiathar the priest, “Bring the ephod.” David said, “Lord, God of Israel, your servant has heard definitely that Saul plans to come to Keilah and destroy the town on account of me. Will the citizens of Keilah surrender me to him? Will Saul come down, as your servant has heard? Lord, God of Israel, tell your servant.”

And the Lord said, “He will.”

Again David asked, “Will the citizens of Keilah surrender me and my men to Saul?”

And the Lord said, “They will.”

So David and his men, about six hundred in number, left Keilah and kept moving from place to place. When Saul was told that David had escaped from Keilah, he did not go there.

David stayed in the wilderness strongholds and in the hills of the Desert of Ziph. Day after day Saul searched for him, but God did not give David into his hands."

Notice that all of the events that the Lord said could have happened ... never actually did. However, God knew exactly what would have happened if David chose otherwise.

There are many other scriptures showing the reality of God's counterfactual knowledge or "Middle Knowledge" as well, such as : Ezek. 3:6-7; Jer. 38:17-18; Deut.28:51-57 : Matt.23:27-32; Matt.24:43; Luke 16;30-31; Luke 22:67-68.
Hope this helps my friend!

Notice the absurdity of the notion that "COUNTERFACTUAL" can be considered reality.

 

[Rapture Bound]

Notice the absurdity of the notion that "COUNTERFACTUAL" can be considered reality.

It's only absurd to those who either do not understand the term, or deny the clear scriptures that proclaim the reality of the concept to which the term refers.

 

[Mark Quayle]

It's only absurd to those who either do not understand the term, or deny the clear scriptures that proclaim the reality of the concept to which the term refers.

"Counterfactual" literally means, "against fact". Thus, not true... not reality.

 

[Rapture Bound]

"Counterfactual" literally means, "against fact". Thus, not true... not reality.

God's counterfactual knowledge asserted by Molinists also entails conditionality... something that some have failed to take into account. All the scriptures that I provided in my original post clearly reveal this type of counterfactualism. And, for that reason, the vast majority of theologians that are non-Molinist are in agreement with what I just stated ... in reality, it's is a non-issue within the world of Christian theological "academia", that is, it's virtually uncontested.... a non-issue among them. However, I'm also aware that general concensus on God's Middle Knowledge counterfactualism [or any question for that matter] certainly does not prove it's validity, but certainly lends to it's plausibility ... just thought this info might somewhat surprise you.

 

[Mark Quayle]

God's counterfactual knowledge asserted by Molinists also entails....

My goodness the amount of notions that can fit in here...

More in a bit.

 

[Mark Quayle]

God's counterfactual knowledge asserted by Molinists also entails conditionality... something that some have failed to take into account. All the scriptures that I provided in my original post clearly reveal this type of counterfactualism. And, for that reason, the vast majority of theologians that are non-Molinist are in agreement with what I just stated ... in reality, it's is a non-issue within the world of Christian theological "academia", that is, it's virtually uncontested.... a non-issue among them. However, I'm also aware that general concensus on God's Middle Knowledge counterfactualism [or any question for that matter] certainly does not prove it's validity, but certainly lends to it's plausibility ... just thought this info might somewhat surprise you.

I'm curious as to what "info [it was that] might somewhat surprise [me]." You haven't told me anything new, here. Though the gall of people to assume that chance is real, and that God bows to the "free will" of his creatures, never ceases to surprise me. Ok —that's an exaggeration. It never ceases to gall me.

To me, the info: "...the vast majority of theologians that are non-Molinist are in agreement with what I just stated ... in reality, it's is a non-issue within the world of Christian theological "academia", that is, it's virtually uncontested.... a non-issue among them" sounds rather misrepresented. What pretty much nobody is contesting is conditionality. The Bible is replete with conditional statements. But to label that with the 'scholarly'-sounding, "academia"-heavy, term, "counterfactual", almost sounds scientific —very impressive!

Maybe I ought to post this as one of those Facebook clickbait statements: "Nobody has yet been able to prove that anything can happen besides what does happen."

Again, if it cannot happen —in fact, if it did not happen— it isn't fact. You can't prove, "could have happened." Choice? Yes, definitely. But the notion that even God [sort of] does not know what will happen, is frankly, heresy.

 

[Rapture Bound]

I'm curious as to what "info [it was that] might somewhat surprise [me]." You haven't told me anything new, here. Though the gall of people to assume that chance is real, and that God bows to the "free will" of his creatures, never ceases to surprise me. Ok —that's an exaggeration. It never ceases to gall me.

To me, the info: "...the vast majority of theologians that are non-Molinist are in agreement with what I just stated ... in reality, it's is a non-issue within the world of Christian theological "academia", that is, it's virtually uncontested.... a non-issue among them" sounds rather misrepresented. What pretty much nobody is contesting is conditionality. The Bible is replete with conditional statements. But to label that with the 'scholarly'-sounding, "academia"-heavy, term, "counterfactual", almost sounds scientific —very impressive!

Maybe I ought to post this as one of those Facebook clickbait statements: "Nobody has yet been able to prove that anything can happen besides what does happen."

Again, if it cannot happen —in fact, if it did not happen— it isn't fact. You can't prove, "could have happened." Choice? Yes, definitely. But the notion that even God [sort of] does not know what will happen, is frankly, heresy.

Does God possess counterfactual Middle Knowledge? ... Of course He does. All a person has to do is read 1 Samuel 23:8-14 to discover that it is true. Now, if you don't like the terms "counterfactual" or "Middle Knowledge" that's o.k.. There's some who argue against the truth it represents by making the absurd claim that the term "Holy Trinity" is also not in the Bible ... therefore the truth represented by the term "counterfactual Middle Knowledge" likewise cannot be scriptural. What you, or anyone else need to do is show exactly how the passage in 1 Samuel 23:8-14 [shown in post #421] fails to provide clear-cut evidence that God possesses this type of knowledge. I wouldn't be too quick to post it as Facebook clickbait if I were you ... at least not until you're able to successfully rebut that passage [a feat that few have ever even attempted ... with good reason].

 

[Mark Quayle]

Does God possess counterfactual Middle Knowledge? ... Of course He does. All a person has to do is read 1 Samuel 23:8-14 to discover that it is true. Now, if you don't like the terms "counterfactual" or "Middle Knowledge" that's o.k.. There's some who argue against the truth it represents by making the absurd claim that the term "Holy Trinity" is also not in the Bible ... therefore the truth represented by the term "counterfactual Middle Knowledge" likewise cannot be scriptural. What you, or anyone else need to do is show exactly how the passage in 1 Samuel 23:8-14 [shown in post #421] fails to provide clear-cut evidence that God possesses this type of knowledge. I wouldn't be too quick to post it as Facebook clickbait if I were you ... at least not until you're able to successfully rebut that passage [a feat that few have ever even attempted ... with good reason].

No, God does not "possess counterfactual Middle Knowledge". That is a human construction, and false as the day is long. We do have real choice, but that does not imply that both (or several) options are equally possible. That there are contingencies, I agree completely. But, the notion that what doesn't actually come to pass was nevertheless possible, cannot be proven, nor does God establish it.

How does contingency imply multiple possibility? It does not. It only implies real choice, and direction of consequences, both natural, and moral.

It will be interesting to see how wide a gulf God sees between things we consider a thread's width apart.

How a person can come to the conclusion that what God has not caused, is able to come to pass, I don't get. It is not logical, nor does the Bible claim such a thing.

 

[DingDing]

"Can a genuine, blood-bought, regenerated believer forfeit their salvation?"

...

Note : "POS" = perseverance of the saints : "OSAS" = once saved, always saved ; "CS" = conditional security. God Bless!


Anyone can forfeit their salvation. Boy, yours was a long post which I did not read. Too many long posts here. And the ads are killing me. Perhaps they are why I left so many years ago.

 

[Rapture Bound]

You said, "Boy, yours was a long post which I did not read". Well, it seems to me that you're really not very interested in discovering the true answer to the question. Do you suppose that an explanation that requires but a few paragraphs will provide a sufficient answer to a topic [the eternal security of the believer] that has confused [and generated so much controversy] among professing Christians?... really?

No genuine, regenerated, child of God will ever forfeit or "lose" their salvation that was purchased for them at Calvary by the precious blood of Jesus Christ once they have genuinely placed their faith in His atoning work ... this is the very essence of the gospel.... we are saved by God's grace through faith .... absolutely apart from works. To deny this is to essentially deny the efficacy of Christ's atoning work. Sadly, it appears to me [please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong], that you do not believe this truth statement. Perhaps you believe God's promise to be "too good to be true", or perhaps "too easy" on the part of man? ... this I have found to be the case with so very many.

Every child of God has been purchased by the blood of Jesus Christ as the result of trusting in Christ's provision for all of their sins [past, present, future]. We become His possession and not our own at that point in time [as a result of a free will decision that we have made]. I hope you don't view this scenario as many do, "stuck forever in a marriage that they have regretted getting into" in which a divorce will simply never be granted" ... no genuine child of God will ever regret making that irreversible decision, they have received a new nature at regeneration that will be sickened by the very thought of it.

 

[DingDing]

You said, "Boy, yours was a long post which I did not read". Well, it seems to me that you're really not very interested in discovering the true answer to the question. ...

Yet another long post. I've been doing this for 25 years and was a moderator for several. Any thread should be started with as simple of a post as possible. This is not how a thread should start out.

 

[Rapture Bound]

Yet another long post. I've been doing this for 25 years and was a moderator for several. Any thread should be started with as simple of a post as possible. This is not how a thread should start out.

 

[Rapture Bound]

"Christian Deconversion"? - Part 2

In my prior post I wrote, "In other words, did these people [professing Christian deconverters] ever truly believe that it is only "by grace through faith and not of works" that a person can be saved with such admissions? The following video is just one, in the avalanche of testimonial videos, which illustrates this recurring theme :

"Leaving Evangelical Christianity - An Intro"

Starting @6:38 mins. into her videos she says, "I just thought about that because this person was a fine person, they were living their life and they just didn't seem to need the Christian teaching". So that kept happening ..."they don't need this Christian stuff, their lives are fine without it. They are playing their part in society, they're doing well, they're benefiting by being good people in society." ...

Who am I to tell people in Australia, in a completely different culture than me, who are doing fine following their own versions of life? They are not hurting anybody and they are doing just fine. Who am I to infiltrate their life and say, "hey you need this Jesus stuff, and if you don't accept it, unfortunately you are going to go to hell?"

In a nutshell she is declaring ... "good people don't need the salvation that Jesus offers."

So I ask you, does it appear to you like this woman ["Dee"], or the multitudes of people that share similar testimonies, ever believed that they were sinners in danger of the wrath of God, and in desperate need of His forgiveness? Did they ever actually understand or receive as truth the clear declaration of Ephesians 2:8-9 that clearly states ... not of works [not because of any of our "superlative feats of morality" that we perform]?

To further illustrate, in another one of her videos entitled, "Why Christians argue about who 'Real' Christians are", she says [similar to the masses of deconverters]...

"The whole saying, a "True Scotsman" applies to Christianity when people like to point at people who used to be Christians and say, 'they were never true Christians', or 'they just didn't understand' ... it has to do with their theological standpoints though. People who can't admit that their theology could be wrong, it's not complicated, it's just a lot to unpack. If somebody says that to you and they are a fundamentalist type of Christian, it's because they literally cannot accept your past as being reality, because if they do, that means they will have to admit their theology is wrong. ****They have to go with the Bible is true over what may happen in reality. If they conflict, they automatically support what the bible says, even if it doesn't match reality"****

****Did you catch that?... in the end it is reality a question of [human] subjective truth [what I feel, what I experience] or [scriptural] objective truth [what God's Word declares as reality], that is to say, which one 'trumps' or 'takes precedence over' the other [which does not imply the total elimination of the another] ... these deconverters have chosen the wrong answer ... subjective truth.****

It appears to me that closely related to this issue is the deconverters rejection of Biblical reliability. They claim that there really isn't any solid evidence for the scriptures being inspired by God. Here's a breathtaking video that I would highly recommend to those scoffers who make that assertion :

<

> "Evidence of God in Mathematics -Truth Project 37, Full Documentary of Proofs of Bible Reliability"

Hell will be filled to the brim with "good men"... "moral" men ... as well as "religious" men who all have this one thing in common ... they have never been born again. Those who have been born again do not boast in their so-called "moral excellence" as the basis or ground for their right-standing [justification] before God; they boast in the cross of Christ alone [Galatians 6:14]. What a man might see in another man as "good", God sees as one that is "dead" .... dead in trespasses and sins [Ephesians 2:1].

To miss this great truth, is in essence, to miss the central message of the Gospel. So, how does Christianity differ from all other religions? If I had to summarize it in one word, it would be "Grace". Other religions require people to try really, really hard to be worthy enough to earn acceptance before their deities. Only in Christianity does God himself come to us to make us worthy, not as a reward for our hard work and striving to obey His rules, but as a free gift of grace for those who would trust in Christ's atoning work rather than their own.

So many stumble right here by choosing to believe that the salvation that God offers[ by grace through faith and not of works] is "too easy" or "too good to be true" [but in truth, they have rejected God's only appointed road to Heaven, it's the very heart of the Gospel message]. Others, who claim to have entered through that narrow gate, are yet striving to be accepted by God through their obedience to God's rules... does that sound like a person who believes that they have been redeemed by Christ's blood? ... "oh yeah", they say, "I've been redeemed by Christ's blood for now, but I've got a little more work to do if I plan on making Heaven my home someday ... but I'm not working for my salvation."

How many people out there do you suppose trust in their good deeds outweighing their bad deeds when those accumulated works are placed on their imaginary, metaphoric, "Great Scale in Heaven" on Judgment day for their admittance into Heaven? Personally, I believe it's very likely that the majority of mankind has bought into this lie fabricated from the demonic hordes.

Here's another shocking and frightening aspect to the scenario ... there are many out there who consider themselves genuine, born-again, blood-bought children of God, that aren't in actuality that far apart from that mind-set ... the parallel is undeniable.

Chaleb [a member here @Christian Forums] vividly describes it like this:

"This is how the enemy works :

A BELIEVING person goes to God, to the Cross, on the day they
are saved, and they are so thankful that GOD saved them. They
know that day, they are saved and who did it, and they know
they are going to HEAVEN, because of God and Christ and The Cross.

2 Yrs later, they are on a forum teaching ....'Here is how you
lose salvation".....>"here are the commandments you need to keep,
and the works you need to do, to STAY SAVED"..

Yet, the day they were saved, they KNEW why they were going to heaven,
as they had the truth then.., and now....= over time they've been
conned out of it by "theology" deceivers."

Galatians 1:9-10, "As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ."

Galatians 6:14, "But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world."

Just recently I've added another video to my above article which provides further compelling mathematical evidence for the Divine inspiration of the Bible. You really don't want to miss this one!

URGENT! New Discovery in FIRST and LAST Verses of the King James Bible! [2023]

 

[Rapture Bound]

"Salvation Shorts" :

There are many professing believers out there who tell me that Jesus' finished work on the cross doesn't equal OSAS. My response ... "correct, it doesn't equal it ... it's the guaranteed result of it for all those who have truly trusted solely in it for their eternal salvation/life."

 

[BNR32FAN]

"Salvation Shorts" :

There are many professing believers out there who tell me that Jesus' finished work on the cross doesn't equal OSAS. My response ... "correct, it doesn't equal it ... it's the guaranteed result of it for all those who have truly trusted solely in it for their eternal salvation/life."

So if Hitler believed that he would be saved even tho he was still ordering the execution, torture, and imprisonment of Jews while killing hundreds of thousands of people in his world domination campaign he would actually be saved?

 

[BNR32FAN]

No genuine, regenerated, child of God will ever forfeit or "lose" their salvation that was purchased for them at Calvary by the precious blood of Jesus Christ once they have genuinely placed their faith in His atoning work ... this is the very essence of the gospel.... we are saved by God's grace through faith .... absolutely apart from works. To deny this is to essentially deny the efficacy of Christ's atoning work. Sadly, it appears to me [please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong], that you do not believe this truth statement. Perhaps you believe God's promise to be "too good to be true", or perhaps "too easy" on the part of man? ... this I have found to be the case with so very many.

What about love? Shouldn’t love also be a factor in that equation?

 

[Rapture Bound]

So if Hitler believed that he would be saved even tho he was still ordering the execution, torture, and imprisonment of Jews while killing hundreds of thousands of people in his world domination campaign he would actually be saved?

Well, it really doesn't matter what Hitler believed or didn't believe ...the truth remains the truth despite his apprehension of it. I really don't understand your question fully .... are you asking me if Hitler was actually saved prior to committing his atrocities .... or could he be forgiven after committing them?

 

[Rapture Bound]

What about love? Shouldn’t love also be a factor in that equation?

Yes, I really don't see why love wouldn't be a factor in the equation.