Once Saved Always Saved - Why is it so hard?

[stuart lawrence]

Matthew 23 is at the heart of loving those who are less fortunate. It is not saying we have to do everything on that list, but it is having a heart attitude of naturally helping the poor (instead of turning our noses up at them). Do I help the poor? This is something that I prefer to keep as a treasure between me and my God (So as not to boast before men but so that the Father may reward me openly me for doing things in secret for Him).


...

Matthew ch23 is all about religious hypocrites. People who do not practice what they preach. People who are careful to look pious and godly on the outside when the inside of the cup is a very different matter.
Hence:

The yeast of the Pharisees was hypocrisy

 

[stuart lawrence]

Following the truth means actually doing what God's Word says.
If a person says they believe the Bible and yet they do not strive to put what it says into practice, they are a hypocrite. The person who strives to obey God is not hypocrital because God realizes that it takes time to Sanctify his body of believers and make them perfect in Him. But a believer who throws up their arms in defeat in defense of sin is defending the devil's kingdom and not God's kingdom because there is no darkness in God. God is holy. God is good. God is love and He shines out the darkness.


...

Who is defending sin.

So you admit you sin and believe you are saved.
But at the same time you attack people who believe in osas as believing a false message of being saved and committing sin.

Wisdom is always proved right by its inconsistencies

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Matthew ch23 is all about religious hypocrites. People who do not practice what they preach. People who are careful to look pious and godly on the outside when the inside of the cup is a very different matter.
Hence:

The yeast of the Pharisees was hypocrisy

Actually, Matthew 23 is about helping the poor out of having a natural love living inside of you because Jesus lives there. One will want to help the poor and the less fortunate as a result of being in Christ. It is a normal thing for a Christian to help them.


...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Who is defending sin.

Do you believe sin is separation from God?
Yes, or no?
Do you believe all future sins are automatically forgiven already?
Yes, or no?

So you admit you sin and believe you are saved.

Sins that do not lead unto death are minor transgressions or faults.
When I say that a believer holds to the idea that they can sin and still be saved, I am talking about serious sins that lead unto death.

But at the same time you attack people who believe in osas as believing a false message of being saved and committing sin.

Minor transgressions is not the same as serious sins. Murder, hate, theft, adultery, coveting, and idolatry are really serious and wrong. They violate the moral law and hurt your neighbor. Not being baptized is not violating a moral law and hurting your neighbor in any significant way.

Wisdom is always proved right by its inconsistencies

Wisdom is justified by it's children.
Meaning, wisdom is proven true by the type of fruit that it bears.
If somebody is wise, then good things will result from that wisdom.
If somebody stumbles into evil and darkness as a result of such wisdom than it is not really true wisdom. I see OSAS as a means of staying in darkness because it preaches against Jesus setting the captives free (with them no longer being slaves to their sin).


...

 

[stuart lawrence]

Actually, Matthew 23 is about helping the poor out of having a natural love living inside of you because Jesus lives there. One will want to help the poor and the less fortunate as a result of being in Christ. It is a normal thing for a Christian to help them.


...

No Jason, I am sure everyone else knows what matt 23 is about, only you I imagine are struggling to understand.

Have to go out now, will respond to any future posts later

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Also, I have explained every verse you have put forth within this thread.
Yet, you really have not done that with me.


....

 

[Bible Highlighter]

No Jason, I am sure everyone else knows what matt 23 is about, only you I imagine are struggling to understand.

Have to go out now, will respond to any future posts later

Thank you for the insult.
I will rejoice in God my Savior.


...

 

[Kenny'sID]

No offense intended, but I think proposing that "fornication" (however you define it) is "close enough" to "murder" to be considered the same thing is going off the proverbial rails of just judgment. One is the product of hatred of brother, the other isn't. One is a clear violation of "love your neighbor" and the other isn't.

The problem with "hardcore perpetual sinners" is that you're just using a phrase without context or meaning. What makes one person a "hardcore perpetual sinner" and you and I, not? We're either "sinners" or we are not "sinners": the scripture doesn't make a difference between "hardcore perpetual sinners" and "softcore perpetual sinners": in the eyes of the law, we're all law-breakers, period. The law doesn't distinguish between a "10% law-breaker" and a "40% law-breaker" it only sees "100% law-breakers"

No offense taken, I just think your wrong...for the purpose of what we are discussing, it makes little difference what the sin is so again...close enough. We just disagree there.

No offense intended, but I think proposing that "fornication" (however you define it) is "close enough" to "murder" to be considered the same thing is going off the proverbial rails of just judgment. One is the product of hatred of brother, the other isn't. One is a clear violation of "love your neighbor" and the other isn't.

Yes, I am indeed saying that the saved can do "whatever they want" and the key word there being: want. To be saved you must first have love; it is love that "graduates" a person from being under the law, and, into grace. In grace, we are a "law unto ourselves" guided by love. We are no longer under the law and can no longer be accused of the law. Though we may sin in the eyes of the law, the law has no power of condemnation over us, we are free from condemnation being dead to the law.

A person that is saved doesn't want to hurt others because love doesn't want to hurt others. Grace is not an invitation to "sin it up" (Galatians 5:13) it is a removal from under the law because the saved one no longer needs the threat of wrath to make him act loving, since he is loving. Since scripture teaches love never fails (1 Corinthians 13:8) then salvation can never fail. The burden is really on the ones saying "love can fail" to demonstrate this is the case, and I'm confident it can't be done. Romans 8:35, Romans 8:38-39

Yet, in reality, they do hurt others/become perpetually disobedient, and become unsaved. You can think they are still saved if you like. On that we will also disagree

We do because "love never fails" thus any failing is not "love" to begin with. Again, look at the parable of the sower. There are only three types in that parable; two were never saved, one was always saved (bearing fruits). A good tree brings forth fruits. A good salvation brings forth fruits. It never fails; if a person's faith, hope or love fail; they were never saved to begin with, else these three would remain when shaken: 1 Corinthians 13:13

"Love never fails" yet people fail to keep loving all the time.

A good tree brings forth good fruit, and like any tree, it could fail to bring fort good fruit at any time. Since we are using a tree to make the point, we must follow through and not stop at just one possibility/cover all a fruit tree can do, and realize anything could stop the production of a fruit tree at any time. The tree is saved/produced fruit, then it started producing bad or no fruit at all...a tree can and does do that. Or are you going to tell me it never produced good fruit to begin with? (wasn't ever saved

You can call deception all you want, the same could be said against what you're teaching; but the ability to speak doesn't make the words spoken into truth. It's just an empty accusation; and if salvation is the unfailing power of God, you'd be falsely accusing the Holy Spirit if the doctrine were not deception. Thus, I, myself, would be very careful about accusing out-of-hand in these matters.

Deception works well for me.

The sheep are them under grace, the goats them under law. This is why Jesus calls the goats "you cursed" because the only place to be cursed is "under the law": Galatians 3:10, Matthew 25:41

Disagree, the goats simply did not do what they should have, what the lord requires. If they were never saved to begin with, why even bother with the parable. A specific point was being made there, otherwise they are just another bunch of unsaved people there is no reason to bring up. The parable is about that point. If it was about, or had anything to do with the grace part, it would have been mentioned, that was never even touched on.

Just because someone "thinks" something doesn't make it true. There are three types of ground, two groups clearly receive the word and are not saved. Jesus explains why in the parable. Only one group produces fruit.

Yet they still prance off into hell because they did "think" it was true, and they thought that because that is what they were tough, and that is what they believed.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

In any event, Stuart, may God's love shine upon you.


...

 

[HatGuy]

Try watching all of his videos.

Alan Ballou's YouTube Video Page.

Also, pray to God to work thru you.
For it is not by our own power that we can overcome sin, but it is by God's power we can do so.


...

I'll give you and him the benefit of the doubt and watch a few.

So many guys say "it's only by the Spirit" and then proceed to give a list of things you must do. Hope it ain't another of those.

But in line with this, here's what I find odd in this conversation. We say "it's only by the Spirit" that we defeat sin, but then insist someone cannot be saved unless they defeat sin, but then say that you only receive the Spirit when you're saved. See the conundrum there? I've heard people say, "don't sin, as it means God will remove his Spirit from you." Yet, those same people also teach the Spirit is required to defeat sin.

Can anyone see the bait and switch here, or is it just me?

If you need the Spirit to defeat sin, then you must remain saved to do it, which would mean that sin cannot make you lose your salvation. That very salvation is required to defeat sin.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Disagree, the goats simply did not do what they should have, what the lord requires. If they were never saved to begin with, why even bother with the parable. A specific point was being made there, otherwise they are just another bunch of unsaved people there is no reason to bring up. The parable is about that point. If it was about, or had anything to do with the grace part, it would have been mentioned, that was never even touched on.

I like what you wrote here.

Well said.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I'll give you and him the benefit of the doubt and watch a few.

So many guys say "it's only by the Spirit" and then proceed to give a list of things you must do. Hope it ain't another of those.

But in line with this, here's what I find odd in this conversation. We say "it's only by the Spirit" that we defeat sin, but then insist someone cannot be saved unless they defeat sin, but then say that you only receive the Spirit when you're saved. See the conundrum there? I've heard people say, "don't sin, as it means God will remove his Spirit from you." Yet, those same people also teach the Spirit is required to defeat sin.

Can anyone see the bait and switch here, or is it just me?

If you need the Spirit to defeat sin, then you must remain saved to do it, which would mean that sin cannot make you lose your salvation. That very salvation is required to defeat sin.

Most of the time he is quoting what Scripture says.
I hope God's Spirit talks to your heart on the verses he brings up.

May God bless you richly in all spiritual things this fine day.


....

 

[Kenny'sID]

Many today( not saying you do) claim you must obey the Ten Commandments to attain to heaven. And when they mention the TC they often refer to not committing adultery, murdering, stealing etc.
Again, i am not claiming this is you. But many give the impression This is what the TC consist of, but it goes much further than that. If you look at a woman with lust in your eye you break the TC. If you have an impure thought you break the TC.
I grew up I a church that stressed holy living/ you must obey the TC.
I responded to an altar call at the tender age of ten. On the outside I could act very pious and holy. I obviously didn't drink, smoke, use foul language, steal, commit adultery, murder etc. I tithed my pocket money and went to most of the church meetings. But I could not obey the TC on the inside. I reached puberty, and my guilt got worse. In my view, how could I be a Christian, I was constantly breaking Gods good and holy laws on the inside/ breaking the TC, for i sinned in my members (rom7:14-25.)
Can I ask you your thoughts on the following?
The church had 350 members. They all heard the same sermons as me. They all believed Gods laws( especially the TC) must be obeyed, and they gave the impression they lived very holy lives. But I left the church at the age of fifteen, because being honest, I knew I could not obey the TC/ Gods laws on the inside.
Yet the core members of the church remained.
Do you imagine I was the only person in the church who had impure thoughts? If not, why do you think the others remained while I left? Do you think possibly they excused breaking the TC themselves though they believed they must be obeyed to attain heaven?
This is an important point. I'm grateful you want to discuss it.
How come, if a variety of people believe you must obey the TC if you want to attain heaven, some of these people walk away from church because they know, in humble honest estimation of themselves they cannot obey them on the inside, while others remain whilst also not being able to obey the TC on the inside.
Why do different people view Thi so differently? Do you think some don't realise they break the TC by having impure thoughts? Is That possible? The law is written on your mind if you are a christian
Do people grade the TC according to what they believe is of lesser or greater importance to keep?

Its a mystery to me. If you say you must obey the TC with the inference heaven hinges on it, you have to obey all of them, not a few of them

I completely missed that post...sorry.

Did these people not teach forgiveness when the 10 were not obeyed? Did they not teach we can always be forgiven, and we just have to keep trying? Are you saying you could have never reached the goal you feel you needed too? I doubt anyone reaches it 100% in even a lifetime. Heaven doesn't hinge on being perfect. We need to try to obey, but no one should have told you or even inferred if you don't, your doomed. I think sometimes adults assume too much and may not have made things clear enough to you or other young people at the time?

FWIW, I still get those thoughts, but not even close to what I used too, and I'm still battling it. You were a kid then, and that's when they are the worse. I understand perfectly the action you took and why, but we need to give ourselves the time, and if nothing else, tell ourselves we'll never give up trying. That type attitude will generally bring on at least better results, but as a kid, you likely didn't know all you should have been told by your church.

I could say that's your fault because it's all in the bible, but younger people go to church so they can understand the bible better. All I can say is chalk your past situation up to part of the learning experience where sometimes thing go well and sometimes they do not, but we usually get things figured out if we are truly wanting too.

IF anyone is teaching "perfect obedience or else" they don't believe as I do. I seem to recall some confusion back then too, so maybe it's just a matter of the adults weren't doing their job, or something else that I'm missing.

 

[Kenny'sID]

I like what you wrote here.

Well said.

Thanks, Jason.

Had to do something, my simply disagreeing just wasn't cutting it, and for good reason...it never does.

 

[John Hyperspace]

No offense taken, I just think your wrong...for the purpose of what we are discussing, it makes little difference what the sin is so again...close enough. We just disagree there.

Not when the spirit is "love of brother" and we are specifically told that: 1 John 3:14. Fornicators isn't murder, and is not even close to the same thing in the purpose of this discussion. You have sinned, true? Would you mind if we make a thread about your murderous past? Then time you murdered someone? By your judgment, close enough, true?

Yet, in reality, they do hurt others/become perpetually disobedient, and become unsaved. You can think they are still saved if you like. On that we will also disagree

Bad news for you then: you're perpetually disobedient right along with them. By your own judgment you're not saved. Looks like it's hell for you, then? Or, when you mean "perpetual disobedience" you just mean, someone more perpetually disobedient than you? What happens when someone less perpetually disobedient than you comes along to condemn you, as you do to ones more perpetually disobedient? And, why is it I don't find the phrase "perpetually disobedient" in scripture? Is it possibley your own invented phrase to use to make it seem like you're "better" than others who sin "more" than you? Like, your XX% rule-breaking isn't as bad as their YY% rule-breaking?

"Love never fails" yet people fail to keep loving all the time.

So now scipture is wrong? Or?

A good tree brings forth good fruit, and like any tree, it could fail to bring fort good fruit at any time. Since we are using a tree to make the point, we must follow through and not stop at just one possibility/cover all a fruit tree can do, and realize anything could stop the production of a fruit tree at any time. The tree is saved/produced fruit, then it started producing bad or no fruit at all...a tree can and does do that. Or are you going to tell me it never produced good fruit to begin with? (wasn't ever saved

I'll just quote Jesus: Matthew 7:18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. So how do you figure a "good tree" can suddenly start producing "bad fruit"?

Deception works well for me.

I guess then pray that you're right? Because if you're not? You're accusing the Holy Spirit of deception if you're misunderstanding, true?

Disagree, the goats simply did not do what they should have, what the lord requires.

I supported my proposition with scripture: Jesus called them "cursed" and we specifically find a "curse" upon men under the law. You have any support for your proposition "[this is what I think it means]"?

Yet they still prance off into hell because they did "think" it was true, and they thought that because that is what they were tough, and that is what they believed.

What was it they thought? Something about, lack of love of brothers? Or, was it something about, "hardcore perpetual sinning"? I'm not seeing anything about "you were saved and now you're not" being said in the passage, do you?

 

[stuart lawrence]

I'll give you and him the benefit of the doubt and watch a few.

So many guys say "it's only by the Spirit" and then proceed to give a list of things you must do. Hope it ain't another of those.

But in line with this, here's what I find odd in this conversation. We say "it's only by the Spirit" that we defeat sin, but then insist someone cannot be saved unless they defeat sin, but then say that you only receive the Spirit when you're saved. See the conundrum there? I've heard people say, "don't sin, as it means God will remove his Spirit from you." Yet, those same people also teach the Spirit is required to defeat sin.

Can anyone see the bait and switch here, or is it just me?

If you need the Spirit to defeat sin, then you must remain saved to do it, which would mean that sin cannot make you lose your salvation. That very salvation is required to defeat sin.

Wonderful post:

If while we seek to be justified in Christ it becomes EVIDENT that we ourselves are sinners, does ThiS mean Tha Christ promotes sin? Absolutely not! If i rebuild what i destroyed I prove I am a lawbreaker.
Gal2:16&17

 

[stuart lawrence]

I completely missed that post...sorry.

Did these people not teach forgiveness when the 10 were not obeyed? Did they not teach we can always be forgiven, and we just have to keep trying? Are you saying you could have never reached the goal you feel you needed too? I doubt anyone reaches it 100% in even a lifetime. Heaven doesn't hinge on being perfect. We need to try to obey, but no one should have told you or even inferred if you don't, your doomed. I think sometimes adults assume too much and may not have made things clear enough to you or other young people at the time?

FWIW, I still get those thoughts, but not even close to what I used too, and I'm still battling it. You were a kid then, and that's when they are the worse. I understand perfectly the action you took and why, but we need to give ourselves the time, and if nothing else, tell ourselves we'll never give up trying. That type attitude will generally bring on at least better results, but as a kid, you likely didn't know all you should have been told by your church.

I could say that's your fault because it's all in the bible, but younger people go to church so they can understand the bible better. All I can say is chalk your past situation up to part of the learning experience where sometimes thing go well and sometimes they do not, but we usually get things figured out if we are truly wanting too.

IF anyone is teaching "perfect obedience or else" they don't believe as I do. I seem to recall some confusion back then too, so maybe it's just a matter of the adults weren't doing their job, or something else that I'm missing.

I left the church at the age of fifteen, I had to right? I couldn't obey the ten commandments. All manner of concupiscence had been aroused in me. I was a slave to masturbation so was continually breaking the TC.
But God was so gracious to me. At the age of nineteen he opened my eyes to grace. I suddenly believed I could be a christian after all for my right standing before God hinged on faith I Christ, not my personal goodness/ observing the law. But what of the masturbation? I didn't want it. I left it in Gods hands to deal with and for the first Time in my life stood on a justification of what Christ did for me at Calvary.
For the next three days I was blatantly breaking the TC, but unlike when I was younger I didn't let such behaviour condemn me, j looked to Christ and trusted he was my right standing before God. It wasn't easy, a voice in my head continually told me I was a hypocrite and fooling myself, I could not be a Christian and do what I was doing. But I ignored That voice, and kept trusting I was saved despite the fact i was breaking the TC.
On the fourth day, the masturbation I had been a slave to for six years stopped.

Paul wrote:

For sin shall no longer be your master, for you are not under law( of righteousness) but under grace( a righteousness of faith in Christ)
Rom 6:14

He preached an incredible message, the greatest message ever preached in my view since Christ walked this earth. But sadly, so few are willing to accept it

 

[stuart lawrence]

In any event, Stuart, may God's love shine upon you.


...

And may Gods love and truth shine on you also

 

[stuart lawrence]

Also, I have explained every verse you have put forth within this thread.
.


....

It isn't hard to do faulty exegesis

 

[Aldebaran]

Most of the time he is quoting what Scripture says.
I hope God's Spirit talks to your heart on the verses he brings up.

May God bless you richly in all spiritual things this fine day.


....

I really liked the points Hatguy made and I was looking forward to what you were going to say in response. Is there any insight that you have that could shed some light on the subject he brought up? I agree with him about how we're told that we need the Spirit to be saved and to defeat sin. Whenever I struggle with a sin, I'm told "You're not defeating that sin because you're trying to do it in the flesh! You need to let the Spirit handle it!" So if I go about it that way, however it's defined, and still don't overcome a sin, then what? Am I to conclude that I'm not saved? It's one of those circular reasonings that make me dizzy after awhile.