Poll - Once Saved Always Saved

[forgivenWretch]

Show me with verses! You can say "you're wrong", but can you do it with Bible verses???
Yes it is --- without "judging", we cannot separate "good" from "evil". The only time "judging" is negative in Scripture, is like in Matt7 --- and it's not judging that's condemned, but hypocrisy.

In Jn7:24, "Do not judge from appearance only, but JUDGE with RIGHTEOUS JUDGMENT".

In 1Cor2:15 (or is it 16?) "The righteous man judges ALL THINGS and is he himself judged by no one."
"Born again", does not "walk in sin".

That's what "back-slidden", means.

We dwell EITHER in sin, OR in Jesus --- never both. For Christ indwells us, and if we walk in continual sin He would not walk there also.

Make sense?

Eph5:5-6: "This we know with certainty, that no immoral or impure man, nor covetous nor idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. Let no one deceive you with empty words --- it is on account of those things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience."

1Cor6:9-11 is as strong; so is Gal5:19-21.

1Jn3:5-10 is stronger...

"He who practices sin does not know God --- he is of the devil."

Scripture has already been offered to which you only attempt to refute, I will not waste my time with this, as it will lead no where, as is quite evident. Your issues are solely between you and God,

I am not here to debate God's Word, nor see it abused only to satisfy one's own personal refusal to take Him at His word.

 

[A Brother In Christ]

Ben Johnson

Explain romans 13:11 And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed.

already saved yet not walking the walk ...gal 5:25 still living in the flesh but saved romans 13:12-14

 

[CShephard53]

you are so wrong!

That is not an argument and adds nothing to discussion.

 

[CShephard53]

your response is the only thing contradicting God's word, so it remains only necessary for you to talk with God, since that is where your issues lie. God's word does not contradict itself

peace to all which doubt God's Word and choose to live full of doubt and uncertainty to that which God so gracefully guarantees. this is between you and God

Truth is not determined by praying or talking to God. Telling someone to go pray about it is useless. You have nothing short of a claim backed by a cop out.

 

[Ben johnson]

Scripture has already been offered to which you only attempt to refute...

I did not "attempt", I succeeded. If I haven't, then you will be able to respond to the verses I've quoted...

I will not waste my time with this, as it will lead nowhere, as is quite evident. Your issues are solely between you and God...

God's views, do not conflict Scripture, Forgiven.

I am not here to debate God's Word, nor see it abused only to satisfy one's own personal refusal to take Him at His word.

"Take Him at His word"? Hmmm; I posted exact Scriptural concepts --- which one is not "taking Him at His word"?

Let's see how you "take Jesus at His word":
"Woe to you, Scribes and Pharisees; not only do you not enter in to the kingdom of Heaven, but those who ARE ENTERING, you stop; you shut off the kingdom of Heaven from men." Matt23:13
Question: WERE they "entering", or "not really"?
Question2: WERE they "stopped/shut-off", or "not really"?

Should we "take Jesus at face value", or not?

"Forgiven", I teach "Responsible Grace" here; because it is revealed in Scripture. My colleagues here and I have fun; we strive for fellowship, and driving each other deeper into Scripture and stronger in spiritual maturity.

My understanding ("Responsible Grace"), is right, or wrong. As with any theological position, opposing views have three choices:

1. Ignore the view
2. Refute the view with Scripture
3. Realize the view correlates with Scripture, and accept it.

Wedare not ignore each others' views. Because if a view is errant enough, then it can lead others astray. OR, if a view is SCRIPTURAL enough, (to quote Gamaliel, Acts5:33) then we might find ourselves standing against God.

Thus --- "ignore" is impossible for several reasons; it can allow "false doctrine", it can "oppose God" if the other doctrine is not false, or it can damage us personally by causing us to think "we have arrived and need learn nothing more."

Please understand I mean no disrespect nor insult. Of course you don't have to respond if you don't wish to, not everyone has the gift of debate. But you cannot say that "the other's view abuses Scripture and ignores face-value-words-of-God."

so can meaningful discussion

You said this --- what does "meaningful discussion" mean to you? We've quoted direct and specific verses, and you decline to respond.

The proof is in the Bible! All anyone has to do is ask God and believe in His Word...how more simple could it be?

I look forward to your explanation of Matt23:13.

The following is 25 reasons why salvation is permanent for Christians:

http://www.truthortradition.com/modules.php?file=article&name=News&sid=126

Wellllll, that site says things like "why EVERYONE SHOULD speak in tongues" (evidence of the indwelling Spirit).

...and Paul said, "Not everyone will speak in tongues" (1Cor12:30, NASV)
Which should we believe? I'm siding with Paul...



Your "serve", my friend.

 

[forgivenWretch]

I did not "attempt", I succeeded.[the only thing you have succeeded at is refute God's Word] If I haven't, then you will be able to respond to the verses I've quoted... God's views, do not conflict Scripture, "Forgiven". This is the first statement that you have gotten correct]
"Take Him at His word"? Hmmm; I posted exact Scriptural concepts --- which one is not "taking Him at His word"?[Hmmm, you only posted scripture after I had posted scripture to which you only attempt to dispute]

Let's see how you "take Jesus at His word":
"Woe to you, Scribes and Pharisees; not only do you not enter in to the kingdom of Heaven, but those who ARE ENTERING, you stop; you shut off the kingdom of Heaven from men." Matt23:13
Question: WERE they "entering", or "not really"?
Question2: WERE they "stopped/shut-off", or "not really"?

Should we "take Jesus at face value", or not?

"Forgiven", I teach "Responsible Grace" here; because it is revealed in Scripture. My colleagues here and I have fun; we strive for fellowship, and driving each other deeper into Scripture and stronger in spiritual maturity. [Well bullie for you]

My understanding ("Responsible Grace"), is right, or wrong. As with any theological position, opposing views have three choices:

1. Ignore the view
2. Refute the view with Scripture
3. Realize the view correlates with Scripture, and accept it.

Wedare not ignore each others' views. [Believe me I dare ignore yours] Because if a view is errant enough, then it can lead others astray. OR, if a view is SCRIPTURAL enough, (to quote Gamaliel, Acts5:33) then we might find ourselves standing against God.

Thus --- "ignore" is impossible for several reasons; it can allow "false doctrine", it can "oppose God" if the other doctrine is not false, or it can damage us personally by causing us to think "we have arrived and need learn nothing more."

Please understand I mean no disrespect nor insult. [Could have fooled me as you are quite vehement in your determination that you are the only one who is correct and are judging me for my beliefs]Of course you don't have to respond if you don't wish to, not everyone has the gift of debate. But you cannot say that "the other's view abuses Scripture and ignores face-value-words-of-God."[I can say what I please thank you, just as you can]
You said this --- what does "meaningful discussion" mean to you?{No sir, I did not, those are your words and question...I made a statement I did not ask a question] We've quoted direct and specific verses, and you decline to respond.
I look forward to your explanation of Matt23:13.
Wellllll, that site says things like "why EVERYONE SHOULD speak in tongues" (evidence of the indwelling Spirit).

...and Paul said, "Not everyone will speak in tongues" (1Cor12:30, NASV)
Which should we believe? I'm siding with Paul...[I'm siding with God]



Your "serve", my friend.

And as a moderator of this forum, it is quite dis-settling as to you tactics, of baiting and flaming. And for the last time! I do not debate God's Word, I take it for what it is.

 

[Ormly]

And as a moderator of this forum, it is quite dis-settling as to you tactics, of baiting and flaming. And for the last time! I do not debate God's Word, I take it for what it is.

Thats an unfair opinion about debating tactics, one a mod should be careful of.

 

[AndOne]

And as a moderator of this forum, it is quite dis-settling as to you tactics, of baiting and flaming. And for the last time! I do not debate God's Word, I take it for what it is.

In all fairness to Ben - he and I have been debating this issue for nearly ten years, between this board and others - and he has never once used his position as an adminstrator/moderator to try to solidify his position or add weight to it.

I've lashed out at Ben quite harshly at times and he has never once tried to have me banned or censored. That says quite a lot about the man and his character.

I believe he is wrong about eternal security - but he is a man of integrity who does not abuse his power. I could be wrong but I'm sure my fellow calvinists and eternal security proponents will agree with me on this.

 

[A Brother In Christ]

Ben Johnson

Explain romans 13:11 And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed.

already saved yet not walking the walk ...gal 5:25 still living in the flesh but saved romans 13:12-14

waiting

 

[Ormly]

Ben Johnson

Explain romans 13:11 And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed.

already saved yet not walking the walk ...gal 5:25 still living in the flesh but saved romans 13:12-14

This is why I make the distinction between being just saved and being born again.

 

[beloved57]

ormly says

This is why I make the distinction between being just saved and being born again.

Whats the difference since being born again indicates one has partook of the fruit of christ resurrection as 1 pet 1

3Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again[ born again] unto a lively hope[ how peter?] by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,

so ormly how is somebody born again not saved ?

 

[CShephard53]

And as a moderator of this forum, it is quite dis-settling as to you tactics, of baiting and flaming. And for the last time! I do not debate God's Word, I take it for what it is.

I say the both of you should be quiet and calm down. Neither one of you is engaging in meaningful discussion right now, you're catfighting.

 

[CShephard53]

ormly says



Whats the difference since being born again indicates one has partook of the fruit of christ resurrection as 1 pet 1

3Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again[ born again] unto a lively hope[ how peter?] by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,

so ormly how is somebody born again not saved ?

Being born again is an event, being 'saved' is not just an event but also a process.

 

[Ben johnson]

"ForgivenWretch", I'm sorry that you perceive my words as "flaming/baiting". Forgive me if I've said anything to cause that.

Could have fooled me as you are quite vehement in your determination that you are the only one who is correct and are judging me for my beliefs

I'm not "condemning you", never would. This is "theological debate", specifically "Soteriology". If I post a theological position, I am required to support it with Scripture. Same charge to anyone else who posts.

If two people understand a particular verse differently, then that is where "discussion/debate" happens. We are NOT to become angry or hurtful in such discussion, this is why I'm asking your forgiveness if I have ben inconsiderate and caused you anger. It is not a "personal contest", but mutual maturing in Christ; that's the goal. No ONE wins here, except God.

May I give you an example of "different meanings"? Calvinists read John10:26-28, and perceive it asserts "sovereign election":
"You do not believe, because you are not My sheep; My sheep hear My voice and I know them, and they follow Me; I give them eternal life and they will never perish, and no one can snatch them out of My hand."

It's supposed that Jesus is saying, "You don't believe in ME, because you're not My predestined sheep; I give eternal life and they can NEVER lose it."

So I've posted a different understanding:
Jews: "Tell us if you are the Messiah!"
Jesus: "I told you (that I'm the Messiah), and you do not believe (that I'm the Messiah). The works I do in My Father's name testify to Me; but you do not believe (that I'm the Messiah), because you're not My sheep (because you don't believe in Me --- see Jn10:9). My sheep (those who believe savingly, 10:9) hear My voice and I know them and they follow Me ('if TIS-ANYONE enters through Me [believes!] he shall be saved, shall go in and out and find pasture [become My sheep!] --- verse 10:9) and I give them eternal life and they (My believing-sheep) will never perish, and no one will snatch ('harpazo', sieze/remove forcibly) them from My hand.

....If you do not believe Me, then believe My works, and you will understand the Father is in Me and I am in the Father.

Verse 38 says "you can believe in Me by looking at what I've done".


This is the spirit of debate, "Forgiven". One person states their understanding, another posts a different understanding, and then there is discussion as to which is better reflected in Scripture. Two differing view can either be singly right, or both wrong; but again it's not a competition, but mutual maturing in Christ.

You stated once that you wished I could grow to better understanding of Christ and His Gospel --- I gratefully accepted that. And I hope you understand that I wish you exactly the same.

I pray that from both of us participating here, God will be honored and glorified, and people from the world will see Him in us and will want what we have.

We will always disagree on some things; let's agree with good discussion, and Christian fellowship between us.

 

[Ben johnson]

This is why I make the distinction between being just saved and being born again.

How is there "salvation", apart from "being born again"?

"If anyone be in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has passed away, behold all has become new." 2Cor5:17

Is there "salvation", without "being in Christ"?

 

[Ben johnson]

A Brother In Christ
Ben Johnson

Explain romans 13:11 And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed.

already saved yet not walking the walk ...gal 5:25 still living in the flesh but saved romans 13:12-14

Ahhhh, my friend --- I owe you an apology also. I fully intended to answer this; was gonna this morning, but the blasted computer was struggling to load for more than an HOUR; nothing I tried to post went through.

Let's discuss Rom13, citing verses 11-14: "And this do (list of commandments), knowing the time, that it is already the hour for you to awaken from sleep; for now salvation is nearer to us than when we believed. The night is almost gone, and the day is at hand. Let us therefore lay aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light. Let us behave properly as in the day, not in carousing and drunkenness, not in sexual promiscuity, not in strife and jealousy. But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh in regard to its lusts."

You and I disagree on some things; specifically, that a man cannot be "saved" while walking in sin (drunken, carousing, fornicating, etcetera). We've discussed 1Cor6:9-11; and Eph5:5-6. And Gal5:19-21, and 1Jn3:5-10. Each of these passages states that "those who DO these things will not inherit the kingdom of God". We can discuss any or all of those again if you wish...

So --- when this passage equates "asleep" with "walking in darkness", and "engaging in carousing/drunkenness/sexual-immorality/strife/jealousy", the only thing "awaken from sleep" can possibly mean, is "turn to God and salvation".

This of course is furthered when he says "put on Christ". So, "awaken", is the same as "put on Christ". It's fully salvational.

He says "make no provision for the flesh" --- this connects directly to Rom8:12 --- which says "We are under obligation not to walk after the flesh --- if you DO you must DIE; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the flesh you will LIVE".

Clearly, "salvation", the consequence of "walking in the Spirit and by His power crucifying the flesh" or "pursuing fleshly lusts", are eternal life or not.

OK, now let's discuss Gal5:25 --- "I say walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh. For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you wish. But if you rae led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law. Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, which I have forewarned you that those who practice these things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kiindness, goodness, self-control; against these things there is no law. Now those who belong to Christ have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit. Let us not become boastful, challenging one another, envying one another." Verses16-25 [end of chapter])

This fits perfectly with what we just discussed in Romans; he who belongs to Christ has CRUCIFIED the flesh and walks not after flesh but by the Spirit. He who walks after the flesh, shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

In Rom6 Paul states "we are slaves; EITHER to righteousness (and God), OR to sin". So it's a choice --- whether to walk after the flesh and its sinful lusts (be "asleep", iow NOT SAVED), or to rest in Him and allow the power of the Spirit to strengthen us against sin.

Make sense?

 

[forgivenWretch]

"And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand."
-John 10:28 (NKJV)

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Swiss, Geneva, Sans Serif]29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.[/FONT]


http://www.christiananswers.net/q-acb/acb-t006.html
Our security further rests on the death and the prayers of Jesus Christ. He has redeemed us (Ephesians 1:7) and removed the wrath of God from us (Romans 3:25) so that we may be justified (Romans 5:1), forgiven (Colossians 2:13), and sanctified (1 Corinthians 1:2).

By the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit, we have received eternal life (Titus 3:5). When we trusted Christ, the Holy Spirit began an eternal indwelling ministry in us (John 14:17). Also He was the seal placed on us by the Father to guarantee our future inheritance (Ephesians 4:30). And He baptized us into union with Christ and into the body of believers (1 Corinthians 12:13).

Can a saved person ever be lost?

"For a believer to lose his salvation would demand a reversal and an undoing of all the preceding works of the Father, Son, and Spirit. The key issue in the discussion of the believer's security concerns the issue of who does the saving. If man is responsible for securing his salvation, then he can be lost; if God secures the person's salvation, then the person is forever secure." [4]
-Paul Enns
"What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who is against us?"
-Romans 8:31; cf. vv. 32-39



OSAS!!!! Now and Forever!

​

 

[beloved57]

Being born again is an event, being 'saved' is not just an event but also a process.

But being born again is the beginning of that process ..

phil 1 6

Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:

 

[CShephard53]

But being born again is the beginning of that process ..

phil 1 6

Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:

You asked how someone born again is not saved. If born again is just the beginning of the salvation process as you just said, the answer is obvious- in order to be saved, one would need to already be done with the salvation process, not just beginning it.

 

[A Brother In Christ]

Ahhhh, my friend --- I owe you an apology also. I fully intended to answer this; was gonna this morning, but the blasted computer was struggling to load for more than an HOUR; nothing I tried to post went through.

Let's discuss Rom13, citing verses 11-14: "And this do (list of commandments), knowing the time, that it is already the hour for you to awaken from sleep; for now salvation is nearer to us than when we believed. The night is almost gone, and the day is at hand. Let us therefore lay aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light. Let us behave properly as in the day, not in carousing and drunkenness, not in sexual promiscuity, not in strife and jealousy. But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh in regard to its lusts."

You and I disagree on some things; specifically, that a man cannot be "saved" while walking in sin (drunken, carousing, fornicating, etcetera). We've discussed 1Cor6:9-11; and Eph5:5-6. And Gal5:19-21, and 1Jn3:5-10. Each of these passages states that "those who DO these things will not inherit the kingdom of God". We can discuss any or all of those again if you wish...

So --- when this passage equates "asleep" with "walking in darkness", and "engaging in carousing/drunkenness/sexual-immorality/strife/jealousy", the only thing "awaken from sleep" can possibly mean, is "turn to God and salvation".

This of course is furthered when he says "put on Christ". So, "awaken", is the same as "put on Christ". It's fully salvational.

He says "make no provision for the flesh" --- this connects directly to Rom8:12 --- which says "We are under obligation not to walk after the flesh --- if you DO you must DIE; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the flesh you will LIVE".

Clearly, "salvation", the consequence of "walking in the Spirit and by His power crucifying the flesh" or "pursuing fleshly lusts", are eternal life or not.

OK, now let's discuss Gal5:25 --- "I say walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh. For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you wish. But if you rae led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law. Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, which I have forewarned you that those who practice these things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kiindness, goodness, self-control; against these things there is no law. Now those who belong to Christ have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit. Let us not become boastful, challenging one another, envying one another." Verses16-25 [end of chapter])

This fits perfectly with what we just discussed in Romans; he who belongs to Christ has CRUCIFIED the flesh and walks not after flesh but by the Spirit. He who walks after the flesh, shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

In Rom6 Paul states "we are slaves; EITHER to righteousness (and God), OR to sin". So it's a choice --- whether to walk after the flesh and its sinful lusts (be "asleep", iow NOT SAVED), or to rest in Him and allow the power of the Spirit to strengthen us against sin.

Make sense?

IF ALREADY SAVED.... WHY DOES HE HAVE TO TELL HIM NOT TO DO THESE THINGS....

BECAUSE HE CAN