Is Final Salvation Free or Contingent upon Obeying Commandments?

[Albion]

I know. Can't we just get that God gives us a gift, of Himself, and then says, "Now come and follow Me, walk in my ways, abide in Me and I'll accomplish good things in you"?

IMO, most people DO get that. It is only then it is linked to salvation or justification and made a "must do or else" proposition that the mistake enters in. There is no question but that the lifestyle the Savior taught us is what we should pursue.

 

[fhansen]

The Decalogue had already been given to mankind. All that any Hebrew had to do was never violate any of them.

Paul seemed to actually claim to have done that in Phil 3 and yet it still wasn't enough; that's the message in fact, that man cannot be righteous unless that righteousness issues from the inside, and that's a feat that God, alone, can do in us as man turns back to and is reconciled with Him. That happens with the righteousness "which is through faith in Christ", "the righteousness that comes from God on the basis of faith." (Phil 3) This is the righteousness not of his own that comes from the law, which is a matter of the flesh, but the righteousness of God, which comes from the Spirit.

The New Covenant is about change, real, positive, change in us, not merely a change in status or position, not merely forgiven sinners but also sinners who're empowered to 'go, and sin no more'. And Scripture is full of warnings against refusing to do so, of rejecting the gift, of turning back away from God and to the flesh again, which never accomplishes anything of value.

 

[BNR32FAN]

This is speaking of those who alleged faith in Christ, outwardly identified with Christ, grafting themselves into Christianity on the surface, but not with a deeply rooted faith. Knowing about Christ, but not knowing him personally. They're like the ground associate with the path upon with the seed of the word fell, whose faith wasn't rooted, so when trouble came because of the word, like pressure from the Neo-Circumcision groups, they departed from the faith and turned to a salvation-by-works soteriology, such is advocated by many on these forums. They've fallen from the gospel of grace into a performance based salvation concept. And this due to the influence of those who promote such a soteriology, whose condemnation is justified as Paul said, "Even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!"

But as for those of us who have genuine faith in Christ, we cannot be moved. Heb 3:14 "For we have become partakers of Christ if we hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast to the end" As it indicates, since they did not confidently believe steadfastly, therefore they had not been partakers of Christ.

For Once Saved, Always Saved to be in effect, the Once Saved has to first occur.

Those who allegedly had faith in Christ cannot fall from grace. By grace you have been saved thru faith not thru “alleged faith”. Do you think God bestows grace on someone who falsely claims to have faith? That a false professor receives Christ’s atonement?

Your reference to Hebrews to Hebrews 3 is completely wrong I’m sorry to say. First of all who is Paul speaking to?

“Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of a heavenly calling, consider Jesus, the Apostle and High Priest of our confession;

Paul is speaking to holy brethren who are partakers of a heavenly calling. Second was Paul himself a false professor? Notice that he includes himself in this next statement by saying “we are Christ’s house, IF WE hold fast to OUR confidence and the boast of OUR hope firm until the end.

but Christ was faithful as a Son over His house-whose house we are, if we hold fast our confidence and the boast of our hope firm until the end.

Paul even includes himself as being held to the contingency of holding fast in his confidence of the hope of salvation firm until the end in order to receive his salvation. This is undeniable proof that a true believer can fall from grace and lose his salvation.

Take care, brethren, that there not be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart that falls away from the living God. But encourage one another day after day, as long as it is still called "Today," so that none of you will be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. For we have become partakers of Christ, if we hold fast the beginning of our assurance firm until the end,”
‭‭HEBREWS‬ ‭3:1, 6, 12-14‬ ‭NASB‬‬

A person who has become a partaker of Christ is someone who has received salvation. They are already died from this world and have already received eternal life. Again Paul includes himself in the condition that in order to become a partaker of Christ he to must hold fast the beginning of our assurance firm until the end.

Your interpretation of this is incorrect. Someone cannot have already become a partaker of Christ if they have not met the requirement of holding fast until the end. As long as a person is still living they have not held fast until the end. We are still “running the race” as Paul put it until the day we die or Jesus returns.

 

[fhansen]

IMO, most people DO get that. It is only then it is linked to salvation or justification and made a "must do or else" proposition that the mistake enters in. There is no question but that the lifestyle the Savior taught us is what we should pursue.

The problem is that man, since Adam, doesn't like obligation. But the obligation to be righteous, to be who we were created to be, doesn't go away with the New Covenant. Instead, it's simply, finally, realized the right way, by subjugation to and the communion with God that comes by faith first of all rather than attempting to justify ourselves first of all, as if we could even do that on our own, apart from Him.

 

[Albion]

Paul seemed to actually claim to have done that in Phil 3 and yet it still wasn't enough; that's the message in fact, that man cannot be righteous unless that righteousness issues from the inside,

Well sure, but that doesn't change anything. What Hebrew would strive to adhere to the commands of God without caring if he were doing God's work thereby, being guided by God's will, or not?

 

[Acts2:38]

Thanks for all that...I was hoping to find out what the candlestick was. You said


i was looking for the relationship of salvation equaling candlestick.

Well if you look at Revelation 1, who is John writing to?

Verse 1 - The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants...

His "servants" are non other than Christian people. Followers of Christ, those in a saved state. These are people who have salvation.

If that wasn't enough, John further states that he is "...brother and companion...in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ..." in Verse 9.

Furthermore, we see that Jesus is telling John to write to those in the church. The seven churches. It also goes on to say that the "Son of man" is in the "midst of them (candlesticks)". Jesus is with them. We are told at the end of Chapter 1 that the seven churches (these are saved Christians, in a saved state) are the seven candlesticks.

When you hit chapter 2 and 3, Jesus tells each church what he likes/accepts from them and what he dislikes/will not tolerate of them.

In each circumstance, when Jesus comes to the part where He harshly chastises them, He later then tells them that if they do not repent, if they do not overcome, the consequences of such will be a loss of their name in the book of life. This quite clearly means a loss of salvation. It is also quite clear that these are people who are saved for the time being, unless they continue in sin, thereby losing salvation. That is the key word though...continuing in sin.

We all fall short Romans 3:23. This is why we need to seek out forgiveness and pray for others as well and aid their quest in forgiveness with prayer, James 5:16; 1 John 1:6-10; Galatians 6:1; 1 Peter 3:12

However, if we choose not to seek out forgiveness in our wrong doings, we would be like Hebrew 6:4-6 and Hebrews 10:26-27.

Christ is telling the seven churches that they need to "overcome" (he that overcometh), or they will not find their name in the book of life.

Revelation 3:5 He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

It is obvious this speaks of loss of salvation. It is unmistakable and undeniable. Because quite clearly if you do NOT overcome, you WILL NOT be in the book of life, and Christ WILL NOT confess you before the Father (Law of Exclusion is used).

The greek word for Candlestick-
lychnia - a lamp-stand (literally or figuratively):—candlestick.

Because the book of Revelation is "signified" the seven churches being the "candlestickes" is a figurative use of the word.

Thayer's greek lexicon describes the use as such:
"to the seven 'candlesticks' (Exodus 25:37 (A. V. lamps; cf. B. D. (especially the American edition), under the word )) also the seven more conspicuous churches of Asia are compared in Revelation 1:12f, 20; Revelation 2:1; κινεῖν τήν λυχνίαν τίνος (ἐκκλησίας) ἐκ τοῦ τόπου αὐτῆς, to move a church out of the place which it has hitherto held among the churches; to take it out of the number of churches, remove it altogether, Revelation 2:5.

Hope that helped answer you better.

 

[Halbhh]

What does that forgiveness do?

The exact result is in 1rst John chapter 1 (in case not already pointed to), what happens when we admit to recent sins.

Real change happens.

 

[fhansen]

Well sure, but that doesn't change anything. What Hebrew would strive to adhere to the commands of God without caring if he were doing God's work thereby, being guided by God's will, or not?

He may've thought so but Jesus came to actually accomplish that fact, to get us away from self-dependence, which was man's problem since Adam anyway, and bring us to authentic God-dependence which is realized as we come to know Him for ourselves, when the time was/is ripe. This, the “knowledge of God”, is what Adam effectively lost for humanity and what Jesus came to reveal and restore. We respond to it because, through human history and the failings of humans and even of the chosen people who had the Law and strove for but failed at obedience, we can come to learn, like prodigals, of our abject poverty; we can develop a hunger and thirst for a righteousness that this world and ourselves lack in so many ways. We become more malleable clay that the Potter can work with, first by just responding to His call. Man needs relationship with God first of all, not self-attempted obedience first of all.

 

[TheSeabass]

You made a definitive statement. I’m asking for support. If you don’t have any, it’s okay to say that it’s your opinion.

As to your question, I don’t think God would have let him not build an ark. God’s will is never thwarted by man.

I gave you proof from the Bible.

Noah built the ark to the saving of His house. Noah did not build the ark because his house was already saved from the flood. Therefore it was necessary that he first build the ark in order to receive God's.

If building the ark was not in order to save Noah's house, then what purpose did building the ark serve?

So the ball is in your court, and remains in your court, until you can show from the Bible how Noah's house could have been saved WITHOUT him building the ark.

 

[-57]

Revelation 3:5 He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

I don't quite see it that way. The verse simply says I will not blot out...What the verse doesn't say, and it is also what you assume it says ...if you DON'T overcome, I WILL blot out your name.

1 John 2:14 mentions something about overcoming. "I write to you, fathers, because you know him who is from the beginning. I write to you, young men, because you are strong, and the word of God abides in you, and you have overcome the evil one." Christians in this sense have already overcome.

But overcoming is bigger than that, or, can be seen in a different light. The 7 churches you mentioned instructed them on how to overcome. the overcoming isn't an overcoming to salvation but rather to "rewards".

 

[TheSeabass]

He's trying to wiggle out by comparing apples to oranges.

He's trying to compare building the ark as being equal to what we must do inorder to maintain salvation...when the ark is an OT type of Christ.

The faith onlyist are trying hard to figure out a way for Noah to receive God's grace (saving of his house) without Noah having to do any obedient work at all (building the ark). Following man-made theologies get men in these type predicaments.

 

[Albion]

He may've thought so but Jesus came to actually accomplish that fact, to get us away from self-dependence, which was man's problem since Adam anyway, and bring us to authentic God-dependence which is realized as we come to know Him for ourselves, when the time was/is ripe. This, the “knowledge of God”, is what Adam effectively lost for humanity and what Jesus came to reveal and restore. We respond to it because, through human history and the failings of humans and even of the chosen people who had the Law and strove for but failed at obedience, we can come to learn, like prodigals, of our abject poverty; we can develop a hunger and thirst for a righteousness that this world and ourselves lack in so many ways. We become more malleable clay that the Potter can work with, first by just responding to His call. Man needs relationship with God first of all, not self-attempted obedience first of all.

Reading this, it seems to make the Commandments be counter-productive or useless. I have a hard time seeing their place in Scripture that way, or in the history of the people whom God brought out of bondage.

 

[fhansen]

Reading this, it seems to make the Commandments be counter-productive or useless. I have a hard time seeing their place in Scripture that way, or in the history of the people whom God brought out of bondage.

But as scripture affirms, the Law/Commandments teach us a very valuable lesson which is that we cannot obey them fully and completely on our own; there's still something missing. Man is not just until something more happens to him first. And that something has to do with grace, has to do with the Spirit of God.

The Law cannot justify even if it correctly tells us what justice should look like

 

[Major1]

Is Final Salvation Free or Contingent upon Obeying Commandments?

What is your view as to what one's final salvation is contingent upon?

I've noticed that some Christians will parse between two types of salvation. The first being "initial salvation" or they may refer to it as "justification" which they say is by faith alone apart from works, but for them that is just the start of the process of salvation culminating in "Final salvation" which involves works. They don't believe that if a person is initially "saved" by faith he will necessarily finally be saved. Salvation is not actually salvation if the person ends up in hell. So if salvation is not finalized upon coming to faith in Christ, it's not salvation. As such the only real "salvation" is final salvation.

But concerning Final Salvation, take Catholicism. According to the Catholic Catechism it says under the topic "Final Salvation"

Catechism of the Catholic Church - The Ten Commandments
The Council of Trent teaches that the Ten Commandments are obligatory for Christians and that the justified man is still bound to keep them; the Second Vatican Council confirms: "The bishops, successors of the apostles, receive from the Lord . . . the mission of teaching all peoples, and of preaching the Gospel to every creature, so that all men may attain salvation through faith, Baptism and the observance of the Commandments.

In fact what the Catholics refer to as "Commandments" go beyond the 10 Commandments as they add a plethora of commandments like if you wear a condom you're guilty of a mortal sin. Can't find that in the 10 Commandments. Likewise there are other Christians of non-Catholic sects who will have their own plethora of commands they insist we have to comply with in order to be finally saved. I've debated with many of them on these forums. Like they'll create a new law by cherry picking the "moral" law of Moses and insist one must keep that new law to be saved. Or likewise others will concatenate all the New Testaments commands together and append to each one the phrase "in order to be saved".

As I see it that's the same concept of justification by law Paul contrasted with justification by faith apart from law. But they'll say that Paul was just referring to a particular set of commands and not to other sets of derivative commands. It's a different gospel as it see it. But what do you think? What is your view of Final Salvation?

Jesus Christ !

John 19:30 ….
"When he had received the drink, Jesus said, "It is finished." With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit."

"IT" was the salvation of humanity.

There is not one single thing that a man can do to obtain or to keep his salvation.

Acts 4:12...………
"Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved."

Ephesians 2:8-9...…
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast."

How else could God have worded this so as to make it more understandable????

 

[Albion]

But as scripture affirms, the Law/Commandments teach us a very valuable lesson which is that we cannot obey them fully and completely on our own there's still something missing. Man is not just until something more habits 10 first. And that something has to do with grace, has to do with the s Spirit of God.

As some comment on the workings of God and human nature, I follow the point, but applying it to the Commandments like that doesn't work. Its just guesswork.

 

[Hammster]

I gave you proof from the Bible.

Noah built the ark to the saving of His house. Noah did not build the ark because his house was already saved from the flood. Therefore it was necessary that he first build the ark in order to receive God's.

If building the ark was not in order to save Noah's house, then what purpose did building the ark serve?

So the ball is in your court, and remains in your court, until you can show from the Bible how Noah's house could have been saved WITHOUT him building the ark.

What you are saying is that your argument is from silence.

And I gave you my answer. I’m not going to defend a claim I never made.

 

[Hammster]

The faith onlyist are trying hard to figure out a way for Noah to receive God's grace (saving of his house) without Noah having to do any obedient work at all (building the ark). Following man-made theologies get men in these type predicaments.

If anything is required to receive it, it’s not grace.

 

[-57]

The faith onlyist are trying hard to figure out a way for Noah to receive God's grace (saving of his house) without Noah having to do any obedient work at all (building the ark). Following man-made theologies get men in these type predicaments.

The faith + me crowd is trying to figure out what they must do in order to maintain salvation...all the while forgetting Jesus did it for them.

 

[bcbsr]

Hi bcbsr,

You write:
<<
So what you're saying is that a person's salvation status is indeterminate in the present, rather it's dependent upon his ongoing performance.
>>

In contrast to your position that a person's salvation status is indeterminate in the present, rather it's dependent upon his ongoing performance, the scriptures say: "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." John 5:24 Notice that Jesus speaks of a person's salvation status as being finalized just as if they had already passed from death to life. They have eternal life. It's already determined and they have to wait for some future event to gain eternal life. They are not subject to condemnation, as it also affirms in Rom 8:1,2 "Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death." The law of sin and death is the law whereby one's eternal destiny is a function of whether one sins. Not the case for those who are in Christ. For under the New Covenant it says, "I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more." Heb 8:12 Thus sin no longer impacts the destiny of those who are in Christ.

"For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith— and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast." Eph 2:8,9 Whereas you make dependent upon the person's performance. And again "have been saved" indicates is already a done deal. This as opposed to your theory that a person's salvation status is indeterminate till the end, and that based upon a person's performance. So as you have it it's the person's works that save them.

1John 5:13 "I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life." Again indicating eternal life is something they already have.

And while Salvation-by-Works Christians view salvation as contingent upon behavior, such as how you've misconstrued a number of verses along that line, Epistles like 1John teach us that behavior is an effect, not a cause, of salvation. For example there's 1John 3:9 "No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God." It's "because he has been born of God" that such people have lost the ability to continue to sin. Whereas Salvation-by-Works Christians get it backwards claiming that to be saved a person must change their behavior. While behavior is an indicator whether one has been born of God, as also the verse that follows that says, "This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not a child of God; nor is anyone who does not love his brother." 1John 3:10, because is not cause of a person's salvation.

The condition of the saved is not the condition to be saved.

You misconstrue verses to be teaching salvation by works.

Take you're reference to Gal 6:7-9 Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life. Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up. What Paul is talking about is what Jesus was talking about in John 4 "Do you not say, ‘There are still four months and then comes the harvest’? Behold, I say to you, lift up your eyes and look at the fields, for they are already white for harvest! And he who reaps receives wages, and gathers fruit for eternal life, that both he who sows and he who reaps may rejoice together." John 4:35,36 He's talking about gaining eternal life for OTHER PEOPLE, by sharing the gospel with them.

Or 1 Corinthians 9:26-27 "Therefore I do not run like a man running aimlessly; I do not fight like a man beating the air. No, I beat my body and make it my slave so that after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified for the prize." Disqualified for rewards for services rendered, not loss of salvation. (See 1Cor 3:11-15)

1Tim 4:16 "Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers" Saves himself from the pollutions of the world and from false doctrines which he previously spoke of in the same chapter. This as opposed to the view of that he was talking about gaining eternal life by his own effort. Timothy was already saved and had eternal life through faith.

The Revelation verses about overcoming are to be interpreted in light of 1John (scripture interprets scriptures), which says, "everyone born of God overcomes" 1John 5:4 And "Who is it that overcomes the world? Only he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God." 1John 5:5 So if a person actually believes in Jesus, he has been born of God, and he will overcome I take it that not all the Christians who go to a church (or even on these forums) have been born of God or have ever grasped what the gospel is, let alone believe it, and thus the warnings.

Rom 6 and Rom 8 is to be read in light of having already been saved. Rom 6:11 "reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord." So in obedience that command I consider it a fact that I am dead indeed to sin but alive to God. To not reckon that to be the case is to be disobedient. Salvation-by-Works Christians don't reckon themselves, or anyone else, to actually be dead to sin but alive to God. They just don't believe it and thus they are unbelievers. I already pointed out verses in Romans 8 they also don't believe and so misconstrue the rest of it as teaching salvation by works whereas the theme of Romans 8 is sanctification and eternal security.

And you mentioned a number of other verse to which you append the idea "in order to be saved". In fact one of the Salvation-by-Works Christians on this forum admits adding the phrase 'in order to be saved" to every command in the New Testament.

You claim that it is OUR responsibility to fulfill the requirements of the whole law, referencing Rom 8:3,4 which speaks of the law of Moses. Yet Paul says, "All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law." Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, "The righteous will live by faith." Gal 3:10-12 You position, making salvation contingent upon obeying the whole law, is much like that of those whom Paul wrote, "I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law." Gal 5:3

As for you spin on the "Rest" of Heb 4 only referring to the future, it says, "those to whom it was first preached did not enter" Gal 4:6b clearly using the past tense. And again in verse 10 "the one who has entered His rest has himself also rested from his works, as God did from His." "has entered" is past tense.

 

[bcbsr]

For we have become partakers of Christ, if we hold fast the beginning of our assurance firm until the end,”
‭‭HEBREWS‬ ‭3:1, 6, 12-14‬ ‭NASB‬‬.

Apparently you failed to realize the significance of the tenses used.

Verses like Heb 3:6 and Heb 3:14, which you mention, actually advocate the doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints just as 1John 2:19 does, "if they had been of us they would have remained with us". Notice the tense used in Heb 3:6 "We are (present tense) his house if indeed we hold firmly to our confidence and the hope in which we glory." So the logic goes something in the present is true only if something in the future is true. If a person doesn't hold firmly to such confidence then he was never really part of his house to begin with. Just like with 1John 2:19 "They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us." Likewise with Heb 3:14 "We have come to share (Perfect Tense) in Christ if we hold firmly till the end the confidence we had at first." How can a past event be true only if a future event occurs? Again it's the Perseverance of the Saints. If a person doesn't persevere in their faith (confidence) it means that they had never come to share in Christ to begin with.