Eternal Security, false doctrine or not?

Near

In Christ we rise
Dec 7, 2012
1,630
287
✟24,154.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I agree. If a person can pluck themselves from His hand then that would mean the claim "no man" would be false.
Ah, but we're not talking about people. Jesus was referring to sheep.
Sheep are not plucked out of God's hand.
How do you know you're a sheep and not a goat?
Some may ask themselves such a question as they find themselves in a dark room alone committing some secret sin.
 
Upvote 0

bling

Regular Member
Supporter
Feb 27, 2008
16,163
1,805
✟794,662.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Then I have to disagree with you.

How do you know you cannot “pluck” yourself out of somewhere? Mark 9:47 talks about plucking out your own eye.

The eyeball did not jump out of its socket and can’t. Christians have the gift of salvation which no one can take away and even God will not take it back. The individual Christians owns his own salvation, since a gift that is given becomes that person’s possession. If God was holding you back against your will He would be a kidnapper, so is that what you think God is?

I believe "no man" means exactly what it says "no man". That includes the person in His hands since they are part of man.

No man can take you away, kidnap you from God’s family, but like the prodigal son you can leave and God will allow you to leave, just as the Father allowed the prodigal son to leave.

So you don't believe other people can lead believers astray?

The person has to “allow” others to lead them astray, just as Eve had to allow Satan to tempt her, he said what she wanted to hear, she was to be busy help Adam, she did not cut the satan off to seek counseling from Adam and/or God.

No one who accepts a gift would consider it kidnapping or being held against there will.

Wait just a minute here: people accept the gift of USA citizenship and a life in the USA, yet give it up sometimes, if they could not give it up would they be held against their will?

Can you give an example of someone who would like to snatch us out of His hand.

Satan, demons, evil living people?

Individuals Christians, themselves get caught up in the perceived pleasures of sin for a season, to the point they no long desire being “Loved” in spite of what they have done and/or will do. People become so engrossed in being loved for the way they want others to perceive them to be and no longer want to humble themselves to the point of accepting pure charity (Godly type Love) and thus place no value on Godly Love so they will give it up.


Like I said, Esau's birthright wasn't a gift, it was a payment. I gift doesn't ask anything back in return.

“What?” Esau was gifted his birthright of the first born, by being the first born (nothing Esau did), but that does not mean Esau cannot sell or give away his birthright. I am not saying: “Esau gifted Jacob with his birthright”, but am just trying to show something that cannot be lost, stolen, taken back or earned can have the ownership transferred to another only by the individual himself, if that included some payment or not is insignificant since no payment is worth, Esau giving up his birthright, yet he gave it up for a bowl of soup. Satan will buy our birthright to heaven on the cheap any time.

So you don't belive you can get your salvation back if you lose it even if you repent?

Sin is not what takes your birthright to heaven away, but getting caught up in a sinful life to the point you no longer desire God’s Love after experiencing God’s Love, will cause you to fall away without a recovery path, because what else can be done, you have experienced God’s Love and no longer want Godly type Love.

No it doesn't, it talks about not giving up on doing good so we can reap a harvest . Not the same thing.

You’re giving up sowing good seed, which means at one time you did sow good seed and would have a harvest of eternal life, but now the you will not have eternal life. That giving up resulted in the loss of eternal life, so by giving up you are also giving up eternal life.

So you don't believe someone who repents like the prodigal son can get their salvation back if they walked away from it?

It is not just a wandering away like some lost sheep, but giving up what you knowing have experienced. The prodigal son prior to leaving never embraced the attitude of unconditional selfless Love, like a Christian does with conversion. The prodigal son from what he said to the father (virtually saying: “I wish you were dead so I could have my inheritance”) shows he choose not to Love the Father to begin with. Christians that “fall away” can be like the lost coin or lost sheep, but to be like the prodigal son you do not start out as a Christian, since the prodigal son does not love the father prior to leaving.
 
Upvote 0

MrMoe

Part-Time Breatharian
Sep 13, 2011
5,715
3,449
Moe's Tavern
✟142,883.00
Faith
Christian
The eyeball did not jump out of its socket and can’t.
Christians have the gift of salvation which no one can take away and even God will not take it back. The individual Christians owns his own salvation, since a gift that is given becomes that person’s possession. If God was holding you back against your will He would be a kidnapper, so is that what you think God is?

Your analogy doesn't work since you are describing two different things. A gift is something that you take possesion of, kidnapping is someone taking possession of you, so God cannot kidnap someone with a gift.

No man can take you away, kidnap you from God’s family, but like the prodigal son you can leave and God will allow you to leave, just as the Father allowed the prodigal son to leave.

So the prodical son lost his salvation?

The person has to “allow” others to lead them astray, just as Eve had to allow Satan to tempt her,

This is not true, you're adding motivation where there is none. Eve was decieved, the bible clearly states this.


he said what she wanted to hear, she was to be busy help Adam, she did not cut the satan off to seek counseling from Adam and/or God.

She was lied to, nowhere in Scripture does it show this is what she wanted to hear. You are adding motivations to Eve that the Scriptures do not show. If she knew she was being decived then by definition it wouldn't be deception.


Wait just a minute here: people accept the gift of USA citizenship and a life in the USA, yet give it up sometimes, if they could not give it up would they be held against their will?

We must have different definitions of what a gift is. A citizenship is something someone works to obtain, we do not work to obtain a gift.


Satan, demons, evil living people?

So how do you explain this verse?

hand this man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord. 1 Corinthians5:5

Individuals Christians, themselves get caught up in the perceived pleasures of sin for a season, to the point they no long desire being “Loved” in spite of what they have done and/or will do. People become so engrossed in being loved for the way they want others to perceive them to be and no longer want to humble themselves to the point of accepting pure charity (Godly type Love) and thus place no value on Godly Love so they will give it up.

Do you have actual proof of this?


“What?” Esau was gifted his birthright of the first born, by being the first born (nothing Esau did), but that does not mean Esau cannot sell or give away his birthright.

A birthright wasn't a gift, it was something given automatically to the firstborn of the family. Esau's gift is described in Genesis 32 and it's not his birthright.

I am not saying: “Esau gifted Jacob with his birthright”,

That's what I thought you were saying, sorry.

but am just trying to show something that cannot be lost, stolen, taken back or earned can have the ownership transferred to another only by the individual himself, if that included some payment or not is insignificant since no payment is worth, Esau giving up his birthright, yet he gave it up for a bowl of soup. Satan will buy our birthright to heaven on the cheap any time.

So if we give up our salvation can we get it back? Esau tried to get his birthright back but couldn't.

Afterward, as you know, when he wanted to inherit this blessing, he was rejected. Even though he sought the blessing with tears, he could not change what he had done. Hebrews 12:17


Sin is not what takes your birthright to heaven away, but getting caught up in a sinful life to the point you no longer desire God’s Love after experiencing God’s Love, will cause you to fall away without a recovery path, because what else can be done, you have experienced God’s Love and no longer want Godly type Love.

Again, do you have proof of this?

You’re giving up sowing good seed, which means at one time you did sow good seed and would have a harvest of eternal life, but now the you will not have eternal life. That giving up resulted in the loss of eternal life, so by giving up you are also giving up eternal life.


But that's not what the verse is talking about. It's talking about gaining not losing.


It is not just a wandering away like some lost sheep, but giving up what you knowing have experienced.

Is there any actual proof of this in the Scriptures? Some say Judas Iscariot was saved but lost it, but there is a good argument that says he was never saved in the first place.

The prodigal son prior to leaving never embraced the attitude of unconditional selfless Love, like a Christian does with conversion.

How do you know this? Sounds like you're adding motivations again. The son would have lived several years in his fathers house so how can you say he never embraced the attitude of unconditional selfless love?


The prodigal son from what he said to the father (virtually saying: “I wish you were dead so I could have my inheritance”) shows he choose not to Love the Father to begin with.

He never said anything close to that. All he said was "Father, give me my share of the estate." No proof that he never loved his Father.

Christians that “fall away” can be like the lost coin or lost sheep, but to be like the prodigal son you do not start out as a Christian, since the prodigal son does not love the father prior to leaving.

There in no proof that he didn't loved his Father prior to leaving.
 
Upvote 0

sculleywr

Orthodox Colitis Survivor
Jul 23, 2011
7,789
683
Starke, FL
✟22,569.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Others
The sheep and goats time is just ahead of the new earth.
It is not about the church nor the great tribulation.
It's the judgement of mankind. It's the criteria for who is saved and not. Eternal Security is not compatible with it.
 
Upvote 0

Oldmantook

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2017
3,633
1,526
64
USA
✟99,173.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Your question: What does it take for one to lose their salvation?
When one falls away because of unbelief - when one no longer believes. We like to quote Jn 3:16 as if it were in the past or present tense but "pisteuo" or "believes" is rendered in the present tense in the Greek so this verse more accurately reads "...so that everyone believing in Him should not perish, but should have eternal life. Christians must continue or go on believing in order to have eternal life. Believers who no longer believe and turn away from the faith lose their salvation.
In addition, Christians can lose their salvation through practicing sin; habitual sin. Rom 8:13 warns "For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live." Christians who live chronically disobedient lives and refuse to yield to the correction of the Spirit will experience spiritual death. Paul directs this warning to the brethren in v.12. This verse cannot refer to physical death because everyone dies physically, regardless of how we live our lives.

Eph 4:30?
Does being "sealed" logically necessitate an unbreakable seal? This verse in itself does not imply an unbreakable seal. After all, seals in the Bible are breakable or opened as in the seals depicted in Revelation. Seals in the Bible were made of wax and could be broken provided that the person opening the seal was authorized to do so. Pilate ordered that a seal be placed on the stone covering Jesus' tomb but that seal was broken at Jesus' resurrection. So we must look elsewhere for more context. In Eph 1:14 the Holy Spirit is given as a guarantee or pledge of our inheritance. Arrabon is the Greek word variously translated as pledge, deposit, guarantee, down payment. Therefore, the Holy Spirit is given as earnest money much in the same way that a down payment in made on a home mortgage. The deposit on the house is made but final ownership of the house is not completed until the last mortgage payment is made. If the mortgage payments are not completed, the purchase fails and the house is not possessed. Similarly, Eph 1:14 states that the Holy Spirit is given as a pledge toward our future redemption but being sealed by the Spirit does not in itself guarantee that our redemption will be completed. The Spirit is given to believers but this does not guarantee that believers will be faithful until the end, much like not being faithful in completing one's mortgage payments. That is why Eph 4:30 warns us to not grieve the Holy Spirit lest our redemption not be finalized.

Jn 10:28?
The promise and assurances of this verse are predicated upon the verse which precedes it. The promise of eternal life and not perishing is made only to those sheep who listen and follow the Shepherd in v.27. Conversely, those sheep/Christians who do not listen and follow cannot be said to have the assurances of v.28.

"...belief in Christ which is the only requirement listed in the entire bible?"
Belief is not the only requirement. We are fond of quoting Jn 3:16 in presenting the gospel message but omit Heb 5:9 - "And being made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him." We are to take the whole of Scripture into account so both belief and obedience are requisite for salvation.
 
Upvote 0

Oldmantook

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2017
3,633
1,526
64
USA
✟99,173.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Yes Eternal Security. It's implied by the gospel itself and stated explicitly in places. I've written an article on the subject at http://bcbsr.com/topics/etsec.html

I guess for the anti-eternal security Christians I would ask, What work must one do to lose their salvation. And doesn't that make salvation contingent upon works?
It is first of all necessary to distinguish between works of obedience to God which the Bible always commends versus works of the flesh and the Law which the scriptures condemn. If one works to earn one's salvation by relying on one's own strength and good works then of course salvation cannot be earned. Nor can salvation be gained by observing the OT Law.
I'm undecided on eternal security. Both sides make good points. So I'd like to ask a couple of questions.


For those who believe in eternal security how do you explain Matthew 13:18-23 ?


For those who don't believe in eternal security how do you explain 1 Corinthians 5:5 ?
1 Cor 5:5 refers to the sinning brother who had sexual relations with his father's wife. In this verse Paul wrote that he had decided to deliver this sinning brother to Satan for the destruction of his flesh in order that his spirit would be saved on the day of the Lord. The pertinent question is what does Paul mean by "destruction of the flesh?" Paul later elaborated on this when he penned his second follow-up letter to the Corinthian church. Note in 2 Cor 2, this chapter is devoted to some unspecified male whom Paul identifies as causing him and the entire church sorrow (v.5). That male person was punished by the Corinthian church (v.6). That person was made sorrowful for his sin and forgiven by the church (v.7); reaffirmed in love by the brethren (v.8).
It is plausible, if not likely that the person Paul references in 2 Cor 2 is the same person that had sinned in 1 Cor 5:5. Through the destruction or crucifying of this brother's flesh, this person was made sorrowful and repentant of his actions. The church then forgave and restored him. This process brought about restoration with the brethren and with God - the end result being "that his spirit would be saved on the day of the Lord." If on the other hand, this brother did not repent and was not reconciled with God then no eternal security to be had.
 
Upvote 0

Oldmantook

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2017
3,633
1,526
64
USA
✟99,173.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Yes Eternal Security. It's implied by the gospel itself and stated explicitly in places. I've written an article on the subject at http://bcbsr.com/topics/etsec.html

I guess for the anti-eternal security Christians I would ask, What work must one do to lose their salvation. And doesn't that make salvation contingent upon works?
Paul warns the Galatian brethren: "Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God" (Gal 5:19-21).
Works of disobedience (habitual sin) may cause one to lose his/her salvation.
 
Upvote 0

bcbsr

Newbie
Mar 17, 2003
4,085
2,318
Visit site
✟193,956.00
Faith
Christian
Paul warns the Galatian brethren: "Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God" (Gal 5:19-21).
Works of disobedience (habitual sin) may cause one to lose his/her salvation.

Doesn't occur in the case of those born of God, and thus such are eternally secure.

"Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God." 1John 3:9

"We know that anyone born of God does not continue to sin; the one who was born of God keeps him safe, and the evil one cannot harm him." 1John 5:18
 
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

Oldmantook

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2017
3,633
1,526
64
USA
✟99,173.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Doesn't occur in the case of those born of God, and thus such are eternally secure.

"Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God." 1John 3:9

"We know that anyone born of God does not continue to sin; the one who was born of God keeps him safe, and the evil one cannot harm him." 1John 5:18
One must ask if it "doesn't occur in the case of those born of God, why then would the apostle Paul direct his warning to the Galatian brethren? In v.21 Paul specifically wrote "I WARN YOU...." So if those sins don't apply to believers, why then would Paul even issue such a warning as that would be nonsensical. Thus I think your interpretation does not fit with the text itself.

You cited 1 Jn 3:9 and 1 Jn 5:18. I don't think you are implying that Christians don't/cannot sin because that directly contradicts what John already writes in 1 Jn 1:8,10 which states that if we claim we are without sin, we deceive ourselves and make God a liar. So the fact is, Christians do sin but the question remains why does 1 Jn 3:9 then say that believers "do not sin"? The answer is the translation you cited is a poor translation of this particular verse. 1 Jn 3:9 contains the words "poiei hamartian" more accurately translated as "practice of sinning." Thus this verse accurately reads: "No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God’s seed abides in him; and he cannot keep on sinning, because he has been born of God" (ESV). It does not mean those born of God do not sin at all. It does mean that Christians who continue to practice or engage in habitual sin, no longer have the assurance of being born of God. This fits perfectly with Gal 5:21 which I cited earlier that those who are do or practice such sins will not inherit the kingdom of God. Habitual sin not repented of disqualifies the believer from having eternal life - thus no eternal security.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
How exactly is Eternal Security Biblical?


Drinking and/or shooting heroin and/or wild sex orgies
are actions that indicate you are not communing with God.
You may stop at any time during or after these fun events
and God will be there for you at your asking.

God is the permanent part of the equation, you are the variable.
 
Upvote 0

bcbsr

Newbie
Mar 17, 2003
4,085
2,318
Visit site
✟193,956.00
Faith
Christian
One must ask if it "doesn't occur in the case of those born of God, why then would the apostle Paul direct his warning to the Galatian brethren? In v.21 Paul specifically wrote "I WARN YOU...." So if those sins don't apply to believers, why then would Paul even issue such a warning as that would be nonsensical. Thus I think your interpretation does not fit with the text itself.

You cited 1 Jn 3:9 and 1 Jn 5:18. I don't think you are implying that Christians don't/cannot sin because that directly contradicts what John already writes in 1 Jn 1:8,10 which states that if we claim we are without sin, we deceive ourselves and make God a liar. So the fact is, Christians do sin but the question remains why does 1 Jn 3:9 then say that believers "do not sin"? The answer is the translation you cited is a poor translation of this particular verse. 1 Jn 3:9 contains the words "poiei hamartian" more accurately translated as "practice of sinning." Thus this verse accurately reads: "No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God’s seed abides in him; and he cannot keep on sinning, because he has been born of God" (ESV). It does not mean those born of God do not sin at all. It does mean that Christians who continue to practice or engage in habitual sin, no longer have the assurance of being born of God. This fits perfectly with Gal 5:21 which I cited earlier that those who are do or practice such sins will not inherit the kingdom of God. Habitual sin not repented of disqualifies the believer from having eternal life - thus no eternal security.

Those who have been born of God don't characteristically sin, and so don't fit in the category of people you're referring to as not inheriting the kingdom of God, or whom you hypothetically claim lose their salvation. (Can't lose what you didn't have in the first place)

Both 1John 3:9 and 1John 5:18 use the perfect tense for "born of God", and thus anyone who has in the past been born of God never loses that state. Likewise in 1John 2:19 John uses the phrase "if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us" (later to be known as the doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints) as an indicator of whether such people had been saved to begin with, proving again - Once Saved, Always Saved, which many unbelievers reckon a doctrine of the Devil.

As for warnings, just like John, how does Paul know whether or not his audience has been born of God or whether they may be individuals who have not? "I am afraid for you, lest I have labored for you in vain." Gal 4:11 Yes, he's questioning whether the Galatians had come to faith, and likewise the Corinthians. "Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you— unless, of course, you fail the test?" 2Cor 13:5
 
Upvote 0

Oldmantook

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2017
3,633
1,526
64
USA
✟99,173.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Those who have been born of God don't characteristically sin, and so don't fit in the category of people you're referring to as not inheriting the kingdom of God, or whom you hypothetically claim lose their salvation. (Can't lose what you didn't have in the first place)
Both 1John 3:9 and 1John 5:18 use the perfect tense for "born of God", and thus anyone who has in the past been born of God never loses that state. Likewise in 1John 2:19 John uses the phrase "if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us" (later to be known as the doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints) as an indicator of whether such people had been saved to begin with, proving again - Once Saved, Always Saved, which many unbelievers reckon a doctrine of the Devil.

As for warnings, just like John, how does Paul know whether or not his audience has been born of God or whether they may be individuals who have not? "I am afraid for you, lest I have labored for you in vain." Gal 4:11 Yes, he's questioning whether the Galatians had come to faith, and likewise the Corinthians. "Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you— unless, of course, you fail the test?" 2Cor 13:5

We agree that those born of God don't characteristically sin - in other words those born of God occasionally sin but do not practice sinning; engage in habitual sin. However, you did not address my point of how can Paul not be addressing the brethren warning them of not practicing sin when he wrote "I warn you...." Clearly, Paul was not addressing those not born of God so I think your interpretation remains problematic. To claim that Paul did not know whether individuals in his audience were born again or not is questionable. The epistles were specifically written to the churches/brethren - not the unsaved. It is not like preaching a sermon to a congregation where one may or may not know who is saved and who is not because of a mixed audience. Instead, the letter writer has the prerogative of addressing a particular subject audience (brothers & sisters) to whom he is writing his intent. Your notion that Paul wondered whether the Galatians "had come to faith" is clearly not supported by the text. In Gal 4:5-6 he refers to the Galatians as adopted sons who know God, known by God (v.9). These terms are exclusively descriptive of regenerated believers so Paul is not questioning whether they had come to faith; rather they are already of the faith. In vs.9-10 Paul fears that these Galatian believers are seeking to be justified by observing the OT Law which is of no use. That is why in v.11 Paul fears for them and that he has labored in vain since they seek to return to the Mosaic Law which would make them apostates - thus he labored in vain.

The verses you cited in 1 John are indeed in the perfect tense which evidences that regenerate believers are referenced here. However those two verses do not say "anyone who has in the past been born of God never loses that state" as that is an overreaching conclusion. That is your conclusion which you have eisegeted from the texts. All these texts simply state is that no one born of God practices or continues in sin. And that is precisely the reason why Paul sternly warned the Galatian brethren against engaging in those specific sins/lifestyles because those [Christians/born of God] who choose practice such sins will not inherit the kingdom of God.

The notion that those who continue to sin were never true believers in the first place is a logical fallacy of bifurcation or false choice. While it is indeed true that "some" were never believers in the first place, it does not logically nor scripturally necessitate that "all" were never believers in the first place. The NT references those who apostatized from the faith. It is impossible to apostatize from the faith; to depart or fall away, if one never truly belonged to the faith to begin with. Only believers can apostatize or defect from the faith so to claim that those persons were never saved is logically impossible. In Jude v.12 it refers to those who are "twice dead." How is it possible for someone to be twice dead? According to Heb 9:27 we are destined to die once and after that to face judgment - so Jude 12 cannot be referring to physical death and must be referring to spiritual death. But then - how can someone spiritually die twice? The only way that someone can spiritually die twice is for a spiritually dead person (unsaved) to be made alive in Christ when he/she becomes a believer. This now saved person either subsequently renounces his/her faith or falls back into unrepented, habitual sin and is now spiritually dead AGAIN - in other words, twice dead. Therefore it is possible for a person to lose his/her salvation by dying twice.

Lastly, you quoted 2 Cor 13:5 which ironically advocates against OSAS instead of supporting it. You claim that in this verse Paul is questioning whether the Corinthians "had come to faith." Yet Paul specifically states in this verse that "Christ Jesus is in you" meaning that Paul definitely considered these Corinthians as true believers. BUT Paul adds a CAVEAT - "unless you fail the test." What test is that? "Fail the test" is translated from the Greek "adokimoi." So Christ is in these believers unless they adokimoi. Logic dictates that if they adokimoi/fail the test - then Christ is no longer in them. What test is that? Paul uses the same term "adokimos" to refer to himself in 1 Cor 9:27 where he describes himself as disciplining his body into subjection lest he become disqualified/adokimos. Thus, no doubt Paul was a believer but even Paul had to discipline his body and crucify his flesh in order to not be disqualified/fail the test. In other words, Paul had to sow to the Spirit and not to his flesh in order to not fail the test and for Christ to remain in him. This mitigates against OSAS and unconditional security.
 
Upvote 0

bcbsr

Newbie
Mar 17, 2003
4,085
2,318
Visit site
✟193,956.00
Faith
Christian
those [Christians/born of God] who choose practice such sins will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Thanks for sharing your hypotheses, though clearly you support a salvation by works soteriology. But just to point out the obvious note your statement above that those who have been born of God choose to practice sin in comparison with the following statement:

"Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God." 1John 3:9

So how is it that one who does not have the ability to practice sin due to the nature of regeneration then go on to practice sin as you allege?

And again 1John 2:19 "They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us."

It's not that the concept of Eternal Security is not clear in scripture, it's just that you can't believe it, just like salvation being apart from works is unbelievable to you.
 
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

sculleywr

Orthodox Colitis Survivor
Jul 23, 2011
7,789
683
Starke, FL
✟22,569.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Others
Thanks for sharing your hypotheses, though clearly you support a salvation by works soteriology. But just to point out the obvious note your statement above that those who have been born of God choose to practice sin in comparison with the following statement:

"Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God." 1John 3:9

So how is it that one who does not have the ability to practice sin due to the nature of regeneration then go on to practice sin as you allege?

And again 1John 2:19 "They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us."

It's not that the concept of Eternal Security is not clear in scripture, it's just that you can't believe it, just like salvation being apart from works is unbelievable to you.
Good to know that the Western world still thinks that using the gift of salvation is salvation by works.

While it is true that a person whose salvation is finished won't sin, those people are in heaven. You and I are not sinless.

And while it is true that works so not earn salvation, using salvation is a work. I was given a beard trimmer/hair trimmer for Christmas. Now, if I never charge it and use it, will I ever benefit from it? No. Does my charging it and trimming my beard with the trimmer take away from the fact that the trimmer was a free gift? Of course not. Does my washing my new jeans and shirt take away from them being a free gift? Of course not.

A person who never uses a gift will never benefit from it. The gift of salvation enables us to do works of good. But if we never use it, then we never benefit from it and will find ourselves without it in the end.
 
Upvote 0

Oldmantook

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2017
3,633
1,526
64
USA
✟99,173.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Thanks for sharing your hypotheses, though clearly you support a salvation by works soteriology. But just to point out the obvious note your statement above that those who have been born of God choose to practice sin in comparison with the following statement:

"Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God." 1John 3:9

So how is it that one who does not have the ability to practice sin due to the nature of regeneration then go on to practice sin as you allege?

And again 1John 2:19 "They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us."

It's not that the concept of Eternal Security is not clear in scripture, it's just that you can't believe it, just like salvation being apart from works is unbelievable to you.

I don't believe what share is my hypothesis. It is what the Bible teaches. Anyone is free to agree or disagree but if one disagrees then one must give a counterpoint to my responses. I don't think you have addressed any of my points in my previous post. How is it possible to be twice dead? Why did the Apostle Paul - arguably the greatest Christian example in the NT consider it possible for himself to be adokimos? Are you able to explain? Since we know that the scriptures do not contradict each other, it is incumbent upon you to reconcile my citations/arguments with your belief in order to hold on to your theology. If you are unable to, perhaps you may want to reconsider your Reformed view. I am also subject to error so if something doesn't fit with my theology then I have to reexamine my beliefs; after all we are fallible creatures.

Since you label my belief as salvation by works theology, can you point out anywhere in the entire OT or NT where works of obedience to God is ever condemned? As I wrote earlier, your error stems from conflating works of obedience to the Word/Spirit with works of the Law and works of the flesh or works done in our own strength, which the Bible condemns. The former is always commended while that latter are always condemned; yes? The NT writers never condemn works which prove faith and repentance. Js 2:24 states: "You see that a person is justified by works and NOT by faith alone." Faith and works go hand in hand. If one wants to know the true gospel message then one need only read Paul's own description of the gospel message he himself preached: "but declared first to those in Damascus and in Jerusalem, and throughout all the region of Judea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent, turn to God, and do WORKS befitting repentance" (Acts 26:20). According to your view, would you also accuse Paul of preaching a salvation by works theology?

I disagree with your claim that the nature of regeneration does not allow a believer to practice sin. Being regenerated does not exclude the possibility of practicing sin. A regenerated believer always has a choice to engage in sin or refrain from it as that is the nature of the battle between our old nature and new nature. Are you claiming that the nature of regeneration results in sinless perfection? That is not what 1 Jn 3:9 states. "No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, because God’s seed abides in him. He cannot keep on sinning (hamartanein | ἁμαρτάνειν | pres act inf), because he has been born of God." What this verse simply states is that Christian cannot persist in habitual, continual sin because he is born of God. You would claim that such persons who sin were never believers in the first place but this verse contradicts your belief as it refers to those "born of God" - not the unsaved.

1 Jn 2:19 does nothing to contradict my belief as I already wrote that it is indeed true that some were never saved in the first place. However, that in and of itself does not exclude the other possibility that believers can lose their salvation which is why I cited persons who are twice dead and Paul's acknowledgment that he is subject to adokimos. There are other scriptural examples I can cite to support my view but no sense in doing so if you don't engage with the examples I have already cited.
 
Upvote 0

bcbsr

Newbie
Mar 17, 2003
4,085
2,318
Visit site
✟193,956.00
Faith
Christian
Good to know that the Western world still thinks that using the gift of salvation is salvation by works.

While it is true that a person whose salvation is finished won't sin, those people are in heaven. You and I are not sinless.

And while it is true that works so not earn salvation, using salvation is a work. I was given a beard trimmer/hair trimmer for Christmas. Now, if I never charge it and use it, will I ever benefit from it? No. Does my charging it and trimming my beard with the trimmer take away from the fact that the trimmer was a free gift? Of course not. Does my washing my new jeans and shirt take away from them being a free gift? Of course not.

A person who never uses a gift will never benefit from it. The gift of salvation enables us to do works of good. But if we never use it, then we never benefit from it and will find ourselves without it in the end.

Salvation being loseable is inconsistent with the rhetoric the Bible utilizes. Salvation being loseable is to say a person's salvation status is not actually determined until the end, in which case one cannot say that a person "has been saved" (rhetoric the Bible uses), but merely that a person "has the possibility of being saved". In the scenario you present a person's "final" salvation, which is really the salvation we're talking about here - salvation from the wrath of God in hell fire - is, according to you, based upon a person's works. And thus you support a salvation by works soteriology, which is consistent with the Neo-Circumcision sect you identify with.
 
Upvote 0

sculleywr

Orthodox Colitis Survivor
Jul 23, 2011
7,789
683
Starke, FL
✟22,569.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Others
Salvation being loseable is inconsistent with the rhetoric the Bible utilizes. Salvation being loseable is to say a person's salvation status is not actually determined until the end, in which case one cannot say that a person "has been saved" (rhetoric the Bible uses), but merely that a person "has the possibility of being saved". In the scenario you present a person's "final" salvation, which is really the salvation we're talking about here - salvation from the wrath of God in hell fire - is, according to you, based upon a person's works. And thus you support a salvation by works soteriology, which is consistent with the Neo-Circumcision sect you identify with.
You mean the rhetoric of branches being removed from the vine? They can't be removed from the vine if they aren't truly in the vine. You cannot remove something that isn't in it. Scripture also uses the rhetoric that we "are being saved".

And no, I never said it is based on a person's work. You obviously didn't read what I wrote.

So, let me make this really big, because if you ever say I support a by works soteriology, I will simply call you a liar to your face:

I do not support a by works soteriology. Anyone who says I do after having been told this is a liar.
 
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

bcbsr

Newbie
Mar 17, 2003
4,085
2,318
Visit site
✟193,956.00
Faith
Christian
You mean the rhetoric of branches being removed from the vine? They can't be removed from the vine if they aren't truly in the vine. You cannot remove something that isn't in it. Scripture also uses the rhetoric that we "are being saved".

And no, I never said it is based on a person's work. You obviously didn't read what I wrote.

So, let me make this really big, because if you ever say I support a by works soteriology, I will simply call you a liar to your face:

I do not support a by works soteriology. Anyone who says I do after having been told this is a liar.

Well, let's see about that, you say, "if we never use it (the "gift" of salvation), then we never benefit from it and will find ourselves without it in the end."

So your claim is use it or lose it. If person doesn't do "works of salvation" as you say, then they lose salvation. So their retaining of their salvation status is contingent upon their works. Which is salvation by works. So you claiming that you don't support a works soteriology is simply a contradiction. You're lying to yourself, making yourself out to be the liar.
 
Upvote 0