Saved by faith alone

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Site Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,508
7,861
...
✟1,194,203.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
From reading this thread and other things happening in the past couple of days, I would say that one thing God is stressing to me is that of love. A person can have all the faith in the world, or have all the works in the world and neither will save if they have not love. But neither can love alone of our own imagining save, either. We need to love in the way God desires us to love. The love of God is what makes our own heart melt in wanting to serve Him out of love. This is not some greasy grace love whereby a person can sin and still be saved, but a love that involves faithfulness (that stems from trust like all loving relationships should have).
 
Upvote 0

zoidar

loves Jesus the Christ! ✝️
Site Supporter
Sep 18, 2010
7,218
2,617
✟885,748.00
Country
Sweden
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
We would not be able to have a discussion on Soteriology if we cannot say which way is the right way and which way is the wrong way. Not all roads lead to salvation. Not everyone preaches the same Jesus, or the same gospel.

I don't hold anything against that, as I stated.

Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.” (2 John 1:9-11).

You know John talks against Gnosticism ...
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Site Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,508
7,861
...
✟1,194,203.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I don't hold anything against that, as I stated.

Not sure you understood what I meant based upon what you said previously. But that's okay. It's not worth making a fuss over it.

You said:
You know John talks against Gnosticism ...

You said it's not a matter of theology. Theology is simply the study of the things of God. We learn doctrines or teachings in Theology. So I just proven by Scripture to you that what you said (before) was not in line with Scripture.
 
Upvote 0

Daryn

Member
Jul 21, 2020
7
0
59
Auckland
✟15,907.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
W


Where does it say all men are saved?

It only says that Jesus if the savior of all men. Meaning.. all men can be saved.
Why would God say that Yeshua is the savior of all men if he was not.
Just a few scriptures to seek Gods wisdom on. GOd be with you.
Gen 3:24
Malachi 3:2-3
Hebrews 12:29
John 6:44
Mark 9:49
1Tim 2:3-6
1Tm 4:9-10
1 Corinthians 3:15
Revelation 1:14-16
Colossians 1:15-20
John 1:29
1 John 2:2
Romans 6:10
2 Corinthians 5:15
Romans 5:6
John 4:42
1 John 4:14
1 Timothy 4:9-11
Luke 19:9-10
John 12:32-33
1 Corinthians 15:22-23
1 Timothy 2:3-6
Ephesians 1:9-10
Isaiah 25:7-8
Isaiah 45:22
Psalm 98:1-3
Psalm 22:27-29
Romans 5:8, 10
Psalm 66:3-4
Psalm 110:1
Hebrews 10:12-13
Hebrews 10:14-17
Matthew 5:43-44
Isaiah 45:25
Romans 5:18-19
Hebrews 12:29
Revelation 1:14-16
 
Upvote 0

zoidar

loves Jesus the Christ! ✝️
Site Supporter
Sep 18, 2010
7,218
2,617
✟885,748.00
Country
Sweden
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
You said it's not a matter of theology. Theology is simply the study of the things of God. We learn doctrines or teachings in Theology. So I just proven by Scripture to you that what you said (before) was not in line with Scripture.

I meant Christian theology.
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Site Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,508
7,861
...
✟1,194,203.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I meant Christian theology.

Believers are called Christians.
So any Bible based Theology today would be Christian in nature.
But yes; I understand that you may be referring to Theology as taught by beliefs of other Christian groups you may not agree with. Theology is not something we exclusively learn by just reading a Theology book alone, but it involves studying God's Word along with prayer in asking God for the meaning behind what His Word says.
 
Upvote 0

Danthemailman

Well-Known Member
Jul 18, 2017
3,702
2,813
Midwest
✟304,980.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The word “practice” in 1 John 3:9 appears in the corrupt Modern Translations, and not the trusted King James Bible. The word “commit” is more accurate.

commit
com·mit
Use commit in a sentence

6. to make known the opinions or views of: to commit oneself on an issue​

Source:
Commit dictionary definition | commit defined
So you promote KJV onlyism and sinless perfection? That would explain a lot about you, as you remain on your high horse. Greek scholar AT Robertson explains in 1 John 3:9 - Doeth no sin (amartian ou poiei). Linear present active indicative as in verse John 4 like amartanei in verse John 8 . The child of God does not have the habit of sin. His seed (sperma autou). God's seed, "the divine principle of life" (Vincent). Cf. John 1. And he cannot sin (kai ou dunatai amartanein). This is a wrong translation, for this English naturally means "and he cannot commit sin" as if it were kai ou dunatai amartein or amarthsai (second aorist or first aorist active infinitive). The present active infinitive amartanein can only mean "and he cannot go on sinning," as is true of amartanei in verse John 8 and amartanwn in verse John 6. For the aorist subjunctive to commit a sin see amarthte and amarth in John 2:1. A great deal of false theology has grown out of a misunderstanding of the tense of amartanein here. Paul has precisely John's idea in Romans 6:1 epimenwmen th amartiai (shall we continue in sin, present active linear subjunctive) in contrast with amarthswmen in Romans 6:15 (shall we commit a sin, first aorist active subjunctive).

Wuest on practices - Poieo (is) in the present tense which always speaks of continuous action unless the context limits it to punctiliar action, namely, the mere mention of the fact of the action, without the mentioning of details. The translation reads, “Every one who has been born out of God, with the present result that he is a born-one (of God), does not habitually do sin.”

MacDonald feels that John "is contrasting the regenerate man with the unregenerate, and is speaking of constant or habitual behavior. The believer does not have the sin habit. He does not defiantly continue in sin."

Henry Mahan - He that is regenerated by the Spirit of God, in whom Christ is formed, who is a new creature in Christ, does not make sin his practice and course of his life. He is not without the motions of sin within, nor free from thoughts, words and deeds of sin in his life, but he does not give himself up to sin, excuse it, nor continue in it as a servant of sin. God’s nature and the grace of the Spirit abide in him and he cannot practice a life of sin; he is born of God! A life of sin is distasteful to him who pants after holiness and desire to be like Christ.

He cannot sin (dunamai = able) (hamartano = sin). Note that both verbs are in the [resent tense which speaks of the general direction of one's life. As discussed above, believers can and do still commit individual acts of sin, but John is not describing our occasional sins, as abhorrent as those are! Nor is he describing sinless perfection as some have falsely interpreted it (1 John 1:8 and 1 John 1:10) both negate "perfectionism").

1 John 3:9 (AMP) - No one who is born of God [deliberately, knowingly, and habitually] practices sin, because God’s seed [His principle of life, the essence of His righteous character] remains [permanently] in him [who is born again—who is reborn from above—spiritually transformed, renewed, and set apart for His purpose]; and he [who is born again] cannot habitually [live a life characterized by] sin, because he is born of God and longs to please Him.

One is not truly viewing sin in the proper way and thus, justifying sin becomes inevitable. Doing good works is not really necessary. Living holy is not really necessary. Not putting away grievous sin that the Bible condemns is not really necessary. Keeping God's commands is not really necessary. Sure, one may say they strive to do things or they do imperfectly, but if one has not made a commitment to stop lying, or lusting, etc. then one is opened a gateway to those sins. For when one opens the door for sin a little bit, it leads to justifying that same sin as being even bigger.
Typical straw man argument from someone who views themselves as "holier than thou."

1 John 1:9 says if we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 1 John 1:9 does not say that if we confess our sins we are restored fellowship with the Lord (even though our forgiveness by God has never been in jeopardy).
Notice that - If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (vs. 9) is IN CONTRAST TO - If we say that we have no sin, (present tense) we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us (vs. 8) and - If we say that we have not sinned, (past tense) we make him a liar, and his word is not in us (vs. 10).

Certain people seem to misunderstand verse 9 to mean that we "must confess each and every sin that we commit as we commit them" (keep a specific inventory) as an "additional requirement" to "remain cleansed" and "if we forget a sin we are toast!" Believers speak the same/acknowledge/agree with God's perspective about their sins and have a settled recognition and acknowledgment that one is a sinner in need of cleansing and forgiveness. Those who believe they live a sinless, without fault or defect, flawless, absolute perfect life 100% of the time (exactly as Jesus lived) are suffering from a terminal case of self righteousness. (1 John 1:8-10)

In other words, 1 John 3:6, and 1 John 3:9 is in view of justifying sin (i.e. thinking they can sin and still be saved) in light of the gnostic belief already previously warned about in 1 John 1:8, and 1 John 1:10. For its the context.
This remains your continued straw man argument. You seem to self righteously believe that abstaining from all sin is what's going to keep you saved. 1 John 1:8 is in the present tense and says otherwise. It's not about justifying a sinful lifestyle or sinless perfection. Now whoever is without sin altogether let him cast the first stone. Are you dropping your stone or throwing it?
 
Upvote 0

Danthemailman

Well-Known Member
Jul 18, 2017
3,702
2,813
Midwest
✟304,980.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
This is the contradictory flaw within Belief Alone-ism. It's not consistent.
So now you are attacking salvation through believing in Jesus (John 3:15,16,18; Acts 10:43; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 4:5-6) apart from works? What is so consistent about type 2 works salvation? So how many works does it take to "keep" you saved?

#1 On the one hand: One says that they do not practice sin as a way of life or lifestyle.

#2. On the second or other hand: One contradicts themself and says, that one is not sinless (meaning, they will sin again as a matter of fact), and that they are not at risk of ever losing salvation when they do sin; Thereby setting up a pattern of lifestyle of justifying in sinning on occasion as a future way of life. For many in Belief Alone-ism have told me that they will not stop sinning this side of Heaven.​

Who gets to decide the line drawn between a lifestyle of sin, vs. a lifestyle of occasional sinning or infrequent sinning (or in sinning a little less as a way of life)? Both are ways of life or a lifestyle of sin.
So according to your argument, ONLY those who live a sinless, perfect life 100% of the time will be saved. Have you arrived? Your argument is with 1 John 1:8-10 and 1 John 3:9 and not with me.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Danthemailman

Well-Known Member
Jul 18, 2017
3,702
2,813
Midwest
✟304,980.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Nah

No friend, according to you saved people practice murder and rape. You already gave the example of David as having committed murder (and adultery by the way).
David did not "practice" murder, rape and adultery. It was a one time deal that David repented of. The Bible does not say that David continued in murder, rape or adultery as his willful, habitual lifestyle.

Now, how many murders and rapes can the "truly saved" person commit? How about two? How about three? How many murders and rapes can he commit before you will say that he is practicing sin and thus was "never really saved in the first place?"
To "practice" describes one's lifestyle or bent of life. No repentance, just bring it on.

No. Some repent, others do not. Some endure to the end, some do not.
Genuine, born again Christians repent when they backslide. Those who never repent demonstrate they were not genuine believers.

Of course not. When I sin, I repent for it. If I do not repent for it, then I do not receive forgiveness for it. And that is why the Bible teaches that Christians should confess and repent for their sins. You see how that works?
So you are one of those I was referring to in post #551 who believes that you "must confess each and every specific sin that you commit as you commit them" (keep a specific inventory) as an "additional requirement" to "remain cleansed" and "if we forget a sin we are toast!" *Notice that - If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (vs. 9) is IN CONTRAST TO - If we say that we have no sin, (present tense) we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us (vs. 8) and - If we say that we have not sinned, (past tense) we make him a liar, and his word is not in us (vs. 10).

Believers speak the same/acknowledge/agree with God's perspective about their sins and have a settled recognition and acknowledgment that one is a sinner in need of cleansing and forgiveness.

You wrote that "we don't infallibly know everyone who truly is one of His saints. Some may look like the real deal for a while (like Judas Iscariot) but in the end turn out to be a devil." How do you know that you are a "genuine believer" as opposed to someone who has fooled himself into thinking that he is a "genuine believer" if we cannot infallibly know who is and who is not a saint? Or is that we don't know in the case of everyone except you?
Believers can know they have eternal life. (1 John 5:13) Prior to my conversion several years ago while still attending the Roman Catholic church, I had absolutely NO assurance of salvation because I was trusting in works for salvation. The day that I finally placed my faith (belief, trust, reliance) in Jesus Christ alone for salvation, I knew without a doubt that I had become born again. I don't worry about thinking I'm fooled into thinking I'm a genuine believer, but am not. I know without a doubt that I am a genuine believer. Praise God! :)

What, you are really arguing that "cut off" applies only to "non-elect branches" who are grafted into Christ? First, the text does not state anything about "non-elect branches". You just made that up. Second, the text states that "you" will be cut off, and St. Paul states that this same "you" "stands fast through faith." St. Paul does not write anything about non-elect branches who merely profess faith, or who have a spurious faith, but that they "stand fast through faith". "Stand fast" indicates a strong faith, not merely a professed faith or a weak faith. So your whole argument goes out the window.
My argument doesn't go out the window and you seem very naive to the fact that in any group of professing believers, it's not hard to find make believers. Did Judas Iscariot remain in the vine? (John 15:2-6) or was he cut off? Was Judas Iscariot a genuine believer or an imposter? Just because letters in the NT are addressed to "believers" does not mean that everyone in a group of professing believers is a genuine believer.

Example: Hebrews 4:1 - Therefore, since a promise remains of entering His rest, let us fear lest any of you seem to have come short of it. 2 For indeed the gospel was preached to US as well as to THEM; but the word which THEY heard did not profit THEM, not being mixed with faith in those who heard it. 3 For we who have believed do enter that rest..

1 John 2 is addressed to, "My little children" (believers) yet in 1 John 2:19, we read - They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.

So "you" in Romans 11 is addressed to believers, yet that does not mean that everyone in the group must be a genuine believer. We see this all throughout scripture. Those who do not continue and are cut off demonstrate they are not genuine believers. One more example:

Hebrews 3:14 - For we have become [past tense Gk. verb, gegonamen, meaning we have become already] partakers of Christ, (demonstrative evidence) if we hold fast the beginning of our confidence steadfast to the end. Notice that this is essentially a repeat of verse 6, where we have read: but Christ was faithful as a Son over His house - whose house we are, (demonstrative evidence) if we hold fast our confidence and the boast of our hope firm until the end. The wording is not - "and you will become partakers of Christ (future indicative) if you (future indicative) hold fast." It is rather - "you have been, and now are, partakers of Christ, (demonstrative evidence) if in the future you hold fast."

The point is that not all of these Hebrews have become partakers in their promised Messiah and the only ones in the end who will be identified as truly born again Hebrew Christians who are partakers of Christ, will have been those who have held fast to the end. What about those faltering Hebrews who depart from God, yet begin with loud confidence and profession of loyalty. But later? Future perseverance is proof of genuine conversion. Jude 1:5 - Though you already know all this, I want to remind you that the Lord at one time delivered his people out of Egypt, but later destroyed those who did not believe.

No, it is very much about being a robot, because you argue that a person who is "truly saved" has no option to reject our Lord.
If we are truly born of God and are new creations in Christ, then why would we want to permanently reject our Lord? Makes no sense.

He does not have a will that is free to continue to accept Christ, or to reject him. He cannot make a choice to reject our Lord. He is a puppet.
Rejecting Christ is unfathomable to me and I don't feel like a puppet.

As for me relying more on self-preservation, far from it. It is God, by way of the Holy Spirit working in our lives, that gives us the strength to perservere.
I like that!

But we can reject God's promptings because we are not robots. And we do in fact reject His promptings every time that we sin, because the Holy Spirit does not prompt us to do evil.
It's one thing to stumble, fall and rise again, yet it's another thing to permanently reject Christ.

Thus, the New Testament has so many warnings to Christians about enduring to the end, continuing to run the race, not falling into unbelief and grave sin. All of these warnings are superfluous if the "truly saved" person is in fact actually incapable of falling.
These warnings are not superfluous because it's not hard to find make believers mixed in with genuine believers. If "truly saved" people can truly lose their salvation, then these promises are superfluous. (Psalm 37:28; John 5:24; 6:37, 39; 10:27-29; Romans 8:30; 2 Corinthians 1:21-22; Ephesians 1:13-14; Philippians 1:6; 1 Peter 1:5; Jude 1:1, 24 etc..). BTW I'm still looking for the specific words, "lost salvation" in the Bible.

Proverbs 24:16 - For a righteous man may fall seven times and rise again, But the wicked shall fall by calamity.
 
Upvote 0

zoidar

loves Jesus the Christ! ✝️
Site Supporter
Sep 18, 2010
7,218
2,617
✟885,748.00
Country
Sweden
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Believers are called Christians.
So any Bible based Theology today would be Christian in nature.
But yes; I understand that you may be referring to Theology as taught by beliefs of other Christian groups you may not agree with. Theology is not something we exclusively learn by just reading a Theology book alone, but it involves studying God's Word along with prayer in asking God for the meaning behind what His Word says.

Not saying it is wrong, on the opposite a good thing, but does the NT say we are to study the word along with prayer?
 
Upvote 0

Swag365

Well-Known Member
Dec 25, 2019
1,352
481
USA
✟50,429.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
David did not "practice" murder, rape and adultery. It was a one time deal that David repented of. The Bible does not say that David continued in murder, rape or adultery as his willful, habitual lifestyle.

To "practice" describes one's lifestyle or bent of life. No repentance, just bring it on.

Genuine, born again Christians repent when they backslide. Those who never repent demonstrate they were not genuine believers.

So you are one of those I was referring to in post #551 who believes that you "must confess each and every specific sin that you commit as you commit them" (keep a specific inventory) as an "additional requirement" to "remain cleansed" and "if we forget a sin we are toast!" *Notice that - If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (vs. 9) is IN CONTRAST TO - If we say that we have no sin, (present tense) we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us (vs. 8) and - If we say that we have not sinned, (past tense) we make him a liar, and his word is not in us (vs. 10).

Believers speak the same/acknowledge/agree with God's perspective about their sins and have a settled recognition and acknowledgment that one is a sinner in need of cleansing and forgiveness.

Believers can know they have eternal life. (1 John 5:13) Prior to my conversion several years ago while still attending the Roman Catholic church, I had absolutely NO assurance of salvation because I was trusting in works for salvation. The day that I finally placed my faith (belief, trust, reliance) in Jesus Christ alone for salvation, I knew without a doubt that I had become born again. I don't worry about thinking I'm fooled into thinking I'm a genuine believer, but am not. I know without a doubt that I am a genuine believer. Praise God! :)

My argument doesn't go out the window and you seem very naive to the fact that in any group of professing believers, it's not hard to find make believers. Did Judas Iscariot remain in the vine? (John 15:2-6) or was he cut off? Was Judas Iscariot a genuine believer or an imposter? Just because letters in the NT are addressed to "believers" does not mean that everyone in a group of professing believers is a genuine believer.

Example: Hebrews 4:1 - Therefore, since a promise remains of entering His rest, let us fear lest any of you seem to have come short of it. 2 For indeed the gospel was preached to US as well as to THEM; but the word which THEY heard did not profit THEM, not being mixed with faith in those who heard it. 3 For we who have believed do enter that rest..

1 John 2 is addressed to, "My little children" (believers) yet in 1 John 2:19, we read - They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.

So "you" in Romans 11 is addressed to believers, yet that does not mean that everyone in the group must be a genuine believer. We see this all throughout scripture. Those who do not continue and are cut off demonstrate they are not genuine believers. One more example:

Hebrews 3:14 - For we have become [past tense Gk. verb, gegonamen, meaning we have become already] partakers of Christ, (demonstrative evidence) if we hold fast the beginning of our confidence steadfast to the end. Notice that this is essentially a repeat of verse 6, where we have read: but Christ was faithful as a Son over His house - whose house we are, (demonstrative evidence) if we hold fast our confidence and the boast of our hope firm until the end. The wording is not - "and you will become partakers of Christ (future indicative) if you (future indicative) hold fast." It is rather - "you have been, and now are, partakers of Christ, (demonstrative evidence) if in the future you hold fast."

The point is that not all of these Hebrews have become partakers in their promised Messiah and the only ones in the end who will be identified as truly born again Hebrew Christians who are partakers of Christ, will have been those who have held fast to the end. What about those faltering Hebrews who depart from God, yet begin with loud confidence and profession of loyalty. But later? Future perseverance is proof of genuine conversion. Jude 1:5 - Though you already know all this, I want to remind you that the Lord at one time delivered his people out of Egypt, but later destroyed those who did not believe.

If we are truly born of God and are new creations in Christ, then why would we want to permanently reject our Lord? Makes no sense.

Rejecting Christ is unfathomable to me and I don't feel like a puppet.

I like that!

It's one thing to stumble, fall and rise again, yet it's another thing to permanently reject Christ.

These warnings are not superfluous because it's not hard to find make believers mixed in with genuine believers. If "truly saved" people can truly lose their salvation, then these promises are superfluous. (Psalm 37:28; John 5:24; 6:37, 39; 10:27-29; Romans 8:30; 2 Corinthians 1:21-22; Ephesians 1:13-14; Philippians 1:6; 1 Peter 1:5; Jude 1:1, 24 etc..). BTW I'm still looking for the specific words, "lost salvation" in the Bible.

Proverbs 24:16 - For a righteous man may fall seven times and rise again, But the wicked shall fall by calamity.
Well for Romans 11, I still don't think your argument works because the text indicates that those "who will be cut off" had previously "stood fast in faith." Your position is that those who were grafted in and "stood fast in faith" were "believers" but not "genuine believers". But the phrase "stand fast" indicates strength, not weakness (I looked it up in the dictionary to confirm). First you stress how you "rely only on Christ for your salvation through faith," then you turn right around and state that someone who "stands fast in faith" is not a "genuine believer" and is not saved. To me, your interpretation seems like a case of special pleading. Most Protestants would always say that a person who has a strong faith in our Lord is saved. But here you are taking the opposite position because that interpretation would conflict with OSAS.

You also seem to argue that within the "you" there is a subset of "genuine believers" and "fake believers" and that the warning that "you" will be cut off applies only to the "fake believers" among the "you". I think that is a weak argument because the text itself does not indicate that there are different classes within the "you" that need to differentiated with respect to the teaching that follows. You don't get the different classes from the text itself, but from other Scripture and appeals to logic. Second, even if we assume for the sake of argument that the "you" applies to a collective including "true believers" and "fake believers", there is nothing in the text that indicates that "cut off" applies only to the subset of "fake believers" as opposed to all members of the collective. If St. Paul wrote "you must put your trust in our Lord Jesus Christ to be saved" nobody would come along and say that the "you" only applies to a subset A among a collective that includes subsets A and B. We would conclude that the "you" applies to A and B, unless the text explicitly indicates otherwise, which it does not. Again, your interpretation seems like a case of special pleading.

As for assurance - a lot of people know without a doubt that they are born again (in the sense that you use the phrase "born again"). Rejecting our Lord is unfathomable to a lot of people. Then a few years later the same people are sleeping with hookers or atheists. I guess you can always say that these folks were "never really born again in the first place." But if you, me, or anyone else falls into that, folks will be right here on the forum saying that we were never truly saved. It seems to be a bit too convenient.

As for "relying on works" for salvation I guess it depends on what you mean by that. If it means that a Christian cannot rape and murder without repenting and expect to be saved, then I suppose we are guilty as charged. But I don't think that is really all that extreme of a position to take given the various warnings in the Bible. At a high level I think we view certain sins as a complete turning away and rejection of God, and in particular his Lordship over our lives. If somebody rapes an infant, he basically has to turn his back on God to do such a thing. You would probably say that a person becoming a "new creation" in Christ means that he is incapable of doing such a thing and was therefore never really saved, but I would say that the "new creation" retains free will, and needs to continually make a choice to follow our Lord each day. The Holy Spirit acts within him so that he can make that choice. In a sense he only needs to accept the promptings of the Holy Spirit, but he still has a choice to make every day as to whether to accept or reject it.

There is probably a lot we could agree on even though we won't agree on OSAS.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Site Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,508
7,861
...
✟1,194,203.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Not saying it is wrong, on the opposite a good thing, but does the NT say we are to study the word along with prayer?

Indeed. Do you know the verses offhand (Note: Check them out below)? The Word has to be on the inside of you, otherwise you are going to speak against the Word by preaching “Faith Alone” when the Bible clearly does not teach that (James 2:24). For remember the parable of the sower? Yes, I know it is referring primarily receiving the gospel message, but I believe it also applies to other things that are important to the faith that are written about in God's Word, as well. The sower is Jesus (Matthew 13:37). The seed is the communicated Word of God (Luke 8:11), and the person who did not receive the Word into their heart, the enemy came and took that word out of their heart before it could be sown (Matthew 13:19). Meaning, if we do not receive God's Word or believe what is written in certain parts of our Bible, we do not understand these parts of the Bible as they were intended, and thus as a result, we can in time speak against these verses.

Side Note:

Verses I was referring to in my conversation above:

2 Timothy 2:15 in the KJV says,
“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15).

Jeremiah 33:3 KJV,
“Call unto me, and I will answer thee, and shew thee great and mighty things, which thou knowest not.”

1 John 2:27 KJV,
“But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.”
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Site Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,508
7,861
...
✟1,194,203.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
So you promote KJV onlyism

So you promote OAO (Original Autograph Only-ism)?
This belief is not biblical; In fact, it is the majority (wide gate) view. Here at CF, I provided 30 reasons in Scripture to be in defense of the KJV as the pure Word of God.

30 Reasons why the KJV is the Divine and Pure Word of God for Today (Update: KJVO Posters Only)

You said:
and sinless perfection?

Sinless Perfection is not a salvation issue because not all sins are the same. There are grievous sins (mortal sins) and sins that do not lead unto spiritual death. Sinless Perfection is putting away even those sins that do not lead unto spiritual death. I believe a Christian can be saved even if they have not put away flaws in their character (like their ability to not listen well always). For Paul did not listen well to God when he decided to ignore the warnings of the Spirit in going to Jerusalem. Paul was not condemned when he went to Jerusalem (against the Spirit's warnings via by other believers). Anyways, I cannot discuss this topic at great length because it is not permitted in this section of the forums. If you are interested in learning more of what the Bible says on this topic, check out this thread here.

You said:
That would explain a lot about you, as you remain on your high horse. Greek scholar AT Robertson explains in 1 John 3:9 - Doeth no sin (amartian ou poiei). Linear present active indicative as in verse John 4 like amartanei in verse John 8 . The child of God does not have the habit of sin. His seed (sperma autou). God's seed, "the divine principle of life" (Vincent). Cf. John 1. And he cannot sin (kai ou dunatai amartanein). This is a wrong translation, for this English naturally means "and he cannot commit sin" as if it were kai ou dunatai amartein or amarthsai (second aorist or first aorist active infinitive). The present active infinitive amartanein can only mean "and he cannot go on sinning," as is true of amartanei in verse John 8 and amartanwn in verse John 6. For the aorist subjunctive to commit a sin see amarthte and amarth in John 2:1. A great deal of false theology has grown out of a misunderstanding of the tense of amartanein here. Paul has precisely John's idea in Romans 6:1 epimenwmen th amartiai (shall we continue in sin, present active linear subjunctive) in contrast with amarthswmen in Romans 6:15 (shall we commit a sin, first aorist active subjunctive).

Sounds confusing and it does not align with a simple and plain reading of the Bible. I already made my case with the Bible on this point. No use rehashing this point.

You said:
Wuest on practices - Poieo (is) in the present tense which always speaks of continuous action unless the context limits it to punctiliar action, namely, the mere mention of the fact of the action, without the mentioning of details. The translation reads, “Every one who has been born out of God, with the present result that he is a born-one (of God), does not habitually do sin.”

MacDonald feels that John "is contrasting the regenerate man with the unregenerate, and is speaking of constant or habitual behavior. The believer does not have the sin habit. He does not defiantly continue in sin."

Henry Mahan - He that is regenerated by the Spirit of God, in whom Christ is formed, who is a new creature in Christ, does not make sin his practice and course of his life. He is not without the motions of sin within, nor free from thoughts, words and deeds of sin in his life, but he does not give himself up to sin, excuse it, nor continue in it as a servant of sin. God’s nature and the grace of the Spirit abide in him and he cannot practice a life of sin; he is born of God! A life of sin is distasteful to him who pants after holiness and desire to be like Christ.

He cannot sin (dunamai = able) (hamartano = sin). Note that both verbs are in the [resent tense which speaks of the general direction of one's life. As discussed above, believers can and do still commit individual acts of sin, but John is not describing our occasional sins, as abhorrent as those are! Nor is he describing sinless perfection as some have falsely interpreted it (1 John 1:8 and 1 John 1:10) both negate "perfectionism").

1 John 3:9 (AMP) - No one who is born of God [deliberately, knowingly, and habitually] practices sin, because God’s seed [His principle of life, the essence of His righteous character] remains [permanently] in him [who is born again—who is reborn from above—spiritually transformed, renewed, and set apart for His purpose]; and he [who is born again] cannot habitually [live a life characterized by] sin, because he is born of God and longs to please Him.

Typical straw man argument from someone who views themselves as "holier than thou."

Notice that - If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (vs. 9) is IN CONTRAST TO - If we say that we have no sin, (present tense) we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us (vs. 8) and - If we say that we have not sinned, (past tense) we make him a liar, and his word is not in us (vs. 10).

The word of God is not taught in the wisdom of men (1 Corinthians 2:13), but by the anointing of the Spirit (1 John 2:27). I would encourage you to just read God's Word plainly and believe it and ask God for the understanding on it instead of trying to fight with those parts of God's Word that you don't like.

As for 1 John 1:8 and 1 John 1:10:

In reality:

#1. 1 John 1:10 is in reference to a person saying they have never sinned in the PAST tense. Obviously this is not referring to you and me. So this is a gnostic belief that John was warning the brethren about (1 John 2:26). It's a denial that a person has never sinned in the past. So it's a denial of sin's existence.

#2. 1 John 1:8 is similar to 1 John 1:10 but it is speaking in the present tense. It's a denial of the existence of sin in the present. Meaning, when a person sins physically, they think sin is an illusion or non-existent. Christian Scientists believe this way. So 1 John 1:8 would be a warning to them. 1 John 1:9 would be the spiritual medical prescription in dealing with their sin. They would confess of their sins to Jesus to be forgiven of sin. But Eternal Security proponents think 1 John 1:9 is just dealing with a loss of fellowship and not salvation (When that it is clearly not the case according to 1 John 1:7, 1 John 2:3-4, 1 John 3:10, 1 John 3:15).

You said:
Certain people seem to misunderstand verse 9 to mean that we "must confess each and every sin that we commit as we commit them" (keep a specific inventory) as an "additional requirement" to "remain cleansed" and "if we forget a sin we are toast!"

You cannot confess of sin if it is already forgiven. Therein lies the problem in your belief. John is clearly referring to salvation in context here (1 John 1:7).

You said:
Now whoever is without sin altogether let him cast the first stone. Are you dropping your stone or throwing it?

This is another obviously illogical belief in the Belief Alone Camp I have seen crop up every once in a while. You can't judge, and they then quote things like Matthew 7:1. Obviously they do not understand that Jesus is referring to hypocritical judgment in context (Matthew 7:2-3). Even Jesus Himself said we can judge righteous judgement (John 7:24). What Jesus was referring to in John 8:7 was Old Testament punishment that is no longer in effect within the New Testament. Believers are to turn the other cheek, and to love and pray and do good towards their enemies. This does not mean they cannot preach against sin, and or to live holy as Scripture plainly teaches. There is a difference between putting to death a person for all time, vs. preaching righteousness. Noah was a preacher of righteousness. I am sure a lot of people then did not believe him, either. The global flood is an example to all who should live ungodly today. See, the problem in your view is that it makes room for a little bit of ungodliness (When that is not what God's Word teaches). Sure, God understands that His followers can mess up honestly sometimes, but believers are to overcome grievous sin and fight and battle against sin and not justify it on any level. For a believer saying they will not stop sinning this side of Heaven is a justification to sin.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Site Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,508
7,861
...
✟1,194,203.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
So now you are attacking salvation through believing in Jesus (John 3:15,16,18; Acts 10:43; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 4:5-6) apart from works? What is so consistent about type 2 works salvation? So how many works does it take to "keep" you saved?

No. I am pointing out the inconsistency in your belief.
You either did not understand what I said, or you simply ignored it.
Again, Belief Alone-ism preaches a double message.

(a) This belief preaches that one does not live a gross lifestyle of sin
(Which appears to be for holiness).

(b) This belief contradicts itself and says that a person can sin and still be saved on a small level of some kind because it does not teach a loss of salvation via if a person sins. This belief teaches king David was saved when he committed his sins of adultery and murder. Just how many murders, or adulteries does it take before they are condemned? (Which means that this belief does not really teach holiness or holy living).​

The Bible teaches...

#1. Numbers 35:16-18 says it only takes one act of murder to be a murderer; And Leviticus 20:10 says it only takes one act of adultery to be an adulterer.

#2. Jesus Himself regarded just looking at a woman once as an act of adultery (Matthew 5:28).

#3. John says, "No murderer has eternal life abiding in them." (1 John 3:15).

#4. Proverbs 6:32 says "Whosoever commits adultery with a woman lacks understanding: he that does it destroys his own soul."

#5. Jesus Himself says that just looking at a woman in lust (Which is adultery) is potential for a person to be cast bodily in hell fire (See Matthew 5:28-30).

#6. David needed to confess of his sin in order to be forgiven (See Psalms 51).

#7. 1 John 1:9 says if we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

#8. Revelation 21:8 says, "But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone: which is the second death." Murderers and whoremongers will be cast into the lake of fire. All liars will be cast into the lake of fire. ALL liars, and not just some. NO murderer has eternal life abiding in them (1 John 3:15).​

Belief Alone-ism is contradictory because it appears to preach holiness, when in reality it simply doesn't. It makes room in justifying future sin as a way of life on some smaller level. For Belief Alone Proponents mantra is that they will not stop sinning this side of Heaven.

You said:
So according to your argument, ONLY those who live a sinless, perfect life 100% of the time will be saved. Have you arrived? Your argument is with 1 John 1:8-10 and 1 John 3:9 and not with me.

Believers need to overcome grievous sin or those sins that the Bible attaches with warnings of condemnation or hellfire (if such sins are not repented of; Note: repentance is seeking forgiveness with the Lord Jesus, and it is with the intention of never wanting to do it again). Belief Alone Proponents just pay empty lip service to restore fellowship and there is no real urgency or pouring out of one's soul in despair over one's sins like King David did in Psalms 51. For why pour out your soul and seek forgiveness in a broken state if one is already forgiven? It makes no sense. Obviously a person is desperate like King David to seek forgiveness with God to be truly forgiven (saved).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

zoidar

loves Jesus the Christ! ✝️
Site Supporter
Sep 18, 2010
7,218
2,617
✟885,748.00
Country
Sweden
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
So you promote OAO (Original Autograph Only-ism)?
This belief is not biblical; In fact, it is the majority (wide gate) view. Here at CF, I provided 30 reasons in Scripture to be in defense of the KJV as the pure Word of God.

30 Reasons why the KJV is the Divine and Pure Word of God for Today (Update: KJVO Posters Only)



Sinless Perfection is not a salvation issue because not all sins are the same. There are grievous sins (mortal sins) and sins that do not lead unto spiritual death. Sinless Perfection is putting away even those sins that do not lead unto spiritual death. I believe a Christian can be saved even if they have not put away flaws in their character (like their ability to not listen well always). For Paul did not listen well to God when he decided to ignore the warnings of the Spirit in going to Jerusalem. Paul was not condemned when he went to Jerusalem (against the Spirit's warnings via by other believers). Anyways, I cannot discuss this topic at great length because it is not permitted in this section of the forums. If you are interested in learning more of what the Bible says on this topic, check out this thread here.



Sounds confusing and it does not align with a simple and plain reading of the Bible. I already made my case with the Bible on this point. No use rehashing this point.



The word of God is not taught in the wisdom of men (1 Corinthians 2:13), but by the anointing of the Spirit (1 John 2:27). I would encourage you to just read God's Word plainly and believe it and ask God for the understanding on it instead of trying to fight with those parts of God's Word that you don't like.

As for 1 John 1:8 and 1 John 1:10:

In reality:

#1. 1 John 1:10 is in reference to a person saying they have never sinned in the PAST tense. Obviously this is not referring to you and me. So this is a gnostic belief that John was warning the brethren about (1 John 2:26). It's a denial that a person has never sinned in the past. So it's a denial of sin's existence.

#2. 1 John 1:8 is similar to 1 John 1:10 but it is speaking in the present tense. It's a denial of the existence of sin in the present. Meaning, when a person sins physically, they think sin is an illusion or non-existent. Christian Scientists believe this way. So 1 John 1:8 would be a warning to them. 1 John 1:9 would be the spiritual medical prescription in dealing with their sin. They would confess of their sins to Jesus to be forgiven of sin. But Eternal Security proponents think 1 John 1:9 is just dealing with a loss of fellowship and not salvation (When that it is clearly not the case according to 1 John 1:7, 1 John 2:3-4, 1 John 3:10, 1 John 3:15).



You cannot confess of sin if it is already forgiven. Therein lies the problem in your belief. John is clearly referring to salvation in context here (1 John 1:7).



This is another obviously illogical belief in the Belief Alone Camp I have seen crop up every once in a while. You can't judge, and they then quote things like Matthew 7:1. Obviously they do not understand that Jesus is referring to hypocritical judgment in context (Matthew 7:2-3). Even Jesus Himself said we can judge righteous judgement (John 7:24). What Jesus was referring to in John 8:7 was Old Testament punishment that is no longer in effect within the New Testament. Believers are to turn the other cheek, and to love and pray and do good towards their enemies. This does not mean they cannot preach against sin, and or to live holy as Scripture plainly teaches. There is a difference between putting to death a person for all time, vs. preaching righteousness. Noah was a preacher of righteousness. I am sure a lot of people then did not believe him, either. The global flood is an example to all who should live ungodly today. See, the problem in your view is that it makes room for a little bit of ungodliness (When that is not what God's Word teaches). Sure, God understands that His followers can mess up honestly sometimes, but believers are to overcome grievous sin and fight and battle against sin and not justify it on any level. For a believer saying they will not stop sinning this side of Heaven is a justification to sin.

The only 100% pure Word of God are the originals, that we don't have in full. A translation can never be 100% correct. There are not even words in English to cover all nuances.
 
  • Useful
Reactions: Danthemailman
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Site Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,508
7,861
...
✟1,194,203.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

zoidar

loves Jesus the Christ! ✝️
Site Supporter
Sep 18, 2010
7,218
2,617
✟885,748.00
Country
Sweden
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
  • Like
Reactions: Hammster
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Site Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,178
25,220
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,728,576.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
(b) This belief contradicts itself and says that a person can sin and still be saved on a small level of some kind because it does not teach a loss of salvation via if a person sins. This belief teaches king David was saved when he committed his sins of adultery and murder. Just how many murders, or adulteries does it take before they are condemned? (Which means that this belief does not really teach holiness or holy living).
In other words, this view teaches the gospel.
 
Upvote 0