Eternal Security

[DD2008]

I am teaching

Should you be?

 

[PrincetonGuy]

The Greek fathers did not misunderstand the Greek grammar. None of them taught salvation by works.

I am teaching that we are saved by grace through faith—but not a temporary faith, but a faith last lasts. Are you suggesting that continuing to believe in Christ is performing works, and therefore not necessary for our salvation?

 

[Hentenza]

I am teaching that we are saved by grace through faith—but not a temporary faith, but a faith last lasts. Are you suggesting that continuing to believe in Christ is performing works, and therefore not necessary for our salvation?

No, I certainly do not believe faith is a work but, with all due respect, you do not teach a salvation by grace through faith but one that relies on man to secure said salvation. If faith is God's work and there is nothing that I can do to earn it then there is nothing that I can do to loose it. I will never be good enough to keep or earn my salvation if I am saved by relying on myself. Grace can not be earned, it is freely given. I am assured in my salvation because God promised that I am saved by His grace through faith. I believe Him.

That is all that I am going to participate in this thread. Have a wonderful Christmas and may the Lord bless you and yours.

 

[DD2008]

you do not teach a salvation by grace through faith but one that relies on man to secure said salvation. If faith is God's work and there is nothing that I can do to earn it then there is nothing that I can do to loose it. I will never be good enough to keep or earn my salvation if I am saved by relying on myself. Grace can not be earned, it is freely given. I am assured in my salvation because God promised that I am saved by His grace through faith. I believe Him.

AMEN!!!

 

[ifightdwagons]

No, I certainly do not believe faith is a work but, with all due respect, you do not teach a salvation by grace through faith but one that relies on man to secure said salvation. If faith is God's work and there is nothing that I can do to earn it then there is nothing that I can do to loose it. I will never be good enough to keep or earn my salvation if I am saved by relying on myself. Grace can not be earned, it is freely given. I am assured in my salvation because God promised that I am saved by His grace through faith. I believe Him.

That is all that I am going to participate in this thread. Have a wonderful Christmas and may the Lord bless you and yours.

Paul said that his life is worth nothing. His only goal as a Saint was to do the task that was given to him, the testifying of the good news of Gods grace. He constantly warned the believers to not live as ungodly or they could fall from grace. Falling from grace is the same as losing your salvation. Meaning blasphemy against the holy spirit. Now you all may turn a blind eye to the letters to the churches in Revelations but it is quite obvious that one who is saved is written in the book of Life. However these people were threatened that the Lord will blot their names out of the book of life if they didn't stop what they were doing, repent, and do the first work. Meaning testifying the gospel that saved them. Every letter to the churches was not about sin in particular but rather about their faiths changing, even slightly. In Galatians 3 they are warned of falling from grace if they tried to be saved by their own human efforts, example circumcision. You can't fall from grace if you aren't in grace. Following the law to be saved is the same thing. Being baptized to be saved can fall into this category, as it is by faith as said in Acts 10:43-47. Hebrews 10 somewhere states that if we deliberately keep on sinning after receiving the knowledge of truth there only remains a judgment who will devour its adversaries. You all must realize also that Paul spoke of two different kinds of sin. The sin not leading to death and the sin leading to death. He said that all the weaknesses like regular sinning are the sins not to death. The sin to death, the loss of salvation, is leaving the gospel.

I used to go to a few Baptist churches because of my family, the asking for forgiveness, believing in the blood only, OSAS, stuff really is a turn off to the faith.

Does this negate what was said in the OPs scriptures? Not at all. But ignoring other scripture is far from being bible based.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

No, I certainly do not believe faith is a work but, with all due respect, you do not teach a salvation by grace through faith but one that relies on man to secure said salvation. If faith is God's work and there is nothing that I can do to earn it then there is nothing that I can do to loose it. I will never be good enough to keep or earn my salvation if I am saved by relying on myself. Grace can not be earned, it is freely given. I am assured in my salvation because God promised that I am saved by His grace through faith. I believe Him.

That is all that I am going to participate in this thread. Have a wonderful Christmas and may the Lord bless you and yours.

Faith is not God’s work. The death of Christ on the cross was God’s work, giving us the opportunity and the responsibility to believe what God has done for us.

Acts 16:25. But about midnight Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns of praise to God, and the prisoners were listening to them;
26. and suddenly there came a great earthquake, so that the foundations of the prison house were shaken; and immediately all the doors were opened and everyone’s chains were unfastened.
27. When the jailer awoke and saw the prison doors opened, he drew his sword and was about to kill himself, supposing that the prisoners had escaped.
28. But Paul cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Do not harm yourself, for we are all here!”
29. And he called for lights and rushed in, and trembling with fear he fell down before Paul and Silas,
30. and after he brought them out, he said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?"
31. They said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.”

What must we do to be saved? We must believe in the Lord Jesus—not just once at a Billy Graham crusade, not just once in a time of conviction for our sins, but throughout the rest of our lives.

We are saved by grace through faith, but that does not mean that we need not abide in Christ in order to remain saved.

John 15:1. “I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser.
2. “Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit, He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit.
3. “You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you.
4. “Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me.
5. “I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing.
6. “If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned.
7. “If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you.”

The basic teaching in this passage is that if a Christian does not abide in Christ, he or she will be “thrown away” as a branch cut off a vine by a vinedresser. The branch will consequently dry up and be cast into the fire where it will be burned. We know that the persons being spoken of are Christians because the Greek verb translated in this passage as ‘abide’ means to ‘continue’ or ‘remain’ (the meaning of the word ‘abide’). In the context of John 15:1-7, it means to continue or remain in Christ. Obviously, a non-Christian cannot continue or remain in Christ.

What does it mean to abide in Christ? Does it mean to keep Ten Commandments? No. Does it mean that we must work for our salvation? No—it simply means that we must continue in our faith in Christ.

Col. 1:21. And although you were formerly alienated and hostile in mind, engaged in evil deeds,
22. yet He has now reconciled you in His fleshly body through death, in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach--
23. if indeed you continue in the faith firmly established and steadfast, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel that you have heard, which was proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, was made a minister.


Thank you for sharing with us. May God especially bless you and your family on Christmas Day and throughout the holiday season.

(All quotations from the Scriptures are from the NASB, 1995)

 

[Hog Red]

guess the Lamb's Book of Life must be in pencil? growing up as a Pentacostal i thought my name must have been written down and erased more times than i care to remember, now i understand my name was written in blood and cannot be erased.

or if i'm wrong (doubt it) my salvation is easier to change than my golf score because those pencils they give you at the clubhouse dont have erasers on the end.

 

[Jeffwhosoever]

guess the Lamb's Book of Life must be in pencil? growing up as a Pentacostal i thought my name must have been written down and erased more times than i care to remember, now i understand my name was written in blood and cannot be erased.

or if i'm wrong (doubt it) my salvation is easier to change than my golf score because those pencils they give you at the clubhouse dont have erasers on the end.

Amen!

 

[His_disciple3]

Paul said that his life is worth nothing. His only goal as a Saint was to do the task that was given to him, the testifying of the good news of Gods grace.

He constantly warned the believers to not live as ungodly or they could fall from grace.

could you give a few scripture references to your statement of falling from grace directly referring to salvation

Falling from grace is the same as losing your salvation.

It was Paul himself who prayed trice that God would remove the thorn in His side and God said my grace is sufficient, salvation is a picture of the Grace of God. But God gives grace when we need to endure the physical trials also so God is not a respect of persons , But is a rewarder of those that diligently seek Him. if we are not faithful for God to get us through a physical trial , then his grace may be lost or fall away from concerning that trial and we lose our reward, But salvation is a GIFT NOT A REWARD. where people misunderstand OSAS is they think when death or to die is in scriptures they also assume that this is a spiritual death. adam was told that if he ate of the fruit of the tree of knowledge that He would die that day, since he lived a long life after that evryone assumes that this was referring to the spiritual death , but one day is a thousand years and a thousand years is as one day, in the eyes of God so Adam physical died before he was a thousand year old , Adam Did also die a physical death that day that he ate of the fruit, in the eyes of God

Meaning blasphemy against the holy spirit. Now you all may turn a blind eye to the letters to the churches in Revelations but it is quite obvious that one who is saved is written in the book of Life. However these people were threatened that the Lord will blot their names out of the book of life if they didn't stop what they were doing, repent, and do the first work.

have you not heard of two books a Lambs book of Life, where all of Jesus's Lambs/flock are written then a book of life where it is a book that every one that has ever lived is written( the book of Life ) if we do those thing that are mentioned in REV. then our names that are written in the book of life are taken out of, we die (physically ) then all the dead stand before God to be judged

Meaning testifying the gospel that saved them. Every letter to the churches was not about sin in particular but rather about their faiths changing, even slightly. In Galatians 3 they are warned of falling from grace if they tried to be saved by their own human efforts, example circumcision. You can't fall from grace if you aren't in grace. Following the law to be saved is the same thing. Being baptized to be saved can fall into this category, as it is by faith as said in Acts 10:43-47. Hebrews 10 somewhere states that if we deliberately keep on sinning after receiving the knowledge of truth there only remains a judgment who will devour its adversaries. You all must realize also that Paul spoke of two different kinds of sin. The sin not leading to death and the sin leading to death. He said that all the weaknesses like regular sinning are the sins not to death. The sin to death, the loss of salvation, is leaving the gospel.

I used to go to a few Baptist churches because of my family, the asking for forgiveness, believing in the blood only, OSAS, stuff really is a turn off to the faith.

what is a turn off to salvation is when we start believing in things we have done for our salvation, instead of things that Christ did for us, if we believe that it is up to us then we are saying That his death and all He went through, was not good enough and that there must be something we need to do in order to obtain salvation.


Does this negate what was said in the OPs scriptures? Not at all. But ignoring other scripture is far from being bible based.

Galatians 2:21
21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
KJV

try Him by saying He has saved us now and forever, or frustrate His grace by saying there is something that we can do or there is something we have done?.

 

[DeaconDean]

He constantly warned the believers to not live as ungodly or they could fall from grace. Falling from grace is the same as losing your salvation.

If you could fall from grace, was you ever under grace to begin with?

Meaning blasphemy against the holy spirit. Now you all may turn a blind eye to the letters to the churches in Revelations but it is quite obvious that one who is saved is written in the book of Life. However these people were threatened that the Lord will blot their names out of the book of life if they didn't stop what they were doing, repent, and do the first work. Meaning testifying the gospel that saved them.

That is quite a leap of faith there. I see nothing in the Revelation letters to indicate that each church that was addressed done what Jesus wanted them to do.

As a matter of fact, where are those churches now?

Unless I'm mistaken, these churches have been gone for some 1900 plus years.

In Galatians 3 they are warned of falling from grace if they tried to be saved by their own human efforts, example circumcision. You can't fall from grace if you aren't in grace. Following the law to be saved is the same thing.

Context, context, context.

Paul was fighting Judaizers in Galatia who were coming behind him planting seeds of "legalism". Saying yes, faith in God is a good thing and what is required, but one must also adhere to (insert law).

I used to go to a few Baptist churches because of my family, the asking for forgiveness, believing in the blood only, OSAS, stuff really is a turn off to the faith.

Does this negate what was said in the OPs scriptures? Not at all. But ignoring other scripture is far from being bible based.

If you used to go to a Baptist church, what church are you attending now?

You know, it is against the rules here to debate here unless you are a Baptist.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[phoenixdem]

Paul said that his life is worth nothing. His only goal as a Saint was to do the task that was given to him, the testifying of the good news of Gods grace. He constantly warned the believers to not live as ungodly or they could fall from grace. Falling from grace is the same as losing your salvation. Meaning blasphemy against the holy spirit. Now you all may turn a blind eye to the letters to the churches in Revelations but it is quite obvious that one who is saved is written in the book of Life. However these people were threatened that the Lord will blot their names out of the book of life if they didn't stop what they were doing, repent, and do the first work. Meaning testifying the gospel that saved them. Every letter to the churches was not about sin in particular but rather about their faiths changing, even slightly. In Galatians 3 they are warned of falling from grace if they tried to be saved by their own human efforts, example circumcision. You can't fall from grace if you aren't in grace. Following the law to be saved is the same thing. Being baptized to be saved can fall into this category, as it is by faith as said in Acts 10:43-47. Hebrews 10 somewhere states that if we deliberately keep on sinning after receiving the knowledge of truth there only remains a judgment who will devour its adversaries. You all must realize also that Paul spoke of two different kinds of sin. The sin not leading to death and the sin leading to death. He said that all the weaknesses like regular sinning are the sins not to death. The sin to death, the loss of salvation, is leaving the gospel.

I used to go to a few Baptist churches because of my family, the asking for forgiveness, believing in the blood only, OSAS, stuff really is a turn off to the faith.

Does this negate what was said in the OPs scriptures? Not at all. But ignoring other scripture is far from being bible based.

"the asking for forgiveness, believing in the blood only, OSAS, stuff really is a turn off to the faith."

What do you see as a "turn-on" to the faith?

Isn't this sort of thing, such as asking for forgiveness and believing in the blood only, central to being a Christian?

 

[faceofbear]

"the asking for forgiveness, believing in the blood only, OSAS, stuff really is a turn off to the faith."

What do you see as a "turn-on" to the faith?

Isn't this sort of thing, such as asking for forgiveness and believing in the blood only, central to being a Christian?

I'm a bit confused by the other posters response, but it could be that he is referencing the easy believism which turns the grace of God into licentiousness, which is easy believism is prevalent in liberal OSAS crowds. "You can sin deliberately all you want, be gay, have premarital sex, use God's name in vain, you're eternally secure!" I know this isn't a conservatives understanding about OSAS, but unfortunately, people have liberalize Calvin theology the mean something else entirely.

 

[DeaconDean]

I'm a bit confused by the other posters response, but it could be that he is referencing the easy believism which turns the grace of God into licentiousness, which is easy believism is prevalent in liberal OSAS crowds. "You can sin deliberately all you want, be gay, have premarital sex, use God's name in vain, you're eternally secure!" I know this isn't a conservatives understanding about OSAS, but unfortunately, people have liberalize Calvin theology the mean something else entirely.

I just ask for you to show me where in this thread anybody has advocated antinomianism.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[ifightdwagons]

"the asking for forgiveness, believing in the blood only, OSAS, stuff really is a turn off to the faith."

What do you see as a "turn-on" to the faith?

Isn't this sort of thing, such as asking for forgiveness and believing in the blood only, central to being a Christian?

ah sorry, my beliefs exclude asking for forgiveness (as I believe you are forgiven through faith, not by prayers of repentance, and also implies you have gotten dirty John 13:10), you can lose your salvation, and it constitutes of water and blood 1 john 5:6

 

[ifightdwagons]

If you could fall from grace, was you ever under grace to begin with?



That is quite a leap of faith there. I see nothing in the Revelation letters to indicate that each church that was addressed done what Jesus wanted them to do.

As a matter of fact, where are those churches now?

Unless I'm mistaken, these churches have been gone for some 1900 plus years.



Context, context, context.

Paul was fighting Judaizers in Galatia who were coming behind him planting seeds of "legalism". Saying yes, faith in God is a good thing and what is required, but one must also adhere to (insert law).



If you used to go to a Baptist church, what church are you attending now?

You know, it is against the rules here to debate here unless you are a Baptist.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Yeah I know the churches have been gone. The churches of Galatia were rebuked by Paul for trying to be saved by their own effort. And sorry for not being Baptist but I will leave then. thx

 

[faceofbear]

I just ask for you to show me where in this thread anybody has advocated antinomianism.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Why would I do that when I expressively said that it is liberal OSAS advocates that are responsible for such teachings, and it appeared to me that is that the person was assuming. And as I said, I know Conservatives do not view OSAS that way, but again, the knowledge of people on this forum and their theological stances whether it be liberal or conservative is quite drastically more thorough, knowledgeable, and conservative than 90% of "Christianity." And I didn't even say Calvinists were responsible for antinomianism because the departure in liberal theology amongst Calvinists aren't really Calvinist, they're just OSAS believers. So there'd be no point in me pointing anyone out because I wasn't referencing anyone here. And for me to even as hint as all Calvinist are antinominist would be similar to a Calvinist believing all Arminians are pelagian when it's Conservative followers who are faithful to Arminius and Wesley believe in bondage of the will. I'm not speaking of the heretics among the Remonstrants and those who followed Limborch which liberalized Arminian theology and lead many people to be deists and doesn't even deserve to be under the title of Arminianism. No need to jump the gun.

 

[DD2008]

Why would I do that when I expressively said that it is liberal OSAS advocates that are responsible for such teachings, and it appeared to me that is that the person was assuming. And as I said, I know Conservatives do not view OSAS that way, but again, the knowledge of people on this forum and their theological stances whether it be liberal or conservative is quite drastically more thorough, knowledgeable, and conservative than 90% of "Christianity." And I didn't even say Calvinists were responsible for antinomianism because the departure in liberal theology amongst Calvinists aren't really Calvinist, they're just OSAS believers. So there'd be no point in me pointing anyone out because I wasn't referencing anyone here. And for me to even as hint as all Calvinist are antinominist would be similar to a Calvinist believing all Arminians are pelagian when it's Conservative followers who are faithful to Arminius and Wesley believe in bondage of the will. I'm not speaking of the heretics among the Remonstrants and those who followed Limborch which liberalized Arminian theology and lead many people to be deists and doesn't even deserve to be under the title of Arminianism. No need to jump the gun.

Arminianism is wrong.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Arminianism is wrong.

Have you read the collected writings of Arminius (three volumes)? Have you read H. Orton Wiley’s three volume Christian Theology? Have you read A Contemporary Wesleyan Theology edited by Charles W. Carter? Have you read A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans by William Sanday, D.D., LL.D., Litt.D., F.B.A., and Rev. Arthur C. Headlam, D.D., the commentary on Romans most frequently quoted by scholars of that epistle for 115 years? Have you studied four years of college-level Greek and yet found a way to get past the obstacles to fairly and objectively interpreting the Gospel According to John in a non-Arminian manner?

Have you read Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion and carefully and prayerfully considered whether what he taught is actually taught in the Bible? Have you read the systematic theologies by Buswell, Hodge, and Shedd and carefully and prayerfully considered whether what they taught is actually taught in the Bible? Did the Holy Spirit tell you that Arminian theology is wrong and that the Bible is so difficult to understand that the doctrine of salvation by grace through faith could not be understood by anyone until a French Roman Catholic Dissenter came along in the 16th century—or was it a spirit of a very different kind—or your own imagination?

What is the basis of your statement that “Arminianism is wrong”?

 

[DD2008]

Have you read the collected writings of Arminius (three volumes)? Have you read H. Orton Wiley’s three volume Christian Theology? Have you read A Contemporary Wesleyan Theology edited by Charles W. Carter? Have you read A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans by William Sanday, D.D., LL.D., Litt.D., F.B.A., and Rev. Arthur C. Headlam, D.D., the commentary on Romans most frequently quoted by scholars of that epistle for 115 years? Have you studied four years of college-level Greek and yet found a way to get past the obstacles to fairly and objectively interpreting the Gospel According to John in a non-Arminian manner?

Have you read Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion and carefully and prayerfully considered whether what he taught is actually taught in the Bible? Have you read the systematic theologies by Buswell, Hodge, and Shedd and carefully and prayerfully considered whether what they taught is actually taught in the Bible? Did the Holy Spirit tell you that Arminian theology is wrong and that the Bible is so difficult to understand that the doctrine of salvation by grace through faith could not be understood by anyone until a French Roman Catholic Dissenter came along in the 16th century—or was it a spirit of a very different kind—or your own imagination?

What is the basis of your statement that “Arminianism is wrong”?

I know Arminianism is wrong because I've read the bible.

 

[faceofbear]

I know Arminianism is wrong because I've read the bible.

Unless you understand the Arminian stance on things you can't disagree with the stance if you're unfamiliar with it. You might have read the Bible, but the Bible doesn't explicitly say, "Calvinism is right, Arminianism is wrong." Thus a rightful understanding of Calvinism and Arminianism is necessary before you can state that one is biblically wrong. Basing on various posts in here, you seem to think Arminianism teaches free will in which man saves himself, which is actually teachings of a heretic named Pelagius, not Arminius. If you read any bit of Arminius teachings you'd realize Arminius was adamant on the sovereignty of God, the bondage of human will, giving glory to God, and a theology of which is thoroughly grace centered.

You can't claim you know something is wrong without understanding what it is you are claiming is wrong. I can just as easily say, "I know Calvinism is wrong because I've read the Bible." But unless my understanding of Calvinism teachings are accurate, I can't but claim, "I don't know if Calvinism is wrong," because though I've read the Bible, if I don't understand Calvinism, then I can't say it's wrong. It's a fallacy.

Many people have "read the Bible" and found Calvinism to be wrong. Many people have "read the Bible" and found Arminianism to be wrong. Many people have "read the Bible" and found both Calvinism and Arminianism wrong. Many people have "read the Bible" and found Baptist theology wrong. Many people have "read the Bible" and found Presbyterian theology wrong. The issue is that the debate between Calvinism and Arminianism has been debated for over 400 years and to claim one is wrong simply because you read the Bible provides no support for your stance. Whether we like it or not, both theologies have biblical support, and both theologies rely on logic and philosophies which is why one becomes Calvinist or Arminian -- not because of proof texts.

The thing is, that you are providing scriptures and commentaries and ideas to support your claim, while people who believe in Arminianism are doing the same thing with equal, greater, or lesser support it's been going back and forth. Have you ever thought that the way you view Arminianism is the way and Arminian views a Calvinist? The hasty generalizations you make and the immaturity in your responses are getting very irritating. You can't even answer his questions directly because the reality is your answer is probably no to all of his questions, which then it should be asked, should you be taking such a vehement stance and causing divisions over something you aren't read up on?

And if you want to know where I stand, I haven't read that much of theology as I haven't been saved very long. However, I currently consider myself a Calvinist but I am open to Arminian ideas because I can see why people arrive at that theology, and for me to be "Arminian" will take sometime, if ever, to arrive there. I'm somewhere in between, though I still consider myself a Calvinist. I'm not teaching anyone, nor have I considered myself teaching at all in any of my posts. I'm simply trying to get people to realize the fact that they might be wrong.

The Bible teaches that in the end times people will follow teachers which they agree with. I can't help but think when someone is so adamant that they are right and do not even consider another viewpoint that they have already been guilty of falling into this bible verse.

Very few people have contributed anything at all to this thread (me being excluded from contributing), and among them I consider Dean, Princeton, and Bill who have actually considered the possibility of being wrong and I know for a fact that Dean has studied BOTH theologies thoroughly for a couple of years because he told me, and I would believe Princeton has too. So, you have two intelligent people who are at different ends and both believe the other is a "false teacher" at worst, or someone who is "mistaken" at best.

At least you could respect someone else's view without the tone of sarcasm and teenaged remarks. Honestly, it just makes the Calvinist side look that much more unfavorable in my eyes. If it is Calvinism that is right and we are both representatives of God, I can tell you the past couple of posts from you, if I was not saved, would draw me away from Christianity because of the childishness and disrespect they seem to have. And that's coming from a young "22 year old."