Eternal vs conditional security, or OSAS vs LOS

[ZacharyB]

OK, show any verse that says that salvation is based on what one "duz" vs what one believes.

Many thanks indeed for the many LOLs ... dey keep me happy and motivated.

There are many passages about ...
the different eternal outcomes (life and death),
which result from:
living in the Spirit vs. living in the flesh,
following after the Spirit vs. not doing so, etc.

Now, if we wish to consider eternal life/death vs. physical life/death,
then we can delve deeper than da bold above.

Yes, one dear lady elsewhere can only grasp ahold of the great hope that Paul
in Romans 6 warns 3 times (in an 8 verse span) about physical death only!
(At least she is accepting that Paul is not referring to unbelievers!)
Perhaps thou, FG2, art joined at the hip with her?

ALL of the NT verses MUST BE RECONCILED together somehow!
I have done that.
But, many others (like you) just choose to ignore one group of verses.
Scripture warns that those teaching false doctrines will receive the greater condemnation.
Believing privately is one matter, but teaching it to others is another matter.

 

[Born Again2004]

Yes, one dear lady elsewhere can only grasp ahold of the great hope that Paul
in Romans 6 warns 3 times (in an 8 verse span) about physical death only!

Yes, like in verse 8 that you stated, though you apply state Paul was talking about physical death, what you fail to emphasize is he is referring to those who die with Christ in them! This is the whole of the Gospel: that we ALL die our physical death but, only those who die with Christ in them , yet live on spiritually.....he is in us based on belief / faith...( what He has done through us) not what we do (our own works).

 

[FreeGrace2]

Many thanks indeed for the many LOLs ... dey keep me happy and motivated.

There are many passages about ...
the different eternal outcomes (life and death),
which result from:
living in the Spirit vs. living in the flesh,
following after the Spirit vs. not doing so, etc.

Now prove that the passages on "life and death" refer to eternal life and death. Since that is your assumption. I need much more than assumption before I accept a doctrine.

Now, if we wish to consider eternal life/death vs. physical life/death,
then we can delve deeper than da bold above.

Yes, one dear lady elsewhere can only grasp ahold of the great hope that Paul
in Romans 6 warns 3 times (in an 8 verse span) about physical death only!
(At least she is accepting that Paul is not referring to unbelievers!)
Perhaps thou, FG2, art joined at the hip with her?

How about typing like an adult? And leave the phony accent at home.

ALL of the NT verses MUST BE RECONCILED together somehow!
I have done that.

I disagree and have seen no evidence of having done so.

But, many others (like you) just choose to ignore one group of verses.
Scripture warns that those teaching false doctrines will receive the greater condemnation.
Believing privately is one matter, but teaching it to others is another matter.

So, show me what "group of verses" that I have ignored, please.

And I'll prove that I haven't ignored them.

I always love to correct the errors of others.

 

[ZacharyB]

Now prove that the passages on "life and death" refer to eternal life and death.

Some of these passages actually spell it out for you
(but you have always insisted on ignoring them) ...
the words "eternal life", "everlasting life", etc.
are right there in those passages which WARN believers:
IF you do such and so ... you lose!
IF you don't do such and so ... you lose!

An example:
• “Do not be deceived, God is not mocked;
for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap.
For he who sows to his flesh will of the flesh reap corruption,
but he who sows to the Spirit will of the Spirit reap everlasting life.”
(Galatians 6:7-8)

So, thus and therefore ...
those passages which speak of life and death,
but which leave out the explicit words in bold above ...
are simply included in the list with those which do
include the explicit words in bold above!

Both groups of verses share the exact same type of dire warning,
butski one group has the explicit words in bold above,
whilst the other group does not have dem!

And again, I ask all of you ...
Is God bluffing, exaggerating, lying, or what?
NO ... but IMO, God includes these dire warnings as
a heads-up for His special elect to heed and follow!
Those who are NOT His elect do NOT heed and follow them!

As always, I write these words to others than the FG2.

 

[bcbsr]

A person cannot use the past tense "I have been saved", when "saved" refers to a future event unless that salvation is secured independent of time. For those who don't believe in eternal security, they're saying that one's salvation status is not determined until the end. And presently such a person cannot logically say that they have been saved. They can only say that they may or may not be saved in the end. As such the phrase "losing salvation" is illogical. It's the wrong term to use. The logically correct term to describe such a soteriology would be that one's salvation status is not determined till the end.

But the rhetoric the Bible uses is contrary to that idea. Take for example John 5:24 "I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life." or Eph 2:8 "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith— and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God" and like verses.

I would go so far to say that those who don't believe the doctrine of Eternal Security don't believe the gospel. And indeed may such people end up making salvation contingent upon one's performance, even one's involvement in rituals, such as water baptism. Yes, a person coming from such a soteriology can read those ideas into the Bible. But I would argue that they misinterpret passages in order to do so.

Much of the verses the "LOS" crowd use are simply talking about the fact that there is a correlation between one's behavior and one's salvation status. But the reality is that one's behavior is not the cause but the effect of one's salvation salvation status.

Take for example John 10:27, mentioned on this thread, "My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me." The LOS crowd adds "in order to be saved", but Jesus is talking about the natural behavior of the sheep, not how one becomes a sheep. How about 1John 2:19 "They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us." Notice John explicitly states, "if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us". Going out doesn't lose one's salvation status, but rather reveals whether one was saved in the first place.

Applying basic reading comprehension skills to interpreting the Bible clears up many misconceptions.

 

[Albion]

A person cannot use the past tense "I have been saved", when "saved" refers to a future event unless that salvation is secured independent of time. .

Well, that's what they mean when they say "saved."

 

[FreeGrace2]

Some of these passages actually spell it out for you
(but you have always insisted on ignoring them) ...
the words "eternal life", "everlasting life", etc.
are right there in those passages which WARN believers:
IF you do such and so ... you lose!

Please back up this claim by a verse that actually "spells out" that "if you do such and so, you will lose eternal life.

IF you don't do such and so ... you lose!

Yes, the Bible does teach that there is much to lose for those believers who behave in certain ways, or don't obey Scriptural commands.

But...no NO verses "spells out" that eternal life, or salvation, can be lost. None means zero.

An example:
• “Do not be deceived, God is not mocked;
for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap.
For he who sows to his flesh will of the flesh reap corruption,
but he who sows to the Spirit will of the Spirit reap everlasting life.”
(Galatians 6:7-8)

So, thus and therefore ...

Sorry that a previous explanation of what the verse means by reaping eternal life went past.

Where would one find any support for concluding that 'reap' means 'have'.

From this site:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/reap

1.
a. To cut (grain or pulse) for harvest with a scythe, sickle, or reaper.
b. To harvest (a crop).
c. To harvest a crop from: reaping a field.
2. To obtain as a result of effort: She reaped large profits from her unique invention.
v.intr.
1. To cut or harvest grain or pulse.
2. To obtain a return or reward.
Not ANY of these usages even comes close to meaning "have".

To "spell it out" for those who aren't comprehending this:
To reap a crop means to harvest a crop.

Neither statement indicates having a crop as in ownership. Farmers hire harvesters to harvest a crop. The EFFORT or RESULTS of harvesting belong to the owner of the field, not necessarily the ones who put forth the EFFORT in reaping.

What is clear from the definition of 'reap' is that of obtaining the results of the reaping or harvesting. Or obtaining a reward. Exactly how the word 'reap' is used today.

those passages which speak of life and death,
but which leave out the explicit words in bold above ...
are simply included in the list with those which do
include the explicit words in bold above!

Having explained the explicit words in bold has refuted your misunderstanding of the passage.

Both groups of verses share the exact same type of dire warning,
butski one group has the explicit words in bold above,
whilst the other group does not have dem!

Yes, which is that rewards will be LOST for certain behaviors.

And again, I ask all of you ...
Is God bluffing, exaggerating, lying, or what?
NO ... but IMO, God includes these dire warnings as
a heads-up for His special elect to heed and follow!
Those who are NOT His elect do NOT heed and follow them!

As always, I write these words to others than the FG2.

Well, the ZackB can do whatever. Matters not. What does matter is truth. For those who want to know the truth.

 

[ZacharyB]

Applying basic reading comprehension skills to interpreting the Bible
clears up many misconceptions.

If you are an American, are you aware that you have been purposely dumbed-down?
50+ years ago, the education system started taking away critical thinking!
British Columbia is beginning this removal next year ...
and how they can be 50 years behind America is a little perplexing!
(Except that, having only 10% of the population, Canada is just not that important.)

You evidently have chosen to misinterpret (or ignore) the many NT passages,
which clearly warn that one's initial salvation status may indeed be lost.
Yes, true believers have indeed initially entered into a "saved" status/category!
However, the NT clearly teaches that this status may indeed be changed
by their free-will choices!
Paul goes into considerable depth explaining that ...
believers can choose to continue (or revert back) to practicing sin,
i.e. being slaves of sin ... thus becoming unrighteous again!

The hopeless condition of almost all American believers is perfectly displayed
by their TOTAL inability to understand and/or accept ROMANS 6 where
Paul WARNS believers 3 times in the span of 8 verses (6:16-23)
... sin results in (eternal) death!

 

[Born Again2004]

Paul WARNS believers 3 times in the span of 8 verses (6:16-23)
... sin results in (eternal) death!

Unforgiven sin!

 

[ZacharyB]

Unforgiven sin!

Yes, you certainly do have ...
if you're not seeing the necessity of continuing to repent of your sins.

 

[Born Again2004]

Yes, you certainly do have ...
if you're not seeing the necessity of continuing to repent of your sins.

What do you do , if you don't see or forget one?

 

[FreeGrace2]

Yes, you certainly do have ...
if you're not seeing the necessity of continuing to repent of your sins.

The necessity is in confession of sins: 1 Jn 1:9. But only for those who want forgiveness.

 

[ZacharyB]

What do you do , if you don't see or forget one?

Okay, it's all about having the right heart attitude.
Everyone knows we are not perfect ... gee, even God knows this!
It's all about the attitude of one's heart before God.

Are you ready for this one? Please sit down ...
Hebrews says disobedience actually is UNBELIEF.
Oh, disobedience to what?
How about to Jesus' commands for starters!

 

[ZacharyB]

The necessity is in confession of sins: 1 Jn 1:9.
But only for those who want forgiveness.

Gee, you used to say 1 John 1:7 thru 1 John 2:1 was only about fellowship with God.
No, thee verses fit in with all the other passages which teach continual repentance.
This demonstrates the correct heart attitude towards God.

Sin = Disobedience = Unbelief (see Hebrews)

 

[Born Again2004]

Are you ready for this one? Please sit down ...
Hebrews says disobedience actually is UNBELIEF.

Please dispense with the dramatics of being ready and to sit down...back to unforgiven sin....that would be the sin of unbelief!

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said this:
"The necessity is in confession of sins: 1 Jn 1:9.
But only for those who want forgiveness. "

Gee, you used to say 1 John 1:7 thru 1 John 2:1 was only about fellowship with God.

They are. One needs forgiveness if one wants fellowship.

Or are you suggesting that when one offends their spouse for any reason, that they don't need to confess their offense to their spouse for forgiveness, and thereby restore fellowship???

Do you really believe that fellowship is maintained even when and after one offends the other? Of course it isn't. Fellowship needs to be restored.

No, thee verses fit in with all the other passages which teach continual repentance.

Actually, continual confession for forgiveness and restoration of fellowship.

This demonstrates the correct heart attitude towards God.

Yes.

Sin = Disobedience = Unbelief (see Hebrews)

Yep. Just as Moses, who was prevented from entering the promised land precisely because of his disobedience when he struck the rock for water even though God commanded him to speak to the rock.

 

[Born Again2004]

I said this:
"The necessity is in confession of sins: 1 Jn 1:9.
But only for those who want forgiveness. "

That verse was meant for unbelievers...Agnostics of the time. Paul talked about not being able to control his sin in Romans 7 and gave the result of being a Christian in Romans 8:1.....no condemnation for what?.....the condemnation for sin.....he didn't deliberately sin....but none the less, he still acknowledges his sin.

 

[ZacharyB]

That verse (1 John 1:7) was meant for unbelievers...Agnostics of the time.

John was writing to believers, period.
One may never say letters written to churches were for unbelievers!
They were all written for Christian instruction, and etc.

 

[Born Again2004]

John was writing to believers, period.
One may never say letters written to churches were for unbelievers!
They were all written for Christian instruction, and etc.

Sorry, that was 1 John 1:9 and though it was written to the church it was to believers but, this particular verse was to believers about unbelievers; what unbelievers need to do to be saved, in this case, Agnostics....research it!
In 1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.
Many people quote this verse as command to ask for forgiveness for each sin, which is impossible and, paramount to continued "works" in order to be saved......which it does not say!

 

[ZacharyB]

Many people quote this verse as command to ask for forgiveness for each sin, which is impossible and, paramount to continued "works" in order to be saved......which it does not say!

I've already explained to you that it's all about the attitude of the heart.
Meanwhile, you insist on being hung up with legalism!