Salvation Cannot be Lost

[Phil W]

Great question. Open your eyes and ears.


I didn't say he was. But he sure did admit that he was a sinner. He used the present tense to Timothy in 1 Tim 1:15. And I explained the 2 previous verses to show the transition from the past when he was unsaved to his present saved state.


You just don't understand the metaphor. To "kill the old man" means to be IN fellowship and filled with the Spirit. That's how we don't sin. As I've been explaining all along.


Seriously??!! Are you kidding? This verse doesn't say anything about how WE rebirth ourselves.

This is what the Bible says about our new birth:
John 1:12,13
12 Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God—
13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.

The red words refer to what God DOES; He is the One who gives us new birth.
The blue words are what humans do and DOESN'T give us new birth.
The purple words refer to the WAY humans are given new birth.


Not any of this supports your claims.


That would be your very own opinion. His words clearly refute your opinions.

He wrote it. And you obviously don't believe it, by your own admission.

Well, it's Scripture, so there you are. Not believing Scripture.

1 Tim 1:13-16
13 Even though I was once a blasphemer and a persecutor and a violent man, I was shown mercy because I acted in ignorance and unbelief.
14 The grace of our Lord was poured out on me abundantly, along with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus.
15 Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners—of whom I am the worst.
16 But for that very reason I was shown mercy so that in me, the worst of sinners, Christ Jesus might display his immense patience as an example for those who would believe in him and receive eternal life.

The purple words are past tense, and reflect Paul's unsaved state.
The blue words reflect the transition to faith and salvation.
The red words are in the present tense. Which you don't believe.

The bible tells me that I can't be tempted above that which I can handle. (1 Cor 10:13)
If the devil can't convince me to go back to the flesh, to sin, to a life without faith, to a now dead nature, to not following Jesus, you sure aren't going to be able to.

 

[FreeGrace2]

The bible tells me that I can't be tempted above that which I can handle. (1 Cor 10:13)

Why don't you believe what Paul said about himself as a saved person then?

Why all this pick and choose what to believe?

If the devil can't convince me to go back to the flesh, to sin, to a life without faith, to a now dead nature, to not following Jesus, you sure aren't going to be able to.

Who said the devil can't convince you? Haven't you ever read the Bible?

Here are some samples of what the Bible says.

Matt 24:4 - Jesus answered: “Watch out that no one deceives you". Note that Jesus didn't except Satan or any angel.

Rev 12:9 - The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him. Note John didn't say "the whole world except Phil W". No exceptions.

Yes, God doesn't give the believer more than they can bear, but that doesn't mean the believer will always be successful.

Why do you continue to reject what Paul said about himself? His writings makes very clear there is a struggle between the 2 natures (which you also reject).

Your style of picking and chooses which verses to believe doesn't bode well.

 

[Phil W]

Why don't you believe what Paul said about himself as a saved person then?
Why all this pick and choose what to believe?

I do believe it.
He was the worst of those saved because before he was saved he persecuted the church.

Who said the devil can't convince you? Haven't you ever read the Bible?
Here are some samples of what the Bible says.
Matt 24:4 - Jesus answered: “Watch out that no one deceives you". Note that Jesus didn't except Satan or any angel.
Rev 12:9 - The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him. Note John didn't say "the whole world except Phil W". No exceptions.

Because God was kind and loving enough to supply ample warnings of all the false doctrines and of upcoming events, I am prepared to defend my position in Christ.
I have been freed from service to sin by the truth that set me free. (John 8:32-34)

Yes, God doesn't give the believer more than they can bear, but that doesn't mean the believer will always be successful.

Yes, it does.

Why do you continue to reject what Paul said about himself? His writings makes very clear there is a struggle between the 2 natures (which you also reject).

I do believe what Paul said about his experiences while still in the flesh. (Rom 7)
Why do you not believe what Paul wrote about the man who has crucified and buried the flesh with Christ in Rom 6:7?

Your style of picking and chooses which verses to believe doesn't bode well.

How can a man with the gift of the Holy Ghost believe the untrue twistings of scripture?

 

[FreeGrace2]

I do believe it.
He was the worst of those saved because before he was saved he persecuted the church.

Don't you see? You're twisted Paul's words to only refer to the past, when he was an unbeliever. But he used the PRESENT TENSE to describe himself. You've just demonstrated what you don't believe about what Paul said.

Because God was kind and loving enough to supply ample warnings of all the false doctrines and of upcoming events, I am prepared to defend my position in Christ.
I have been freed from service to sin by the truth that set me free. (John 8:32-34)

Why can't you see that it's the very penalty of sin that Jesus paid??

Consider these 2 verses from Rom 6:
22 But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life.
23For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

v.22 uses your own words "set free from sin". And v.23 explains what the believer has been set from, specifically by the words "the wages of sin is death". There it is.

Death. Spiritual death, the penalty for sin.

And Jesus paid that debt by His own spiritual death, when, on the cross, the Father and Spirit forsake Him while He was paying that debt.

But you keep resisting this truth. Why?

I said:
"Yes, God doesn't give the believer more than they can bear, but that doesn't mean the believer will always be successful."

Yes, it does.

The Bible gives us many examples of believers who failed. But you resist that truth as well.

I do believe what Paul said about his experiences while still in the flesh. (Rom 7)

He was speaking in the present tense, and you cannot prove from the text that he was speaking in the historical present, as you wrongly claim.

Why do you not believe what Paul wrote about the man who has crucified and buried the flesh with Christ in Rom 6:7?

This isn't a one time deal, as you opine. He was clearly speaking about the dynamics of the Christian life and spiritual growth (or not), which you have indicated you don't believe.

I've proven from Scripture that believers still have their sinful nature, and you don't believe the verses that say and indicate that.

How can a man with the gift of the Holy Ghost believe the untrue twistings of scripture?

By grieving or quenching the Holy Spirit. Something Paul wrote about and warned believers to NOT do.

Why would he tell believers not to grieve or quench the Spirit if they were unable to do so?

And if they are able to do so, it surely CAN'T come from their new nature.

Again, proving your theory to be wrong and unbiblical.

btw, refusing to believe the truth of Scripture doesn't come from a sinless nature. It comes from a sinful nature. Thnk about it.

 

[Phil W]

Don't you see? You're twisted Paul's words to only refer to the past, when he was an unbeliever. But he used the PRESENT TENSE to describe himself. You've just demonstrated what you don't believe about what Paul said.

Do you really believe that Paul was still persecuting the church?

 

[FreeGrace2]

Do you really believe that Paul was still persecuting the church?

Why would anyone think that is what I believe? That is beyond absurd.

The point remains that Paul still considered himself a sinner, which refutes your theory completely.

In order to accept your claim, I would have to reject what Paul said about himself.

And I won't do that. Not ever. What Paul wrote was God breathed (inspired).

What you claim is not.

 

[Phil W]

Why would anyone think that is what I believe? That is beyond absurd.

That is what made him the "chief" of those saved, but you say erroneously he is still doing it.

The point remains that Paul still considered himself a sinner, which refutes your theory completely.

He considered himself the worst of those saved.
If one is saved, they are not walking in the flesh anymore as the old man has been crucified with Christ.
They are walking in the Spirit instead of in the flesh.
They are new creatures, and born of the seed of God.
God's seed cannot bear the fruit of the devil.

In order to accept your claim, I would have to reject what Paul said about himself.

In order for you to accept Paul's claim correctly, you will need to quit demonizing the saved.
And quit insisting that parts of the old man survive its crucifixion with Christ.

 

[FreeGrace2]

That is what made him the "chief" of those saved, but you say erroneously he is still doing it.


He considered himself the worst of those saved.
If one is saved, they are not walking in the flesh anymore as the old man has been crucified with Christ.
They are walking in the Spirit instead of in the flesh.
They are new creatures, and born of the seed of God.
God's seed cannot bear the fruit of the devil.


In order for you to accept Paul's claim correctly, you will need to quit demonizing the saved.
And quit insisting that parts of the old man survive its crucifixion with Christ.

I see you are still rejecting the FACT that Paul was speaking in the present tense.

He said "I AM a sinner". Not "I was a sinner" as you claim for yourself.

You are still just as much a sinner as Paul the saved evangelist.

Are you not aware that rejecting Scripture is a sin?

 

[Phil W]

I see you are still rejecting the FACT that Paul was speaking in the present tense.
He said "I AM a sinner". Not "I was a sinner" as you claim for yourself.

You are misinterpreting it so you can sooth a conscience that wants to keep sinning without blame.
Paul said he was the chief of those saved sinners.
If he still committed sin he would still be unsaved, and a child of the devil. (1 John 3:10)

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"I see you are still rejecting the FACT that Paul was speaking in the present tense.
He said "I AM a sinner". Not "I was a sinner" as you claim for yourself."

You are misinterpreting it so you can sooth a conscience that wants to keep sinning without blame.

What can be "misinterpreted"? It's you who aren't accepting the FACT that Paul spoke in the present tense, which indicates that he was STILL a sinner.

Paul said he was the chief of those saved sinners.

Well, there you go. Sinners who are saved. They are STILL sinners. That's the point of the present tense.

If he still committed sin he would still be unsaved, and a child of the devil. (1 John 3:10)

Well, you haven't shown this from Scripture, which is the ONLY WAY I will believe it.

Believers commit sin, which is WHY John gave believers the solution to sin; which is confession of sin for cleansing.

We've been through all this before.

 

[Phil W]

Well, you haven't shown this (sinners are still the children of the devil), from Scripture, which is the ONLY WAY I will believe it.

It is written..."In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.' (1 John 3:10)

 

[FreeGrace2]

It is written..."In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.' (1 John 3:10)

The words "not of God" does not mean "not God's children". It speaks to not manifesting as a child of God.

 

[Phil W]

The words "not of God" does not mean "not God's children". It speaks to not manifesting as a child of God.

Seeing as the traits of those who ARE of God are mentioned in the prior verse, (1 John 3:9), you are mistaken.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Seeing as the traits of those who ARE of God are mentioned in the prior verse, (1 John 3:9), you are mistaken.

I have already proven from Scripture that believers still have a sin nature. You have not proved your case.

 

[Phil W]

I have already proven from Scripture that believers still have a sin nature. You have not proved your case.

You have proved only that you don't understand 2 Cor 5:17.

 

[FreeGrace2]

You have proved only that you don't understand 2 Cor 5:17.

Of course that is totally incorrect.

As to your erroneous claim about believers no longer having a nature that sins, I proved that wrong by what Paul said in different epistles. But you won't accept the obvious.

 

[Phil W]

Of course that is totally incorrect.

As to your erroneous claim about believers no longer having a nature that sins, I proved that wrong by what Paul said in different epistles. But you won't accept the obvious.

If I tell you not to commit murder...are you a murderer?
That seems to be the foundation of your beliefs...that if you are told not to do a sin you are a sinner.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"Of course that is totally incorrect.

As to your erroneous claim about believers no longer having a nature that sins, I proved that wrong by what Paul said in different epistles. But you won't accept the obvious."

If I tell you not to commit murder...are you a murderer?
That seems to be the foundation of your beliefs...that if you are told not to do a sin you are a sinner.

I guess you may not realize that your "example" doesn't come close to being equivalent.

The point isn't what you are trying to make it. The point is that a command is only relevant to those who CAN obey it.

So, to tell me not to murder someone is to tell me that I am capable of murder.

So, when the Bible tells believers not to sin, it is because they are capable of sin.

You have been claiming that you don't have a sin nature and can't sin. Therefore, most of the Bible wouldn't be relevant to you.

Which is ridiculous, of course.

 

[Phil W]

I said:
"Of course that is totally incorrect.

As to your erroneous claim about believers no longer having a nature that sins, I proved that wrong by what Paul said in different epistles. But you won't accept the obvious."

I guess you may not realize that your "example" doesn't come close to being equivalent.

The point isn't what you are trying to make it. The point is that a command is only relevant to those who CAN obey it.

So, to tell me not to murder someone is to tell me that I am capable of murder.

So, when the Bible tells believers not to sin, it is because they are capable of sin.

You have been claiming that you don't have a sin nature and can't sin. Therefore, most of the Bible wouldn't be relevant to you.

Which is ridiculous, of course.

Let's go to the scripture that infers "can't", shall we?
1 John 3:9..."Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God."
Grape vines CANNOT bear figs, right?
Why do you think that God's seed CAN bear the fruit of the devil?
As long as I retain my faith, I will not exhibit the works of the flesh.
But if I do loose that faith I will betray the One who suffered and died for me.
By breaking my repentance, I will relapse into the child of the devil I once was.
I cannot commit sin because the seed of God has created a new creature in His image.
It is up to me to see it through till the end.
Sin would show that my rebirth was fake.
That is what the exhortations and admonissions of scripture are designed to protect me from.
From revealing that I was never really reborn of God's seed.

So the key is, am I "really" reborn of God, or not.
My actions in this life will determine the truth of it on the day of judgement.

You can just substitute the word "won't" for "cannot" commit sin...
The outcome is the same.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Let's go to the scripture that infers "can't", shall we?
1 John 3:9..."Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God."

I've already explained this verse. And you did not even try to refute it.

Grape vines CANNOT bear figs, right?

So what?

Why do you think that God's seed CAN bear the fruit of the devil?

As I have repeatedly explained, God's seed CANNOT SIN. Why do you keep missing that point? The believer has a new nature that CANNOT SIN. However, the believer still has his human nature. Which is sinful. But you simply ignore/reject that. So I guess more explanation won't make any difference, huh.

As long as I retain my faith, I will not exhibit the works of the flesh.

No, as long as you are IN fellowship, a concept that you haven't shown any familiarity with, and are filled with the Spirit, another concept that you haven't shown any familiarity with, then and only then will you NOT exhibit the works of the flesh.

However, when you are NOT in fellowship, and not filled with the Spirit, you ARE functioning from your human nature, and you will "exhibit the works of the flesh.

Paul even said as much, in Gal 5:16 - But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh.

Maybe you don't see the choice here, but it is nonetheless there.

But if I do loose that faith I will betray the One who suffered and died for me.
By breaking my repentance, I will relapse into the child of the devil I once was.

But isn't your view that a believer no longer has a sinful nature. That the "old man" was killed off and no longer exists???

I cannot commit sin because the seed of God has created a new creature in His image.

OK, let's go with this. If this statement is true, then what you just said above CANNOT EVER occur.

So explain how you could "loose" that faith if you no longer have a sin nature.

It is up to me to see it through till the end.

OK, so you're your own savior, in your mind then.

Sin would show that my rebirth was fake.

OK, just another type of Calvinism's "true believer won't leave the faith".

Even though Jesus SAID they could, from His parable of the soils. Luke 8:13. And Paul's epistle to Timothy, in 1 Tim 4:1.

That is what the exhortations and admonissions of scripture are designed to protect me from.

You're not making sense. Why would you need "protection" from anything if your rebirth was fake?

And how would "protection" help you if your rebirth was fake?

And, if your rebirth was real, there would be no need of protection.

These are the questions that you haven't answered, and CANNOT.

From revealing that I was never really reborn of God's seed.

So, where is this "protection" then? If you never were reborn, how would "protection" help you?

So the key is, am I "really" reborn of God, or not.

According to your theory then, Paul wasn't "really reborn of God", since he admitted that he was a sinner, and used the present tense. He NEVER even hinted that he no longer sinned, as you keep doing.

My actions in this life will determine the truth of it on the day of judgement.

Everyone's actions and thoughts in this life will be examined.

You can just substitute the word "won't" for "cannot" commit sin...
The outcome is the same.

Please just answer my questions, if you can.

From what I'm seeing, your theory is totally contradicted and unbiblical. Your answers will help revealing what is truth.