Once Saved Always Saved: Fact or Fiction?

[FreeGrace2]

Yes Christ died for all sin but if we confess our sin he is faithful and just to forgive us , and to cleanse us from all sin

Since the context of ch 1 is about FELLOWSHIP with the Father and the Son, it should be obvious that believers confess their sins to maintain fellowship. Jesus made the same point in John 13 when He was washing the disciples' feet. When He got to Peter, Pete said "no way". Then Jesus said, "if I don't do this for you, you can have no part with Me". That was about fellowship, not relationship. We know this because then Pete responded by saying, "then give me a full bath" rather than just wash his feet. Jesus' response: "you are all clean (saved), but not all of you (referring to Judas)". Jesus' point was that even though the 11 disciples were saved (clean), they still needed their feet washed. That is what confession of sin is about.

what if we don't confess and forsake it and abide in darkness and through the deceitful was of sin we have unbelief

What if? Provide Scripture for what you think may happen.

Unbelief will also go to the lake of fire . So did Jesus die for those who don't believe? Yes but if they do not believe they do not have life or forgiveness

When the Bible speaks of "unbelief", it is referring to those who NEVER believed. They NEVER received eternal life, which is a gift of God that is irrevocable.

And, yes, Jesus DID die for those who don't believe. That's why no one goes to the lake of fire for sin. It was paid for. They are cast into the lake of fire because they NEVER received the free gift of eternal life, which is irrevocable.

 

[Butch5]

OSAS is something obvious in the Scriptures, which isn't very debatable because the doctrine was formed no sooner than the Bible became published to the public- when Protestantism really gained speed.

The Catholic Church's 'Infused Righteousness', where one's salvation is at stake in the event of a mortal sin, was quickly challenged in light of what people read in the New Testament.

But even then there's an issue- OSAS isn't necessarily concrete either, there in fact several different notions of it. Calvin's 'Perseverance of the Saints' is probably the roughest of all, which states that if a person fails to persevere then they were never saved to begin with- that a permanent infusion takes place rather then a breakable one. Which is a lot like Luther's ideology except that he taught even such perseverance wasn't really needed.

OSAS only appears to be obvious in the Scriptures because Christians are taught to proof text rather than study the scriptures. Christians are presented with doctrines and then a list of sentences that are supposed to prove said doctrine. That's called eisegesis. Think about it, when you study American history do you choose to believe something and then root through history books to find sentences that prove what you believe? Of course not. Yet that is exactly what many do with the Bible. There is not a single passage of Scripture that say salvation can't be lost. The doctrine is simply fabricated on a bunch of inferences.

This doctrine didn't even come into the church until the Reformation. For 1400 years the doctrine was rejected by the Church and yes it has been around that long. It was first presented to the church in the form of Gnosticism which was flatly rejected as heresy. So, the first Christians to be presented with this doctrine rejected it and labeled those who presented it as heretics. Given that history and the fact that the church rejected it for 1400 years and still does, (it's a protestant doctrine) I find it incredibly hard to believe that this is a Bilabial doctrine.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"Slight problem here. There are NO verses that teach that "falling away" equals loss of salvation. That is merely a false assumption. As for the rest of your post, no evidence was given that supports the fallacy that to "fall away" equals "loss of salvation".

Here you go , very simple

"For by grace are ye saved through faith..."Eph 2:8

And

" ye are fallen from grace."Gal 5:4

And

"For the grace of God that bringeth salvation"Titus 2:11

So if we are saved by grace to fall from grace is to fall from salvation

This is just poor "math" by trying to cobble together several verses to try to make a point. There are NO verses that say that falling from grace means loss of salvation. All that has been done here is use 3 verses that are unrelated.

We are saved by grace. We don't earn it. We are kept by grace. We don't earn it. We can't lose our salvation because we can't earn that loss.

That's just one of the huge problems of the insecurity crowd. They all preach some form of sin or sinful behavior as earning loss of salvation, even though they won't admit that they have earned such loss.

 

[Albion]

It's not just Calvinists who believe in eternal security

Just thought I'd throw that out there.

And not only that, but what's the definition of a "Calvinist?" The term is used very liberally by critics, I've noticed.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"Slight problem here. There are NO verses that teach that "falling away" equals loss of salvation. That is merely a false assumption. As for the rest of your post, no evidence was given that supports the fallacy that to "fall away" equals "loss of salvation".

There are no verses that say "God is Trinity" either.

A rather tired defense, imho. The Bible clearly notes that The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are all God. And 2 Cor 13:14 includes all 3. We could just as well say that there are no verses about God being "three", yet we know that He exists in three Persons.

One cannot compare the Trinity concept to the concept that falling away means loss of salvation. That's just an opinion from a run-away imagination.

When one of God's children (saved) becomes disobedient or rebellious, God may remove the protections He had placed around that one, so that Satan has free access to him. We see that principle in 1 Cor 5 and the incestuous man: I have decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

Here, Paul telling us that divine discipline may lead to physical death for the believer, not eternal death. Does being turned over to the devil for physical death sound minimal or inconsequential? I think not.

MY: To "fall away" means to leave the faith. No longer follow it."

Yes, that's what it means.

The passage in Hebrews explicitly and at length describes exactly what such a person "falls away" from. How you are able to interpret that as anything other than the abandonment and loss of one's salvation is a complete mystery to me.

The real mystery is why anyone would think one CAN abandon one's salvation. One can surely quit believing. But since we are kept by God, we don't have the power or authority to abandon our salvation.

Further, salvation includes a whole lot of changes that CANNOT be undone. Regeration, being born again, being a new creature. How would one change all that? Impossible.

Because the gift of God that is justification and eternal life are IRREVOCABLE.

Please explain how you come to the absurd conclusion that you hold so dear in the face of scripture that explicitly refute your false doctrine.

Since that hasn't been done yet, and the FACT that my conclusions come from Scripture, your request is immaterial and moot.

Right. That eternal reward is eternal life.

The Bible says we are saved by grace. Not by earning it. A reward, by definition, if something EARNED.

Can a "saved" person continually indulge in any and all those sins and remain saved?

The only appropriate answers are a "yes" or a "no."

Only until God disciplines him so severely that he either stops, or God takes him home.

Another question is not an answer.

I didn't ask another question. Please quit trying to second guess me.

 

[LoveofTruth]

Since the context of ch 1 is about FELLOWSHIP with the Father and the Son, it should be obvious that believers confess their sins to maintain fellowship. Jesus made the same point in John 13 when He was washing the disciples' feet. When He got to Peter, Pete said "no way". Then Jesus said, "if I don't do this for you, you can have no part with Me". That was about fellowship, not relationship.

No, fellowship with the Lord which means "participation with , communion, intercoarse " in Greek. This participation with Christ is our life and walk in Christ. If we walk in the light as he is in the light then we have fellowship and then ONLY then does the blood of Christ cleanse us from all sins. But if we ( believers) walk in darkness and say we are in the light, we lie and do not the truth. If we ( believers) do not the truth, then we are not in the truth and Jesus is the truth as he said.

"5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin." 1 John 1:5-7

and John writes

"3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked." 1 John 2:3-6)

Notice here that in God is not darkness at all and if a professing believer says he is IN HIM and that they KNOW HIM and do not keep his commandments he is a liar and the truth is not IN HIM. If a believer does not have the TRUTH in him he is not saved. John says, hereby we know that we are IN HIM, if we walk even as he walked.This is far more than your understanding of fellowship.

If we walk in the light we are not in darkness. To be in the light means to be "enlightened" which is salvation. To have the Light and walk in the light is to have the light of LIFE, only in this life is fellowship. Outside of this light is no life or fellowship.

"Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life."John 8:12

When the Bible speaks of "unbelief", it is referring to those who NEVER believed. They NEVER received eternal life, which is a gift of God that is irrevocable.

No believers can fall into unbelief as scripture clearly shows,

"3 Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling," Hebrews 1:1 [speaking to HOLY BRETHREN, saints in Christ]

"6 But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end." Hebrews 3:6 [speaking to believers again in Christ and tells them to hold fast their confidence and UNTIL the END. ]

"8 Harden not your hearts," Hebrews 3:8 [ showing that there is a warning here and that believers can harden their hearts. God is not hardening them here first.]

"12 Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.13 But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.14 For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end;" (Hebrews 3:12-14) [Clearly here a believer a holy one in Christ can enter into UNBELIEF and depart from the living God this can happen as they get hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. So yes there is scripture for this.

And what happens if believers have unbelief or murder (1 John 3:15) or do the sins mentioned to the saints in 1 Cor 6:9 and Galatians 5? They will also end up here,

"But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death." (Revelation 21:8)

 

[LoveofTruth]

And not only that, but what's the definition of a "Calvinist?" The term is used very liberally by critics, I've noticed.

I refer to the TULIP idea of their views

 

[LoveofTruth]

I said:
"Slight problem here. There are NO verses that teach that "falling away" equals loss of salvation. That is merely a false assumption. As for the rest of your post, no evidence was given that supports the fallacy that to "fall away" equals "loss of salvation".

This is just poor "math" by trying to cobble together several verses to try to make a point. There are NO verses that say that falling from grace means loss of salvation. All that has been done here is use 3 verses that are unrelated.

We are saved by grace. We don't earn it. We are kept by grace. We don't earn it. We can't lose our salvation because we can't earn that loss.

That's just one of the huge problems of the insecurity crowd. They all preach some form of sin or sinful behavior as earning loss of salvation, even though they won't admit that they have earned such loss.

No I said before it is unbelief that causes believers to depart from the living God. Sin hardens the heart and we can then have an evil heart of unbelief as hebrews 3 clearly says.

I used scripture right there. i showed that it is by grace we are saved, through faith and then i showed that grace is saving and that believers can fall from that grace and Christ shall be of no profit to them. And that he will be of no effect to them. The verses are clear to the unbiased reader. If you are saved by grace and fall from grace then you fall from salvation also. Grace = salvation, falling from grace = no salvation

Sometimes it is very simple to take down a massive giant with only one smooth stone as David did. Or with just a few scriptures. I know those who hold their views will be troubled , after all they have spent so much time and effort studying their books and listening to their teachers and have whole assemblies built up around their views and all it takes is a few simple verses to bring down the giant.

 

[outsidethecamp]

Quotes by Calvinists:

"We have no sympathy whatever with the bald and unqualified declaration, "Once saved always saved". (Arthur Pink, Eternal Security, pg 11)

"I have never liked that definition because it leaves God out of the process, and makes the security of the believer automatic." (Ben Lacy Rose, T.U.L.I.P. Five Disputed Steps of Calvinism, pg 50).

"If should be obvious that the Calvinist doctrine of the perseverance of the saints is not one and the same thing with "once saved always saved." (Kenneth G. Talbot and W. Gary Crampton, Calvinism, Hyper-Calvinism and Arminianism, pg 52)

Arthur Pink even stated that, "many have been lulled into a fatal sleep by the soothing lullaby, "once saved always saved." (Eternal Security, pg 21)

Further, Arthur Pink adds, "Reader, if there is reserve in your obedience, you are on your way to hell." (Practical Christianity, pg 16)

As well as Charles Hodge - "Neither the members of the church nor the elect can be saved unless they persevere in holiness; and they cannot persevere in holiness without continual watchfulness and effort." (Charles Hodge, Corinthians, pg 81).

and R.C. Sproul: "Endurance in faith is a condition for future salvation. Only those who endure in faith will be saved for eternity."

And...John Calvin, himself referring to Matthew 24:13: "When the love of many should fail to support the weight of iniquity Christ tells them that this barrier too must be overcome in case the faithful should break under bad example and defect. So He repeats the sentence, that no man can be saved unless he strive lawfully to persevere to the end of the course." (Calvin, Commentaries. Vol 3, pg 82).

Sure does sound like the Arminians, to me.

I think you now see the difference between "persevering in the faith", and being preserved in salvation by God. Anyone with a dictionary can see that perseverance is not the same as preservation.

 

[LoveofTruth]

I already explained what scholars call a 'litotes'.


The overcoming in 1 John is our FAITH, not our efforts. The overcoming in Rev 2 and 3 is about our efforts. Obviously different.

our efforts are only in faith and as God works in us and makes us perfect unto every good work. Without Jesus we can do nothing.

 

[LoveofTruth]

Quotes by Calvinists:

"We have no sympathy whatever with the bald and unqualified declaration, "Once saved always saved". (Arthur Pink, Eternal Security, pg 11)

"I have never liked that definition because it leaves God out of the process, and makes the security of the believer automatic." (Ben Lacy Rose, T.U.L.I.P. Five Disputed Steps of Calvinism, pg 50).

"If should be obvious that the Calvinist doctrine of the perseverance of the saints is not one and the same thing with "once saved always saved." (Kenneth G. Talbot and W. Gary Crampton, Calvinism, Hyper-Calvinism and Arminianism, pg 52)

Arthur Pink even stated that, "many have been lulled into a fatal sleep by the soothing lullaby, "once saved always saved." (Eternal Security, pg 21)

Further, Arthur Pink adds, "Reader, if there is reserve in your obedience, you are on your way to hell." (Practical Christianity, pg 16)

As well as Charles Hodge - "Neither the members of the church nor the elect can be saved unless they persevere in holiness; and they cannot persevere in holiness without continual watchfulness and effort." (Charles Hodge, Corinthians, pg 81).

and R.C. Sproul: "Endurance in faith is a condition for future salvation. Only those who endure in faith will be saved for eternity."

And...John Calvin, himself referring to Matthew 24:13: "When the love of many should fail to support the weight of iniquity Christ tells them that this barrier too must be overcome in case the faithful should break under bad example and defect. So He repeats the sentence, that no man can be saved unless he strive lawfully to persevere to the end of the course." (Calvin, Commentaries. Vol 3, pg 82).

Yes but Calvin did believe that the "elect would persevere in faith to eternal life. so he was wrong there

Sure does sound like the Arminians, to me.

I think you now see the difference between "persevering in the faith", and being preserved in salvation by God. Anyone with a dictionary can see that perseverance is not the same as preservation.

Calvin taught that the "elect " would perservere to the end, so in a sense he did teach OSAS. But he also taught infant baptism and kind of baptismal regeneration. Like Luther they were both in error there, greatly.

 

[outsidethecamp]

Calvin taught that the "elect " would perservere to the end, so in a sense he did teach OSAS. But he also taught infant baptism and kind of baptismal regeneration. Like Luther they were both in error there, greatly.

I am very acquainted with what Calvin taught and you are most correct, but I thought it would be interesting to show some quotes from "Calvinists", on perseverance. To Calvinists, whoever is not a Calvinist is automatically of "Arminian" persuasion and yet in their quotes, they sound very much like Arminians. Calvinists also trip themselves up (contradict themselves) on the TULIP, many times. Many of them disagree with one another. But, such is the case with man-made theological systems of belief. God never intended for His word to be codified into other lengthy volumes that take precedence over His pure word.

Psa 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Psa 12:7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

 

[gigman7]

I'll ask again, who on here believes they have lost their salvation and been saved again?

 

[FreeGrace2]

I sid this:
"Since the context of ch 1 is about FELLOWSHIP with the Father and the Son, it should be obvious that believers confess their sins to maintain fellowship. Jesus made the same point in John 13 when He was washing the disciples' feet. When He got to Peter, Pete said "no way". Then Jesus said, "if I don't do this for you, you can have no part with Me". That was about fellowship, not relationship."

No, fellowship with the Lord which means "participation with , communion, intercoarse " in Greek.

Thank you for supporting my post.

This participation with Christ is our life and walk in Christ.

That's correct. It's not about relationship; it's about fellowship, or as you've said: participation with, communion, intercourse. These are words of fellowship, not relationship.

If we walk in the light as he is in the light then we have fellowship and then ONLY then does the blood of Christ cleanse us from all sins.

Again, correct. ONLY when we confess our sins are we cleansed and HAVE FELLOWSHIP. Again, thanks for supporting my view.

[QUOE]But if we ( believers) walk in darkness and say we are in the light, we lie and do not the truth. If we ( believers) do not the truth, then we are not in the truth and Jesus is the truth as he said.[/QUOTE]
And that means no fellowship.

If we walk in the light we are not in darkness.

Again, correct. And those believers who aren't walking in the light (fellowship) are in darkness (stupidity, ignorance, etc)

To be in the light means to be "enlightened" which is salvation.

No it doesn't. It's the opposite of stupidity, ignorance, etc.

To have the Light and walk in the light is to have the light of LIFE, only in this life is fellowship. Outside of this light is no life or fellowship.

It is obvious that there is a huge misunderstanding of the difference between fellowship and relationship.

No believers can fall into unbelief as scripture clearly shows,

Well, you've just disagreed with Jesus. He said that some "believe for a while". Luke 8:13

"3 Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling," Hebrews 1:1 [speaking to HOLY BRETHREN, saints in Christ]

"6 But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end." Hebrews 3:6 [speaking to believers again in Christ and tells them to hold fast their confidence and UNTIL the END. ]

I have to suppose that the word "if" was missed entirely.

And what happens if believers have unbelief or murder (1 John 3:15) or do the sins mentioned to the saints in 1 Cor 6:9 and Galatians 5? They will also end up here,

"But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death." (Revelation 21:8)

OK, so your view completely disagrees with Scripture, because the free gift of eternal life is irrevocable, as has been repeatedly been shown in this thread.

 

[AVBunyan]

Undo it it all by turning away from Christ through unbelief.
Beware, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God;
Hebrews 3:12

Wel, you picked a passage that doctrinally deals with Jews working their way thru in the future great tribulation - notice to whom the book was written to, Hebrews.
Again, When God saved me I was baptized by the Holy Spirit into Christ's literal body and I am now bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh (Eph. 5:30) and seated in heavenly places in Christ (Eph. 2:4-6).
Now explain to me how I would be able to undo that by myself.

 

[AVBunyan]

I'll ask again, who on here believes they have lost their salvation and been saved again?

Good question - I'd like someone to take this one and run with it!

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"Slight problem here. There are NO verses that teach that "falling away" equals loss of salvation. That is merely a false assumption. As for the rest of your post, no evidence was given that supports the fallacy that to "fall away" equals "loss of salvation".

This is just poor "math" by trying to cobble together several verses to try to make a point. There are NO verses that say that falling from grace means loss of salvation. All that has been done here is use 3 verses that are unrelated.

No I said before it is unbelief that causes believers to depart from the living God.

To depart means loss of fellowship, not relationship. Even in the prodigal son, he was ALWAYS a son, and the father was ALWAYS the father. That is relationship. What was lost (or died in the parable) was FELLOWSHIP.

How can 2 have fellowship when one departs with a bad attitude? They can't.

I used scripture right there. i showed that it is by grace we are saved, through faith and then i showed that grace is saving

This is only half right. Grace is not saving. God is saving. Grace is the means by which God saves people. Big difference.

and that believers can fall from that grace and Christ shall be of no profit to them. And that he will be of no effect to them. The verses are clear to the unbiased reader. If you are saved by grace and fall from grace then you fall from salvation also. Grace = salvation, falling from grace = no salvation

OK, then let's just tear out Romans 3, 5, 6 and 11, since Paul defined justification and eternal life as gifts of God and then wrote that God's gifts are IRREVOCABLE. Your view is that eternal life is revocable, in direct conflict with Scripture. So just tear out those chapters from Romans and continue to believe what hasn't and can't be proven from Scripture.

Sometimes it is very simple to take down a massive giant with only one smooth stone as David did. Or with just a few scriptures.

That is EXACTLY what Rom 5:15-17, Rom 6:23 and Rom 11:29 does to the insecurity crowd!! Great imagery!

I know those who hold their views will be troubled

I would strongly suggest that those who hold to the insecurity view be very troubled by the fact that their view cannot be shown from Scripture, and the fact that it is obviously refuted by Scripture.

after all they have spent so much time and effort studying their books and listening to their teachers and have whole assemblies built up around their views and all it takes is a few simple verses to bring down the giant.

The simple verses are are about eternal security, not insecurity.

 

[FreeGrace2]

our efforts are only in faith and as God works in us and makes us perfect unto every good work. Without Jesus we can do nothing.

Please explain what it means "without Jesus we can do nothing". What is it we can't do? Specifically.

 

[JLB777]

Since the context of ch 1 is about FELLOWSHIP with the Father and the Son, it should be obvious that believers confess their sins to maintain fellowship. Jesus made the same point in John 13 when He was washing the disciples' feet. When He got to Peter, Pete said "no way". Then Jesus said, "if I don't do this for you, you can have no part with Me". That was about fellowship, not relationship. We know this because then Pete responded by saying, "then give me a full bath" rather than just wash his feet. Jesus' response: "you are all clean (saved), but not all of you (referring to Judas)". Jesus' point was that even though the 11 disciples were saved (clean), they still needed their feet washed. That is what confession of sin is about.


What if? Provide Scripture for what you think may happen.


When the Bible speaks of "unbelief", it is referring to those who NEVER believed. They NEVER received eternal life, which is a gift of God that is irrevocable.

And, yes, Jesus DID die for those who don't believe. That's why no one goes to the lake of fire for sin. It was paid for. They are cast into the lake of fire because they NEVER received the free gift of eternal life, which is irrevocable.

Still waiting for the verse that backs this false claim up.

Romans 11:29 does not contain any such phrase.

No scripture in the bible states "eternal life is irrevocable".


JLB

 

[gigman7]

Still waiting for the verse that backs this false claim up.

Romans 11:29 does not contain any such phrase.

No scripture in the bible states "eternal life is irrevocable".


JLB

Rom 11:29 says we cannot lose our salvation.