Please HELP re: Losing Salvation

[BT]

Hi folks!

I'm writing a paper on "The Security of the Believer" (OSAS true or false) and I could use your help.

I have a chapter on scripture passages that "seem to indicate" that salvation can be lost. In that portion I will go through some of the most common verses used by some to "prove" that salvation can be lost. The idea is that the belief in a loss of salvation is supposedly Biblical. Anyway I have a list of verses that I will use to play devil's advocate so to speak, but I want to make sure that I haven't missed any of the real common ones.

So if you could list some of the verses that you have personally heard used in an attempt to prove the loss of salvation I can compare and make sure that I have the most common ones... or the hardest ones there are some that are simply too easy to disprove... so that makes for a strawman paper... which I don't do. Besides I prefer to take on the tough challenges, I find that I learn more that way.

Please stick to the New Testament passages... I'm a dispensationalist so what you may have heard use from the OT is something that would fall under an entire different category for me and I don't want to get myself side-tracked.

So any and every that you know would be a great help.

Thanks a bunch

 

[Bible2]

"...thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but
fear: For if God spared not the natural branches,
take heed lest he also spare not thee. Behold
therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them
which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if
thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also
shalt be cut off."

(Romans 11:20-22)

 

[rural_preacher]

Hebrews 6:4-6

For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame.

Hebrews 10:26-31

For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries. Anyone who has rejected Moses' law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know Him who said, "Vengeance is Mine, I will repay," says the Lord. And again, "The LORD will judge His people." It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

--

 

[Sword-In-Hand]

I actually wrote a paper about Eternal Security and you're welcome to look at it if you like BT, but here are some verses.

Galatians 5:4---You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by the law; you have fallen from grace.

Revelation 2:5--- Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent and do the first works, or else I will come to you quickly and remove your lampstand from its place—unless you repent.

 

[Gold Dragon]

Here are some in 1 Corinthians.

NASB - 1 Cor 8:9-13

But take care that this liberty of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak. For if someone sees you, who have knowledge, dining in an idol's temple, will not his conscience, if he is weak, be strengthened to eat things sacrificed to idols? For through your knowledge he who is weak is ruined, the brother for whose sake Christ died. And so, by sinning against the brethren and wounding their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ. Therefore, if food causes my brother to stumble, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause my brother to stumble.

NASB - 1 Cor 9:24-27

Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but only one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may win. Everyone who competes in the games exercises self-control in all things. They then do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. Therefore I run in such a way, as not without aim; I box in such a way, as not beating the air; but I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified.

 

[9-iron]

I don't really have anything to add, but would like to read your paper after you get it compiled.

 

[Unnamed Servant]

Matthew 5:13

You are the salt of the earth, but if salt has lost its tate, how shall its saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything except to be thrown out and trampled under people's feet.

- If you don't mind, please e-mail me your paper when you get through

 

[Gold Dragon]

I hope you have a great paper BT!

Often, we go in with an assumption that a doctrine is correct and try to "disprove" verses that appear to oppose that doctrine. I prefer the hermeneutic that ...

1) checks the doctrine at the door
2) humbly approaches God's word through prayerful requesting of guidance from the Holy Spirit
3) looks at all the passages that are both for and against the doctrine
4) contextually interprets each passage trying to avoid any assumptions of the "right" answer
5) draw conclusions to see what God's word really has to say about an issue

This can all be done within the dispensational framework. It sounds like you are doing something like this and that is great!

Letting God's Word and the Holy Spirit speak for itself instead of trying to impose meaning on it can often be a difficult thing.

 

[Matthan]

BT, a good, up-to-date- commentary on the New Testament would be a priceless aid to you and your studies. I would suggest the Liberty Bible Commentary as a wonderful source. The authors usually give all reasonable interpretations of any "difficult" verses, and discuss each in the light of OSAS, which is God's promise to us.

With respect to the Hebrews 6:4-6 verses mentioned above, the author gives the four most predominant interpretations, alone with specific commentary on each, kept in context with the scriptural author's obvious intentions. This discussion makes understanding a whole lot easier for me, I assure you.

The ISBN for this book is 0-8407-5295-4. Check it out, and thank me later.

Matthan <J><

 

[daveleau]

Here are a few. I'd like to read what you write. God bless you in your work.

John 15:1,2,6
Matt 7:21-23
Luke 12:9
Matt 24:13
Hebrews 2:1-4; 3; 4; 5:8-14; 6; 10:18-39
Romans 8:1-13; 11:22
I Corinthians 10:1-14; 15:1-2
Galatians 6:7-8; I John 5:16
Revelation 2:9-11; 13:1-18; 14:6-16; 21:6-8; 22:16-20
Matthew 6:9-15; 7:21-27; 10:22, 28, 33-39; 12:31-37; 13:5-6; 20-21; 18:21-35; 24:45-51; 25:1-46
Luke 6:47-49; 8:6, 13; 12:35-48; 22:31-32
John 7:59-71; 8:31-51; 15:1-17; 17:12
Acts 8:17-24; 20:28-32

 

[BT]

I hope you have a great paper BT!

Often, we go in with an assumption that a doctrine is correct and try to "disprove" verses that appear to oppose that doctrine. I prefer the hermeneutic that ...

1) checks the doctrine at the door
2) humbly approaches God's word through prayerful requesting of guidance from the Holy Spirit
3) looks at all the passages that are both for and against the doctrine
4) contextually interprets each passage trying to avoid any assumptions of the "right" answer
5) draw conclusions to see what God's word really has to say about an issue

This can all be done within the dispensational framework. It sounds like you are doing something like this and that is great!

Letting God's Word and the Holy Spirit speak for itself instead of trying to impose meaning on it can often be a difficult thing.

Much thanks. I am a hermeneutics major and so the premise of my paper with relation to Eternal Security (and all doctrine) is that we must apply a consistent hermeneutic. Then we move on to exegete responsibly the difficult passages. The two major laws of context are that you first interpret in the immediate, grammatical, historical, cultural context. When you come across a passage that "seems" to contradict other sections or doctrines (as this subject does) you move to the second law which is the entire context of the Scripture. The second law deals with obscure passages that seem to contradict major doctrines as they are laid out. So I would contend that OSAS is a major doctrine.. meaning that in the specific doctrinal teachings of salvation the doctrine of OSAS is imposed, so the obscure passage that seems to contradict the direct doctrinal teachings must be re-examined (never dismissed). Since no scripture contradicts other scripture exgesis must be performed on the obscure (back to law 1) to determine what is actually being taught, shadowed, allegorized, hyperbolized etc.

Anyway I don't want to give away the whole paper here. The focus is on the passage from Hebrews 6 (since the paper is in response to a course on Hebrews...), but I want to include all the relavent doctrinal positions from the other side of the coin. Because after all, if the scriptures don't say what "they" say they say then they (the Scriptures) must be saying something else... so what is it. It is not enough (not a responsible hermeneutic) to "explain away" or dismiss any passage. So if you want to disprove the application made on a portion you must offer what you have exegetically interpreted from said passage. ... ok rambling..

It's not my fault.. when I get going on hermeneutics (especially the application of a responsible or reasonable hermeneutic) I can go on for hours... I suppose that's why I major in it

So yeah I'll let whomever wants to read it have a copy when it's done... not sure how long it will take.. I have a long bibliography (in the works) so there is a significant amount of research still to be done...

 

[Iollain]

Rev 3:11 Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.

 

[Gold Dragon]

It is exciting to dig into God's word and see what He has to say.

Since no scripture contradicts other scripture exgesis must be performed on the obscure (back to law 1) to determine what is actually being taught, shadowed, allegorized, hyperbolized etc.

I guess my concern with this perspective is that you have already assumed that OSAS is the best way to describe what God's Word has to say about our security and that these obscure passages must be talking about something else (shadow, allegory, hyperbole, etc).

Doctrines like OSAS are man's way of encapsulating the truth found in God's word into simplified words and concepts. Some doctrines are good at encapsulating that truth, others are over-simplifications or outright wrong.

I think a more honest approach of seeing what God's word has to say would also challenge the passages traditionally used to support OSAS and consider the possible validity of those used to oppose OSAS to see how accurate OSAS really is at describing the truth found in the bible about our security.

I would suggest that what He really has to say about it is OSAS, but not quite. Although I'm sure others like yourself have done much more study on the passages relevant to eternal security with considerations of what other Holy Spirit indwelled Christians through history have had to say about it.

I would also look forward to reading your paper as well, if you don't mind.

 

[BT]

No you misunderstand. The statement was not to do with OSAS. It is a general hermeneutic principle. That you can't deny that a scripture says one thing without offerring a sound exegesis of what it actually does say. That is just a general principle and not to do with this paper in particular. Actually in my second chapter I talk about the purpose of the paper as "not to prove that this scripture does not speak of losing salvation, but to learn what the scripture is saying regardless of dogmatic leanings. Let the truth be truth and all else be trash."

 

[Gold Dragon]

No you misunderstand. The statement was not to do with OSAS. It is a general hermeneutic principle. That you can't deny that a scripture says one thing without offerring a sound exegesis of what it actually does say. That is just a general principle and not to do with this paper in particular. Actually in my second chapter I talk about the purpose of the paper as "not to prove that this scripture does not speak of losing salvation, but to learn what the scripture is saying regardless of dogmatic leanings. Let the truth be truth and all else be trash."

to that. Sorry if I misunderstood.

 

[jcright]

Sorry BT, I have no scripture to offer...can I still get a copy of your paper though?

 

[BT]

Sure can John. I worked on it last night till about 3 in the morning, research and scribble. I should have it finished in a week or so. I'll let you know when it's done.

The unfortunate thing is that I'm limited in the length of it. So I can't really dig deeply or deal with every argument used to show that you can lose you salvation. What I'm reading and hearing though is that this passage in Hebrews 6 is one of the primary (if not the primary) verses used to present the argument. So in that regard I'm glad that I am dealing with it as opposed to some others that are more summarily dismissed.

I may have to talk to my prof. and see if I can get an extension on the length...

 

[jcright]

I think you should write two papers One that adheres to the length prescribed by your prof and the other for us

 

[FaithWeaver]

Good Luck!

 

[SonOfThunder]

I am not sure many Christians feel secure. I certainly don't. When I was growing up salvation was to be attained by obedience to the ways of God. Is your spirit alive when you backslide? I don't know. How do you endure to the end if your backslidden? We are given a handbook by God Himself and if we ignore it and go our own way, are we even Christian in the first place? Lots of thoughts and no security here.


James