Impossible to go to heaven if you deny OSAS

TibiasDad said:

Jim,

Two honest observations:

1) In your original response to my thoughts on the OP, you did indeed quote 1John 2:19, and your assertions therein would definitively disagree and run counter to my understanding of the passage.

2) I am now seeing that you are attempting to insert your eschatological point of view, expressed in the "controversial" theology forum, into this soteriological forum thread that , in my humble opinion, has no bearing on eschatological points of view. Your original response to me, noted above, did not concern itself with eschatology, and thus I responded without any thought of such being a part of the matter. However, I now see your obvious attempt to conflate the two very different subject matters, and see little value in prolonging this conversation here beyond the immediate parameters of the OSAS question in the OP. I will be happy to carry on if this is acceptable to you, and I hope it will.

Doug

Click to expand...

Doug, I see that you are right, I did cite John 2:19 in my post.
But I did so, not with the intent of talking about the many
Anti-Christs that arise during the Great Commission, but
ONLY on the point that those who go out from us were never
of us. My apology for the confusion. However, my point
remains, and if it runs "counter" to your understanding that
is only because you view the passage from the standpoint
of addressing only the "wheat" in the church where I view
the passage as contrasting the "wheat and tares" in the
church. So the issue is NOT unrelated.

Moreover, my points stand about the DIFFERENCE between
the many Anti-Christs of the Great Commission who go out
from the church and THE Anti-Christ that arises during the
Great Tribulation "Kingdom of Heaven" [Mat 25:1] and is
the chief emissary of Satan during the Revelation Beast.

I am not attempting to "insert my eschatological point of view"
only to clarify the DIFFERENCE between the MANY Anti-Christs
that leave the church during the Christian "Kingdom of Heaven"
[Mat 13]... which you mentioned... and THE Anti-Christ or
Man of Sin that arises during the Great Tribulation "Kingdom
of Heaven" [Mat 25:1]. These are DIFFERENT issues altogether.
Which is obvious when harmonizing what Daniel and Isaiah say
about this person called the "Little Horn" or "Fierce King" and
what Revelations says about this "False Prophet".

Again, I am not trying to "insert" anything... I was only responding
about the DIFFERENCE with the many "Anti-Christs" of 1 John 2.
AND I did say that this was not an appropriate discussion on this
thread - so I am a little surprised about you comment, as if I was
trying to hijack the thread into a different subject.

Is it controversial? Of course. The Bible PROMISED the mysteries
of Daniel's prophecies and Great Tribulation prophecies ("signs")
would only be revealed by the Last Saints as the Seventh Trumpet
"begins to sound". Which, again, is the reason I suggested it was
not appropriate for this thread. HOWEVER, that does not suggest
that it is not PART of the Gospel - and THAT is an important point.

Hopefully we have now established the difference between the
MANY Anit-Christs in the Great Commission and THE Anti-Christ
of the Great Tribulation and we can move on.

I am happy to continue with discussion about the OSAS and POS.
And I am interested in your response to my comments about both
2 Peter and Hebrews.

Jim

/

TibiasDad said:

Jim,

Two honest observations:

1) In your original response to my thoughts on the OP, you did indeed quote 1John 2:19, and your assertions therein would definitively disagree and run counter to my understanding of the passage.

2) I am now seeing that you are attempting to insert your eschatological point of view, expressed in the "controversial" theology forum, into this soteriological forum thread that , in my humble opinion, has no bearing on eschatological points of view. Your original response to me, noted above, did not concern itself with eschatology, and thus I responded without any thought of such being a part of the matter. However, I now see your obvious attempt to conflate the two very different subject matters, and see little value in prolonging this conversation here beyond the immediate parameters of the OSAS question in the OP. I will be happy to carry on if this is acceptable to you, and I hope it will.

Doug

Click to expand...

BTW... as you can see from my eschatology...
I am NOT Calvinistic.

.

5thKingdom said:

BTW... as you can see from my eschatology...
I am NOT Calvinistic.

.

Click to expand...

Well the "Calvinistic" perspective that is contentious theologically is soteriological not eschatological.

Doug

TibiasDad said:

Well the "Calvinistic" perspective that is contentious theologically is soteriological not eschatological.

Doug

Click to expand...

Whatever...
I noticed you did not respond to my comments about 2Peter
or Hebrews.

.

5thKingdom said:

Whatever...
I noticed you did not respond to my comments about 2Peter
or Hebrews.

.

Click to expand...

Haven't had time yet, but will get to it.

Doug

5thKingdom said:

2Pe 3:17-18
Ye [wheat] therefore, beloved [wheat], seeing ye know these things
before, beware lest ye [wheat] also, [contrasting the tares] being led
away with the error of the wicked, [the tares] fall from your own
stedfastness.[sanctification] But grow in grace, [be sanctified] and
in the knowledge [understanding] of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.

I do not see anything in these verses that suggests the elect could
ever lose their salvation. Rather, I see a warning against being led
astray by the doctrines of the unsaved tares, which would retard
both our understanding of the Gospel and our sanctification.

Click to expand...

We are probably not going to get very far in this discussion because the cornerstone of your arguments for both Peter and Hebrews (and 1 John for that matter) is that the audience to which the authors are writing is the local church, which has both true believers, and those who have not yet believed as well as those who are pretending to be believers, but are purposefully seeking to either benefit themselves and/or create their own following of people by leading pastry the !embers of that local fellowship of believers.

Now to assert that this is not the case is to fly into the face of history, personal experience, and common sense, however it does not mean that every passage is pointed at the hodge-podge of types of people in any local church. These warning passages are only logically aimed at those the writer believes to be genuine believers, not unbelievers of any particular type.

Thus, specifically in 2 Peter 3, the only contextual people in view, are the scoffers (3:3), and "are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells." (3:13)

Scoffers are not "tares" in the church, they are openly antagonistic to the message of Christ, and particularly of his second coming. The passage only makes sense if it is pointed at authentic believers.

Secondly, in my humble opinion, the language used does not support your thinking!
The word translated "steadfastness" in verse 17, is the word "stérigmos", a noun whose only used is in this verse, and means to be firmly standing. It is a derivative of another word, a verb, "stérizó", which means to establish, to make fast. So to negate said steadfastness, is to be dis-established from the firmness of being established.

Furthermore, the the word "ekpipto", translated as "to fall away from" (your steadfastness), is an absolute negation of what it modifies, in this case, steadfastness. It is not a weakening, or less secure position, it is an abandonment of that position. It is a loss of something.

Peter is warning the Church, the true believers, that these scoffers are coming and to beware of them lest they be "carried away" by their seductions and lose their current state of steadfast surity.

Doug

5thKingdom said:

Hebrews 10:26-39

For if we [wheat] sin wilfully after that we [wheat] have received
the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for
sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation,
which shall devour the adversaries [tares]. He that despised Moses'
law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: Of how much
sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath
trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the
covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done
despite unto the Spirit of grace? For we know him that hath said,
Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord.
And again, The Lord shall judge his people. It is a fearful thing
to fall into the hands of the living God. But call to remembrance the
former days, in which, after ye [wheat] were illuminated, ye endured
a great fight of afflictions; Partly, whilst ye were made a gazingstock
both by reproaches and afflictions; and partly, whilst ye became
companions of them [tares] that were so used. For ye [wheat] had
compassion of me in my bonds, and took joyfully the spoiling of your
goods, knowing in yourselves that ye have in heaven a better and an
enduring substance. Cast not away therefore your confidence, which
hath great recompence of reward. For ye have need of patience, that,
after ye [wheat] have done the will of God, ye might receive the promise.
For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry.
Now the just [wheat] shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my
soul shall have no pleasure in him. But we [elect] are not of them [tares]
who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of
the soul.

Again, above, I do not see anything that suggests the elect can lose
their salvation. I see only a warning that (if we sin willfully) there is
no sacrifice to cover willful sins. This MUST be viewed, not as the
case of occasional sin, but rather, as a sinful lifestyle. Since we see
in 1 John 1 and Romans 7 that Saints continue to sin... but NOT as
a lifestyle. A sinful lifestyle ("them who draw back unto perdition")
is the "fruit" of unsaved "tares" and not the saved "wheat". This
view is emphasized by contrasting the "wheat" with the "tares" in
"who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the
blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing,
and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?" There are those
who "fall away" from the faith, but that is the act of unsaved "tares"
and not the elect. The phrase "he was sanctified" is addressed in
Hebrews 6:4-8.

Click to expand...

Okay, Jim, let's walk through the entire context of the warning passage within it.

Heb 10:19Therefore, brothers and sisters, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, 20by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body, 21and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22let us draw near to God with a sincere heart and with the full assurance that faith brings, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water. 23Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful. 24And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds, 25not giving up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but encouraging one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.

So this opening section of the final section of Hebrews 10, you will see, is clearly focused on the authentic believers, the actual members of the Church. This is especially apparent by the use of the first person plural pronouns, we and us, used throughout. This eliminates any potential for his words to be directed toward anyone other than true believers. There are no "tares" in the mind of the author! The descriptions made of their (the author and his Hebrew brethern) common experiences, namely by having "a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body...having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water"' exclude any who have not experienced these things.


Heb 10:26If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, 27but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. 28Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29How much more severely do you think someone deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified them, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace? 30For we know him who said, “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” and again, “The Lord will judge his people.” 31It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.


We see that the first lines of the second portion of the text are also placed in the first
person plural (we), and this includes the real potential of deliberately continuing the sin of which we had been forgiven, and that doing such nullifies hope for any effectual sacrifice for those sins deliberately committed after believing, and leaves only one possible "expectation", the" judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. " In other words, believers (remember the "we" which includes the author) are quite capable of going from the result of being children of God, to the results of being the enemies of God.

He emphasises this by drawing on the Hebrew scriptures, pointing out that under Moses' law, a man was condemned by the witness of only two or three men; how much worse if the witness is the trampled on blood of Christ that had made these men holy, insulting the grace that had redeemed them from their past sins.

Heb 10:32Remember those earlier days after you had received the light, when you endured in a great conflict full of suffering. 33Sometimes you were publicly exposed to insult and persecution; at other times you stood side by side with those who were so treated. 34You suffered along with those in prison and joyfully accepted the confiscation of your property, because you knew that you yourselves had better and lasting possessions. 35So do not throw away your confidence; it will be richly rewarded.

The author goes on to to remind them of what they have already endured for the sake of Christ, and, in verse 35, admonishes them to not "throw away" the faith they have already suffered so much for holding, if they continue on as they have been, they will be rewarded. (This reward is in contrast to the expectation of reward for the enemies of God.) The word translated "throw away", apoballó, means to throw away, or cast off in a permanent manner, such a throwing something overboard a ship.


Heb 10:36You need to persevere so that when you have done the will of God, you will receive what he has promised. 37For "In just a little while, he who is coming will come
and will not delay.” 38And, “But my righteous one will live by faith.
And I take no pleasure in the one who shrinks back.”
39But we do not belong to those who shrink back and are destroyed, but to those who have faith and are saved.

The chapter ends with further admonishments that you "need to persevere" because God does not take pleasure in those who " shrink back". Now the final verse cannot be an absolute statement, even given the return of the author including himself by saying "we do not belong to those who shrink back", because implicit to the statement is the thought that there are a group of those who actually do shrink back and abandon their faith in Christ, that "we" do not belong to. The author is simply expressing his confidence that those to whom he is writing will, like himself, continue in the faith. There is no prohibition expressed about the real potential of throwing away their faith. If there were, the warning against it is meaningless!

Doug

5thKingdom said:

I am sorry I upset you.
Please forget that I posted.

/

Click to expand...

Don’t be hard on yourself I just didn’t understand your points and questions and how they fit into the conversation. We must just see it differently no big deal.


Life is busy and time is precious so forgive me if I don’t respond to you in a timely manner.

5thKingdom said:

For it is impossible for those [wheat and tares] who were once
enlightened [by the Gospel], and have tasted of the heavenly gift,
[of the Gospel] and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
[through the Gospel] And have tasted the good word of God,
and the powers of the world to come, If they [the tares]
shall fall away, [from the Gospel] to renew them [the tares]
again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the
Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame. For the earth
which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth
herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God:
But that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, [the tares] and is
nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned. But, beloved, [the wheat]
we are persuaded better things of you, [the wheat] and things that
accompany salvation, though we thus speak.

Again, I see nothing to suggest the elect can lose their salvation.
["beloved, we are persuaded better things of you"]. In this passage
(as in the phrase "he was sanctified" in Hebrews 10:26-39) we see
that the church consists of BOTH saved "wheat" and unsaved "tares".
That BOTH are "sanctified" by hearing the gospel. That BOTH were
"enlightened" by hearing the Gospel. That BOTH "taste the heavenly
gift" of the Gospel... and, in this sense BOTH were "partakers" of the
light "of the Holy Spirit" through the Gospel.

If we were to look at this passage as addressing ONLY the "wheat"
in the church... then we would be concerned about those who can
"fall away". However, if we understand the church consists of BOTH
saved "wheat" and unsaved "tares" then we can appreciate that
BOTH the "wheat and tares" receive the blessings of the Gospel
which is preached through the Holy Spirit. And we can then also
understand that some ("tares") do "fall away" from the Gospel
and have no way to "renew" themselves AGAIN "unto repentance".

This is why it's so important to understand the CONTEXT of verses.
Passages about the church could be talking about ONLY the "wheat"
or ONLY the "tares" or BOTH the "wheat and tares". If we cannot
discern the context of the passage we have no hope of understanding
the MEANING of that passage.

Jim

Click to expand...

Jim,

There are many similarities between this passage and that in chapter 10, which we will see as we progress though the details of the passage, as we did in chapter 10.

Heb 6:4It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age 6and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace. 7Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. 8But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned.

The first similarity is the description of the spiritual experience of those to whom he is writing. The chapter opens in this manner: "Therefore let us move beyond the elementary teachings about Christ and be taken forward to maturity, not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death, and of faith in God, instruction about cleansing rites, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment." (Heb 6:1-2) The ones to whom the message of chapter 6 (and following, especially including chapter 10) are actually true believers, if yet still weak babes (5:11-ff), because they are going to be talking about going on to maturity. The focus is not on the "tares" but the wheat, and the language will prove it.

Heb 6:4 begins with the describing of one who has been enlighten, Greek photizo, which means, "to imbue with saving knowledge" (Thayer) Now this could be construed as just being exposed to the information about salvation, but that would not be either proper biblical usage or proper English. It is not enlightenment about how to be saved, it is enlightenment that saves. This would be especially true of those whose soteriological stance tends to the Calvinistic side of the equation, because knowledge that saves, is not knowledge that can be comprehended unless one is regenerated or born again; it is spiritual understanding that unspiritual minds cannot understand. (1 Cor 2:12). But, as is usually the case, the best evidence is the evidence within the text itself, and the next descriptor strengthens my case beyond any reasonable doubt.

Not only are they enlightened, they have "...tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age... "(Heb 6:4-5) "Tasted", Greek geuomai, when used figuratively, always means to experience the reality of something, such as when Jesus spoke of some not tasting death before the coming of Christ's Kingdom. (Matt 16:28) Thus, the tasting of the heavenly gift (salvation/eternal life), and thus, being those have shared in the Holy Spirit, which have tasted the goodness of the word of God, and the power of the coming age (again a reference to the Holy Spirit working within the believer) are all experiential in fact. This is not true of "tares"! This can only be a person who has really been saved!

Next, the author shifts to a contrasting reality statement by saying that those who have experienced these things in the past, but now "have fallen away" will find renewal to their former state of repentance, an impossibility! One thing is obvious: You cannot fall from something that you haven't attained! You cannot fall from a tree or a wall or a mountain cliff you haven't climbed. You cannot leave something you've never reached! There is no middle ground between being forgiven or being unforgiven; you're one of the other. Likewise, you cannot be renewed to repentance unless you were once repentant. You cannot fall away from a faith that you never possessed!

The fallacy I find in your interpretation is that you equate the experience level of the wheat and tares until it comes to the point of falling away, then it can only be tares! This is blatant eisegesis for there is zero evidence of non-Christian tares being in the author's mind. It doesn't say that tares and not wheat can fall, in fact it says nothing at all about the differential between wheat and tares, and yet this is precisely what you are making an implicit necessity to your arguments. If the experience of the tastings are equal for both groups (wheat and tares), then they are in equal standing before God. You can't have it both ways; if they are equal in there experiential qualities, there can be no inequity in their potential falling away.


Heb 10:9 Even though we speak like this, dear friends, we are convinced of better things in your case—the things that have to do with salvation. 10God is not unjust; he will not forget your work and the love you have shown him as you have helped his people and continue to help them. 11We want each of you to show this same diligence to the very end, so that what you hope for may be fully realized. 12We do not want you to become lazy, but to imitate those who through faith and patience inherit what has been promised.

Here again, we have a strong similarity with the way he makes his arguments in chapter 10. The author turns to encouraging and showing personal confidence that the hearers will stay true to their faith but he says something interesting here, that the things he is talking about are "the things that have to do with salvation"; whether they are going to be saved or not and why! The author is confident because a) "God is not unjust; he will not forget your work and the love you have shown him as you have helped his people and continue to help them" (vs10), and b) "We want each of you to show this same diligence to the very end, so that what you hope for may be fully realized, (vs11), and finally, c) "We do not want you to become lazy, but to imitate those who through faith and patience inherit what has been promised." (vs12)

You will note, that the inheritance that "has been promised", and the full realization for "what you hope" is contingent on their "show[ing] this same diligence to the very end", and that God will do "what is promised" for "those who through faith and patience " come to actually "inherit" said promises. In other words, there is no guarantee of "showing this same diligence to the very end", but only that God is faithful to do what he promises for those who do.

So I have now taken deliberate pains in showing the context, lexigraphical, and consistency of thought for all three of my texts in support of my original post on this thread (which strangely enough has been, to my knowledge at this moment, ignored by the original author of the thread...hmmm). I think it is a far cry from your wheat/tares theory, which, in my humble opinion and experience, cannot stand to the actual evidence of the texts themselves.


Doug

BibleBeliever1611 said:

Those who deny the doctrine of "Once Saved Always Saved" claim that they also believe in Jesus. But if you believe that you must maintain salvation by living a good life, how is that compatible with believing in Jesus? If you must meet a certain goal to be saved, then you must have faith in yourself that you are able to meet that goal. So instead of having faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, you are having faith in yourself and your good works.

What does it mean to have faith in something? It means to trust. For example, if you have faith in your favorite football team, it means that you trust that team and you believe that the team will win. You could say: "I believe in this team!" That's kind of what it means to believe in Jesus. It means to trust Jesus that he will save you, no matter what happens in your life. It's pretty simple.

This is why it's crucial to believe in eternal security. If you believe that you can lose your salvation, then you are not saved because haven't put all of your faith in Jesus Christ yet.

And then people respond by saying something like this: "You just want to have licence to sin!"

Well, better to have a licence to sin because the Bible says that if we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. And that also applies to saved people. If we didn't have a licence to sin, we would all go to hell. So good luck if you want to be without a licence.

Click to expand...

I cannot actually believe that you admit a believer has a license to sin and that is okay. What separates the difference between the children of God and the children of the devil? (See 1 John 3:10).

As for your reference to 1 John 1:8:

What is helpful in understanding 1 John 1:8 is looking at its immediate context. 1 John 1:10 says if we say we have not sinned. 1 John 1:10 switches gears from 1 John 1:8 in regards to time; John talks about the declaration on committing sin in verse 8 (which is present tense) to a declaration on committing sin being a past declaration (with verse 10). Verse 10 is saying there are people who said they have not sinned (past tense). This is clearly a gnostic belief. Why? Well, most believers today hold to the idea that they have sinned as a part of their old life before coming to Christ (Regardless of whether they are “OSAS,” a “Sin and still be saved” type believer, or a “Conditional Salvationist”). So this clearly is a “gnostic belief” that John was warning the brethren about (See 1 John 2:26). 1 John 1:8 is a present declaration of sin. It is saying if we say we have no sin when we do sin (present tense). This has to be the interpretative understanding of this verse because 1 John 2:4 says if we say we know Him and do not keep His commandments we are a liar and the truth is not in us. The OSAS's interpretation on 1 John 1:8 does not work because it conflicts with a normal reading on 1 John 2:3-4. You cannot always be in sin (breaking God's commands) as a part of 1 John 1:8 and yet also fulfill 1 John 2:3 that says we can have an assurance of knowing Him if we keep His commandments. Especially when 1 John 2:4 says we are a liar and the truth is not in us if we break his commandments. In other words, if the OSAS interpretation on 1 John 1:8 was true, then I would be damned if I do by obeying God's commands (1 John 1:8) and yet I would be damned if I don't by not obeying God's commands (1 John 2:4).

In fact, the New English Translation says this for 1 John 1:8,


In other words, this verse is saying that if a person sins and says they do not bear the guilt of sin (in the sense that they will not have to face any wrath or Judgment from God over their sin) then they would be deceiving themselves and the truth would not be in them. This is exactly what the Eternal Security proposes. They are saying that they do not bear the guilt of any sin (destruction of their soul and body in hell fire) if they do sin because they believe their future sins are paid for by Jesus. They are saying, they do not bear the guilt or the punishment of sin at the final Judgment because of their belief on Jesus. In short, 1 John 1:8 is a denial of the existence of sin on some level. “If we say we have no sin (in the sense that it does not exist) we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.” (1 John 1:8). Christian Scientists think sin is an illusion and does not exist at all. So this verse would apply to them. Eternal Security Proponents and those who deny that “Sin Can Separate a Believer from God” deny the existence of sin partially. They believe sin exists physically but they do not believe sin exists for them on a spiritual level because Jesus has forgiven them of all their sin by their belief on Jesus. In fact, to see just how silly your argument actually is for 1 John 1:8, you would have to believe that you are sinning right now at this very moment in order for such a verse to be true because 1 John 1:8 is speaking in the present tense.

John prescribes that we do not think that sin is an illusion, and we are automatically saved, but John is telling us to "sin not" and go to our advocate Jesus Christ (1 John 2:1), and confess our sins so as to be forgiven of sin and to be cleansed of all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9). How can you confess and be forgiven of sin if all your future sin is paid for? It makes no sense.

You can say that John is talking about a break of fellowship by one's sins and not a loss of salvation, but that would not be consistent with Scripture. 1 John 5:12 says he that has the Son has life, and he that does not have the Son does not have life.

Jesus and His followers warned against how sin can destroy our souls (See: Matthew 5:28-30, Matthew 6:15, Matthew 12:37, Matthew 25:31-47, Luke 9:62, 1 John 3:15, Titus 1:16, Romans 8:13, Galatians 5:19-21, Revelation 21:8, etc.).

BibleBeliever1611 said:

Those who deny the doctrine of "Once Saved Always Saved" claim that they also believe in Jesus. But if you believe that you must maintain salvation by living a good life, how is that compatible with believing in Jesus? If you must meet a certain goal to be saved, then you must have faith in yourself that you are able to meet that goal.

Click to expand...

Um, no, wrong, wrong, wrong. I must continue to trust in Christ, not " live a good life" to remain saved. God doesn't force anyone to stay in him.

BibleBeliever1611 said:

Those who deny the doctrine of "Once Saved Always Saved" claim that they also believe in Jesus. But if you believe that you must maintain salvation by living a good life, how is that compatible with believing in Jesus? If you must meet a certain goal to be saved, then you must have faith in yourself that you are able to meet that goal. So instead of having faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, you are having faith in yourself and your good works.

What does it mean to have faith in something? It means to trust. For example, if you have faith in your favorite football team, it means that you trust that team and you believe that the team will win. You could say: "I believe in this team!" That's kind of what it means to believe in Jesus. It means to trust Jesus that he will save you, no matter what happens in your life. It's pretty simple.

This is why it's crucial to believe in eternal security. If you believe that you can lose your salvation, then you are not saved because haven't put all of your faith in Jesus Christ yet.

And then people respond by saying something like this: "You just want to have licence to sin!"

Well, better to have a licence to sin because the Bible says that if we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. And that also applies to saved people. If we didn't have a licence to sin, we would all go to hell. So good luck if you want to be without a licence.

Click to expand...

Do you believe George Sodini was saved or that is possible that he could have been saved? If you do, I find that to be totally immoral and unbiblical.

Here is a quote from George Sodini:
(Sodini blog diary: August 3, 2009 day before the serial murder):

Quote:
George Sodini.

Bible Highlighter said:

I cannot actually believe that you admit a believer has a license to sin and that is okay. What separates the difference between the children of God and the children of the devil? (See 1 John 3:10).

As for your reference to 1 John 1:8:

What is helpful in understanding 1 John 1:8 is looking at its immediate context. 1 John 1:10 says if we say we have not sinned. 1 John 1:10 switches gears from 1 John 1:8 in regards to time; John talks about the declaration on committing sin in verse 8 (which is present tense) to a declaration on committing sin being a past declaration (with verse 10). Verse 10 is saying there are people who said they have not sinned (past tense). This is clearly a gnostic belief. Why? Well, most believers today hold to the idea that they have sinned as a part of their old life before coming to Christ (Regardless of whether they are “OSAS,” a “Sin and still be saved” type believer, or a “Conditional Salvationist”). So this clearly is a “gnostic belief” that John was warning the brethren about (See 1 John 2:26). 1 John 1:8 is a present declaration of sin. It is saying if we say we have no sin when we do sin (present tense). This has to be the interpretative understanding of this verse because 1 John 2:4 says if we say we know Him and do not keep His commandments we are a liar and the truth is not in us. The OSAS's interpretation on 1 John 1:8 does not work because it conflicts with a normal reading on 1 John 2:3-4. You cannot always be in sin (breaking God's commands) as a part of 1 John 1:8 and yet also fulfill 1 John 2:3 that says we can have an assurance of knowing Him if we keep His commandments. Especially when 1 John 2:4 says we are a liar and the truth is not in us if we break his commandments. In other words, if the OSAS interpretation on 1 John 1:8 was true, then I would be damned if I do by obeying God's commands (1 John 1:8) and yet I would be damned if I don't by not obeying God's commands (1 John 2:4).

In fact, the New English Translation says this for 1 John 1:8,

"If we say we do not bear the guilt of sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us." (1 John 1:8 NET).​

In other words, this verse is saying that if a person sins and says they do not bear the guilt of sin (in the sense that they will not have to face any wrath or Judgment from God over their sin) then they would be deceiving themselves and the truth would not be in them. This is exactly what the Eternal Security proposes. They are saying that they do not bear the guilt of any sin (destruction of their soul and body in hell fire) if they do sin because they believe their future sins are paid for by Jesus. They are saying, they do not bear the guilt or the punishment of sin at the final Judgment because of their belief on Jesus. In short, 1 John 1:8 is a denial of the existence of sin on some level. “If we say we have no sin (in the sense that it does not exist) we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.” (1 John 1:8). Christian Scientists think sin is an illusion and does not exist at all. So this verse would apply to them. Eternal Security Proponents and those who deny that “Sin Can Separate a Believer from God” deny the existence of sin partially. They believe sin exists physically but they do not believe sin exists for them on a spiritual level because Jesus has forgiven them of all their sin by their belief on Jesus. In fact, to see just how silly your argument actually is for 1 John 1:8, you would have to believe that you are sinning right now at this very moment in order for such a verse to be true because 1 John 1:8 is speaking in the present tense.

John prescribes that we do not think that sin is an illusion, and we are automatically saved, but John is telling us to "sin not" and go to our advocate Jesus Christ (1 John 2:1), and confess our sins so as to be forgiven of sin and to be cleansed of all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9). How can you confess and be forgiven of sin if all your future sin is paid for? It makes no sense.

You can say that John is talking about a break of fellowship by one's sins and not a loss of salvation, but that would not be consistent with Scripture. 1 John 5:12 says he that has the Son has life, and he that does not have the Son does not have life.

Jesus and His followers warned against how sin can destroy our souls (See: Matthew 5:28-30, Matthew 6:15, Matthew 12:37, Matthew 25:31-47, Luke 9:62, 1 John 3:15, Titus 1:16, Romans 8:13, Galatians 5:19-21, Revelation 21:8, etc.).

Click to expand...

Amen!!

Doug

TibiasDad said:

Jim,

There are many similarities between this passage and that in chapter 10, which we will see as we progress though the details of the passage, as we did in chapter 10.

Heb 6:4It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age 6and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace. 7Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. 8But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned.

The first similarity is the description of the spiritual experience of those to whom he is writing. The chapter opens in this manner: "Therefore let us move beyond the elementary teachings about Christ and be taken forward to maturity, not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death, and of faith in God, instruction about cleansing rites, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment." (Heb 6:1-2) The ones to whom the message of chapter 6 (and following, especially including chapter 10) are actually true believers, if yet still weak babes (5:11-ff), because they are going to be talking about going on to maturity. The focus is not on the "tares" but the wheat, and the language will prove it.

Heb 6:4 begins with the describing of one who has been enlighten, Greek photizo, which means, "to imbue with saving knowledge" (Thayer) Now this could be construed as just being exposed to the information about salvation, but that would not be either proper biblical usage or proper English. It is not enlightenment about how to be saved, it is enlightenment that saves. This would be especially true of those whose soteriological stance tends to the Calvinistic side of the equation, because knowledge that saves, is not knowledge that can be comprehended unless one is regenerated or born again; it is spiritual understanding that unspiritual minds cannot understand. (1 Cor 2:12). But, as is usually the case, the best evidence is the evidence within the text itself, and the next descriptor strengthens my case beyond any reasonable doubt.

Not only are they enlightened, they have "...tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age... "(Heb 6:4-5) "Tasted", Greek geuomai, when used figuratively, always means to experience the reality of something, such as when Jesus spoke of some not tasting death before the coming of Christ's Kingdom. (Matt 16:28) Thus, the tasting of the heavenly gift (salvation/eternal life), and thus, being those have shared in the Holy Spirit, which have tasted the goodness of the word of God, and the power of the coming age (again a reference to the Holy Spirit working within the believer) are all experiential in fact. This is not true of "tares"! This can only be a person who has really been saved!

Next, the author shifts to a contrasting reality statement by saying that those who have experienced these things in the past, but now "have fallen away" will find renewal to their former state of repentance, an impossibility! One thing is obvious: You cannot fall from something that you haven't attained! You cannot fall from a tree or a wall or a mountain cliff you haven't climbed. You cannot leave something you've never reached! There is no middle ground between being forgiven or being unforgiven; you're one of the other. Likewise, you cannot be renewed to repentance unless you were once repentant. You cannot fall away from a faith that you never possessed!

The fallacy I find in your interpretation is that you equate the experience level of the wheat and tares until it comes to the point of falling away, then it can only be tares! This is blatant eisegesis for there is zero evidence of non-Christian tares being in the author's mind. It doesn't say that tares and not wheat can fall, in fact it says nothing at all about the differential between wheat and tares, and yet this is precisely what you are making an implicit necessity to your arguments. If the experience of the tastings are equal for both groups (wheat and tares), then they are in equal standing before God. You can't have it both ways; if they are equal in there experiential qualities, there can be no inequity in their potential falling away.


Heb 10:9 Even though we speak like this, dear friends, we are convinced of better things in your case—the things that have to do with salvation. 10God is not unjust; he will not forget your work and the love you have shown him as you have helped his people and continue to help them. 11We want each of you to show this same diligence to the very end, so that what you hope for may be fully realized. 12We do not want you to become lazy, but to imitate those who through faith and patience inherit what has been promised.

Here again, we have a strong similarity with the way he makes his arguments in chapter 10. The author turns to encouraging and showing personal confidence that the hearers will stay true to their faith but he says something interesting here, that the things he is talking about are "the things that have to do with salvation"; whether they are going to be saved or not and why! The author is confident because a) "God is not unjust; he will not forget your work and the love you have shown him as you have helped his people and continue to help them" (vs10), and b) "We want each of you to show this same diligence to the very end, so that what you hope for may be fully realized, (vs11), and finally, c) "We do not want you to become lazy, but to imitate those who through faith and patience inherit what has been promised." (vs12)

You will note, that the inheritance that "has been promised", and the full realization for "what you hope" is contingent on their "show[ing] this same diligence to the very end", and that God will do "what is promised" for "those who through faith and patience " come to actually "inherit" said promises. In other words, there is no guarantee of "showing this same diligence to the very end", but only that God is faithful to do what he promises for those who do.

So I have now taken deliberate pains in showing the context, lexigraphical, and consistency of thought for all three of my texts in support of my original post on this thread (which strangely enough has been, to my knowledge at this moment, ignored by the original author of the thread...hmmm). I think it is a far cry from your wheat/tares theory, which, in my humble opinion and experience, cannot stand to the actual evidence of the texts themselves.


Doug

Click to expand...

Doug,

I am sorry. For some reason I never got a notification
in my email that you had responded to our discussion.
I just noticed it now as I was scrolling through the posts.
God Willing I will get a chance to answer your posts this
weekend.

Jim

@5thKingdom

First, go back to the Garden of Eden. Re-read the story of Adam and Eve in Genesis 2-3. If you do, you will discover that a person can go from being in favor with God (saved), to falling out of favor with God (not saved). For God told Adam he would die the very day he would eat of that tree. Did Adam and Eve fall dead to the ground the day they ate of the tree? No. Adam and Eve died spiritually the day they ate of the tree and they did not die physically. Remember, they needed to eat of the tree of life in order to have immortality. Immortality was not something that they automatically had.

Second, the devil was trying to convince Eve of the lie that she could disobey God's command and not die. This is the same exact lie that the devil is pushing today.

Folks today are buying into the devil's same ole lie way back in the Garden... hook, line, and sinker.


Yet, this is the same lie Eve bought into by the devil. Think. The Bible is consistent in what it says.


Side Note:

*Words in brackets in blue ( [....] ) are my commentary to the verse above.

5thKingdom said:

If the definition of being "saved" is that you have
eternal life... then, what part of ETERNAL do they
not understand.

If someone can LOSE their "eternal life"... that is only
evidence they never had "eternal life".
This is not hard.

/

Click to expand...

So how do you answer what Peter stated in 2 Pt 2:1 when he said, "“there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction” (2 Pet. 2:1). Didn't it say they were ransomed by Christ but they opened the door to destruction for themselves?

To all:

First, many Christians are confused when they read Paul in Ephesians 2:8-9, Titus 3:5, Romans 4:3-5, and Romans 11:6 (When in reality Paul was referring to the 1st Process of salvation, i.e. Justification). Many Christians today think Paul was referring to ALL Law or ALL works when he mentions the word “Law” in a generic sense. This is not the case, Paul was referring to being justified by the 613 Laws of Moses given to Israel. Paul was referring to trying to be saved by “Law ALONE Salvationism,” or “Works ALONE Salvationism” (without God's grace). Paul was not referring to the commands of Jesus and His followers in the New Testament or New Covenant (after a person was saved by God's grace through believing the gospel in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, and in their seeking forgiveness with the Lord Jesus Christ - Romans 10:13, Luke 15:17-21, Luke 18:9-14, 1 John 2:1, 1 John 1:9, Hebrews 4:16). Paul was fighting against Circumcision Salvation. This was the heresy that a man first needs to be circumcised in order to be saved. If they believed this way, they would be making circumcision (the Law of Moses) the basis of their salvation and not God's grace faith in Jesus Christ.

Proof?

Just click on the spoiler button here to check out the verses:


Second, another problem is that many Christians think all sin is the same or equal in God's eyes or sight. This is simply not the case.

Click on the following spoiler button to see the list.


Three, while we are not under the Law of Moses (the 613 commands as a whole given to Moses and the Israelites) (Note: Check out the following verses of how we are not under the Old Law: 2 Corinthians 3:7-11, 2 Corinthians 3:14, Romans 7:4, Romans 7:6, Colossians 2:14, Colossians 2:16-17, Colossians 2:20-23, Ephesians 2:15, Hebrews 7:18, Hebrews 8:13, Hebrews 9:9-10, Hebrews 9:15, Hebrews 9:16-17, Hebrews 10:8-9, Matthew 26:27-28, Matthew 27:50-51, Acts of the Apostles 15:1, Acts of the Apostles 15:5, Acts of the Apostles 15:24), we are under a New Covenant with New Commands given to us by Jesus and His followers (Revelation 22:14). Some of these laws or commands are repeated from the Old Law and others are entirely new laws or commands.

The "Belief Alone Proponent" or the "Secure in Their Grievous Sin Salvationist" tries to lump all sin and offenses into one bucket so as to say you cannot possibly keep God's laws and thus.... it defends their belief that says all we need to do is believe in Jesus and we are good to go. I would like to wish them good luck with believing that way, but I know that such a belief will not work out for anyone in the end. We see warnings of such a wrong belief many times in Scripture.



Today, we hear the same ole song and dance. We are "sons of God" or "I am saved by the finished work of the cross," and nothing we can do can take away our salvation. Yet, if Jesus was here today, He most likely would be rebuking the churches and He probably say something of the effect of, "if ye were children of God, ye would do the works of the Son of God."

Ironically Scripture confirms this even more.

1 John 3:10 says,


No doubt, the Belief Alone Proponent does not accept these verses in what they plainly say. They must be saying something else. So they have to cook up some other meaning so as to explain them away. But a person cannot change what God's Word plainly says. One either accepts the whole counsel of God's Word as it normally reads or they seek to insert an outside belief into the Scriptures that they prefer to hear.

I hope this helps someone today.

May the Lord Jesus bless you all.


Side Note:

*Words in brackets in blue ( [....] ) are my commentaries to the verses above.

To all:

In Scripture, there are 4 different aspects of salvation described.

#1. Provisional Atonement (not "Limited Atonement").
(A 100% Work of God alone that can only be applied personally to an individual's life via by Justification and Sanctification).
This is Jesus paying the price for the sins of the entire world so as to offer mankind the free gift of salvation (if they so choose to accept it); Note: Christ's resurrection (to give us a new body not tainted by sin one day), and the ascension to the Father (after Christ telling Mary not to touch Him), and his entering the holy temple by his blood (to be our Heavenly High Priest) is also included in the Provisional Atonement, too. (For Provisional Atonement verses, see: John 1:29, 1 John 2:2, 1 Timothy 2:6, 2 Corinthians 5:19, Romans 5:6-8.).

#2. Justification (Initial Salvation, and or Foundational Salvation).
(The 1st synergistic work of GOD done in a believer).
Justification is the entrance gate to salvation, and it is the foundation of our salvation (by faith) upon which we stand. Justification is believing the gospel (Which is the power of God unto salvation to everyone who believes it - Romans 1:16). According to 1 Corinthians 15:1-4: The gospel is you believing that Jesus Christ died for your sins, He was buried, and He had risen again three days later for your salvation (Note: Do not let anyone sell you on another gospel besides this one). Depending on a person’s access or exposure to the Word: Justification will also generally include receiving Jesus as your Savior (John 1:12), and calling upon the name of the Lord (i.e. confessing with your mouth the words: “Lord Jesus” or similar equivalent - Romans 10:9) as a part of seeking forgiveness of your sins with Him by way of prayer (Romans 10:13) (Luke 15:18-21) (Luke 18:9-14). This process of salvation is without the deeds of the Law or works because it is based upon God’s mercy and grace and His redemptive work. As a result: One is born again spiritually (Note: Born again by the Spirit, and born again by water (i.e. the Scriptures - Romans 10:17, 1 Peter 1:23)). A person is foundationally or ultimately saved by God’s grace because if they happen to sin on rare occasion in their Christian walk, they do not do a good work to absolve that sin, but they confess of their sins to Jesus in order to be forgiven of that sin (1 John 1:9) (1 John 2:1) (Hebrews 4:16) (For Justification verses, see: Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 4:1-6, Titus 3:4-7, 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, Luke 18:9-14, Romans 5:1-2).

#3. Sanctification (The Next Step or Phase in the Salvation Process).
(The 2nd synergistic work of God done in a believer).
Sanctification is the next step or phase in Salvation for a believer who lives out their faith; This is the work of God moving in a believer's life so as to help them to live holy, and to do good works and to put away the lusts of the flesh. These good works are the works of God done through the believer, and so all boasting or praise is given to the Lord. Therefore, there is no boasting in one's own work because they are ultimately the works of God done through the believer. A believer today who obeys the Lord looks to the commands of Jesus and His followers within the New Testament primarily. For believers today are not under the 613 Laws of Moses as a whole package deal (even though certain laws have carried over into the New Testament). Basically all ceremonial laws and judicial laws in the Old Testament no longer apply. For example: Believers do not have to keep the Saturday Sabbath, circumcision, dietary laws, animal sacrifices, holy days, etc.; However, believers must keep God's Moral Laws like: Do not murder, do not steal, do not covet, do not lie, do commit adultery, etc.; Two of the greatest commands that we should focus on daily is to love God and love our neighbor which is more fully described in Mark 12:29-31. We need to worship or adore the Lord our God, preach the gospel, help the poor, love the brethren, love our enemies, and live holy lives, etc. (For Sanctification verses, see: James 2:24, James 2:17-18, Titus 1:16, Hebrews 5:9, 2 Thessalonians 2:13, Hebrews 12:14, Romans 8:1 (KJV), 1 Corinthians 16:22, Romans 8:13, etc.).

#4. Glorification (The Future Salvation of the Truly Faithful Believer).
(A 100% Work of God alone that can only be applied personally to an individual's life via by Justification and Sanctification).
Glorification is when God takes the believer home to be with Him in His kingdom and He gives Him a new resurrected body that is not tainted by sin. This process of salvation (in being taken home) is a by product automatically for those believers who properly applied Justification and Sanctification to their lives (For Glorification verses, see: 1 Peter 5:4, 1 Peter 1:4, 1 Corinthians 15:51-57, 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17, Romans 13:11, Philippians 3:20-21, Hebrews 9:28).


Conclusion:

Justification, and then Sanctification is what we as believers need to be focused on. For if we are justified, and sanctified (which is only made possible by the Provisional Atonement), then we will be glorified.

Many today confuse these different aspects of salvation. They try to oversimplify Scripture to their own understanding. Some try to make salvation all about works with little to no grace, and others try to make salvation all about grace and they can be lazy unfruitful servants and or live like the devil on some level.

Salvation is in having a healthy balance between God's grace, and Sanctification. It's not all one or the other.

The Lord Jesus has provided a way of escape through Him in both His grace, and His Sanctification.

Bible Highlighter said:

@5thKingdom

First, go back to the Garden of Eden.

Click to expand...

But of course that is a STRAWMAN argument because
Adam and Eve were not born spiritually DEAD.

Can you show ONE VERSE in the Bible where someone
OTHER than Adam and Eve had eternal life and lost it?

Jim

.