Is assurance of salvation possible?

[Invalidusername]

This is true, which is why I'm against all forms of it, including the discussion ongoing in this thread. So many people want to contribute something to their salvation. The only real difference between all you works-based salvation proponents is the timing and nature of those works.

Not true. Saying that you must abide in Jesus is not a work. It's submitting to the HS. You ignore all of the verses that says we must remain to the end or it would have been better to have never been saved.

Read 2 Peter 2:19-22 please

 

[Dorothy Mae]

If you mean my agenda is to stand against a 'salvation by works' gospel before it pollutes someone else, then yes, I will never be shaken. I don't want such teaching to cause anyone else go to hell because they feel they can be 'good enough'.

Never yet met a believer who refused OSAS doctrine who was either working for salvation or thought about them being good enough or not. Frankly speaking we don’t about ourselves as much as the OSAScrowd who assures themselves heaven no matter how much they lie or steal or whatever sin against others they allow themselves to do.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

This is true, which is why I'm against all forms of it, including the discussion ongoing in this thread. So many people want to contribute something to their salvation. The only real difference between all you works-based salvation proponents is the timing and nature of those works.

Not at all. You simply don’t understand those who accept the command to love God and others as binding on their behavior. You probably don’t want to have to do anything include loving God. Heaven? yes. God? only it fits in with the desires at the moment.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

The problem is there's a difference between works based salvation and biblical salvation.

Hyper grace is not biblical.

Works based salvation is extremely rare in the church. The catholics and JWS believe that though. But their not christians as an organization.

 

[FreeGrace2]

OSAS people have a very specific agenda on scripture and they will never be shaken so don't bother debating.

Truth is never shaken. And our very specific agenda is knowing the truth.

But, the question remains, why don't you believe what Jesus said in John 10:28?

He told us that recipients of eternal life shall never perish.

 

[FreeGrace2]

The problem is there's a difference between works based salvation and biblical salvation.

Hyper grace is not biblical.

Please define and explain what this so-called "hyper grace" is.

It seems the OSNAS crowd wants to cripple God's grace.

 

[FreeGrace2]

You ignore all of the verses that says we must remain to the end or it would have been better to have never been saved.

Then it should be rather easy to at least quote one of these verses.

 

[SeventyOne]

Not true. Saying that you must abide in Jesus is not a work. It's submitting to the HS. You ignore all of the verses that says we must remain to the end or it would have been better to have never been saved.

Read 2 Peter 2:19-22 please

I haven't ignored anything. Try reading that passage in context. In verse 9, Peter separates the righteous from the unrighteous, then goes on to describe in detail the nature and judgment of the unrighteous. Verses 19-22 have nothing to do with those who belong to Him as they are continued descriptors of the unrighteous.

And if you think abiding in Jesus is accomplished by your works, you are one who believes salvation is by works. Again, the only real difference is the type and timing of those works.

 

[SeventyOne]

Never yet met a believer who refused OSAS doctrine who was either working for salvation or thought about them being good enough or not. Frankly speaking we don’t about ourselves as much as the OSAScrowd who assures themselves heaven no matter how much they lie or steal or whatever sin against others they allow themselves to do.

If you mean that OSAS people realize that we can't work our way into good standing with God or maintain that standing by our own works, then yes, that would be the case.

That said, the accusation is that OSAS people only think that way so we can live massively sinful lifestyles, which is nothing but a strawman argument, and a slanderous lie. Born again people have the Spirit within us, and we seek lifestyles consistent with the desires of the Spirit. But when we do sin, we also know we have forgiveness that we don't have to seek to earn over and over. An overtly sinful lifestyle is a great indication of the lack of the Spirit and salvation, OSAS-believing or not.

 

[SeventyOne]

Not at all. You simply don’t understand those who accept the command to love God and others as binding on their behavior. You probably don’t want to have to do anything include loving God. Heaven? yes. God? only it fits in with the desires at the moment.

That's quite the imaginative accusation.

 

[SeventyOne]

Works based salvation is extremely rare in the church. The catholics and JWS believe that though. But their not christians as an organization.

Unfortunately, it's not rare at all. It's all over the place, including this thread. Some place their salvati0on works at the front, where they earn initial salvation, others put them more in the rear where they claim they maintain salvation by their works, and some want both to be the case.

 

[FreeGrace2]

If you mean that OSAS people realize that we can't work our way into good standing with God or maintain that standing by our own works, then yes, that would be the case.

That said, the accusation is that OSAS people only think that way so we can live massively sinful lifestyles, which is nothing but a strawman argument, and a slanderous lie. Born again people have the Spirit within us, and we seek lifestyles consistent with the desires of the Spirit. But when we do sin, we also know we have forgiveness that we don't have to seek to earn over and over. An overtly sinful lifestyle is a great indication of the lack of the Spirit and salvation, OSAS-believing or not.

Excellent response! I would just like to add that the OSNAS ilk always ignore the many warnings of God's painful discipline (Heb 12:11) for His rebellious and disobedient children. They twist the warnings of discipline into the ridiculous loss of salvation argument.

 

[Invalidusername]

If you mean that OSAS people realize that we can't work our way into good standing with God or maintain that standing by our own works, then yes, that would be the case.

That said, the accusation is that OSAS people only think that way so we can live massively sinful lifestyles, which is nothing but a strawman argument, and a slanderous lie. Born again people have the Spirit within us, and we seek lifestyles consistent with the desires of the Spirit. But when we do sin, we also know we have forgiveness that we don't have to seek to earn over and over. An overtly sinful lifestyle is a great indication of the lack of the Spirit and salvation, OSAS-believing or not.

Excellent response! I would just like to add that the OSNAS ilk always ignore the many warnings of God's painful discipline (Heb 12:11) for His rebellious and disobedient children. They twist the warnings of discipline into the ridiculous loss of salvation argument.

I have no reason to doubt that you both are regenerate believers. So with that presumption, allow me to pose a direct question to you guys. Please answer it as you would answer for yourself; not how someone else might supposedly answer it. My question to you is:
If you were forced to decide whether or not to take the mark of the beast, would you take it? As far as I can determine you have 3 options:
#1. Yes, you would take it because as a believer you are secure in your salvation and can never lose it.
#2. No, you would not take it because of the consequences spelled out in Rev 14:9-11
#3. Yes, you would take it but that would mean that you were never a believer in the first place.

If you choose option #1, at least you are perfectly consistent in your belief however it goes against what Scripture teaches happens to anyone who accepts the mark.
If you choose option #2, it nullifies your belief that you being a regenerate believer, can never lose your salvation.
If you choose option #3, I imagine that would be unsettling to you as I'm sure you consider yourself to presently be a genuine believer.

And if you answer that this question is irrelevant by claiming that the saints aren't around on the earth at that time because you you are a preterist or they are all raptured to heaven, do not neglect to notice Rev 14:12 "This calls for patient endurance on the part of the saints who obey God's commandments and remain faithful to Jesus." Whether these are the church-age saints or the tribulation saints is subject to another debate but the fact remains the saints are referenced in this context and are admonished to endure, obey and remain faithful to Jesus rather than worship the beast and accept the mark. Lastly if you claim that under no circumstance you are certain without a doubt, that you would never accept the mark of the beast, how would you know for sure what you would do or not do in the future, especially under extreme duress/persecution? Even Peter who saw Jesus face-to-face and walked with him daily, was absolutely certain than he would never deny the Lord - but we all know what happened to Peter.

 

[Invalidusername]

Also I suggest you guys ignore Dorothy Mae. Her heart is full of hate and malice. Not worth it to debate with her, especially since she has no scripture support at all for her premise. I have more respect for OSAS people since they actually try to use scripture.

So here's some verses for loss of salvation for you OSAS folks. 83 of them specifically.

What Does the Bible Say About Losing Your Salvation?

 

[SeventyOne]

I have no reason to doubt that you both are regenerate believers. So with that presumption, allow me to pose a direct question to you guys. Please answer it as you would answer for yourself; not how someone else might supposedly answer it. My question to you is:
If you were forced to decide whether or not to take the mark of the beast, would you take it? As far as I can determine you have 3 options:
#1. Yes, you would take it because as a believer you are secure in your salvation and can never lose it.
#2. No, you would not take it because of the consequences spelled out in Rev 14:9-11
#3. Yes, you would take it but that would mean that you were never a believer in the first place.

If you choose option #1, at least you are perfectly consistent in your belief however it goes against what Scripture teaches happens to anyone who accepts the mark.
If you choose option #2, it nullifies your belief that you being a regenerate believer, can never lose your salvation.
If you choose option #3, I imagine that would be unsettling to you as I'm sure you consider yourself to presently be a genuine believer.

And if you answer that this question is irrelevant by claiming that the saints aren't around on the earth at that time because you you are a preterist or they are all raptured to heaven, do not neglect to notice Rev 14:12 "This calls for patient endurance on the part of the saints who obey God's commandments and remain faithful to Jesus." Whether these are the church-age saints or the tribulation saints is subject to another debate but the fact remains the saints are referenced in this context and are admonished to endure, obey and remain faithful to Jesus rather than worship the beast and accept the mark. Lastly if you claim that under no circumstance you are certain without a doubt, that you would never accept the mark of the beast, how would you know for sure what you would do or not do in the future, especially under extreme duress/persecution? Even Peter who saw Jesus face-to-face and walked with him daily, was absolutely certain than he would never deny the Lord - but we all know what happened to Peter.

That's a much deeper and involved question than you think, especially since the body of Christ is seen raptured beforehand in Revelation 12, and you are discussing the nature of a new dispensation, comparing apples and oranges, so to speak. Don't really think this is the thread for that particular discussion.

 

[Invalidusername]

That's a much deeper and involved question than you think, especially since the body of Christ is seen raptured beforehand in Revelation 12, and you are discussing the nature of a new dispensation, comparing apples and oranges, so to speak. Don't really think this is the thread for that particular discussion.

Knew I'd get a response like that.

Ok hypothetically IF we could take the Mark if the Beast tell me which premise do you believe?

 

[SeventyOne]

but deacti

Knew I'd get a response like that.

A response like what? The question, as presented, isn't actually a viable one. I really can't help that.

Ok hypothetically IF we could take the Mark if the Beast tell me which premise do you believe?

Not sure how to answer this since you are mixing mutually exclusive dispensations. I know you think its a cop-out, but the question just doesn't make any sense whatsoever. It really shouldn't make any sense to you either. You might as well be asking 'If clouds sleep faster on Christmas, then what color does peanut butter fart?'

 

[Invalidusername]

but deacti


A response like what? The question, as presented, isn't actually a viable one. I really can't help that.




Not sure how to answer this since you are mixing mutually exclusive dispensations. I know you think its a cop-out, but the question just doesn't make any sense whatsoever. It really shouldn't make any sense to you either. You might as well be asking 'If clouds sleep faster on Christmas, then what color does peanut butter fart?'

It is a cop out. If you took the mark of the beast while saved, where is your destination?

 

[FreeGrace2]

I have no reason to doubt that you both are regenerate believers. So with that presumption, allow me to pose a direct question to you guys. Please answer it as you would answer for yourself; not how someone else might supposedly answer it.

I would never presume how anyone else would answer questions to me.

My question to you is:
If you were forced to decide whether or not to take the mark of the beast, would you take it? As far as I can determine you have 3 options:
#1. Yes, you would take it because as a believer you are secure in your salvation and can never lose it.
#2. No, you would not take it because of the consequences spelled out in Rev 14:9-11
#3. Yes, you would take it but that would mean that you were never a believer in the first place.

#1 is unbiblical because the Bible is clear that those who take the mark of the beast will end up in hell.
#2 is biblical because born again believers won't take it.
#3 is also correct, in that no believer will take it.

If you choose option #1, at least you are perfectly consistent in your belief however it goes against what Scripture teaches happens to anyone who accepts the mark.
If you choose option #2, it nullifies your belief that you being a regenerate believer, can never lose your salvation.
If you choose option #3, I imagine that would be unsettling to you as I'm sure you consider yourself to presently be a genuine believer.

I don't understand your explanation of #2. How does not taking the mark "nullify your belief in eternal security"?

And if you answer that this question is irrelevant by claiming that the saints aren't around on the earth at that time because you you are a preterist or they are all raptured to heaven, do not neglect to notice Rev 14:12 "This calls for patient endurance on the part of the saints who obey God's commandments and remain faithful to Jesus." Whether these are the church-age saints or the tribulation saints is subject to another debate but the fact remains the saints are referenced in this context and are admonished to endure, obey and remain faithful to Jesus rather than worship the beast and accept the mark. Lastly if you claim that under no circumstance you are certain without a doubt, that you would never accept the mark of the beast, how would you know for sure what you would do or not do in the future, especially under extreme duress/persecution?

This is my belief on the issue of the mark of the beast. By the time that rolls around, all the unfaithful, disobedient believers will have died the "sin unto death", which I believe is part of God's discipline towards His children. Therefore, the believers who are left are faithful to Jesus. They won't take the mark, and they WILL become martyrs of the faith.

Even Peter who saw Jesus face-to-face and walked with him daily, was absolutely certain than he would never deny the Lord - but we all know what happened to Peter.

Of course Peter denied he knew Jesus. Did he lose salvation? No.

btw, I asked you to define what you mean by "hyper grace" in post #346.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I have more respect for OSAS people since they actually try to use scripture.

We don't "try". We DO. Unlike the OSNAS ilk.

So here's some verses for loss of salvation for you OSAS folks. 83 of them specifically.

What Does the Bible Say About Losing Your Salvation?

You're kidding me, right? How come the 2nd verse in your long list is John 10:28??

That verse is the SINGLE MOST DIRECT AND CLEAR VERSE in the Bible on eternal security. How come you list it as a verse supporting losing salvation??

Here's a color coded explanation of John 10:28, just so you can follow my points more easily and not get distracted.

"I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish,"

Here, Jesus speaks of both the CAUSE and EFFECT of having or possessing eternal life.

So, the red words teach us the CAUSE of having eternal life, which is Jesus Christ. He is the CAUSE of anyone who possesses eternal life, because He is the One who gives it.

The blue words teach us the EFFECT of having eternal life, which is never perishing.

Did you notice any list of conditions that recipients of eternal life must meet in order to have the EFFECT of possessing eternal life between the red words and the blue words?

No, there are none. If there were any such conditions, Jesus would have HAD to include them in that verse.

So, if salvation can be lost, then what Jesus said would be a LIE.

Is that all you're trying to do here, an attempt to prove that Jesus was a LIAR??

You should know better than that.

So, now that you have an explanation, color coded no less, of what Jesus was teaching in John 10:28, I invite you to address my points and prove that He wasn't teaching either the CAUSE or the EFFECT of having eternal life.

But, just to be clear, so far, I've met no one who has been able to do that.

Keep in mind what the verse is about; it is about HAVING or POSSESSING eternal life, and Jesus teaches us the CAUSE and EFFECT of having eternal life.