Can "salvation", be "forfeit"?

[Ormly]

You can start here.

Again, I will not approach Scripture with a preconception that Scripture itself contradicts, which is precisely what you advocate. You may be comfortable with reading the Bible through the dark shades of anthropocentric philosophy, but I am not.

Once justified, surely glorified. NOBODY is able to snatch them from His grasp.

What you talking about???

 

[heymikey80]

What He will do often is make him willing to be willing.

A refusal to consider what you just said. You just said God forces someone's will to will differently. To make someone -- to compel someone to will differently is directing their wills against their wills.

I said no such thing. Is this going to be about lying now??? Putting words into someone’s mouth to make them say contradictory things???

You said "make him willing".

I didn't put the word in your mouth. You did.

If you need someone to explain what it means by God ordering a man's steps, yer in bigger trouble than I thought. If you are that slow in your understanding what more I can add won’t help your situation.

Bait & switch. Returning to the question, was it that you didn't mean God made people willing or no? If you mean something different, describe what's different. But I wouldn't accuse someone of lying for this. You said it. I'm surprised by your inconsistency. I've said so.

 

[Ormly]

You said "make him willing".

I didn't put the word in your mouth. You did.

Bait & switch. Returning to the question, was it that you didn't mean God made people willing or no? If you mean something different, describe what's different. But I wouldn't accuse someone of lying for this. You said it. I'm surprised by your inconsistency. I've said so.

Fair enough. Poor choice of words on my part.
Ever hear of God ordering one's steps as in setting up circumstances? Man has a choice in such matters. He can either turn to God, as David did, or turn away from God. Either way, God did would He could to move man. That is why David is said to be a man after God's own heart. David chose God.

 

[heymikey80]

Fair enough. Poor choice of words on my part.
Ever hear of God ordering one's steps as in setting up circumstances? Man has a choice in such matters. He can either turn to God, as David did, or turn away from God. Either way, God did would He could to move man. That is why David is said to be a man after God's own heart. David chose God.

Paul disagrees.

So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires. You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?" Rom 9:18-19

​

Paul doesn't answer this by saying, "Oh, well, you resist His will." Nothing of the sort.

On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? Rom 9:20-21
​

It doesn't appear Paul is answering consistently with your view.

 

[nobdysfool]

God "would do what he could" to move man? God moves man. End of story. Man's will does not over-ride God's Will. God orders mans steps in such a way that he will certainly choose as God Wills. Or do you think that God must wait to see what man will do?

 

[Ormly]

Paul disagrees

So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires. You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?" Rom 9:18-19​

Paul doesn't answer this by saying, "Oh, well, you resist His will." Nothing of the sort.

On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? Rom 9:20-21​

It doesn't appear Paul is answering consistently with your view.

Out of context, you can make it read anyway you like. Knock yourself out.


Unsubscribe me Mods. I'm done.

 

[heymikey80]

You may unsubscribe from any thread by simply checking it off and choosing "unsubscribe" from the combobox at the bottom.

Out of context, you can make it read anyway you like. Knock yourself out.

Thank you, but I like to read Paul in context.

That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants. Rom 9:8

And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles. Rom 9:23-24
​

The focus of the passage is on who are God's children, God's vessels of mercy for glory. He's said who. He's said it's individual persons. He's said what these things do and do not depend on.

So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. Rom 9:16
​

 

[sawdust]

There are many who accept the idea of "backslidden-SAVED". Obviously I don't. If we are not "under the Spirit's control", then we are goats, and not sheep.

As you see it, we are goats but the word doesn't see it that way. Let's go back to the Laodiceans. You asked me earlier "am I sure they are saved". My answer? Yes, 100% sure Why?

1. Christ calls them the church. When Christ spoke to the "goats" in Matthew 7:23 He says "I never knew you". Does Christ not know His own body?
2. He loves them with a brotherly love. To be brothers you have to have the same father. God loves unbelievers with an "agape" love but never a "phileo" love. Agape love is dependant on the one doing the loving. It is a love that comes from the virtue of the lover. Phileo love is a love based on the object of one's love. It means there is some virtue in the object for loving. In the case of the Laodiceans, it is not their current behaviour that is the virtue but their position as sons of God.
3. It is what is not there in the passage. Christ instructs them to buy "gold, eye salve and clothes". If they were unbelievers He would instruct them in the Gospel (the Gospel is the power unto salvation) not instruct them to purchse those things that accompany salvation.

There are other reasons I believe they are saved but those are the top three.

"SHALL we not much rather BE subject to the (discipline of) Father of spirits, and live?" Is there any way that "live", doesn't mean "eternally"?

I explained what the writer meant by "living". The problem with the recipients of the Hebrew letter is not that they don't have salvation but that they are refusing to grow up in the salvation they have been giving. Eternal life is knowing God. (Jn.17:3) These people know God. They have the basic doctines regarding Christ (see Heb.6:1&2). What they are refusing is to know more of God. In other words the writer is encouraging them to not refuse God's teaching about Himself and grow up into the full knowledge of God not just a partial knowledge. This can only happen within the confines (control) of the filling of the Spirit. If a believer is not living the new life (the spiritual life) that God has given him then it will be impossible for them to know more of God. It is the Holy Spirit who makes known to us the things of God.

How can one be "Christian", and refuse God's word?

Like I explained before. If what I am telling you is the truth and you refuse to believe it? You are refusing the word of God. God's word is truth. One of us is refusing the truth or it might be both of us are wrong and both of us are refusing the truth. The truth is more than the Gospel. It is the whole counsel of God covering every area of one's life for both time and eternity. The Gospel is what saves us and the rest of God's counsel teaches us how to live in that salvation and the blessings we have if we do and the discipline we can expect if we don't.

But "humbling", is a choice; James and Peter both say so...

I never said it wasn't. One of the doctrines of scripture is the "Law of Volitional Responsibility". In a nutshell it is "what a man sows, he reaps". But unlike what one poster tried to suggest, man's volition never has ultimate dominance over God's will. There is at least one thing that both believers and unbelievers share and that is the end of time. (and I don't just mean the very end) Every person gets one life to live in time then it ends. When it ends there are no more choices of an "either/or" nature. You will do God's will in toto or you are not in His Kingdom. It is no shame to a believer who has learnt to do His will in this lifetime but to the one who has only learnt to do God's will in part, they will know shame (briefly) at the evaluation seat of Christ as their error is burnt up and destroyed. This is not a private evaluation. All his brethen is present. Yet because he aligned his will with God's will on at least one occasion (he believed in Christ), his shame has an ending. The unbeliever, on the other hand, has not even done this much. His shame is eternal and the source of his torment.

Most people refuse to humble themselves before God. That's why there are so few believers...
Publicly, the world accepts (and encourages) such refusal. If a "believer" refuses to listen to God, and continues to refuse, he/she isn't a believer.

If they are a believer then they haven't refused to listen to God. They have, at the very least, listened to His word of first importance, the Gospel of Jesus Christ and hence are saved. What is no guarantee is that they will continue to listen to the whole counsel of God.

There is no such thing as "sinningly-saved", or "backslidden-saved", or "not-following-God-SAVED"

Yes there is, King Saul was one. Started well, stuffed up. Went from bad to worse till he took his own life. Yet Samuel told him that he (Saul) would be with Samuel after death. So unless you think Samuel wasn't in Paradise .... ????

peace

 

[savedbygrace57]

Anyoen who believes a person can loose their salvation, makes manifest that they are trusting in themselves..

 

[NorrinRadd]

Are there any verses in Scripture that present truly saved people, becoming unsaved?

Well, 1 Cor. 6:9, Gal. 5:21, Eph. 5:5 certainly seem to have been written as warnings to "believers."

Gal. 5:4 speaks of those who have "fallen from grace" and been "severed from Christ." The most straightforward way to interpret that is they "were" in a state of grace, but "now" are NOT so; they "were" joined to Christ, but "now" are NOT.

Heb. 6:6 alludes to the possibility that some might fall away, and the impossibility of their ever again being renewed.


It may not be "provable," but that does seem to be the most normal way to interpret several passages.

 

[Ormly]

You may unsubscribe from any thread by simply checking it off and choosing "unsubscribe" from the combobox at the bottom.


Thank you, but I like to read Paul in context.

That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants. Rom 9:8​

And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles. Rom 9:23-24​

The focus of the passage is on who are God's children, God's vessels of mercy for glory. He's said who. He's said it's individual persons. He's said what these things do and do not depend on.

So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. Rom 9:16​

More lack of understanding! Do not be conceited, but fear; for if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will He spare you. Romans 11:20-21 (NASB77)

Put that into context.

 

[AndOne]

Heb. 6:6 alludes to the possibility that some might fall away, and the impossibility of their ever again being renewed.

So in light of this passage (Hebrew 6:4-6 actually) what do you do with the person who has fallen away then? You don't try to restore them do you? Because it is crystal clear here that they have no hope at returning.

Again - we're back to the biggest hang-up that responsible-gracers have - that it is impossible for the fallen away to return in light of this passage.

 

[nobdysfool]

So in light of this passage (Hebrew 6:4-6 actually) what do you do with the person who has fallen away then? You don't try to restore them do you? Because it is crystal clear here that they have no hope at returning.

Again - we're back to the biggest hang-up that responsible-gracers have - that it is impossible for the fallen away to return in light of this passage.

And since Ben has defined losing salvation as practicing sin, i.e. doing the same sin twice or more without repentance after each time, there is no hope for anyone.

We're all.....DOOMED!

 

[Ormly]

So in light of this passage (Hebrew 6:4-6 actually) what do you do with the person who has fallen away then? You don't try to restore them do you? Because it is crystal clear here that they have no hope at returning.

Again - we're back to the biggest hang-up that responsible-gracers have - that it is impossible for the fallen away to return in light of this passage.

Yeah, but you refuse to see that that passage isn't addressed to the one who has only repeated the sinners prayer.

 

[Ormly]

And since Ben has defined losing salvation as practicing sin, i.e. doing the same sin twice or more without repentance after each time, there is no hope for anyone.

We're all.....DOOMED!

No, you all just don't know where you stand. . . . as in experiencing fatalism.

 

[nobdysfool]

No, you all just don't know where you stand. . . . as in experiencing fatalism.

I guess you have no sense of humor. I was poking fun at the conclusions some people come to. I don't have to be serious all the time.

I know where I stand, even if you don't think I do. I'm glad I don't have to answer to you about it.

 

[heymikey80]

More lack of understanding! Do not be conceited, but fear; for if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will He spare you. Romans 11:20-21 (NASB77)

Put that into context.

In this context Paul is talking to new converts from the nations, who were not Jewish.

That's two chapters after the context we're discussing. It's well out of the context of Romans 9, and it doesn't describe the election of either group of people -- as its own context points out that God's election will change this whole situation.

 

[squint]

So in light of this passage (Hebrew 6:4-6 actually) what do you do with the person who has fallen away then? You don't try to restore them do you? Because it is crystal clear here that they have no hope at returning.

Again - we're back to the biggest hang-up that responsible-gracers have - that it is impossible for the fallen away to return in light of this passage.

You make an EXCELLENT observation there Behe's Boy.

NOW if we saw these same ones as being ENSLAVED by the power of SIN indwelling them, that POWER is now FAR GREATER just by exposure to THE WORD.

I mean after all, wherever the Word is sown, SATAN comes to steal Word/Spirit from the heart. Believers often fall back into VICTIMIZATION after they have once believed. And most don't even know what they are victims of...it's called the SIN of unbelief.

Paul so very rightly called the sin indwelling himself NO LONGER I. He disassociated that working from being HIMSELF...

When we see then the SIN of UNBELIEF it is an implanting of THE DEVIL...who seeks to KEEP his victims. That particular sin is a very rough rascal. You see them often on the heretic boards, and at many christian message boards. They are actually some of our best critics. If one wants to hone their evangelizing skills, fallen believers are a good candidate because when speaking to those people, you ARE in fact speaking directly to a working of SATAN upon that VICTIM.

 

[squint]

Because apart from God, there is no other place.

That statement says no such thing as you impose upon it.

Your view of "sinful men having their SINS cast into Hell, but they'll waltz into Heaven", is beyond the scope of this thread. Would it be all right if we started a new thread?

Try not to misrepresent my understanding. The SIN INDWELLING is OF THE DEVIL...so NO, it's not just a bunch of past actions, but an ACTIVE PRESENCE of the DEVIL that IS in everyone...because those who sin ARE OF THE DEVIL.

 

[moonbeam]

Unsubscribe me Mods. I'm done.

You speak with fork tongue....old indian saying.