Eternal Security

[Osage Bluestem]

Osage,

If that were the case, there would not be this kind of discussion among evangelicals who believe the Bible. I have shown in my article, that your statements cannot be supported biblically.

Electon is indeed supported biblically. Go to any on-line bible and word search elect.

The Bible teaches that some commit apostasy (Heb. 6:4-6)

That is talking about sanctified people in heaven. It is a hypothetical situation and an illustration.

and some shipwreck their faith (1 Tim. 1:19-20).

This is simply talking about being in the word or you can get confused. It says he handed them over satan to learn. He didn't say they lost their salvation.

Judas Iscariot was chosen by Jesus but he betrayed Jesus and Satan entered into him (John 13:27).

It is quite obvious that Judas was meant to betray Jesus and Jesus even told him "what you do do it quickly" He wasn't one of the elect he was a betrayer predestined to hell and used for his purpose. God meant it for good Judas meant it for evil.

No matter how you wish to give your spin on history, the facts are that for the first 16 centuries of the church, the Bible teachers taught the conditional security of the believer. Why? That's what the Bible teaches.

Many of the teachers of that time weren't even literate. Many more didn't even know the bible, they followed a liturgy in a language that most people including many of them didn't even know.

Talking about the Southern Baptists growing and they teach eternal security, is not a good enough argument. Postmodern theology is growing and influencing lots of denominations. Does that make postmodernism right?

This is an age where there are more resources thatn ever before to help with bible study. The doctrine of the eternal security of the believer is winning out because truth seekers see it clearly in the bible that God made available to them through the reformers.

 

[phoenixdem]

phoenix,

There was false teaching in the first centuries of the church. What do you think influenced Paul to write Galatians and Colossians, and Jude to write the Book of Jude? There was false teaching already in the church in the first century after Christ's death.

This is what Paul wrote to the Galatians 1:6-9:
There are things in RC theology with which I do not agree, but please do not place the root of the problem with the RCC with statements like the one you made:
Error was in the church long before the 16th century.

Sincerely, Spencer

You are quite correct about the errors even in the first century. The poster to whom I replied was talking about errors in the 15th and 16th Centuries when the Roman Catholic Church was in control of the teachings and I answered in kind.

 

[His_disciple3]

Electon is indeed supported biblically. Go to any on-line bible and word search elect.



That is talking about sanctified people in heaven. It is a hypothetical situation and an illustration.



This is simply talking about being in the word or you can get confused. It says he handed them over satan to learn. He didn't say they lost their salvation.



It is quite obvious that Judas was meant to betray Jesus and Jesus even told him "what you do do it quickly" He wasn't one of the elect he was a betrayer predestined to hell and used for his purpose. God meant it for good Judas meant it for evil.



Many of the teachers of that time weren't even literate. Many more didn't even know the bible, they followed a liturgy in a language that most people including many of them didn't even know.



This is an age where there are more resources thatn ever before to help with bible study. The doctrine of the eternal security of the believer is winning out because truth seekers see it clearly in the bible that God made available to them through the reformers.

election is bibical, but everyone's intrepretation of that election is not bibical, God so loved the world that whosoever!!!!! this goes against the tulip doctine of grace, unless you take away from it and say that whosoever, doesn't mean everyone but only the elected. but even at that if you are already elected before time begin then why whosoever beleiveth. Paul did not teach/preach election by sovereignty, but rather sovereignty by foreknowledge, God knew whosoever would believe, before time even begin, so by His sovereign foreknowledge/omniscience came the elect. if election is correctly taught by calvin and calvin was lined up perfectly with the election doctrine taught by paul, some are elected into hell and some into heaven then why would Paul also preach this:

2 Timothy 2:10
10 Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.
KJV
if you are elected into heaven you have already obtained salvation. so maybe election not as calvinist sees it after all, and please don't try to say that Paul didn't know who the elect was, it doesn't matter who the elect was Paul preached that they still needed to obtain salvation. or please don't go with John Mac and say that even the elect needs to be sanctified, so what God elects someone into heaven before time begins but if they do not receive sanctification, then that over rules the Sovereignty of God and even though there were elected into heaven they could wind up in hell!!!! I mean it is either sovereignty of God or sanctification by the Blood which way is it. or is it that God forordained that sanctification would come by the shed blood being applied, and the even the Jews/His elect would need the blood to obtain salvation!!

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Hebrews 6:4-6. This passage refers to false believers. How do we know? (1) They tasted but they did not drink and eat (contrast John 6:54). (2) Those who fall away cannot be saved again. This shows the error of those who teach that a believer can lose his salvation; because invariably they exhort those who allegedly lose their salvation to return to Christ. (3) The difference between the true believer and the false is the fruit and the evidence (v. 7,8). (4) Paul plainly states that he is not referring to true believers (v. 9).

Teachers of the Biblical doctrine of the conditional security of the Christian do NOT invariably exhort those who lose their salvation to return to Christ; indeed, they NEVER do! Instead, they warn those who are beginning to stray of the danger of continuing to stray. Once salvation is lost, it is lost forever.

There are, however, some people who lack an education in the Bible, including the Biblical doctrine of the conditional security of the Christian, who do all sorts of unbiblical things—including exhorting people whom they believe have lost their salvation to return to Christ.

 

[His_disciple3]

Teachers of the Biblical doctrine of the conditional security of the Christian do NOT invariably exhort those who lose their salvation to return to Christ; indeed, they NEVER do! Instead, they warn those who are beginning to stray of the danger of continuing to stray. Once salvation is lost, it is lost forever.

There are, however, some people who lack an education in the Bible, including the Biblical doctrine of the conditional security of the Christian, who do all sorts of unbiblical things—including exhorting people whom they believe have lost their salvation to return to Christ.

Romans 6:9-11
9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.
11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
KJV
your spiritual body was dead, and quicken By the Lord, brought to life, for you that died unto sin once!!!!!! not twice!! so you are either saved forever or you are never saved. you can not die /fallaway again/the second time. it is once

John 10:28
28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
KJV

if you could fall away, your faith was not in God to begin with!!! and without faith it is impossible to please Him!!

Jude 23-25
23 And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.
24 Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy,
25 To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.
KJV

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Romans 6:9-11
9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.
11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
KJV
your spiritual body was dead, and quicken By the Lord, brought to life, for you that died unto sin once!!!!!! not twice!! so you are either saved forever or you are never saved. you can not die /fallaway again/the second time. it is once

John 10:28
28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
KJV

if you could fall away, your faith was not in God to begin with!!! and without faith it is impossible to please Him!!

Jude 23-25
23 And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.
24 Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy,
25 To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.
KJV

Romans 6:1. What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin so that grace may increase?
2. May it never be! How shall we who died to sin still live in it?
3. Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death?
4. Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.
5. For if we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall also be in the likeness of His resurrection,
6. knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin;
7. for he who has died is freed from sin.
8. Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him,
9. knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, is never to die again; death no longer is master over Him.
10. For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God.
11. Even so consider yourselves to be dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus. (NASB, 1995)

Paul is not saying in this passage that our “spiritual body” died; Paul is saying that “our old self,” our former self, the old man, died and has been buried with Christ, and that, having died, we have been freed from sin. This, however, is what ought to be and can be, but not always is. Very many Christians, their former selves having died, once again begin partaking of the sinful ways of their former selves. Paul, being all too aware of this, is reminding the Christians in Rome what Baptism is all about, and admonishing them to consider themselves “dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus.” Some Christians, however, choose to continue partaking of the sinful ways of their former selves. Peter expressed this happening in this way,

2 Peter 2:22 It has happened to them according to the true proverb, A DOG RETURNS TO ITS OWN VOMIT,” and, “A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire.” (NASB, 1995)

We saw in posts earlier in this thread that included a discussion of this passage and the parallel passage in Isa. 43 that John 10:27-29 actually teaches the conditional security of the believer. Christians are secure only so long as they choose to remain in the hand of God.

Jude 24-25 is a doxology, and like all of the doxologies in the Bible, it tells only one side of the story—God’s faithfulness to us; it does not tell us the other side of the story—our responsibility to be faithful to God. That side of the story is told in scores of other passages in the Bible, including Rom. 6:1-23. In that passage, after his lengthy admonition, Paul reminds the Christians in Rome that the wages of sin is death!

 

[DeaconDean]

No one from the early church taught "eternal security".

Hum...

It wasn't taught before the 15th or 16 century.

Hum...

What about these passages from the Old Testament:

The Eternal Security Of The Believer
"For the Lord loveth judgment, and forsaketh not His saints; they are preserved forever. . ." (Ps. 37:28). "The Lord. . .will preserve me unto His heavenly kingdom. . ." (2 Tim. 4:18).
"For He is our God; and we are the people of His pasture, and the sheep of His hand. . ." (Ps. 95:7). "My sheep hear My voice. . .and I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of My hand" (John 10:27-28).
"For the Lord shall be thy confidence, and shall keep thy foot from being taken" (Prov. 3:26). "Now unto Him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of His glory with exceeding joy" (Jude 24).
"I will be with thee; I will not fail thee, nor forsake thee" (Joshua 1:5). "...He hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee" (Heb. 13:5).
We could go on indefinitely comparing Scripture with Scripture, showing the perfect harmony existing between the Old and New Testaments as relates to the God honoring doctrine of the eternal preservation of the saints, but will conclude this point by saying, any interpretation of Scripture that contradicts the final preservation of the believer, is a wrong interpretation, and is injurious to faith.

Oscar B. Mink, Eternal Secutity

Source

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[His_disciple3]

Romans 6:1. What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin so that grace may increase?
2. May it never be! How shall we who died to sin still live in it?
3. Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death?
4. Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.
5. For if we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall also be in the likeness of His resurrection,
6. knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin;
7. for he who has died is freed from sin.
8. Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him,
9. knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, is never to die again; death no longer is master over Him.
10. For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God.
11. Even so consider yourselves to be dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus. (NASB, 1995)

Paul is not saying in this passage that our “spiritual body” died; Paul is saying that “our old self,” our former self, the old man, died and has been buried with Christ, and that, having died, we have been freed from sin. This, however, is what ought to be and can be, but not always is. Very many Christians, their former selves having died, once again begin partaking of the sinful ways of their former selves. Paul, being all too aware of this, is reminding the Christians in Rome what Baptism is all about, and admonishing them to consider themselves “dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus.” Some Christians, however, choose to continue partaking of the sinful ways of their former selves. Peter expressed this happening in this way,

2 Peter 2:22 It has happened to them according to the true proverb, A DOG RETURNS TO ITS OWN VOMIT,” and, “A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire.” (NASB, 1995)

We saw in posts earlier in this thread that included a discussion of this passage and the parallel passage in Isa. 43 that John 10:27-29 actually teaches the conditional security of the believer. Christians are secure only so long as they choose to remain in the hand of God.

Jude 24-25 is a doxology, and like all of the doxologies in the Bible, it tells only one side of the story—God’s faithfulness to us; it does not tell us the other side of the story—our responsibility to be faithful to God. That side of the story is told in scores of other passages in the Bible, including Rom. 6:1-23. In that passage, after his lengthy admonition, Paul reminds the Christians in Rome that the wages of sin is death!

you can call it doxology or anything you want to call it, but I call it scriptures

 

[JuJube]

I use to post here way back...still keep up with all of you. Not much has changed tho...sorry to see. I have been an on fire and active Baptist for 12 yrs. now. Was raised a Catholic thru my childhood, so I feel I've have some knowledge and the authority to post on this subjust. I do not say this in any way to disrespect anyones religion or beliefs, but when I hear the Calvinist stand on things it takes me back to my childhood and fear that I always have to earn my grace. If you loose your eternal salvation, at one point is your service not enough. This is not to start any arguements and I don't claim to be a scholar on scripture, just expressing how this theology makes me feel and I thought the Protestants pulled out of the Catholic guilt belief system long ago.

 

[phoenixdem]

I use to post here way back...still keep up with all of you. Not much has changed tho...sorry to see. I have been an on fire and active Baptist for 12 yrs. now. Was raised a Catholic thru my childhood, so I feel I've have some knowledge and the authority to post on this subjust. I do not say this in any way to disrespect anyones religion or beliefs, but when I hear the Calvinist stand on things it takes me back to my childhood and fear that I always have to earn my grace. If you loose your eternal salvation, at one point is your service not enough. This is not to start any arguements and I don't claim to be a scholar on scripture, just expressing how this theology makes me feel and I thought the Protestants pulled out of the Catholic guilt belief system long ago.

You have me confused. I cannot understand how you would feel that you have to earn your salvation from the Calvinist stand on scripture. The Calvinist stand is salvation by unmerited grace by election from God. There is nothing you can do to earn your salvation from the Calvinist stand or scripture itself. Are you basing your viewpoint on the Book of James?

Actually, it is the Arminian viewpoint that salvation is earned by an act from man, i.e. a man must choose to receive salvation from God and God has to wait until the person earns his salvation before He, God, can forgive the sinner and receive him as a son or daughter.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

I use to post here way back...still keep up with all of you. Not much has changed tho...sorry to see. I have been an on fire and active Baptist for 12 yrs. now. Was raised a Catholic thru my childhood, so I feel I've have some knowledge and the authority to post on this subjust. I do not say this in any way to disrespect anyones religion or beliefs, but when I hear the Calvinist stand on things it takes me back to my childhood and fear that I always have to earn my grace. If you loose your eternal salvation, at one point is your service not enough. This is not to start any arguements and I don't claim to be a scholar on scripture, just expressing how this theology makes me feel and I thought the Protestants pulled out of the Catholic guilt belief system long ago.

The Bible says what it says, and it means what it means. Fears based upon misunderstandings of Biblical theology do not change what the Bible says or what the Bible means. Furthermore, a correct understanding of Roman Catholic theology, when appropriately applied to ones daily life, will result in hope rather than fear. The problem with Roman Catholic theology in this regard is not due to the theology, but due to a lack of knowledge of it. Indeed, the Roman Catholic Church teaches the security of the believer in Christ, but warns of the danger of apostatizing from the Christian faith. Unfortunately, it also teaches a very distorted view of Mariology and other aberrational theology, and many individual Roman Catholic priests have their own, personal theology that they teach their own congregations. Calvinism teaches that all Christians will persevere and that none of them will apostatize from the Christian faith. Arminianism teaches that all Christians have the responsibility before God to be faithful to Christ, and that those who are faithful to Christ are secure in Him. It also warns of the danger of apostatizing from the Christian faith, as was warned by the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers and the Church as a whole up to the 16th century when the errors of Calvinism were first introduced into the Church. There are numerous other systems of Christian theology, and the very large majority of Baptists today hold to a hodgepodge of Calvinism, Arminianism, and miscellaneous other theologies. A small fraction of Baptists, however, are either very Calvinistic or Arminian in their beliefs. Very few of them believe with Calvin, that being baptized as a baby is efficacious and that there is no need to be baptized as a believer.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Actually, it is the Arminian viewpoint that salvation is earned by an act from man, i.e. a man must choose to receive salvation from God and God has to wait until the person earns his salvation before He, God, can forgive the sinner and receive him as a son or daughter.

These statements are absolutely false! The Arminian viewpoint is that we are saved by grace through faith, and that there is absolutely nothing that anyone can do to earn his or her salvation. Calvinism teaches that all Christians will persevere and that none of them will apostatize from the Christian faith. Arminianism teaches that all Christians have the responsibility before God to be faithful to Christ, and that those who are faithful to Christ are secure in Him. It also warns of the danger of apostatizing from the Christian faith, as was warned by the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers and the Church as a whole up to the 16th century when the errors of Calvinism were first introduced into the Church. The doctrine that salvation must be earned is not taught in the Bible, and it has never been taught by any Arminian believer. Indeed, anyone who teaches such a thing is not an Arminian, but a false teacher.

 

[phoenixdem]

Anyone that teaches infant baptism advances that viewpoint from a source outside the teachings of the Holy Bible. Man's reasoning doesn't count as being biblical. The Holy Bible nowhere teaches infant baptism.

The matter of God's sovereignty and His election is biblical as is the security of the believer. Christ cannot lose anyone given to Him by the Father. This is also biblical. The soverereignty of God in the election of the believers is plainly taught in the Holy Bible. So, it comes down to a choice for the Christian: believe the Holy Bible or man.

The Roman Catholic Church teaches salvation by works as do the Arminians. Christians believe in salvation by faith through the unmerited grace of God.

 

[JuJube]

Forgive me Phoenixdem...it wasn't the Calvinists belief....they believed some are chosen for life and the others chosen for death. Right, how could one change that. I got lost on all the many pages of this and who is who. It was for whoever believes that you can lose your salvation.
I would still like to know at what point you could lose your salvation. My sister (Catholic) still believes if she misses a mass her salvation is jeopardized. For a Protestant, what is it? Breaking one of the big ten, which Jesus says you can do by just pondering the sin in your heart.

 

[phoenixdem]

Forgive me Phoenixdem...it wasn't the Calvinists belief....they believed some are chosen for life and the others chosen for death. Right, how could one change that. I got lost on all the many pages of this and who is who. It was for whoever believes that you can lose your salvation.
I would still like to know at what point you could lose your salvation. My sister (Catholic) still believes if she misses a mass her salvation is jeopardized. For a Protestant, what is it? Breaking one of the big ten, which Jesus says you can do by just pondering the sin in your heart.

As for the matter of losing salvation, I can quote one verse out of many others that say a Christian cannot lose his salvation. From the Book of John,

10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish,
neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is
able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand.
​

10:30 I and my Father are one.

There are many people who want to argue that Christians can lose their salvation despite scripture such as the one I referenced above. In other words, they teach that one from day to another, Christians can lose their salvation, gain their salvation, and lose it again. They enjoy saying that no man or thing (Romans, Chapter 8) can separate us from the love of God, but we can take outself out of the love of God, i.e. out of the salvation of God. You have to be discerning in these times.

 

[JuJube]

That makes me a pretty powerful person to be able to remove myself from Gods love. I just can't imagine that if I have nothing to do with earning my salvation, how could I possibly have something to do with losing it?

 

[phoenixdem]

That makes me a pretty powerful person to be able to remove myself from Gods love. I just can't imagine that if I have nothing to do with earning my salvation, how could I possibly have something to do with losing it?

It would give you power reserved to God only. It is God alone who consigns us to Heaven or Hell.

In the Book of Romans, God tells us about His gifts and calling.

11:29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Anyone that teaches infant baptism advances that viewpoint from a source outside the teachings of the Holy Bible. Man's reasoning doesn't count as being biblical. The Holy Bible nowhere teaches infant baptism.

From your perspective, the Bible does not teach infant baptism, but from the perspective of Roman Catholicism and main-line Protestant theology, it does. Indeed, if I were to be placed into a debate on infant baptism in which the arguments could be based solely upon the Bible, I would be swimming upstream against a very strong current if I were to be on the side against infant baptism. Personally, I do not believe in infant baptism, but exclusively in the baptism of believers; and for that reason, I am a Baptist. However, that belief is based upon my personal experience and upon my observations as a Christian much more than it is upon the Bible. This is a Baptist forum, and therefore I shall not present the scriptural case for the baptism of infants, but I will say that anyone who is familiar with the New Testament knows for himself the Biblical foundation for belief in infant baptism, whether they agree with it or not. For those who are not familiar with the New Testament, I suggest that they study it. Furthermore, the basic teachings of Calvinism regarding Romans chapter five must be rejected if one is to come to the conclusion that the Bible does not teach infant baptism.

The matter of God's sovereignty and His election is biblical as is the security of the believer. Christ cannot lose anyone given to Him by the Father. This is also biblical. The soverereignty of God in the election of the believers is plainly taught in the Holy Bible. So, it comes down to a choice for the Christian: believe the Holy Bible or man.

Numerous passages from the Bible pertinent to the doctrine of eternal security have been discussed in this thread, and it has been shown that not a single one of them teaches the doctrine of eternal security. Furthermore, it has been well documented that the doctrine of eternal security was given birth in the 16th century as a deductive conclusion based upon the false premise that God is absolutely sovereign. Simply saying that the Bible teaches the doctrine of eternal security when it has been shown that it does not does nothing to prove the assertion.

The Roman Catholic Church teaches salvation by works as do the Arminians. Christians believe in salvation by faith through the unmerited grace of God.

The Saint Joseph Edition of the New American Bible with the second edition of the New Testament (1986) has the following note on Romans 3:21-31,

These verses provide a clear statement of Paul’s “gospel,” i.e., the principle of justification by faith in Christ. God has found a means of rescuing humanity from its desperate plight: Paul’s general term for this divine initiative is the righteousness of God (21). Divine mercy declares the guilty innocent and makes them so. God does this not as a result of the law, but apart from it (21), and not because of any merit in human beings but through their forgiveness of their sins (24), in virtue of the redemption wrought in Christ Jesus for all who believe (22.24-25). God has manifested his righteousness in the coming of Jesus Christ, whose saving activity inaugurates a new era in human history.
​

The same Roman Catholic Bible has the following note on Rom. 4:3,

Jas 2, 24 appears to conflict with Paul’s statement. However, James combats the error of extremists who used the doctrine of justification through faith as a screen for moral self-determination. Paul discusses the subject of holiness in greater detail than does James and beginning with ch 6 shows how justification through faith introduces one to the gift of a new life in Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit.
​

To state that Arminians teach salvation by works is either to willfully state a falsehood, or to demonstrate one’s ignorance of Arminian theology.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Forgive me Phoenixdem...it wasn't the Calvinists belief....they believed some are chosen for life and the others chosen for death. Right, how could one change that. I got lost on all the many pages of this and who is who. It was for whoever believes that you can lose your salvation.
I would still like to know at what point you could lose your salvation. My sister (Catholic) still believes if she misses a mass her salvation is jeopardized. For a Protestant, what is it? Breaking one of the big ten, which Jesus says you can do by just pondering the sin in your heart.

Many people in the Romans Catholic Church believe some non-Catholic doctrines. That is not the fault of Roman Catholicism; it is the fault of Catholics who do not read the Bible and study the doctrines of their Church. Christians who lose their salvation do not lose it because of breaking one of the Ten Commandments—or even several of them—they lose their salvation for committing apostasy—that is, for turning their backs to Christ and returning to the lifestyle from which they were saved. Calvinists say that genuine Christians cannot do not do this; Roman Catholics and Arminians say that they can to this, and that the consequence of doing so is the loss of their salvation.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

As for the matter of losing salvation, I can quote one verse out of many others that say a Christian cannot lose his salvation. From the Book of John,

10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:​

10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish,
neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.​

10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is
able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand.​

10:30 I and my Father are one.

There are many people who want to argue that Christians can lose their salvation despite scripture such as the one I referenced above. In other words, they teach that one from day to another, Christians can lose their salvation, gain their salvation, and lose it again. They enjoy saying that no man or thing (Romans, Chapter 8) can separate us from the love of God, but we can take outself out of the love of God, i.e. out of the salvation of God. You have to be discerning in these times.

Calvinists, Roman Catholics, and Arminian Christians who have studied John 10:27-29 all agree that it does NOT teach the doctrine of eternal security. That it does not teach it has already been proven in previous posts in this thread.