How many times can one be regenerated?

[GodsGrace101]

Anthony2019 said: ↑
My view is that once a person becomes saved, they must continue to live their lives faithfully in obedience to Christ. Our salvation is secure only if we continue to trust in Jesus and abide in Him.

And Scripture doesn't agree with either of you.


Yes, a great question. But the answer is NOT about "how to stay saved". Jesus took care of that when He died for ALL of your sins.

It is very important to live a life that is pleasing to God. That's the ONLY WAY He will bless you on earth, and reward you in heaven. And Scripture DOES agree with that.


The error is presuming such a believer is "in the same condition as an unsaved person". Such a presumption has to ignore all that Scripture teaches about HOW DIFFERENT a believer becomes when they believe.

1. They are born again. Regenerated. Titus 3:5
2. They are given the indwelling Holy Spirit. Eph 1:13
3. They are a new creation. 2 Cor 5:17
4. They are forgiven. Acts 10:43
5. They are justified. Rom 5:1
6. They are given eternal life. John 10:28

Now, those who STILL want to argue that salvation can be lost, and the "former believer" CAN revert back to the "same condition" as before they believed, then they MUST address each of the 6 points above and PROVE FROM SCRIPTURE that these things can be reverted, revoked, removed, lost, forfeited, etc.

If that cannot be done, then just accept the facts of Scripture.


Do you not understand that believers have been justified, forgiven regenerated? Therefore, cleansed. The sin nature stays with their physical bodies, which are in the grave. To be resurrected as a NEW body, which is still clean. So you don't have to worry about any believer in heaven being unclean.


More propagated error. Eternal life MOST DEFINITELY IS conditional. It's conditioned on believing in Christ for salvation.

John 3:15,16
15 that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.”
16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

John 5:24 - “Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life.

John 6:47 - Very truly I tell you, the one who believes has eternal life.

1 John 5:11,13
11 And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
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.

These verses refute OSNAS.


The key is "as Ive understood it". That's where the problem lies.


It's more unfortunate that when believers are shown Scripture that proves eternal security, they simply turn the other way.


If Scripture "is to be YOUR authority", as you seem to claim, then WHY don't you accept the clear teaching on eternal security?


They are all screwed up doctrinally. They have ignored the clear verses.

FreeGrace....
How about cutting down your posts a little?
It's impossible for me to take the time to keep up with you.


Comments on your above:

1. What exactly are we saved for? Heaven or a reward?
I know Paul also speaks of rewards,,,but is that what it's all about?

2. Does a "saved" person living a life exactly the same as a sinning unbeliever have eternal life?

If so, then exactly what is it that allows that person to be saved?

3. You want me to prove your 6 points? How do YOU explain
2 Peter 2:20-22 I've posted pages of verses which you dispel due to your belief that we are walking towards rewards and not heaven. This goes to question 1.

4. Please show how a "dirty body" will be resurrected as a new body as in Revelation 21:27 which CLEARLY states that nothing unclean is going to heaven. Paul speaks many times of what is UNCLEAN. I'm sure you've noticed it.

5. You said: More propagated error. Eternal life MOST DEFINITELY IS conditional. It's conditioned on believing in Christ for salvation.

Agreed ! We must BELIEVE in Christ to be saved.

6. Re 1 John 5: 11, 13
Agreed! THE LIFE IS IN THE SON.
No Son.......No Life.

7. I do accept clear teaching. OSAS is a lie and not accepted by either the early church....or mainline churches today. Except, of course, reformed churches.


BTW, I notice you never answer my verses but just throw out your own ideas.
This is a sign that you cannot answer my verses/posts. (as I do to yours since I know I'm in the right).

 

[FreeGrace2]

Hello FreeGrace2
Would it not be fairer to say that there are different interpretations on what the scriptures say?

Yes, of course there are. And those that don't agree with the Bible are in error.

Some Christians believe in predestination and the perseverance of the saints, others do in part, and others not at all. Yet all of them will state they have faithfully studied the scriptures and drawn their own conclusions from them.

Sure. Everyone makes that claim. Everyone thinks their own view is correct.

The real test is when Scripture is shown that clearly refutes an interpretation, how does the interpreter respond?

Logic tells us that not all of these interpretations are correct, so how do we determine who is right?

The one that can be easily shown from Scripture.

I would genuinely love to believe in once saved always saved. But having looked at the scriptures, studied church tradition, and examined the teaching of the Early Church fathers (to whom the faith was passed on by the apostles), I do not see enough evidence to support it.

First, why would you love to believe it, if you don't?

The Scripture is quite clear. Jesus said those He gives eternal life shall never perish. John 10:28. The Arminian "explanation" of v.27 and 28 don't even come close to being true to the very words of the verses. Arminians try to force conditional clauses for never perishing. But Jesus was clear; recipients of eternal life shall never perish. That is exactly what v.28 says, and says very clearly.

But there's much more. Eph 1:13,14 says those who "have believed" (note the tense here) are sealed with the Holy Spirit, as a deposit which guarantees the inheritance of God's possession. Another statement of eternal security.

You come across to me as someone who has a very strong Christian faith, and I totally respect that. With that in mind, I hope you will not be offended by my next question. And my question is: Why should I believe your personal interpretation of the scriptures on OSAS, when others who have studied the same scriptures do not agree with it?

Easy. I don't have a "personal interpretation" of Scripture. I simply believe what is very clearly stated.

I'm not offended by any question. So feel free to ask away.

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace....
How about cutting down your posts a little?

The length of my posts is entirely dependent upon what others post. Because I respond to what they post.

It's impossible for me to take the time to keep up with you.

It is what it is.

Comments on your above:

1. What exactly are we saved for? Heaven or a reward?

No one is saved for a reward. This is what we are saved FROM. No one is saved FOR.

Past tense salvation: we were saved FROM the penalty of sin. Justification
Present tense salvation: we are being saved FROM the power of sin. Sanctification
Future tense salvation: we will be saved FROM the presence of sin. Glorification

If you don't understand or agree with any of these 3 tenses regarding salvation, please address your concerns.

I know Paul also speaks of rewards,,,but is that what it's all about?

nope.

2. Does a "saved" person living a life exactly the same as a sinning unbeliever have eternal life?

Because Jesus Christ gives eternal life to those who have believed. I've already given you the verses that prove this:

John 5:24 - “Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life.

John 6:47 - Very truly I tell you, the one who believes has eternal life.

John 10:28 - I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand.

Regarding 10:28, here is a color coded explanation:

The red words are what Jesus does for believers.
The blue words is the result of what Jesus does for believers.

If so, then exactly what is it that allows that person to be saved?

I don't know what you mean by "allows". It is God who saves those who believe.

1 Cor 1:21 - For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. God was pleased to save those who believe.

3. You want me to prove your 6 points?

They don't need "proving". They all agree with Scripture. Did you mean "refute"?

How do YOU explain
2 Peter 2:20-22 I've posted pages of verses which you dispel due to your belief that we are walking towards rewards and not heaven.

You are not reading my posts carefully at all. I never said "we are walking towards rewards and not heaven". Not ever. So please dispel your erroneous ideas.

First, we aren't "walking toward heaven". It's not a walk. It's a guarantee.
Second, our Christian life IS called a "walk", or the Christian walk. The Greek word for "walk" means lifestyle. And it is our lifestyle that determines whether we will earn reward or not.

4. Please show how a "dirty body" will be resurrected as a new body as in Revelation 21:27 which CLEARLY states that nothing unclean is going to heaven. Paul speaks many times of what is UNCLEAN. I'm sure you've noticed it.

First, Rev 21:27 isn't remotely related to the resurrection. So you can dispel that notion. As to your request about the resurrection of a "dirty body", I don't know where to start. I assume believers who are interested in theology and such have a solid grasp of the resurrection, but it appears from your question that you don't.

The physical body in the grave will be TRANSFORMED at the resurrection.

5. You said: More propagated error. Eternal life MOST DEFINITELY IS conditional. It's conditioned on believing in Christ for salvation.

Agreed ! We must BELIEVE in Christ to be saved.

Well then, what's the problem?

6. Re 1 John 5: 11, 13
Agreed! THE LIFE IS IN THE SON.
No Son.......No Life.

Well then, what's the problem?

7. I do accept clear teaching. OSAS is a lie and not accepted by either the early church....or mainline churches today. Except, of course, reformed churches.

You just contradicted yourself. Jesus stated eternal security in the clearest of terms.

BTW, I notice you never answer my verses but just throw out your own ideas.

What verses are those?

This is a sign that you cannot answer my verses/posts. (as I do to yours since I know I'm in the right).

The reverse is true. You never address my verses, or my points. By addressing, I mean to show that they are wrong.

But the only issue here is how you misread my verses. There are no conditional clauses in John 10:27 or 28, as Arminians must claim to defend their own position.

Go back and look at my color coded explanation of 10:28. Then, explain how the red words and blue words do NOT represent what I said they did.

 

[GodsGrace101]

I said:
"What Scripture teaches that eternal security is based on how you live your life?

To "have no inheritance in the kingdom" doesn't preclude entrance into the kingdom, but precludes having any inheritance in the kingdom."

You didn't answer the question.


I'll simplify. to "have no inheritance in the kingdom" doesn't mean "will not enter the kingdom". What is precluded is the inheritance in the kingdom.


Is getting into heaven anything like your rich uncle's will?? So please cease with these silly "examples" that aren't even close to Scripture.

Here. Try this. "have no inheritance IN the kingdom". Does this verse say "won't enter the kingdom"? No. In fact, I emphasized the word "IN" to show that one CAN be IN the kingdom but be denied an inheritance.


Is being quite snarky necessary?

I'm not struggling to understand anything. In fact, I'm the one who is explaining what others seem not to understand.

1. I did answer you. My answer was HUH? (IOW are you kidding!)

2. You don't want to compare a rich uncle with the Kingdom!!!

But you DO want to compare my earthly father with my heavenly Father?
And where is the consistence in that???
You tend to choose what you like at the time you like it and then decide you do NOT like it when it does not suit you.

3. INHERITANCE means POSSESSION.

4. I was snarky? I learned from you FG. But you are getting much better all the time. And I don't think I was snarky.
Of course you don't use syntax in your replies so I don't really know what you're talking about.

 

[FreeGrace2]

GG101, I wish you would face the reality of the fact that God uses words of a human PERMAMENT relationship (father and child) to explain the PERMANENT relationship between Himself and His children.

Since it is unarguable that the relationship between a human father and child is permanent, why would God use such a description of His own relationship with His own children?

Can you explain that?

 

[GodsGrace101]

That is not possible. The very clear words are DIFFERENT than what you believe.


The mystery is why you obviously misread v.27 and v.28.

You are forcing v.27 to be some kind of conditional clause for never perishing in v.28.

Why do you do that? But since you believe that, please show me the exact words that form a conditional clause in v.27.

If your opinion were correct, this is how v.28 would have been stated:

"I give them eternal life, AND AS LONG AS, or IF they continue to listen and follow, they shall never perish."

But it doesn't say that. There are NO conditions beyond receiving eternal life, in order to never perish.

You know, actually I agree with you that the N.T. writers could have been more clear in their statement. Of course, they never even IMAGINED that 2,000 YEARS down the line some would teach that once a person believes he is still saved even if returning to a life of sin. THIS WAS UNTHINKABLE. Until recently...all those theologians before must have been wrong, right? ONLY NOW, have we come to the truth:
Christ is NOT NECESSARY for salvation.
Believe one time and you'll be saved forever.
Kill, fornicate, get drunk, whatever you do is fine...
the good news is that you'll still be saved.

See FG,,,YOUR good news is DIFFERENT than the good news the rest believe.

Forget John 10:27, 28 We've gone over this ad nauseum... please come up with some new verses that support your claim.

Please explain 2 Peter 2:20-22

 

[GodsGrace101]

I said:
"Yet, Scripture teaches, in plain language no less, that the inheritance of those who HAVE BELIEVED (notice the tense here, from Eph 1:13)is GUARANTEED for the day of redemption (v.14)."

Getting a bit snarky again, I see.


That was my point. Don't you understand what that means? It means that from "having believed" (which is done in the past), their inheritance IS GUARANTEED.

It seems you are stilling having problems understanding what "earnest" means in the Greek.


Sso what? Totally irrelevant. But I do see your bias again about your flawed understanding about the present tense.


But v.14 doesn't say what you believe. In fact, it tells us those who have believed in the past have been given the Holy Spirit as a pledge which GUARANTEES their inheritance for the day of redemption.

You have failed to understand what Paul wrote.

And the supposed pages of verses about former believers no longer making use of the earnest is silly, since v.14 tells us plainly that the earnest (which is a GUARANTEE, whether you believe it or not) is for the day of redemption.


It's rather frustrating when posters keep adding their own opinions to Scripture. All I can do is call it out every time it occurs.

So, stop adding your opinion to Scripture. There are no verses about God's GUARANTEE being conditional on anything the believer might do.


Once again you stoop to the human weakness of finding totally unrelated things.

It seems to me that your view of your own salvation is not much different than your view of buying a radio. If you break it, the guarantee can be voided.

Well, fortunately, God doesn't operate that way and you haven't found any verses that says He does. In fact, Eph 1:13,14 totally REFUTES your views.


Again, your opinion here is not found in Scripture.


Jesus said the Holy Spirit (our seal and earnest) will be with us FOREVER. I believe that. So should you.


Aren't you aware that "having believed", the indwelling Holy Spirit is a GUARANTEE for their inheritance for the day of redemption. And NO conditions, as you opine.

I'm serious about the English.
Translators are very intelligent persons.
We don't need to get into the Greek ... we're not theologians here.

A guarantee will only work if you FOLLOW THE RULES/CONDITIONS of the guarantee.

The Holy Spirit puts a mark on us...sealing really is referring to the seal or mark of baptism, but there's no reason to get into this since there are so many verses refuting what you believe.

Many person get baptized,,,receive the seal of the Holy Spirit, and will not be going to be with God.

I'd like to discuss a different verse other than John 10:27-28.
The condition to verse 28 is this:
MY SHEEP HEAR MY VOICE.

Those that do NOT hear the voice of Jesus are not part of verse 28.
Only those that HEAR HIS VOICE will never perish....
Those that endure to the end.
Revelation 2:3-5
3and you have perseverance and have endured for My name’s sake, and have not grown weary.
4‘But I have this against you, that you have left your first love.
5‘Therefore remember from where you have fallen, and repent and do the deeds you did at first; or else I am coming to you and will remove your lampstand out of its place—unless you repent.

Please explain the above.

And I DO believe the Holy Spirit will be with us forever...
as long as we want Him to be with us....
God invites
We reply
We retain our free will ....

 

[GodsGrace101]

GG101, I wish you would face the reality of the fact that God uses words of a human PERMAMENT relationship (father and child) to explain the PERMANENT relationship between Himself and His children.

Since it is unarguable that the relationship between a human father and child is permanent, why would God use such a description of His own relationship with His own children?

Can you explain that?

I stick to my statement.
Never again use human relationships in reference to God
OR
you also have to accept mine.

 

[GodsGrace101]

The length of my posts is entirely dependent upon what others post. Because I respond to what they post.


It is what it is.


No one is saved for a reward. This is what we are saved FROM. No one is saved FOR.

Past tense salvation: we were saved FROM the penalty of sin. Justification
Present tense salvation: we are being saved FROM the power of sin. Sanctification
Future tense salvation: we will be saved FROM the presence of sin. Glorification

If you don't understand or agree with any of these 3 tenses regarding salvation, please address your concerns.


nope.


Because Jesus Christ gives eternal life to those who have believed. I've already given you the verses that prove this:

John 5:24 - “Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life.

John 6:47 - Very truly I tell you, the one who believes has eternal life.

John 10:28 - I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand.

Regarding 10:28, here is a color coded explanation:

The red words are what Jesus does for believers.
The blue words is the result of what Jesus does for believers.


I don't know what you mean by "allows". It is God who saves those who believe.

1 Cor 1:21 - For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. God was pleased to save those who believe.


They don't need "proving". They all agree with Scripture. Did you mean "refute"?


You are not reading my posts carefully at all. I never said "we are walking towards rewards and not heaven". Not ever. So please dispel your erroneous ideas.

First, we aren't "walking toward heaven". It's not a walk. It's a guarantee.
Second, our Christian life IS called a "walk", or the Christian walk. The Greek word for "walk" means lifestyle. And it is our lifestyle that determines whether we will earn reward or not.


First, Rev 21:27 isn't remotely related to the resurrection. So you can dispel that notion. As to your request about the resurrection of a "dirty body", I don't know where to start. I assume believers who are interested in theology and such have a solid grasp of the resurrection, but it appears from your question that you don't.

The physical body in the grave will be TRANSFORMED at the resurrection.


Well then, what's the problem?


Well then, what's the problem?


You just contradicted yourself. Jesus stated eternal security in the clearest of terms.


What verses are those?


The reverse is true. You never address my verses, or my points. By addressing, I mean to show that they are wrong.

But the only issue here is how you misread my verses. There are no conditional clauses in John 10:27 or 28, as Arminians must claim to defend their own position.

Go back and look at my color coded explanation of 10:28. Then, explain how the red words and blue words do NOT represent what I said they did.

How many times must we go over John 10?
It's useless.

You're not using syntax again.

I just willl no longer answer comments that make no sense.
Not being snarky...it just takes up too much time and we can't get to the meat of the discussion.

Anyway, almost midnight here....
'night.

 

[FreeGrace2]

You know, actually I agree with you that the N.T. writers could have been more clear in their statement. Of course, they never even IMAGINED that 2,000 YEARS down the line some would teach that once a person believes he is still saved even if returning to a life of sin. THIS WAS UNTHINKABLE. Until recently...all those theologians before must have been wrong, right? ONLY NOW, have we come to the truth:
Christ is NOT NECESSARY for salvation.
Believe one time and you'll be saved forever.
Kill, fornicate, get drunk, whatever you do is fine...
the good news is that you'll still be saved.

I see you're still obsessed with sin. Didn't you know that Christ died for all sin?

And your response regarding my point about John 10:28 just shows once again that you really don't understand what Jesus said at all.

See FG,,,YOUR good news is DIFFERENT than the good news the rest believe.

What is good about your beliefs? That you can mess up the salvation that Christ gives? How is that good?

btw, Rom 4:16 -Therefore, the promise (of salvation) comes by faith, so that it (salvation) may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham’s offspring—not only to those who are of the law but also to those who have the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all.

This refers to the Greek word for "guaranteed"
Strong's Concordance
bebaios: firm, secure
Original Word: βέβαιος, α, ον
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: bebaios
Phonetic Spelling: (beb'-ah-yos)
Definition: firm, secure
Usage: firm, steadfast, enduring, sure, certain.
HELPS Word-studies
949 bébaios (an adjective, derived from bainō, "to walk where it is solid") – properly, solid (sure) enough to walk on; hence, firm, unshakable; (figuratively) absolutely dependable, giving guaranteed support (security, surety).

949 /bébaios (literally, "what can be tread upon") then refers to what is fully dependable, i.e. worthy of confidence because on "solid footing." This describes what is fully secure (stable), and therefore can be trusted to give full support.

So, there you go.

Forget John 10:27, 28 We've gone over this ad nauseum... please come up with some new verses that support your claim.

Sure. Keep ignoring the verse that totally refutes your opinion.

I gave you a color coded explanation, to make it easy to follow. But it is clear that you are not interested in facing that explanation.

Please explain 2 Peter 2:20-22

I don't know why I am bothering, since you have dismissed the concept of reward earned or lost by behavior, that God uses divine discipline on His rebellious children, etc.

20 If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and are overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning.
21 It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them.
22 Of them the proverbs are true: “A dog returns to its vomit,” and, “A sow that is washed returns to her wallowing in the mud.”

v.20 The "if" are believers, obviously. To be "worse off at the end" doesn't refer to eternity, as many assume. It refers to the end of their life. This is about divine discipline, which is painful. Such a believer will suffer painful consequences.

v.21 this verse makes the startling statement that believers who re-enter the corruption of the world will have a far worse life following such a life than if they hadn't believed. Peter was speaking about their life on earth.

v.22 A dog's or pig's life is worse by returning to vomit or mud. worse than if they hadn't returned.

Why people assume these verses speak about loss of salvation is beyond me.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"I said:
"Yet, Scripture teaches, in plain language no less, that the inheritance of those who HAVE BELIEVED (notice the tense here, from Eph 1:13)is GUARANTEED for the day of redemption (v.14).""

I'm serious about the English.

Doesn't appear that way to me.

Translators are very intelligent persons.
We don't need to get into the Greek ... we're not theologians here.

Yes we do. But your unwillingness to do so reveals a serious lack of real interest in truth.

A guarantee will only work if you FOLLOW THE RULES/CONDITIONS of the guarantee.

OK, now show and explain these "rules/conditions" on sealed ones in Eph 1:13,14.

The Holy Spirit puts a mark on us...sealing really is referring to the seal or mark of baptism, but there's no reason to get into this since there are so many verses refuting what you believe.

You've refuted zero so far.

Many person get baptized,,,receive the seal of the Holy Spirit, and will not be going to be with God.

Your opinion is not inspired.

I'd like to discuss a different verse other than John 10:27-28.
The condition to verse 28 is this:
MY SHEEP HEAR MY VOICE.

Since you claim to be "serious about English", prove your claim that hearing is any kind of condition for v.28. That means actual words that form a conditional clause.

Then we'll see how "serious" you really are.

Those that do NOT hear the voice of Jesus are not part of verse 28.[/QUOTE}
Again, you are expressing your opinion. Show me the actual words that support your opinion.

Only those that HEAR HIS VOICE will never perish....

show me where "only" occurs in either verse.

I'll show you how v.28 would be IF you were right:

I given them eternal life, and AS LONG AS... or IF... or AND ONLY THOSE who keep listening and following shall never perish.

Do you see the huge difference between the statement above and what Jesus ACTUALLY said??

Revelation 2:3-5
3and you have perseverance and have endured for My name’s sake, and have not grown weary.
4‘But I have this against you, that you have left your first love.
5‘Therefore remember from where you have fallen, and repent and do the deeds you did at first; or else I am coming to you and will remove your lampstand out of its place—unless you repent.

Please explain the above.

This is a warning of God's discipline. Where do you see anything about salvation, much less loss of it?

And I DO believe the Holy Spirit will be with us forever...
as long as we want Him to be with us....

OK, you've used a conditional clause in the words "AS LONG AS...".

Now, prove your claim from Scripture. Your opinion does not count.

God invites
We reply
We retain our free will ....

So, how does this relate to loss of salvation?

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"GG101, I wish you would face the reality of the fact that God uses words of a human PERMAMENT relationship (father and child) to explain the PERMANENT relationship between Himself and His children.

Since it is unarguable that the relationship between a human father and child is permanent, why would God use such a description of His own relationship with His own children?

Can you explain that?"

I stick to my statement.

I'll take that as you CANNOT explain that. Which I already knew.

Never again use human relationships in reference to God
OR
you also have to accept mine.

Why do you have such difficulty with how God describes His relationship with His own children in parallel with human fathers with their own children??

So, instead of facing that reality, you'd just rather duck and run.

btw, I will NEVER take such advice as to "never again use human relartionshiops in refernece to God" since the Bible USES those terms. Even though they bug you.

That's not my problem. I have no problem with how the Bible explains itself.

But your refusal to deal with God calling Himself a heavenly Father and believers as His children PROVES that the believer's relationship to God is as PERMANENT as a human father's relationship to his own children is just as PERMANENT.

And you just don't want to deal with that. And that's the problem.

 

[FreeGrace2]

How many times must we go over John 10?
It's useless.

It's useless only for those who are so unwilling to face the truth.

You're not using syntax again.

I think you mean "context".

I just willl no longer answer comments that make no sense.

You are free to do whatever you feel like. But if you were really interested in knowing truth, you'd at least make an effort to understand my posts.

Not being snarky...it just takes up too much time and we can't get to the meat of the discussion.

Well, that's on you. Here are some choice comments in your posts:

"Never again use human relationships in reference to God"

"How many times must we go over John 10?
It's useless."

"I just willl no longer answer comments that make no sense."

When I come across such comments, I ask for clarification. I AM interested in what others think, and why.

 

[Anthony2019]

Yes, of course there are. And those that don't agree with the Bible are in error

I certainly agree with the point you are making here, but I think what I was trying to say was that there are people who genuinely believe and trust in the Bible but come to different conclusions on what it teaches.
To illustrate my point, let's imagine there are two Christians, both mature in their faith, who live exemplary and faithful lives, and show the fruits as described in Galatians 5:22-23. Both are avid readers of the Bible and believe in biblical inerrancy. Yet one believes in the conditional perserverance of the saints, whereas the other believes in once saved always saved. How can we say for certain who is correct and who is not? What is our proof?
Do you think is possible to properly read and understand the scriptures on their own without being guided by tradition, reason and experience?

First, why would you love to believe it, if you don't?

I'm glad you asked! I know from personal experience what it means to have a strong faith, but equally I also have enormous empathy for those who go through times of weakness and temptation. I have failed God on many occasions, but He has always led me back to Himself. So, personally, I find it very hard to believe that God will give up on anyone.

The doctrine of Once Saved Always Saved is not something that offends me. It is something I would go along with if I genuinely believed it was a reality. At the same time, I believe that God has given us the freedom to choose whether or not to love and serve him. I don't think that choice is taken from us when we become Christians. It is a choice we must continue to make.

Most Christians I know still have to deal with temptations and struggles of some kind and occasionally will fall into sin, some more than others. And yet I believe that those who still struggle with sin are covered by God's grace. He still loves us and forgives us even though we are not perfect. That said, I accept that there are more serious sins that, if not repented of, can damage our relationship with Christ. I believe there is a distinction between sins that are venial and mortal. It makes little sense to me that someone who calls themselves a Christian, who engages in idolatry, rebellion, acts cruelly towards others, or treats others with contempt or indifference, can continue to enjoy fellowship with Christ. Jesus said that a tree that does not bear fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire. Paul stated that slanderers, swindlers, the sexually immoral, idolators, etc. will not inherit the kingdom of God. We are also discouraged to pray for a brother "committing a sin unto death". My own understanding of this is that we can pray for others in venial sin which will be forgiven. However, mortal sin causes an individual to fall from a state of grace and it is up to their own freewill to repent and receive forgiveness. We can of course pray for them to repent and turn back to God.

None of us can gain salvation through our own works. Salvation is a free gift from God, given to anyone who places their faith in Christ. We are all human and we make mistakes. God continues to forgive us. Of course I believe that those who place their faith in Christ are eternally secure - no-one can snatch them out of His hand. But I do believe that this has to be carefully balanced with the fact that as Christians we are called to be faithful. As Jesus said: "The one who stands firm to the end will be saved" (Matthew 10:22).

 

[GodsGrace101]

It's useless only for those who are so unwilling to face the truth.


I think you mean "context".


You are free to do whatever you feel like. But if you were really interested in knowing truth, you'd at least make an effort to understand my posts.


Well, that's on you. Here are some choice comments in your posts:

"Never again use human relationships in reference to God"

"How many times must we go over John 10?
It's useless."

"I just willl no longer answer comments that make no sense."

When I come across such comments, I ask for clarification. I AM interested in what others think, and why.

I don't mean CONTEXT
I mean SYNTAX

Find out the difference.

 

[GodsGrace101]

I said:
"GG101, I wish you would face the reality of the fact that God uses words of a human PERMAMENT relationship (father and child) to explain the PERMANENT relationship between Himself and His children.

Since it is unarguable that the relationship between a human father and child is permanent, why would God use such a description of His own relationship with His own children?

Can you explain that?"

I'll take that as you CANNOT explain that. Which I already knew.


Why do you have such difficulty with how God describes His relationship with His own children in parallel with human fathers with their own children??

So, instead of facing that reality, you'd just rather duck and run.

btw, I will NEVER take such advice as to "never again use human relartionshiops in refernece to God" since the Bible USES those terms. Even though they bug you.

That's not my problem. I have no problem with how the Bible explains itself.

But your refusal to deal with God calling Himself a heavenly Father and believers as His children PROVES that the believer's relationship to God is as PERMANENT as a human father's relationship to his own children is just as PERMANENT.

And you just don't want to deal with that. And that's the problem.

I'm not replying to the above because it just demonstrates how you do NOT understand 70% of what I post.

This might be my problem,,,but it seems everyone else understands my points except you.

I'm not really worried about you FG,,,but I AM worried about those that read this stufff about OSAS and actually might come to believe it.
BECAUSE IT IS NOT BIBLICAL and I've shown you many times why it is not.

YOU, OTOH, only post a couple of passages that can be disproven in a minute of writing.

If you ever come up with something new...reply -
otherwise, what's the use?
No reply necessary.

 

[GodsGrace101]

I certainly agree with the point you are making here, but I think what I was trying to say was that there are people who genuinely believe and trust in the Bible but come to different conclusions on what it teaches.
To illustrate my point, let's imagine there are two Christians, both mature in their faith, who live exemplary and faithful lives, and show the fruits as described in Galatians 5:22-23. Both are avid readers of the Bible and believe in biblical inerrancy. Yet one believes in the conditional perserverance of the saints, whereas the other believes in once saved always saved. How can we say for certain who is correct and who is not? What is our proof?
Do you think is possible to properly read and understand the scriptures on their own without being guided by tradition, reason and experience?


I'm glad you asked! I know from personal experience what it means to have a strong faith, but equally I also have enormous empathy for those who go through times of weakness and temptation. I have failed God on many occasions, but He has always led me back to Himself. So, personally, I find it very hard to believe that God will give up on anyone.

The doctrine of Once Saved Always Saved is not something that offends me. It is something I would go along with if I genuinely believed it was a reality. At the same time, I believe that God has given us the freedom to choose whether or not to love and serve him. I don't think that choice is taken from us when we become Christians. It is a choice we must continue to make.

Most Christians I know still have to deal with temptations and struggles of some kind and occasionally will fall into sin, some more than others. And yet I believe that those who still struggle with sin are covered by God's grace. He still loves us and forgives us even though we are not perfect. That said, I accept that there are more serious sins that, if not repented of, can damage our relationship with Christ. I believe there is a distinction between sins that are venial and mortal. It makes little sense to me that someone who calls themselves a Christian, who engages in idolatry, rebellion, acts cruelly towards others, or treats others with contempt or indifference, can continue to enjoy fellowship with Christ. Jesus said that a tree that does not bear fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire. Paul stated that slanderers, swindlers, the sexually immoral, idolators, etc. will not inherit the kingdom of God. We are also discouraged to pray for a brother "committing a sin unto death". My own understanding of this is that we can pray for others in venial sin which will be forgiven. However, mortal sin causes an individual to fall from a state of grace and it is up to their own freewill to repent and receive forgiveness. We can of course pray for them to repent and turn back to God.

None of us can gain salvation through our own works. Salvation is a free gift from God, given to anyone who places their faith in Christ. We are all human and we make mistakes. God continues to forgive us. Of course I believe that those who place their faith in Christ are eternally secure - no-one can snatch them out of His hand. But I do believe that this has to be carefully balanced with the fact that as Christians we are called to be faithful. As Jesus said: "The one who stands firm to the end will be saved" (Matthew 10:22).

This is a great post and explains everything perfectly.

It's unfortunate that some do not understand the simple words in the bible
and must depend on just a couple of verses to come to their conclusion.
One of the first things I learned in theology was that we cannot make a doctrine out of a few verses but the N.T. must NOT be in conflict with itself or it becomes invalid.

The Early Church Fathers did NOT believe in OSAS and they were taught by the Apostles. If Jesus and Paul and Peter and James and the Early Fathers don't know what Jesus taught --- then I don't know who does.

 

[GodsGrace101]

btw, Rom 4:16 -Therefore, the promise (of salvation) comes by faith, so that it (salvation) may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham’s offspring—not only to those who are of the law but also to those who have the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all.

Read it again.
Then answer this:

1. How does salvation come?
2. To whom is it guaranteed?

 

[FreeGrace2]

I certainly agree with the point you are making here, but I think what I was trying to say was that there are people who genuinely believe and trust in the Bible but come to different conclusions on what it teaches.

Yes, I got your point. But still, there is only one conclusion from the Bible.

To illustrate my point, let's imagine there are two Christians, both mature in their faith, who live exemplary and faithful lives, and show the fruits as described in Galatians 5:22-23. Both are avid readers of the Bible and believe in biblical inerrancy. Yet one believes in the conditional perserverance of the saints, whereas the other believes in once saved always saved. How can we say for certain who is correct and who is not?

Yes, we can.

What is our proof?

The very words of the Bible.

The single most clear verse on eternal security is John 10:28, though there are many more verses. In that verse, Jesus said those He gives eternal life shall never perish. I don't see how He could have been more clear.

Yet, Arminians will consistently read their own opinion into the verse, by forcing conditions upon recipients of eternal life in order for them to never perish.

Do you think is possible to properly read and understand the scriptures on their own without being guided by tradition, reason and experience?

The only legitimate source of understanding is from the Holy Spirit. And those who come to conclusions that are opposed to Scripture are clearly NOT being led by the Spirit.

I'm glad you asked! I know from personal experience what it means to have a strong faith, but equally I also have enormous empathy for those who go through times of weakness and temptation. I have failed God on many occasions, but He has always led me back to Himself. So, personally, I find it very hard to believe that God will give up on anyone.

In fact, His Word promises that He won't!

The doctrine of Once Saved Always Saved is not something that offends me.

Sadly, it does to the OSNAS crowd.

It is something I would go along with if I genuinely believed it was a reality. At the same time, I believe that God has given us the freedom to choose whether or not to love and serve him.

But, having free will doesn't mean using that freedom to leave your salvation. That is just one of the Arminian fallacies. When Jesus said "no one" can snatch His sheep from His or the Father's hand, He was meaning "no person". Since believers are persons, He was meaning that even the sheep him/herself cannot snatch themselves out of His hand.

I don't think that choice is taken from us when we become Christians. It is a choice we must continue to make.

Are there any really clear verses that a believer is free to give away or _________ (fill in the blank) their salvation?

Most Christians I know still have to deal with temptations and struggles of some kind and occasionally will fall into sin, some more than others. And yet I believe that those who still struggle with sin are covered by God's grace. He still loves us and forgives us even though we are not perfect.

Of course, all of this is true.

That said, I accept that there are more serious sins that, if not repented of, can damage our relationship with Christ.

Actually, all sin has a negative effect on our relationship with Christ. It is described as being "out of fellowship with Him". Yet, many Arminians mock such words.

Yet, 1 John 1 mentions "fellowship" 4 times in 3 verses. Kinda important huh. And the word is found 14 times in the NT. Really important.

The reason for confession of sin in 1 John 1 is to restore fellowship. Sin offends God. All sin. Not just the big ones. And we lose fellowship. That means we aren't benefitting from His blessings. So we need to confess. Also, we need cleansing, which is accomplished through confession. v.9

I believe there is a distinction between sins that are venial and mortal.

What verses convince you that there are sins that lead to loss of salvation, which leads to the "second death"?

It makes little sense to me that someone who calls themselves a Christian, who engages in idolatry, rebellion, acts cruelly towards others, or treats others with contempt or indifference, can continue to enjoy fellowship with Christ.

Of course they aren't. And that's the point. No fellowship. No blessings. No eternal reward. But discipline from God. And it is described as "painful" in Heb 12:11.

In essence, such believers will have a miserable life. Count on it.

Jesus said that a tree that does not bear fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire.

Believers aren't trees. He was using a farming metaphor to speak to the reality that believers who don't bear fruit (which is service to God, and what election is all about) will be discarded. If that means death, it only refers to physical death, of which the NT has a number of examples.

Paul stated that slanderers, swindlers, the sexually immoral, idolators, etc. will not inherit the kingdom of God.

There are 3 parallel verses about this. 1 Cor 6, Gal 5 and Eph 5. In the first 2, the phrase is "will not inherit the kingdom of God". However, in Eph 5:5, the phrase is "have no inheritance IN the kingdom". I emphasized the word "IN" for a reason. The verse actually mentions "IN the kingdom". So it cannot be true that "have no inheritance" means "not enter the kingdom" but too many believers understand it that way. Which is an error.

The fact is; there will be many believers who will enter the kingdom, but have no inheritance there. It's all about earning rewards, or losing rewards IN heaven.

We are also discouraged to pray for a brother "committing a sin unto death". My own understanding of this is that we can pray for others in venial sin which will be forgiven. However, mortal sin causes an individual to fall from a state of grace and it is up to their own freewill to repent and receive forgiveness. We can of course pray for them to repent and turn back to God.

There are no verses about praying for others to be forgiven. The biblical statue is clear; one must confess their own sins for forgiveness. 1 John 1:9

None of us can gain salvation through our own works. Salvation is a free gift from God, given to anyone who places their faith in Christ. We are all human and we make mistakes. God continues to forgive us. Of course I believe that those who place their faith in Christ are eternally secure - no-one can snatch them out of His hand.

That's called eternal security.

But I do believe that this has to be carefully balanced with the fact that as Christians we are called to be faithful. As Jesus said: "The one who stands firm to the end will be saved" (Matthew 10:22).

The context for this verse is the Tribulation. And "saved" doesn't speak of eternal soul salvation, but deliverance from dangers in the temporal sense, meaning during our life.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I don't mean CONTEXT
I mean SYNTAX

Find out the difference.

Well, now I'm confused and not sure at all about your statement about your "serious about English" comment.

So, please enlighten me.