Once Saved, Always Saved?

[Alithis]

Your theory:

When Paul boasted he boasted that he had a messenger of satan. It's impossible for a person to boast in that way and still have the power of Christ manifest in his ministry.

My theory :

When Paul bosted he boasted that he was not the person who was the source of revelations and miracles that manifested in His ministry.

He said that this confession, along with his meekness, and refusal to take payment for preaching was being mistaken for falsehood and cheating, so he was forced to reveal his equality with other Apostles, although it meant that his ministry would be compromised:

2 Corinthians 11
17What I am saying, I am not saying as the Lord would, but as in foolishness, in this confidence of boasting.

He had always confessed before it was God who was the source of his ministry, but now, like Moses he had stopped giving glory to God.

2 Corinthians 13
2I have previously said when present the second time, and though now absent I say in advance to those who have sinned in the past and to all the rest as well, that if I come again I will not spare anyone, 3since you are seeking for proof of the Christ who speaks in me, and who is not weak toward you, but mighty in you.

For that reason, even though his reputation would be cleared, God would humiliate him by not letting him be the one who led the people into rest:

2 Corinthians 12
21I am afraid that when I come again my God may humiliate me before you, and I may mourn over many of those who have sinned in the past and not repented of the impurity, immorality and sensuality which they have practiced.

again .. its not my theory i have not presented a theory
i simply quoted what paul plainly states in the text .. because he actually says simply what he means . so if you cal it my theory one more time i wil have to block ya .
good grief, if i quote john chapter one are you going to start calling "that" my theory also ?
read the text and accept what is written .
it is beginning to appear that you are more interested in discrediting paul then you are inn the truth of the inspired word of God . and that is a concern .

 

[DJKWord]

I do have a concern about this. What about witnessing?

In the Navy I went to a Bible study where the leader spoke of our responsibility to do so, and quoted Luke 12:47:

And that servant who knew his master’s will, and did not prepare himself or do according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.

If believers are once saved always saved, then where does that leave this?

 

[Wordkeeper]

"no law, no sin" ? crazy
"Adam brought sin into the world because he brought in law" ? ridiculous

the presence of the law is not sin, it is breaking the law.
adam did not brought the law, God did. God said " you shall not eat..", and Adam was NOT sinful yet. It is when he disobeyed.

you should start re-reading Genesis 1-3 with fresh new eyes, or study Romans 5.

"Elizabeth and Zacharias were said to be righteous."- and yet they died. why? do you think.

even the people living before the law was given to moses - they all still died even if they were outside the law. why? do you think.

because sin is not just about disobeying the law personally, it is all humankind's sin represented by Adam's in his sin.

and thus ALL SINNED, because of ADAM.
and thus ALL DIED because ALL SINNED even before the law was given in their generation.

this means ADAM's sin is IMPUTED TO US which doomed all mankind (existing or to be born later)

and by the same token
​

Christ's righteousness is IMPUTED TO US which saves all those who put their trust in him by faith.​

Rom 5:12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned--
Rom 5:13 for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law.
Rom 5:14 Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come. ​

Augustine, who used Scripture to formalise the doctrine of Original Sin, made a mistake because:

1. He was a neoplatonist, a Manicheanist, who believed that matter was evil and the spirit was good, and to get to heaven men had to shed their body.

2. He did not know Greek and had to depend on Latin translations.

Augustine took Paul’s phrase “ἐφ᾽ ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον” following the Vulgate “in quo omnes peccaverunt” to be “in whom [Adam] all sinned”.

That means we all sinned whilst we were all in Adam's body.

But Paul meant Adam's action caused us to fall under the jurisdiction of the law. If I worked in Monaco I would be free from taxes. If my father broke the law and the whole family was deported back Stateside , then I would have to start paying income tax for my salary. Because of my father, law, tax regulations, is now in the picture.

Adam's action caused all of mankind to be deported to a law enforcable state. Where there is no law there is no transgression. Now every person born is a transgressor. That's why the Orthodox Church says we are sinners because of the CONSEQUENCE of Adam's action, not because we were in Adam.

 

[Wordkeeper]

again .. its not my theory i have not presented a theory
i simply quoted what paul plainly states in the text .. because he actually says simply what he means . so if you cal it my theory one more time i wil have to block ya .
good grief, if i quote john chapter one are you going to start calling "that" my theory also ?
read the text and accept what is written .
it is beginning to appear that you are more interested in discrediting paul then you are inn the truth of the inspired word of God . and that is a concern .

Scripture was written in a different age and culture. That's why we have to interpret it. That's why commentaries are written. To make theories about what the author meant. Door meant way in Jesus' days.

Otherwise I would quote the text woodenly, directly, and say Jesus was a door, complete with hinges and a handle.

 

[SeventyOne]

I do have a concern about this. What about witnessing?

In the Navy I went to a Bible study where the leader spoke of our responsibility to do so, and quoted Luke 12:47:

And that servant who knew his master’s will, and did not prepare himself or do according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.

If believers are once saved always saved, then where does that leave this?

What does one have to do with the other? Is he any less a slave? Is he dismissed from his duties? Is he killed? Or is he just punished and remains a slave?

I think the last would be correct in this instance.

What's being missed is that when a person is born again, they are actually new creations. We are told we are new creatures. That's why we are called 'sons of God' in the NT. We are now directly created by God. It would take another act of creation to get us back to our original state if the salvation was lost, and there is no provision given in scripture for such a change.

 

[bbbbbbb]

I do have a concern about this. What about witnessing?

In the Navy I went to a Bible study where the leader spoke of our responsibility to do so, and quoted Luke 12:47:

And that servant who knew his master’s will, and did not prepare himself or do according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.

If believers are once saved always saved, then where does that leave this?

Where does that leave you, indeed? If you believe that Christians who do not do God's will shall be beaten with many stripes, then you will spend an eternity in heaven being perpetually beaten for each and every time you failed to do God's will (which is innumerable given the fact that God commanded you to love your neighbor as yourself).

 

[Alithis]

I do have a concern about this. What about witnessing?

In the Navy I went to a Bible study where the leader spoke of our responsibility to do so, and quoted Luke 12:47:

And that servant who knew his master’s will, and did not prepare himself or do according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.

If believers are once saved always saved, then where does that leave this?

right along side all the other MANY contradictions to the osas theory

 

[bbbbbbb]

right along side all the other MANY contradictions to the osas theory

Are these like all the MANY contradictions in the Bible?

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

No, interpreting as it has been done wickedly for 2000 years shows clearly that interpretation is NOT needed.

No theories are needed either.

Ask Y'SHUA again "How did Simon Barjona LEARN who the MESSIAH IS ? "

THAT is the answer TODAY ALSO.

And the ONLY way to stay free from idols and heresy.(of many interpretations never needed in the first place; never authorized by YHWH).

That's why we have to interpret it. That's why commentaries are written. To make theories about what the author meant.

 

[Geralt]

yeah i have read and know all the accusations and defamation made by the orthodox church against augustine, so they can put forward their own version of a kinda "collateral damage" formulation of Adams sin effects on the human race.

but we are not talking about Augustine, but the apostle Paul and its context. and Paul uses both Adam and Christ as representative heads of both races. in fact Paul defines christ as a second adam. and this corporate identity is the foundation of both the atonement system in the OT and the means of salvation in the NT - that like the priest in the OT representing the people and their sins in the ritual of the atonement of the OT sacrifice, so both christ and adam represented their own races in both damnation and reconciliation.​

Augustine, who used Scripture to formalise the doctrine of Original Sin, made a mistake because:

1. He was a neoplatonist, a Manicheanist, who believed that matter was evil and the spirit was good, and to get to heaven men had to shed their body.

2. He did not know Greek and had to depend on Latin translations.

Augustine took Paul’s phrase “ἐφ᾽ ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον” following the Vulgate “in quo omnes peccaverunt” to be “in whom [Adam] all sinned”.

That means we all sinned whilst we were all in Adam's body.

But Paul meant Adam's action caused us to fall under the jurisdiction of the law. If I worked in Monaco I would be free from taxes. If my father broke the law and the whole family was deported back Stateside , then I would have to start paying income tax for my salary. Because of my father, law, tax regulations, is now in the picture.

Adam's action caused all of mankind to be deported to a law enforcable state. Where there is no law there is no transgression. Now every person born is a transgressor. That's why the Orthodox Church says we are sinners because of the CONSEQUENCE of Adam's action, not because we were in Adam.

 

[Wordkeeper]

yeah i have read and know all the accusations and defamation made by the orthodox church against augustine, so they can put forward their own version of a kinda "collateral damage" formulation of Adams sin effects on the human race.

but we are not talking about Augustine, but the apostle Paul and its context. and Paul uses both Adam and Christ as representative heads of both races. in fact Paul defines christ as a second adam. and this corporate identity is the foundation of both the atonement system in the OT and the means of salvation in the NT - that like the priest in the OT representing the people and their sins in the ritual of the atonement of the OT sacrifice, so both christ and adam represented their own races in both damnation and reconciliation.​

No one pays for Adam's sin:

The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child.

Ezekiel 18:20 (TNIV)

Also, the priest did not stand in the place of the people. Two goats represented the people:

Leviticus 16
5“He shall take from the congregation of the sons of Israel two male goats for a sin offering and one ram for a burnt offering.

 

[Alithis]

Are these like all the MANY contradictions in the Bible?

there are none .. note i said contradictions to a theory (referring to a theory some people have,not the bible )

 

[Wordkeeper]

Where does that leave you, indeed? If you believe that Christians who do not do God's will shall be beaten with many stripes, then you will spend an eternity in heaven being perpetually beaten for each and every time you failed to do God's will (which is innumerable given the fact that God commanded you to love your neighbor as yourself).

Christians will not be punished eternally. The worry is those who believe they are Christians but are not:

Luke 13
9Then if it should bear fruit next year, well and good; but if not, you can cut it down.

 

[Geralt]

- and yet achan's sin caused the death of his entire household, Joshua 7
- and yet Lot and Moses asks for withholding against the many, in behalf of the righteousness of the few.
- and yet all people suffered death, even though they did not sin like adam and outside the law.
- priest mediates, not goats. priests lays hands on the goats, one dies , the other is banished. expiation, propitiation.

only the willfully blind will deny the fact that God recognizes and acts accordingly based on representative's own acts in behalf of the many. i mean why even pray for the salvation of your unregenerate friends, unless God honors the one praying as representing in behalf of those who are lost. the entire concept of the priesthood, either christ or us rests on the concept of corporate representation. the gospel itself would lose its meaning without this process. and what is left is another version of performance based gospel, where salvation becomes a reward and not a gift.

the eastern/orthodox can only suggest other suffers due to the consequence of the sins of others (like adam) and acts as victims or collateral damage.​

No one pays for Adam's sin:
The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child.

Ezekiel 18:20 (TNIV)

Also, the priest did not stand in the place of the people. Two goats represented the people:

Leviticus 16
5“He shall take from the congregation of the sons of Israel two male goats for a sin offering and one ram for a burnt offering.

 

[sculleywr]

2000 years ? total delusion.
council of orange canons in ad529 is even against your position.

see you are still trying to forced the issue/accusation of antinomianism.
that is of course predictable, the reason Paul wrote Romans 6.

'living by faith' is the inevitable result of a change life, sanctification. we do not discount the fact.

however it is NOT what justifies the believer as righteous before God, nor declares him to be saved. (Eph 2:8)

it is by faith in Christ alone. it is 'apart from obedience or works of the law'.

and this faith results in gifts and fruits, living righteously, imitators of Him.​

Council of Orange? Don't you mean the Council of Ephesus? The Orthodox didn't change their theology in the Council of Ephesus. They stated that which was always taught. Read the very words of the Council, which


For one, the issue of Antinomianism is the only logical result if there is no human cooperation required in salvation. That's just in the definition of the word Antinomian:

one who holds that under the gospel dispensation of grace the moral law is of no use or obligation because faith alone is necessary to salvation.

If faith alone is all that is needed, then a changed life is completely unnecessary to salvation. A person can do whatever he wants. He can go across the world raping, killing, torturing, blaspheming, and nothing will ever happen to his eternal soul as a result.

There is no argument that works of the law do not save, because the law does not go as far as Christ commanded us to go. But following Christ's command is how we are saved. Christ did not say "you need do nothing but have a mental assent and I will save you". He used PISTIS. Pistis is not simple assent. It is not mental. In point of fact, the mental component of Pistis is the LEAST IMPORTANT PART. It has to be there, but the most important part is the action. It is not a noun. It is not passive. It is active and continuous. Christ did not say "believe once", because that wouldn't have even made grammatical sense in the Greek. He said believe ALWAYS. Another translation would be "be faithful to the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved". In John 3:16, it could be written, "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever is faithful to Him, will not perish, but have everlasting life". The problem is that most translations of the New Testament in the west were Protestant. They did the translating with the assumptions of the five solas coming BEFORE the meaning of the words themselves, which is why when we see the Syrian, Russian, and other translations which were done in the East, they do not use the passive present form. Let's observe some early prayers of the Church from St. John Chrystostom, much earlier than the Council of Orange:

1. O Lord, deprive me not of Thy heavenly good things.

2. O Lord, deliver me from the eternal torments.

3. O Lord, if I have sinned in mind or deed, forgive me.

4. O Lord, deliver me from all ignorance, forgetfulness, faintheartedness, and stony insensibility.

5. O Lord, deliver me from every temptation.

6. O Lord, enlighten my heart which evil desire hath darkened.

7. O Lord, as a man I have sinned, but do Thou, as the compassionate God, have mercy on me, seeing the infirmity of my soul.

8. O Lord, send Thy grace to my help, that I may glorify Thy holy name.

9. O Lord Jesus Christ, write me Thy servant in the Book of Life, and grant me a good end.

10. O Lord my God, even though I have done nothing good in Thy sight, yet grant me by Thy grace a good beginning.

11. O Lord, sprinkle into my heart the dew of Thy grace.

12. O Lord of heaven earth, remember me Thy sinful servant, shameful and unclean, in Thy Kingdom, Amen.

13. O Lord, accept me in penitence.

14. O Lord, forsake me not.

15. O Lord, lead me not into temptation.

16. O Lord, grant me good thoughts.

17. O Lord, grant me tears, and remembrance of death, and compunction.

18. O Lord, grant me the thought of confessing my sins.

19. O Lord, grant me humility, chastity, and obedience.

20. O Lord, grant me patience, courage, and meekness.

21. O Lord, implant in me the root of good, Thy fear in my heart.

22. O Lord, vouchsafe me to love Thee with all my soul and thoughts, and in all things to do Thy will.

23. O Lord, protect me from evil men, and demons, and passions, and from every other unseemly thing.

24. O Lord, Thou knowest that Thou doest as Thou wilt: Thy will be done also in me a sinner; for blessed art Thou unto the ages.

The first two prayers of this antiphonal prayer by St. John Chrystostom is to not be deprived of the heavenly good things and that God will not deliver him to eternal torment. Now, if he believed in OSAS, as you seem to imply in your posts, would John have asked this? Seriously. This is an evening prayer. Let's see some of his prayers from the pre-Communion prayers, just to ensure it wasn't a single instance:

O Lord my God, I know that I am not worthy nor sufficiently pleasing that Thou shouldst come under the roof of the house of my soul for it is entirely desolate and fallen in ruin and Thou wilt not find in me a place worthy to lay Thy head. But as Thou didst humble Thyself from on high for our sake, so now humble Thyself to my lowliness.

As Thou didst deign to lie in a cavern, in a manger of dumb beasts, so now deign to enter in to the manger of my beastly soul, and into my soiled body.

And as Thou didst not disdain to enter and to eat with sinners in the house of Simon the leper, so now be pleased to enter into the house of my soul, humble and leprous and sinful.

And as Thou didst not cast out the prostitute, the sinful woman who came to touch Thee, so have compassion on me a sinner who comes to touch Thee.

And As Thou didst not abhor the kiss of her sin-stained and unclean mouth, do not abhor my mouth, worse stained and more unclean than hers, nor my stained and shamed and unclean lips, nor my still more impure tongue.

But let the fiery coal of Thy most pure Body and Thy most precious Blood bring me sanctification, enlightenment and strengthening of my lowly soul and body, relief from the burden of my many transgressions, protection against every action of the devil, repulsion and victory over my wicked and evil habits, mortification of my passions, accomplishment of Thy commandments, increase of Thy divine grace, and inheritance of Thy kingdom.

For I do not come to Thee in presumption, O Christ my God, but made bold by Thine unspeakable goodness, lest I stray far away from Thy flock, O Master, and become caught by the wolf of souls.

Therefore I pray Thee, O Master, for Thou alone art holy, sanctify my soul and body, my mind and heart, my muscles and bones. Renew me entirely. Implant Thy fear in my fleshly members and let Thy sanctification never be removed from me.

Be my helper and defender, guide my life in peace and make me worthy to stand at Thy right hand with all Thy saints.

By the prayers and supplications of Thy most pure Mother, of Thy spiritual servants, the most pure angelic powers, and of all the saints who from all ages have been well-pleasing to Thee. Amen.
​

So again, "enter my soul" and "Let Thy sanctification never be removed from me". If he believed in Eternal Security, then he would have no reason to pray this. These are from the fourth century. This is much earlier than your Council of Orange.

As soteriology goes, the Council of Orange did not argue against the Synergistic view. And neither was it universally accepted, as evidenced by the fact that it isn't considered and Ecumenical Council, unlike the position of Ephesus from more than a century before. Welcome to history class.

The fact is that with Eternal Security, Sanctification is unnecessary. It's just decoration. There is no need to make the vessel itself clean. Just sweep the dirt under the rug and make the rug look nice and clean. Don't worry about the mildew and stuff eating away at the wood under the rug. That is Eternal Security, in a nutshell. It's why I left the Baptist Church in the first place. They were too busy making "there's a new name written down in pencil" jokes to get about the real business of Christianity: "acquire the Spirit of Peace, and thousands around you will be saved."

 

[chipg]

John 10:27-29 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.

WHAT MANY ARE FAILING TO LOOK AT IS THE TIMES RIGHT UP AHEAD OF US WHEN THE MARK WILL BE FORCED ON THE MANY. IF YOU GET THE MARK, A CHIP, YOU HAVE LOST YOUR WAY. can we all agree on that...

 

[Geralt]

- your presumption here is the God leaves his own people after regeneration like santa clause and just keeps checking on them. this is not correct and as I have kept banging all over again to semi-pelagians like yourself, if GOD SAVES PEOPLE, HE ALSO CHANGES THEM. Ephesians 2:8-9 is followed by Ephesians 2:10.

God saved us not because of our works, but for good works as He works with us (we are His workmanship).
what can be a more simplier explanation than that !!

a changed life is the inevitable result of a regenerated life. salvation is God saving you, changed life is God-saved-you vindicated.

the reason you cannot simply see it like this is not for biblical reasons but purely prejudiced towards your sect.

2Ti 1:9 who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began, ​

if we are his workmanship working us (not just working with us), obviously there can be no doubt about eternal security. qed: once saved by God, will always remain saved until we meet Him in glory. he who justifies, is the one who glorifies.​

Council of Orange? Don't you mean the Council of Ephesus? The Orthodox didn't change their theology in the Council of Ephesus. They stated that which was always taught. Read the very words of the Council, which


For one, the issue of Antinomianism is the only logical result if there is no human cooperation required in salvation. That's just in the definition of the word Antinomian:

one who holds that under the gospel dispensation of grace the moral law is of no use or obligation because faith alone is necessary to salvation.

If faith alone is all that is needed, then a changed life is completely unnecessary to salvation. A person can do whatever he wants. He can go across the world raping, killing, torturing, blaspheming, and nothing will ever happen to his eternal soul as a result.

There is no argument that works of the law do not save, because the law does not go as far as Christ commanded us to go. But following Christ's command is how we are saved. Christ did not say "you need do nothing but have a mental assent and I will save you". He used PISTIS. Pistis is not simple assent. It is not mental. In point of fact, the mental component of Pistis is the LEAST IMPORTANT PART. It has to be there, but the most important part is the action. It is not a noun. It is not passive. It is active and continuous. Christ did not say "believe once", because that wouldn't have even made grammatical sense in the Greek. He said believe ALWAYS. Another translation would be "be faithful to the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved". In John 3:16, it could be written, "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever is faithful to Him, will not perish, but have everlasting life". The problem is that most translations of the New Testament in the west were Protestant. They did the translating with the assumptions of the five solas coming BEFORE the meaning of the words themselves, which is why when we see the Syrian, Russian, and other translations which were done in the East, they do not use the passive present form. Let's observe some early prayers of the Church from St. John Chrystostom, much earlier than the Council of Orange:

1. O Lord, deprive me not of Thy heavenly good things.

2. O Lord, deliver me from the eternal torments.

3. O Lord, if I have sinned in mind or deed, forgive me.

4. O Lord, deliver me from all ignorance, forgetfulness, faintheartedness, and stony insensibility.

5. O Lord, deliver me from every temptation.

6. O Lord, enlighten my heart which evil desire hath darkened.

7. O Lord, as a man I have sinned, but do Thou, as the compassionate God, have mercy on me, seeing the infirmity of my soul.

8. O Lord, send Thy grace to my help, that I may glorify Thy holy name.

9. O Lord Jesus Christ, write me Thy servant in the Book of Life, and grant me a good end.

10. O Lord my God, even though I have done nothing good in Thy sight, yet grant me by Thy grace a good beginning.

11. O Lord, sprinkle into my heart the dew of Thy grace.

12. O Lord of heaven earth, remember me Thy sinful servant, shameful and unclean, in Thy Kingdom, Amen.

13. O Lord, accept me in penitence.

14. O Lord, forsake me not.

15. O Lord, lead me not into temptation.

16. O Lord, grant me good thoughts.

17. O Lord, grant me tears, and remembrance of death, and compunction.

18. O Lord, grant me the thought of confessing my sins.

19. O Lord, grant me humility, chastity, and obedience.

20. O Lord, grant me patience, courage, and meekness.

21. O Lord, implant in me the root of good, Thy fear in my heart.

22. O Lord, vouchsafe me to love Thee with all my soul and thoughts, and in all things to do Thy will.

23. O Lord, protect me from evil men, and demons, and passions, and from every other unseemly thing.

24. O Lord, Thou knowest that Thou doest as Thou wilt: Thy will be done also in me a sinner; for blessed art Thou unto the ages.

The first two prayers of this antiphonal prayer by St. John Chrystostom is to not be deprived of the heavenly good things and that God will not deliver him to eternal torment. Now, if he believed in OSAS, as you seem to imply in your posts, would John have asked this? Seriously. This is an evening prayer. Let's see some of his prayers from the pre-Communion prayers, just to ensure it wasn't a single instance:

O Lord my God, I know that I am not worthy nor sufficiently pleasing that Thou shouldst come under the roof of the house of my soul for it is entirely desolate and fallen in ruin and Thou wilt not find in me a place worthy to lay Thy head. But as Thou didst humble Thyself from on high for our sake, so now humble Thyself to my lowliness.

As Thou didst deign to lie in a cavern, in a manger of dumb beasts, so now deign to enter in to the manger of my beastly soul, and into my soiled body.

And as Thou didst not disdain to enter and to eat with sinners in the house of Simon the leper, so now be pleased to enter into the house of my soul, humble and leprous and sinful.

And as Thou didst not cast out the prostitute, the sinful woman who came to touch Thee, so have compassion on me a sinner who comes to touch Thee.

And As Thou didst not abhor the kiss of her sin-stained and unclean mouth, do not abhor my mouth, worse stained and more unclean than hers, nor my stained and shamed and unclean lips, nor my still more impure tongue.

But let the fiery coal of Thy most pure Body and Thy most precious Blood bring me sanctification, enlightenment and strengthening of my lowly soul and body, relief from the burden of my many transgressions, protection against every action of the devil, repulsion and victory over my wicked and evil habits, mortification of my passions, accomplishment of Thy commandments, increase of Thy divine grace, and inheritance of Thy kingdom.

For I do not come to Thee in presumption, O Christ my God, but made bold by Thine unspeakable goodness, lest I stray far away from Thy flock, O Master, and become caught by the wolf of souls.

Therefore I pray Thee, O Master, for Thou alone art holy, sanctify my soul and body, my mind and heart, my muscles and bones. Renew me entirely. Implant Thy fear in my fleshly members and let Thy sanctification never be removed from me.

Be my helper and defender, guide my life in peace and make me worthy to stand at Thy right hand with all Thy saints.

By the prayers and supplications of Thy most pure Mother, of Thy spiritual servants, the most pure angelic powers, and of all the saints who from all ages have been well-pleasing to Thee. Amen.
​

So again, "enter my soul" and "Let Thy sanctification never be removed from me". If he believed in Eternal Security, then he would have no reason to pray this. These are from the fourth century. This is much earlier than your Council of Orange.

As soteriology goes, the Council of Orange did not argue against the Synergistic view. And neither was it universally accepted, as evidenced by the fact that it isn't considered and Ecumenical Council, unlike the position of Ephesus from more than a century before. Welcome to history class.

The fact is that with Eternal Security, Sanctification is unnecessary. It's just decoration. There is no need to make the vessel itself clean. Just sweep the dirt under the rug and make the rug look nice and clean. Don't worry about the mildew and stuff eating away at the wood under the rug. That is Eternal Security, in a nutshell. It's why I left the Baptist Church in the first place. They were too busy making "there's a new name written down in pencil" jokes to get about the real business of Christianity: "acquire the Spirit of Peace, and thousands around you will be saved."

 

[Wordkeeper]

- and yet achan's sin caused the death of his entire household, Joshua 7
- and yet Lot and Moses asks for withholding against the many, in behalf of the righteousness of the few.

Life is knowing God, union with God. Death is separation from God. Adam did not die, he was separated from God, he died spiritually. Jesus came so that we may have life, union with God.

- and yet all people suffered death, even though they did not sin like adam and outside the law.

People died because they broke the law. Because of Adam humanity became culpable, were prosecutable under God's eternal law, to love Him with all our being and love others as ourselves.

- priest mediates, not goats. priests lays hands on the goats, one dies , the other is banished. expiation, propitiation.

only the willfully blind will deny the fact that God recognizes and acts accordingly based on representative's own acts in behalf of the many. i mean why even pray for the salvation of your unregenerate friends, unless God honors the one praying as representing in behalf of those who are lost. the entire concept of the priesthood, either christ or us rests on the concept of corporate representation. the gospel itself would lose its meaning without this process. and what is left is another version of performance based gospel, where salvation becomes a reward and not a gift.

Sin has a penalty, death. Amongst God's people, the penalty is taken away by the death of another. In this case, the death of a goat. Although the blood of bulls and goats cannot take way sin, they are the symbolic payments that are encashed in the future by the blood of Christ.

the eastern/orthodox can only suggest other suffers due to the consequence of the sins of others (like adam) and acts as victims or collateral damage.

That's because the text says all sin because of Adam, not IN Adam. IOW, Adam does not represent us. He was our father and his disobedience put the human family in harm's way. Just as if your father committed a terrorist act, and the entire family is deported to a war zone.

 

[sculleywr]

- your presumption here is the God leaves his own people after regeneration like santa clause and just keeps checking on them. this is not correct and as I have kept banging all over again to semi-pelagians like yourself, if GOD SAVES PEOPLE, HE ALSO CHANGES THEM. Ephesians 2:8-9 is followed by Ephesians 2:10.

God saved us not because of our works, but for good works as He works with us (we are His workmanship).
what can be a more simplier explanation than that !!

a changed life is the inevitable result of a regenerated life. salvation is God saving you, changed life is God-saved-you vindicated.

the reason you cannot simply see it like this is not for biblical reasons but purely prejudiced towards your sect.

2Ti 1:9 who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began, ​

if we are his workmanship working us (not just working with us), obviously there can be no doubt about eternal security. qed: once saved by God, will always remain saved until we meet Him in glory. he who justifies, is the one who glorifies.​

If the change is complete at salvation, the saved person is completely and utterly sinless. If salvation is a one time only process, then Antinomianism is still the only logical conclusion. God doesn't have to change us.

However, this means that it is ALL God's fault. Every good deed AND sin is HIS action, not ours. When Brock raped that girl behind the dumpster, if he did so because God did not regenerate him, then it was not an action of free will, but an action imposed by God's failure to regenerate Brock.

See, taking only half of the passages that deal with Salvation, soteria in the Greek, you have a warped view of God and man. Since man is incapable of good deeds, he has no free will and is thus completely not responsible for his evil actions:

• 
  We have learned from the prophets, and we hold it to be true, that punishments, chastisements, and rewards are rendered
  according to the merit of each man’s actions. Otherwise, if all things happen by fate, then nothing is in our own power. For
  if it be predestined that one man be good and another man evil, then the first is not deserving of praise or the other to be
  blamed. Unless humans have the power of avoiding evil and choosing good by free choice, they are not accountable for their
  actions-whatever they may be.... For neither would a man be worthy of reward or praise if he did not of himself choose the
  good, but was merely created for that end. Likewise, if a man were evil, he would not deserve punishment, since he was not
  evil of himself, being unable to do anything else than what he was made for. (St. Justin Martyr
  • 
    

This is the problem of the Sola Grazie platform that you are pushing: it makes God the sinner. He is the one that programmed the evil to be evil. It was not their free choice. They are literally born that way and God failed to intervene, either because He was incapable, or unloving.

And again, we come back to the Antinomian requirement of your platform, because since you are now claiming that not only does God make them choose to convert, but now He reprograms them, with none of their free will being required, and thus again, the moral law is of no use. What does it matter if the law is written down if God is going to forcibly reprogram you to follow it anyways?

Moral law has no place unless there is an ability to choose to follow it and a need to do so. Since man ate of the tree of the knowledge of GOOD and evil, and not only the tree of the knowledge of evil, the whole case of Total Depravity is bunk. The tree imparts both good and evil knowledge, and then we CHOOSE which to take. If man is programmed by God to be evil, then God is the evil one, because man is simply a computer program, coded by God to do whatever He chooses. Some of us are coded as Office suites and photo and video editing software. Others are coded like the Love Bug, only designed to cause harm. The ultimate sinner is the one who coded us. So is it our decision to control the coding, or is God the Coder and therefore the responsible party that belongs in a deep dark fiery pit? For me, I could never believe in something that makes God evil. Free will, all through life from beginning to end, is the only way this works.

And we know this because even Paul demonstrates that people who have no knowledge of the law still do the things written therein, showing that the law of God is written in their hearts. And this law will EITHER condemn OR DEFEND them in the end. Now how can those who, according to Paul, are never exposed to the Truth, be DEFENDED in the final Judgment by their conscience if salvation is by some mental assent to some certain set of facts?

And how is mental assent even possible without free will AND knowledge of those facts? This is where both the Baptist and Presbyterian models fall apart, because these are people described by Paul as being separate from the Church, separate from the Jews, but still defended in the final days by their Conscience. But in the Baptist view, it is a certain "saving knowledge" that saves, and in the Presbyterian five points view it's essentially a lottery, so the person's conscience has no meaning, nor even does the moral law. At least in the Baptist point of view, the moral law or Conscience can be used to judge you unworthy, but since you are programmed by God to be worthy or unworthy, regenerate or reprobate, good or evil, there is no point for there to be any Scripture, no point to evangelism or any of it.

And so we are left with a choice:

1. Calvinism pure, where God makes you evil and is logically responsible for your actions.
2. Baptist, where God reprograms you after your depraved mind somehow makes a mental assent, even though it doesn't really make logical sense that you would assent to this since you have a depraved mind
3. Free will, where all your sins are your responsibility, and all of your good deeds are produced either through your free will, or in cooperation with God, still in free will.

In only one of these is God capable of being just according to the description of just in Scripture, and in only one is God capable of being loving according to I Corinthians 13. God cannot be loving if He made Brock Turner rape that girl. If Brock was free of will to choose not to rape her because he could choose to do good, then God is not responsible, but if the actions of Brock Turner are the results of God not regenerating him, then God is the one who raped that girl, using Brock as the tool. It's horrible sounding, but it's accurate if we are to follow the earliest understanding of the pure Hellenism found in the Calvinistic model. If a person is fated to be evil, then the one who fated is the responsible party.​

 

[sculleywr]

- your presumption here is the God leaves his own people after regeneration like santa clause and just keeps checking on them. this is not correct and as I have kept banging all over again to semi-pelagians like yourself, if GOD SAVES PEOPLE, HE ALSO CHANGES THEM. Ephesians 2:8-9 is followed by Ephesians 2:10.

God saved us not because of our works, but for good works as He works with us (we are His workmanship).
what can be a more simplier explanation than that !!

a changed life is the inevitable result of a regenerated life. salvation is God saving you, changed life is God-saved-you vindicated.

the reason you cannot simply see it like this is not for biblical reasons but purely prejudiced towards your sect.

2Ti 1:9 who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began, ​

if we are his workmanship working us (not just working with us), obviously there can be no doubt about eternal security. qed: once saved by God, will always remain saved until we meet Him in glory. he who justifies, is the one who glorifies.​

IT's also telling that you completely abandoned your accusation that the Orthodox Church's view on soteriology is a change, especially considering that if you had pressed it, the fact is that Calvinism and Sola grazie in general are the result of a late interpretation of a fifth century Christian writer, and probably not one St. Augustine intended, since we can see from even earlier that Predestination doesn't exist in the early Church fathers, with Ignatius, Clement, Justin Martyr, and more forming a consensus on our free will choice.

Predestination is just a Christianized version of Hellenistic Fatalism. It isn't an early Christian view.