Is assurance of salvation possible?

[Invalidusername]

Not true. I told you that Judas walked away and Jesus did not prevent him from doing so. Do you really need the scripture for that? I told you the 70 walked away and Jesus did nothing to pevent them from doing so. Do you need the scriptures for that? Jesus said all of the disciples would fall away and abandon him and they all did. They repented and came back. But Jesus did not prevent them from falling away. What more do you need?
You don't even cast a shadow on my parade. You know too little.
Again, you know too little to discuss this. NO one says the ABOVE. No one. But Jesus said many would fall away from the faith and that happens. Do you need the scripture for that? YOu might because you do not seem to know the scriptures well.

This is how I know the Holy Spirit is not within you, your attitude and words. This is also how it is clear that you have not repented. You are sorry for what you gave up that you once enjoyed. True. But that is not sorry for what you did. This attitude I have not seen.

I am sorry for what I did. You do not know my heart... At all.

And it's clear that you do not know Christ's heart. I see nothing of Christ within you. It's pretty clear that there's no love or compassion in you. I have more love and compassion than you. You have fallen away or have never been saved. The Spirit is not within you since you lack fundamental understanding of salvation and how to be saved/remain saved.

 

[Invalidusername]

There's nothing in those passages to presume such people go to hell other than desire that was the case. Those people just witnessed Peter pronounce God's judgment on two people and saw them drop dead at his feet. A quick vindication of the Gospel message, the messengers, and a reminder that God isn't fooling around. Their response is understandable.

Could you imagine if God were to strike down everyone who had ever stood in a pulpit and uttered a lie? At some point, no one would ever set foot behind one again, even if there were a chance of slipping up.

In contrast, what you are teaching is that if a person even lies, they will go to hell. Forget the gospel, it's too fragile to help. What Jesus did wasn't sufficient enough to cover it.

No but they lied to the Holy Spirit. Perhaps they committed blasphemy of the Holy Spirit?

 

[SeventyOne]

No but they lied to the Holy Spirit. Perhaps they committed blasphemy of the Holy Spirit?

All sin is a sin against God. Recall what David said when confronted with his sin of adultery and murder. He said he sinned only against God, but from our point of view we'd clearly state Bathsheba and Uriah were wronged as well.

These two lied to Peter, not God directly, but Peter transferred the injury to God Himself. When we sin, we sin against God. When we lie, we lie against God. There was nothing extraordinary about their lying that others don't do regularly. What was extraordinary was the measure of punishment God used when making an example out of them.

 

[Invalidusername]

All sin is a sin against God. Recall what David said when confronted with his sin of adultery and murder. He said he sinned only against God, but from our point of view we'd clearly state Bathsheba and Uriah were wronged as well.

These two lied to Peter, not God directly, but Peter transferred the injury to God Himself. When we sin, we sin against God. When we lie, we lie against God. There was nothing extraordinary about their lying that others don't do regularly. What was extraordinary was the measure of punishment God used when making an example out of them.

I always assumed the punishment was severe since the sin itself was severe

 

[SeventyOne]

I always assumed the punishment was severe since the sin itself was severe

The severity of the punishment here isn't uniform. Recall Jesus said it would be more tolerable for Sodom on the day of judgment that it will be for others in certain towns in His day. Although their judgment will be far more severe, they weren't destroyed in judgment here by fire and brimstone as Sodom was.

Even Moses lost his life due to his disobedience. I doubt anyone would claim he went to hell as a result.

 

[FreeGrace2]

The problem is you take a verse and don't apply it the way it is intended.

Excuse me!? I apply verses based on what is SAID, especially those verses that are very straightforward and plain in meaning.

I agree with you that when you are saved you do possess eternal life.

OK, that's a start.

That's a fact. You believe, receive the Holy Spirit, are reborn, and have an inheritance. However WHILE WE ARE IN THIS LIFE we always have free will. We can turn into sin and reject that gift.

Yes, Jesus actually noted people who "believe for a while, and in time of testing/temptation, fall away". Luke 8:13

But He never said such people lose the eternal life that He gave them.

Otherwise, His statement in John 10:28 is a lie.

John 15 about the vine makes it perfectly clear when He says that people are cut from the vine if they are not abiding in Christ. This means we must remain in the vine to be saved.

No, it does NOT mean that. You've taken an agricultural metaphor WAY too far.

Back up a bit. The whole point of John 15:1-7 is about bearing fruit, not "how to get saved" or "how to stay saved".

And here's the color coded proof!

1 “I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener.
2He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit, while every branch that does bear fruit he prunes so that it will be even more fruitful.
3 You are already clean because of the word I have spoken to you.
4 Remain in me, as I also remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me.
5 “I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing.
6 If you do not remain in me, you are like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned.
7 If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you.

So, the red words clearly speak of bearing fruit. But if you were correct, Jesus would have not mentioned "bearing fruit" but instead "stay saved".

Also, the passage is about reciprocal relationship, or FELLOWSHIP.

The blue words reflect this reciprocal fellowship.

The sad thing is I was enlightened and had that new nature but gradually over time my heart grew hard and I began to love sin more than God. This is why Jude warns us to "remain in his love" and the Bible also states to "make sure of our election".

Peter never meant "ensure you are or stay saved". That is absurd. Why? Because Peter also wrote 1 Pet 1:23 - For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God.

This verse is directly comparable to John 10:28.

Because the believer has been born of IMPERISHABLE SEED, he/she CANNOT PERISH.

Christ did die for every sin that is forgivable. Did Christ die for blasphemy of the Holy Spirit?

Full stop!!

That particular sin has some important context. You cannot just rip it out of its context and apply it however your heart desires.

And the context shows that ONLY Jews who actually saw Jesus in the flesh performing miracles and attributing those miracles to the devil were guilty of that sin.

So, because it's been over 2,000 yrs since Jesus walked on earth in the flesh, that sin CANNOT be committed today. Totally impossible.

Clearly He didn't since that sin is unforgivable.

Clearly, from the context, that sin cannot be committed today.

Did Christ die for people who commit the Hebrews 6 apostasy? Clearly not.

What's so "clear" about it? How are these verses NOT CLEAR to you?

2 Cor 5:14,15 - 14 For Christ’s love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died. 15 And he died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again.

Heb 2:9 - But we do see Jesus, who was made lower than the angels for a little while, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.

1 John 2:2 - He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

Did Christ die for the sin of rejecting Christ? No He did not, otherwise universalism would be true.

The error here is thinking that His death saves people. Since the above 4 verses SAY that He did die for everyone, and obviously most will end up in hell, your premise is quite faulty.

His death paid the sin debt for everyone, so that God's grace can be applied to everyone. We are saved by grace, through faith. Not, as you assume, "we are saved by Christ's death".

We have eternal life and will never perish... As long as we remain in that state in this life.

OK, rubber needs to hit road here. What verse says what you are claiming here?

Where is that "as long as..." verse?

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said this:
"In spite of color coding my explanation, you still do not understand. I never said that eternal life is "an effect". What I said, and you missed, was that the possession of eternal life is the effect of Jesus giving the gift to believers."

Let us apply your word play to real life.

Before we do get that distracted, just a question: why do you twist a color coded explanation of actual verses into being some kind of "word play"??

How does that work? I have color coded the words OF SCRIPTURE and then explained them.

So, rather than playing word games, as you falsely charge, I have provided a clear explanation of what the words of Scripture refer to.

So, if you disagree, all you really need to do is address the color coded explanation and prove that my explanation is in error.

Do you tell those you love to whom you give a present that their possession of that persent is an effect that comes from the cause of you giving it?

No, I do not. And neither does Jesus. When a person believes, He just GIVES the gift to them. However, John 10:28 is the explanation of WHO gives this gift, which is Himself. And a direct statement of the RESULT of having that gift. The recipient SHALL NEVER PERISH.

So, why don't you believe what Jesus said?

Do they like this description of them receiving a present?

I don't do it, so I can't answer your question.

That them having it is an EFFECT That proceeds from a CAUSE?

Are you really so dense that you cannot grasp the simple point that Jesus was making in John 10:28?

He is the GIVER of the gift. That makes Him the CAUSE of HAVING the gift. Duh.

Do you see the problem here?

Yes, very clearly. You've having a huge problem with what is obvious.

Do you that you reducing having what is given to a EFFECT that proceeds from a heartless and humanless CAUSE eliminates love?

I do not have any idea what this sentence means. It seems were typing too fast or something. Please re-read your sentence: "do you that you reducing having what is given to a EFFECT that proceeds from....".

And the focus is you POSSESSING the matter and not the matter (salvation) itself.

I couldn't disagree more. Of course the focus is on WHAT you possess.

This is eternal security, a subject that you do not believe. But is obvious nonetheless.

That which is possessed can be lost.

OK, now you've thrown in a very generalized statement, as if the gift of eternal life is nothing more than an object, like a pebble, coin, or anything.

What verse in the Bible tells us in plain language that eternal life can be lost? You cannot provide any verse that says that.

Or that salvation can be lost.

And, in fact, anything possessed can be lost.

It is obvious to me that you are either ignorant of Eph 1:13,14, or you just don't believe it.

The whole idea of it being possessed means it can be lost.

Again, eternal life is not like some coin, pebble, car keys or anything else that can be lost.

All you are doing is trying to turn God's actual life (eternal) into a finite object. Disgusting.

You have ensured that the matter can be lost.

I have ensured NO SUCH THING. It is your claim, which is false, when speaking of eternal life.

To use biblical terms, one can shipwreak ones salvation.

Wrong again. I recommend that you read the verse before trying to quote it from memory. NO VERSE says that salvation can be shipwrecked. The verse that you were trying in vain to quote is 1 Tim 1:19 - holding on to faith and a good conscience, which some have rejected and so have suffered shipwreck with regard to the faith.

So we see that it's not about salvation but about what one believes (their faith).

But you probably assume that one is saved by their action of believing. But that's not true. We are saved by God on the basis of believing. But NOT on our action of believing.

One can neglect it. ONe can walk away from it. It does not mean that it is merely not going well.

There are NO VERSES that say we can walk away from salvation. Or neglect it, as if it's some kind of garden that needs tending. How absurd is that!

And you seem to want to ignore what Jesus said when he said that many will fall away FROM the faith.

Ignore? I can tell you without having to look it up what verse that is: 1 Tim 4:1

So don't tell me what I'm ignoring.

But talk about who is ignoring "what Jesus said". Just read John 10:28 and tell me with a straight faith that anyone who has been given eternal life CAN perish.

Means the faith is lost. Why is this not clear?

It's very clear. And NOT the point. Losing faith is not losing salvation. Or what Jesus said in John 10:28 is WRONG, a LIE.

Is that what you're trying to prove?

When one no longer believes, one has lost salvation.

You are full of opinions here, but quite short on any verses that support your opinions.

One gave it up and jumped out of the hand that held them where no one can snatch them.

Oh, really? Do you consider yourself a person? OK, then, in John 10:28 you can exchange "no one" with "no person". Now try to apply your opinion about yourself "jumping out of His hand".

Since "no one" is able to remove the believer from God's hand, EVEN the believer him/herself cannot remove themselves. But your opinion claims that the believer is able (basically powerful enough) to remove them from God's hand, when the words of the verse are QUITE CLEAR.

Jesus said why and it is always the reasons he suggested. Life is too difficult or too pleasurable, in short. They jumped out of the hand. IT happens.

So, you've actually seen people jump out of God's hand? Really? Absurd.

The bible does not use the word "never" as to believed. That plays no role, frankly speaking.

Your lack of biblical knowledge is appalling. Here are 2 verses:

John 3:18 - Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.

1 Thess 2:12 - and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.

Here's the truth: the red words mean "never believed". But go ahead and try to prove otherwise.

If one repents of not believing and believes, one can be saved. If one believes but repents of believing and decides not to believe, they are lost.

If you are correct, then just admit that you believe that Jesus LIED in John 10:28.

However, I will ALWAYS believe what Jesus said over your contradiction of what Jesus said.

The warnings of Jesus you ignore.

There you go again; making FALSE CONCLUSIONS about what I pay attention to and what I ignore. I don't ignore ANY warning of Scripture. But, unlike yourself, I DO understand what is being warned of.

You do not have to take care lest you stumble and fall in your OSAS theology.

You have just demonstrated your abject ignorance of my theology. The Bible is very clear that the warnings in Scripture refer to God's discipline towards His own children, just like a good father who doesn't spoil their children but disciplines them when they misbehave.

Heb 12:11 says God's discipline is PAINFUL. And I believe it. Paul made that point in 1 Cor 11:30 - That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep.

See the progression? weakness, then sickness, then physical death. Does that sound like a mere slap on the wrist?

Or, consider 1 Cor 5:5 - 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.

Does that sound like a mere slap on the wrist, when Satan has access to a believer for "the destruction of the flesh". Think he'll be "gentle" or "polite" when destroying one's flesh?

Neither Jesus nor anyone in the Bible promises eternal security nor anything close to is.

This ignorance is just appalling. Not only Jesus, but Paul and Peter were absolutely clear.

Jesus in John 3:16, 10:28 recipients of eternal life shall never perish
Paul in Rom 11:29 God's gifts are irrevocable
Peter in 1 Pet 1:23 we are born again of IMPERISHABLE SEED

YOu think because no one can snatch you out, that you cannot leave.

Again, I ask for verses that express your opinions, not your opinions.

But you cannot support your opinions from Scripture.

I assure you, you can and many have.

You have no ability to assure anyone of anything, given your lack of biblical knowledge.

Jesus said many would fall away from the faith they had. They lost what he had possesed and were lost.

No, you've just made a serious error in your conclusion.

 

[Invalidusername]

The severity of the punishment here isn't uniform. Recall Jesus said it would be more tolerable for Sodom on the day of judgment that it will be for others in certain towns in His day. Although their judgment will be far more severe, they weren't destroyed in judgment here by fire and brimstone as Sodom was.

Even Moses lost his life due to his disobedience. I doubt anyone would claim he went to hell as a result.

Moses simply didn't enter the promised land. He was not struck dead. What do you think about King Saul? Did he lose his salvation since the Holy Spirit departed him?

Excuse me!? I apply verses based on what is SAID, especially those verses that are very straightforward and plain in meaning.


OK, that's a start.


Yes, Jesus actually noted people who "believe for a while, and in time of testing/temptation, fall away". Luke 8:13

But He never said such people lose the eternal life that He gave them.

Otherwise, His statement in John 10:28 is a lie.


No, it does NOT mean that. You've taken an agricultural metaphor WAY too far.

Back up a bit. The whole point of John 15:1-7 is about bearing fruit, not "how to get saved" or "how to stay saved".

And here's the color coded proof!

1 “I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener.
2He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit, while every branch that does bear fruit he prunes so that it will be even more fruitful.
3 You are already clean because of the word I have spoken to you.
4 Remain in me, as I also remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me.
5 “I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing.
6 If you do not remain in me, you are like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned.
7 If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you.

So, the red words clearly speak of bearing fruit. But if you were correct, Jesus would have not mentioned "bearing fruit" but instead "stay saved".

Also, the passage is about reciprocal relationship, or FELLOWSHIP.

The blue words reflect this reciprocal fellowship.


Peter never meant "ensure you are or stay saved". That is absurd. Why? Because Peter also wrote 1 Pet 1:23 - For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God.

This verse is directly comparable to John 10:28.

Because the believer has been born of IMPERISHABLE SEED, he/she CANNOT PERISH.


Full stop!!

That particular sin has some important context. You cannot just rip it out of its context and apply it however your heart desires.

And the context shows that ONLY Jews who actually saw Jesus in the flesh performing miracles and attributing those miracles to the devil were guilty of that sin.

So, because it's been over 2,000 yrs since Jesus walked on earth in the flesh, that sin CANNOT be committed today. Totally impossible.


Clearly, from the context, that sin cannot be committed today.


What's so "clear" about it? How are these verses NOT CLEAR to you?

2 Cor 5:14,15 - 14 For Christ’s love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died. 15 And he died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again.

Heb 2:9 - But we do see Jesus, who was made lower than the angels for a little while, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.

1 John 2:2 - He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.


The error here is thinking that His death saves people. Since the above 4 verses SAY that He did die for everyone, and obviously most will end up in hell, your premise is quite faulty.

His death paid the sin debt for everyone, so that God's grace can be applied to everyone. We are saved by grace, through faith. Not, as you assume, "we are saved by Christ's death".


OK, rubber needs to hit road here. What verse says what you are claiming here?

Where is that "as long as..." verse?

The problem is you understand the initial salvation process BUT don't understand the sanctification process. When you are saved you receive the Holy Spirit and then the sanctification process begins. This is what Jesus talks about when He says I am the vine and you're the branches. He is talking about the Christian life after being saved and how it must bear fruit in order to remain in the vine. When the branch does not bear fruit, it withers and dies. This is spiritual death. After it withers and dies, Jesus has no choice but to remove the dead branch and throw it in the fire. It's clear what this means.

I do not believe that's what blasphemy of the Holy Spirit means. There is no reason for the Bible to record that sin if it is unable to be committed today. It's a clear warning for us. The Holy Spirit can be blasphemed today and that's a pretty sure fact. You're taking a risky gamble by saying it cannot be committed today and basically calling that scripture useless. Jesus did so many things that it could not all be recorded so everything that is recorded is for our benefit and instruction.

1 John 2 "24As for you, see that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you. If it does, you also will remain in the Son and in the Father. 25And this is what he promised us—eternal life."

1 Cor 5:2 "By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain."

 

[FreeGrace2]

The severity of the punishment here isn't uniform. Recall Jesus said it would be more tolerable for Sodom on the day of judgment that it will be for others in certain towns in His day. Although their judgment will be far more severe, they weren't destroyed in judgment here by fire and brimstone as Sodom was.

Even Moses lost his life due to his disobedience. I doubt anyone would claim he went to hell as a result.

To be clear, Moses didn't lose his life. He lost his ticket into the promised land. And you are correct; he did go to heaven.

 

[FreeGrace2]

The problem is you understand the initial salvation process BUT don't understand the sanctification process.

Is that so? Let's see.

When you are saved you receive the Holy Spirit and then the sanctification process begins.

Of course.

This is what Jesus talks about when He says I am the vine and you're the branches. He is talking about the Christian life after being saved and how it must bear fruit in order to remain in the vine.

No, He was speaking of a reciprocal relationship that is required in order to bear fruit.

Ever hear "being in fellowship" and "being out of fellowship"? If not, you've got some catching up to do. Only when a believer is IN fellowship with Christ can they bear fruit.

Being IN fellowship is akin to being "filled with the Spirit" from Eph 5:18 or "walking by the Spirit" from Gal 5:16.

However, believers who grieve (Eph 4:30) or quench (1 Thess 5:19) the Spirit are OUT of fellowship with the Lord and CANNOT bear fruit.

So, the sanctification process ONLY progresses WHEN the believer is IN fellowship. It absolutely ceases to progress WHEN the believer is OUT of fellowship.

When the branch does not bear fruit, it withers and dies. This is spiritual death.

This is impossible AND absurd. Why? Because Jesus said He gives eternal life and they (recipients) SHALL NEVER PERISH in John 10:28. Your suggestion is that one who was given eternal life can die spiritually, which directly contradicts Jesus.

Further, Peter aligns perfectly with Jesus in 1 Pet 1:23 when he wrote that we are "born again, not of perishable seed (human life), but of IMPERISHABLE SEED (spiritual life, eternal life).

So, eternal life cannot die for any reason. So, all who have been given eternal life SHALL NEVER PERISH.

Why don't you believe what Jesus said?

After it withers and dies, Jesus has no choice but to remove the dead branch and throw it in the fire. It's clear what this means.

What is clear is that you do not know what this means.

Jesus used a common agricultural metaphor to make the point that those who don't bear fruit will be removed from service. To an orthodox Jew in that day was just shocking, since they were (and still are) so proud of being God's chosen people.

The very idea of being discarded or removed from service was unthinkable to them.

I do not believe that's what blasphemy of the Holy Spirit means. There is no reason for the Bible to record that sin if it is unable to be committed today.

Says you.

Jesus wasn't speaking of every generation anyway. What makes you think He was? Just look at the context.

When the Pharisees saw Jesus perform miracles, they attributed the miracles to the devil. So Jesus addressed THAT problem right THEN. And those Jews committed a sin that was not forgivable.

The fact is, that particular sin cannot be committed today.

It's a clear warning for us. The Holy Spirit can be blasphemed today and that's a pretty sure fact.

Why are you so sure? Do you really believe that any believer today can actually Jesus in the flesh perform a miracle and then attribute it to the devil? Absurd.

Moreover, those who did atrribute His miracles by the Spirit to the devil were already unbelievers. All they did was seal their destiny.

You're taking a risky gamble by saying it cannot be committed today and basically calling that scripture useless.

I've never even suggested that absurdity.

1 John 2 "24As for you, see that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you. If it does, you also will remain in the Son and in the Father. 25And this is what he promised us—eternal life."

Don't you see 2 points here?

The first point is about reciprocal relationship (fellowship) and the second point is about God's promise of eternal life.

1 Cor 5:2 "By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain."

The words 'hold firmly' has nothing to do with how strong your grip is. It's a single word in the Greek and means to "possess". And we know that "whoever believes" has (possesses) eternal life. John 5:24, 6:47, 1 John 5;11, 13.

Also, the words 'in vain' means 'without reason'. Do you understand what "without reason" means? It means to believe something without any purpose or goal.

iow, faith requires a purpose of goal. Otherwise, just "having faith" is worthless.

So when someone says, "just have faith" in a difficult situation is absurd. They need to specify WHAT to have faith IN.

 

[SeventyOne]

Moses simply didn't enter the promised land. He was not struck dead. What do you think about King Saul? Did he lose his salvation since the Holy Spirit departed him?

To be clear, Moses didn't lose his life. He lost his ticket into the promised land. And you are correct; he did go to heaven.

The method God used to ensure Moses never entered the promised land was by him dying. Recall that scripture even tells us that when he died he was in good health and even his eyesight wasn't dimmed.

In other words, when he died, it wasn't because he was dying on his own. There was an external factor involved in his death, and that was the judgment of God keeping His promise that Moses would not enter the promised land.

 

[Eloy Craft]

a reminder that God isn't fooling around. Their response is understandable.

Indeed, their salvation was at stake.

 

[SeventyOne]

Indeed, their salvation was at stake.

Once again. It doesn't say any such thing. You are imposing your desires on the scriptures.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"To be clear, Moses didn't lose his life. He lost his ticket into the promised land. And you are correct; he did go to heaven."

The method God used to ensure Moses never entered the promised land was by him dying. Recall that scripture even tells us that when he died he was in good health and even his eyesight wasn't dimmed.

My only point was that Moses was preventedfrom entering the promised land.

In other words, when he died, it wasn't because he was dying on his own.

As I said, "Moses didn't lose his life". But he did lose his "ticket" into the promised land.

There was an external factor involved in his death, and that was the judgment of God keeping His promise that Moses would not enter the promised land.

No argument.

 

[Eloy Craft]

Once again. It doesn't say any such thing. You are imposing your desires on the scriptures.

Then Peter sent Ananias and Sapphira to heaven? If so what was the great fear abouit that the whole Church felt?

 

[Invalidusername]

Then Peter sent Ananias and Sapphira to heaven? If so what was the great fear abouit that the whole Church felt?

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

 

[SeventyOne]

Then Peter sent Ananias and Sapphira to heaven? If so what was the great fear abouit that the whole Church felt?

I've already gone over that point.

 

[SeventyOne]

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

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'.

 

[Invalidusername]

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'.

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

Hyper grace is not biblical.

 

[SeventyOne]

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

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.