At What Point Do You Think You Are Truly Saved?

[zoidar]

Ephesians 2:8-9 is just a tiny piece of the message. Ephesians 2:8-9 doesn’t include Jesus’ message in John 15:1-10 that we must abide in Him does it? Or His message in Luke 13:6-9 that every tree that doesn’t bear fruit will be cut down. Yeah Luther had a good idea and a just cause for rebelling against the Roman Church. Unfortunately his theology was not correct. So far everyone who claims that a person cannot lose their salvation has failed to explain how John 15:6 can be possible. I mean Jesus said that this will happen and reformed advocates seem to skip over this verse and others.

I think Luther taught we CAN lose salvation. At least the Lutherans I know hold this view.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Reconciled does in fact indicate salvation.

In fact, this is just your opinion.

2 Cor 5:19 - that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation.

And this followed v.14,15
14 For Christ’s love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died.
15And he died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again.

So, go ahead and argue that only the "elect" died, from v.14.

I think you make your own interpretations of scripture because few if any would agree with this assertion.

It is obvious that you do that.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Here's the trade-off. If Christ died for all, and most are lost, he must not have paid for sin at all. It must come back to only those who are saved. Either he paid only for their sins only, or they saved themselves through self-righteous works the others did not perform.

This is just so off base! There is no 'trade-off'.

Calvinists wrongly think that it is Christ's death that saves people. But the Bible NEVER says that. It does say that salvation is by believing in Christ.

Why is it that Calvinists seem unable to understand this?

 

[RickReads]

In fact, this is just your opinion.

2 Cor 5:19 - that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation.

And this followed v.14,15
14 For Christ’s love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died.
15And he died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again.

So, go ahead and argue that only the "elect" died, from v.14.


It is obvious that you do that.

Unproductive. Ignored.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Unproductive. Ignored.

Yep. That's the common tactic of those who have no answers. Just ignore.

 

[RickReads]

This is just so off base! There is no 'trade-off'.

Calvinists wrongly think that it is Christ's death that saves people. But the Bible NEVER says that. It does say that salvation is by believing in Christ.

Why is it that Calvinists seem unable to understand this?

Says, the guy who doesn`t know what reconciled means.

 

[RickReads]

Yep. That's the common tactic of those who have no answers. Just ignore.

The post didn`t contain any questions. You really don`t know what you`re talking about.

 

[Studyman]

The core issue is free will. The council of Ephesus condemned Pelagianism (free will) as heresy in 431. Most churches today believe this heresy along with the Catholics. Possibly you too?

I find no difference between any of the religious franchises of the land I was born into. They all seem to have their own version of the Levitical Priesthood with their shrines of worship and images of God in the likeness of man. They are all religious business, just and the Mainstream God of Abraham preachers of Jesus’ time turned God’s Word into business.
Jesus gave no such directives to His Apostles.

The temple is in our mind. Jesus tells us how to pray and warns about religious men who come in His name.

We are told to “be separate” as the early church separated themselves from the mainstream religions of their time.

it wasn’t easy for them, and there is a cost for doing so today. Jesus said so.

So “No”, I don’t believe free will is heresy. And I think men should “Beware they are not spoiled by the religious philosophy of men”.

 

[Studyman]

This is just so off base! There is no 'trade-off'.

Calvinists wrongly think that it is Christ's death that saves people. But the Bible NEVER says that. It does say that salvation is by believing in Christ.

Why is it that Calvinists seem unable to understand this?

Yes, it says “we are saved by His Life” which gave His offering value.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Says, the guy who doesn`t know what reconciled means.

So, what have you proved lately?

 

[zoidar]

Ephesians 2:8-9 is just a tiny piece of the message. Ephesians 2:8-9 doesn’t include Jesus’ message in John 15:1-10 that we must abide in Him does it? Or His message in Luke 13:6-9 that every tree that doesn’t bear fruit will be cut down. Yeah Luther had a good idea and a just cause for rebelling against the Roman Church. Unfortunately his theology was not correct. So far everyone who claims that a person cannot lose their salvation has failed to explain how John 15:6 can be possible. I mean Jesus said that this will happen and reformed advocates seem to skip over this verse and others.

"Martin Luther (1483–1546)

Like Augustine, Martin Luther believed that salvation or "regeneration occurred through the waters of baptism."[121] "But," noted the Reformer, "all of us do not remain with our baptism. Many fall away from Christ and become false Christians." In his commentary on 2 Peter 2:22 he writes as follows on apostates in the Church: "Through baptism these people threw out unbelief, had their unclean way of life washed away, and entered into a pure life of faith and love. Now they fall away into unbelief and their own works, and they soil themselves again in filth."[122]

Luther held that even if one has experienced the justifying grace of God through faith in Christ, they still "can lose that justification through unbelief or false confidence in works."[123] In his comments on Galatians 5:4, "Ye are fallen from grace," Luther writes, "To fall from grace means to lose the atonement, the forgiveness of sins, the righteousness, liberty, and life which Jesus has merited for us by His death and resurrection. To lose the grace of God means to gain the wrath and judgment of God, death, the bondage of the devil, and everlasting condemnation."[124]

Martin Luther shared with Augustine, Aquinas, and "the Roman Catholic Church of his day the belief that the grace of baptismal regeneration and justification could be lost."[123]

Apostasy in Christianity - Wikipedia

 

[BNR32FAN]

Then explain Iconology, Purgatorial sanctification, veneration of statues, the whole Marianist mess, the falsehood the a priest can absolve for SIN, and many other clearly NON-Biblical beliefs shared to some degree among Catholics. You Decry "Paganism" until you re-shape into your own tradition, and start to serve it.

Can you be more specific about the problem with Iconology? Purgatory is a Roman Catholic belief rejected by the Orthodox Church. Now the Orthodox Church does believe that it could be possible that a purging of our sinful nature may take place but they reject the notion that any sins would need to be paid for in the afterlife. Veneration of statues again is a Roman Catholic thing. The Orthodox Church told them to remove the artwork before the schism. Now the beliefs pertaining to Mary aren’t near as bad in the Orthodox Church as they are in the Roman Church. The Orthodox Church does not teach that Mary never sinned they believe that she had been cleansed of her sins before Christ’s incarnation. They do however teach Mary’s perpetual virginity, a belief that I have chosen to remain neutral on because I can see evidence supporting both sides of the argument but I don’t see anything conclusive so I prefer to not hold to any belief on the subject. To be honest it’s really none of mine or anyone else’s business in my opinion. As for priests being able to absolve sin I don’t have a problem with that. The apostles were given the authority to forgave sins in John 20:23. So why wouldn’t a priest be able to do the same? What does any of this have to do with paganism? What false god or idol are they promoting worship to?

 

[BNR32FAN]

Nope, the HOLY SPIRIT is the life of the CHurch, and HE's been around all through the catastrophic foolishness that the visible church went through, and God has always drawn people to CHrist - IN SPITE of the visible church, and more recently more because of it. Martin Luther was God's PROHET to the Roman Catholic Church in a time when the Roman Catholic system had essentially forgotten what Christianity was even all about with their pagan teachings, and worthless rituals. The Visible church has been rebuilding line upon line, and precept ever since. The Charismatic outpouring of the '70s was the latest "Season of Refreshing", that brought MANY Roman Catholics into real salvation.

Martin Luther was a servant of God no doubt but he was not a prophet otherwise his theology would be in line with all scripture not just some of it.

 

[BNR32FAN]

The "Orthodox Denominations" have always been closer to genuine Biblical teaching, and haven't followed ROme's pagan excesses. but the Orthodox still cover up the utter simplicity of the gospel with layers of tradition, and ceremonial fluff.

I won’t dispute that. They do have their traditions that personally I don’t believe are necessary and unfortunately I do still disagree about some things pertaining to the Eucharist but hey I could be wrong. Maybe there is some truth to what they believe about the Eucharist. I don’t believe the bread of life discourse had anything to do with bread and wine. It was about receiving Him within us. Jesus said anyone who eats my flesh and drinks my blood will have eternal life. Last time I read the accounts of the Last Supper Judas received the Eucharist and it didn’t do him any good. I think this is evidence that the bread of life discourse is figurative not literal.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Says both of them to my knowledge.

The bishop of Rome held a position of primacy in honor not authority. That was the dispute.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I explained it to you. You just won`t accept the truth.

Which post? Maybe I missed it?

 

[Noxot]

Are you saved when you're
Called
Called and Chosen
Called, Chosen and Faithful

Some believe once saved always saved, with some scripture to suggest this. Some believe they can lose salvation, with some scripture to suggests this. I do not wish to argue, debate over this, just your thoughts on the above question, whichever side you're on.



Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him

We no longer look to be served. We look to serve and give our lives for others. No longer fight for privilege, influence and status. We esteem others better than ourselves and put their interests above our own.

Peace be with all those in the body of Christ

I was saved when God created me. The only hope I ever had was he.

 

[RickReads]

The bishop of Rome held a position of primacy in honor not authority. That was the dispute.

Not held, holds. The only thing in dispute is the Pope's authority over the EO. His primacy in honor is already acknowledged by them. I`m talking about today not 1000 years ago.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Not held, holds. The only thing in dispute is the Pope's authority over the EO. His primacy in honor is already acknowledged by them. I`m talking about today not 1000 years ago.

I find it hard to believe that the EOC holds the pope in highest honor among the patriarchates while at the some time not in communion with him.

 

[RickReads]

I find it hard to believe that the EOC holds the pope in highest honor among the patriarchates while at the some time not in communion with him.

They are talking about an eventual reunification. What you find hard to believe does not change the facts of this world.