Poll - Once Saved Always Saved

[MamaZ]

You just told me that you continue in sin.

Jesus gave us very specific instructions as to what he expected of his followers.

Why would you want to ignore these instructions?

I just told you that yes I still do sin. I did not tell you I continue living a life of sin.. Death has not been swallowed up in victory yet.. So therefore those of us here on earth still have this good old lust of the flesh to deal with every day.. That is why I said that We are to put off the old and put on the new..

 

[MamaZ]

Even Peter sinned tee hee was He not saved?

 

[Charis kai Dunamis]

And to you, that you should make personal comments about me, especially when you continue to mis-read me.

Alright... now I will cease with all personal comments. I expect you to do the same.

Please explain what I am misreading. I'm starting to believe you just don't have anything to say because that's what you're doing: not saying anything.

 

[Ormly]

Instead of just stating it as such, maybe you should explain yourself. What you are putting forth is an OPINION, nothing more. You can try to explain so I can better understand, but simply stating something over and over again does not make you correct, and certainly doesn't make it truth. I believe I have explained myself well, with no contradictions and I have answered all of your questions completely forthright. Yet you do not explain yourself but claim that I "have dodged it, evaded it and twisted it". Where you get that from, I don't understand.

I would love to discuss what you and I believe, but you don't seem to want to. You just want to state that I twist people's words without any explanation whatsoever.

If anybody else is following my discussion with Ormly, maybe you can fill me in where I am twisting his words? Because he won't...

As far as Calvinism being a snare, I believe the same thing about Arminianism, so where does that leave us? With two opinions.

I am not of Arminism. Further, you need to correctly read my posts before commenting. You are too eager to shoot down anyone not of the Calvin camp. You so by attempting to make them say what they aren't.

Do a review. If you find something unclear from me, say so. Just quote me correctly.

 

[Charis kai Dunamis]

I am not of Arminism. Further, you need to correctly read my posts before commenting. You are too eager to shoot down anyone not of the Calvin camp. You so by attempting to make them say what they aren't.

Do a review. If you find something unclear from me, say so. Just quote me correctly.

Alright, I will do so.

 

[Charis kai Dunamis]

I am not of Arminism. Further, you need to correctly read my posts before commenting. You are too eager to shoot down anyone not of the Calvin camp. You so by attempting to make them say what they aren't.

Do a review. If you find something unclear from me, say so. Just quote me correctly.

Alright I read a bunch of your posts and still can't distinguish you from an Arminian. The vast majority of your posts aren't you giving your doctrinal stances, they are just you having personal arguments. So it's hard to tell.

If you aren't Arminian, then you are still some sort of semi-pelagian. I usually lump them all together under "Arminian", although that isn't technically accurate. If you wouldn't mind telling me what makes you different from classical Arminianism, it would be much appreciated.

 

[HisServants]

That's a wonderful claim. Where is your backing?

go to www .evangelicaloutreach .org/cat1.htm

 

[Ormly]

Alright I read a bunch of your posts and still can't distinguish you from an Arminian. The vast majority of your posts aren't you giving your doctrinal stances, they are just you having personal arguments. So it's hard to tell.

If you aren't Arminian, then you are still some sort of semi-pelagian. I usually lump them all together under "Arminian", although that isn't technically accurate. If you wouldn't mind telling me what makes you different from classical Arminianism, it would be much appreciated.

I personally believe the whole lot of them [church fathers] saw something back then and tried to define as they undertsood it. The problem is with what they didn't see. i.e., there was more to be from man's salvation than their interpretation of it was affording them, which left them in conflict and argument.To understand, they would have had to all start from the proper starting point in the Bible, to the place before there was anything created. It has only been since the reformation that God began to rectify the situation. Rectification continues to this day, albeit not to explain salvation but creation and the reason why because the mystery of the cross is being unfolded in a more accurate way that speaks of the ultimate intention of God for having created man in the first place. Certainly God didn't create man for him to fail to only be redeeemed at some future time so he could go to heaven and all for the pleasure of God. No, It is more than that, the Bible says so.

Much, due to an improper staring point, is assumed man acquires by saying the sinners prayer and beyond that it becomes a matter of duty that he performs until death. This, by unlearned leadership, is to be considered the new birth experience. Men have believed this and have faithfully done their duty and, no doubt, gone to heaven. This I won't argue however, they have gone to heaven without ever knowing that God wanted them for something more in Him. i.e., for divinity a sons; Throne-ship with Jesus and not ever knowing that the grooming for that position was to take place in this life after they were born again of the Holy Ghost; born again of the very Nature of God as Jesus was of Mary. Few, if any knew or even now, know of the "way of the cross", our privelge in Christ made possible by the "work of the cross", the enabling of His Life given us that we become as He now is, an heir with Him in the Godhead.

That is what God is after in His creation; man to rule and reign with Christ and not be as one who simply makes it, by the skin of his teeth, into heaven.

 

[Charis kai Dunamis]

go to www .evangelicaloutreach .org/cat1.htm

Wow...

Let's be careful, there is an awful lot of evidence for the doctrine of OSAS whether you agree with it or not. It is quite extreme to say it is a doctrine of Satan. What if you are wrong? You are then calling a truth of God a lie from Satan. That is not to be taken lightly...

 

[Ormly]

Wow...

Let's be careful, there is an awful lot of evidence for the doctrine of OSAS whether you agree with it or not. It is quite extreme to say it is a doctrine of Satan. What if you are wrong? You are then calling a truth of God a lie from Satan. That is not to be taken lightly...

Well becareful not to assume anything of the sort from me since I haven't touched on any of that. . . have I?

 

[Ben johnson]

Quoted by Yashualover:
Joh 3:3 Jesus replied to him, "Truly, truly I tell you, unless a person is born from above he cannot see the kingdom of God."​

Do you accept that "see", is "enter"? "Unless a person is born again, he cannot enter the kingdom of God".

Quote:
Do you think a person can make himself born again? Or is it a supernatural work of God?​

Depends on your perspective; the birth (begottenness) is all of God, and nothing of men (Jn1:13). But becoming begotten is completely by believing and receiving Jesus. Jn1:12

We participate (by our faith) in salvation. 1Pet1:9, 1Tim4:16.
God's position is RECEIVING man's faith rather than INITIATING it. Heb11:6, Acts10:34-35
Perseverance requires diligence, completely our continuing choice. 2Pet1:5-10.

Quote:
1Co 2:14 Now the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him; and he cannot know them, because they are spiritually judged. ​

What "things", YL? It can't mean saving-belief-in-Jesus; because those same things, are revealed by the received Spirit in verse 12. So the sequence is:

1. Believe in Jesus
2. Receive the Spirit
3. Understand deeper spiritual things of God

The natural man does not understand spiritual things, because he has not believed/received Jesus.]

"Yashualover", this passage has been refuted in any "osas" understanding dozens of times. Please tell me where is the fault in recognizing that "received" removes saving-belief from "things".

Quote:
The natural man does not recieve the things of God, do you think a natural man can all of a sudden make himself recieve the things of God?

Think man, think.​

Pretty much, YES.

Look at 1Cor1:18-21; the Gospel is foolishness to the perishing; but to us-being-saved it is power. God is well pleased, THROUGH the foolishness of the message preached to save those WHO BELIEVE.

Thus --- a natural man can suffer CONVICTION, and believe. Just as those did in Acts2:37.

Belief is man's choice, not God's; and men receive the consequence of their choices.

 

[MamaZ]

Once we enter we can go in and out because we are free. We are now Children of God born of the Spirit of God washed clean in the blood of Jesus and heaven bound.. For we are joint heirs with Christ..

 

[A Brother In Christ]

Quoted by Yashualover:
Joh 3:3 Jesus replied to him, "Truly, truly I tell you, unless a person is born from above he cannot see the kingdom of God."
​

Do you accept that "see", is "enter"? "Unless a person is born again, he cannot enter the kingdom of God".

Quote:
Do you think a person can make himself born again? Or is it a supernatural work of God?
​

Depends on your perspective; the birth (begottenness) is all of God, and nothing of men (Jn1:13). But becoming begotten is completely by believing and receiving Jesus. Jn1:12

Both is true Ben.... what happens if God does not get Satan out of the way... 2 cor 4:3-6 they do not believe

Without the Father seed which marks the elect ... 1 jn 3:9, eph 1:4 for the Holy Spirit His part

Without the Holy Spirit ... Conviencing work ...john 16:7-11
without the Holy Spirit Telling Satan to get out of the way...

thus making John 6:65 ... so true...

We participate (by our faith) in salvation. 1Pet1:9, 1Tim4:16.
God's position is RECEIVING man's faith rather than INITIATING it. Heb11:6, Acts10:34-35
Perseverance requires diligence, completely our continuing choice. 2Pet1:5-10.

Very true ... thus we do sin even after believeing ... 1jn 1:8-10 ... 2 cor 3:18

Quote:
1Co 2:14 Now the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him; and he cannot know them, because they are spiritually judged.
​

What "things", YL? It can't mean saving-belief-in-Jesus; because those same things, are revealed by the received Spirit in verse 12. So the sequence is:

1. Believe in Jesus
2. Receive the Spirit
3. Understand deeper spiritual things of God

The natural man does not understand spiritual things, because he has not believed/received Jesus.]

Yet in 1 cor 1:2 states that they have been set apart in Christ... making them believers who are carnal 1 cor 3:1-3

how were they carnal they were looking at people how they were on this earth... instead of how God sees them in Christ : perfect ...

by doing this they were being a respecter of certain men ... thus choosing not to love the unacttractive believer according to this world .. 1cor 2:9, jn 13:34-35

"Yashualover", this passage has been refuted in any "osas" understanding dozens of times. Please tell me where is the fault in recognizing that "received" removes saving-belief from "things".

Quote:
The natural man does not recieve the things of God, do you think a natural man can all of a sudden make himself recieve the things of God?

Think man, think.
​

Pretty much, YES.

Look at 1Cor1:18-21; the Gospel is foolishness to the perishing; but to us-being-saved it is power. God is well pleased, THROUGH the foolishness of the message preached to save those WHO BELIEVE.

Thus --- a natural man can suffer CONVICTION, and believe. Just as those did in Acts2:37.

Belief is man's choice, not God's; and men receive the consequence of their choices.

Yet when any man believes ... they do not recieve what they deserve .... romans 4:2-5

 

[Charis kai Dunamis]

Well becareful not to assume anything of the sort from me since I haven't touched on any of that. . . have I?

No, you have not. And I commend you for that.

 

[Charis kai Dunamis]

Do you accept that "see", is "enter"? "Unless a person is born again, he cannot enter the kingdom of God".

Quote:
Do you think a person can make himself born again? Or is it a supernatural work of God?​

Depends on your perspective; the birth (begottenness) is all of God, and nothing of men (Jn1:13). But becoming begotten is completely by believing and receiving Jesus. Jn1:12
​

Ben, instead of going around stating that "see" means "enter" like you constantly do, please answer my post to you-

http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=47277765&postcount=954

I believe I have properly exegeted the passage so that "see" is the best possible interpretation for "see". Believing "see" actually means "enter" is just a way around having to accept Calvinistic teaching that regeneration is prior to justification.​

 

[Charis kai Dunamis]

I personally believe the whole lot of them [church fathers] saw something back then and tried to define as they undertsood it. The problem is with what they didn't see. i.e., there was more to be from man's salvation than their interpretation of it was affording them, which left them in conflict and argument.To understand, they would have had to all start from the proper starting point in the Bible, to the place before there was anything created. It has only been since the reformation that God began to rectify the situation. Rectification continues to this day, albeit not to explain salvation but creation and the reason why because the mystery of the cross is being unfolded in a more accurate way that speaks of the ultimate intention of God for having created man in the first place. Certainly God didn't create man for him to fail to only be redeeemed at some future time so he could go to heaven and all for the pleasure of God. No, It is more than that, the Bible says so.

Much, due to an improper staring point, is assumed man acquires by saying the sinners prayer and beyond that it becomes a matter of duty that he performs until death. This, by unlearned leadership, is to be considered the new birth experience. Men have believed this and have faithfully done their duty and, no doubt, gone to heaven. This I won't argue however, they have gone to heaven without ever knowing that God wanted them for something more in Him. i.e., for divinity a sons; Throne-ship with Jesus and not ever knowing that the grooming for that position was to take place in this life after they were born again of the Holy Ghost; born again of the very Nature of God as Jesus was of Mary. Few, if any knew or even now, know of the "way of the cross", our privelge in Christ made possible by the "work of the cross", the enabling of His Life given us that we become as He now is, an heir with Him in the Godhead.

That is what God is after in His creation; man to rule and reign with Christ and not be as one who simply makes it, by the skin of his teeth, into heaven.

So let me get this straight. From what I understand (I may be misrepresenting you), you are stating that God's ultimate purpose in creating man is that he "rule and reign with Christ "?

Also, I'm kind of confused on this:

Certainly God didn't create man for him to fail to only be redeeemed at some future time so he could go to heaven and all for the pleasure of God. No, It is more than that, the Bible says so.

I'm not sure whether you are saying that the entire idea of the first sentence isn't true, or rather, it just isn't the all encompassing purpose of God, as stated in your second sentence (it's more than that, that being the first sentence)? Also, if there is a greater purpose than the pleasure of God, what is it, and where does the bible say there is a greater purpose??

 

[Ormly]

So let me get this straight. From what I understand (I may be misrepresenting you), you are stating that God's ultimate purpose in creating man is that he "rule and reign with Christ "?

Yes. Do you really need scripture for that?

Also, I'm kind of confused on this:

I'm not sure whether you are saying that the entire idea of the first sentence isn't true, or rather, it just isn't the all encompassing purpose of God, as stated in your second sentence (it's more than that, that being the first sentence)?

What words are baffling you?

Also, if there is a greater purpose than the pleasure of God, what is it, and where does the bible say there is a greater purpose??

This is the area where, when understood, a doctrinal problem arises, presumption being at the heart of it..

You, as well as others, no doubt believe it is all a done deal when getting saved. i.e., one is automatically a joint-heir with Christ and gets all the goodies. After all, this is all about me and how much God loves me. All he/she has to do is be good person after you get saved and you get it all, having no idea what becoming a son through adoption means nor that through the process of becoming one is the learning of the Chatacter of the Father a necessity. You, as well as, others probably never ask yourself the question why we are given the tutorship of the Holy Ghost and for it to be the reason for learning the Character of the Father? I mean, why does one need Him after one is saved, what's the point? He did His job by convicting me of my sins for which I have asked forgiveness and now I am saved and on my way the heaven. The fault for not recognizing there is more lies with the teaching of cheap grace that says, "I have it all when I confess my sins and get forgiven". At this point the preacher might follow up with: "Now you must learn to be like Christ" but he doesn't explain "why" beyond a holiness thing, and you are left with the question, "why"? I mean after you are saved, what's the point except not to backslide, right? So I say that anyone who embraces that way has simply joined a "whiteknuckle" club; 'hang on til heaven', while never coming into the knowledge of the Father Jesus who exhorted His followers to learn to learn the Father by learning Him.. If you need to ask why about that you must study Jesus and what made Him, "tick". It is all about son-ship, heir-ship and throne-ship with the Father in Jesus; ruling and reigning; equality with Him, with Jesus always being the Head, for all eternity. No other people are given this privilege in all the universe but the followers of Jesus Christ. The sad part is that it will exclude much of Christendom who follow after a many man-reasoned out doctrines of beliefs about Him centered in redemption and not He Himself.

Still need scripture? For starters, read John 17 and ponder it.

 

[yashualover]

Quoted by Yashualover:
Joh 3:3 Jesus replied to him, "Truly, truly I tell you, unless a person is born from above he cannot see the kingdom of God."
​

Do you accept that "see", is "enter"? "Unless a person is born again, he cannot enter the kingdom of God".

Quote:
Do you think a person can make himself born again? Or is it a supernatural work of God?
​

Depends on your perspective; the birth (begottenness) is all of God, and nothing of men (Jn1:13). But becoming begotten is completely by believing and receiving Jesus. Jn1:12

We participate (by our faith) in salvation. 1Pet1:9, 1Tim4:16.
God's position is RECEIVING man's faith rather than INITIATING it. Heb11:6, Acts10:34-35
Perseverance requires diligence, completely our continuing choice. 2Pet1:5-10.

Quote:
1Co 2:14 Now the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him; and he cannot know them, because they are spiritually judged.
​

What "things", YL? It can't mean saving-belief-in-Jesus; because those same things, are revealed by the received Spirit in verse 12. So the sequence is:

1. Believe in Jesus
2. Receive the Spirit
3. Understand deeper spiritual things of God

The natural man does not understand spiritual things, because he has not believed/received Jesus.]

"Yashualover", this passage has been refuted in any "osas" understanding dozens of times. Please tell me where is the fault in recognizing that "received" removes saving-belief from "things".

Quote:
The natural man does not recieve the things of God, do you think a natural man can all of a sudden make himself recieve the things of God?

Think man, think.
​

Pretty much, YES.

Look at 1Cor1:18-21; the Gospel is foolishness to the perishing; but to us-being-saved it is power. God is well pleased, THROUGH the foolishness of the message preached to save those WHO BELIEVE.

Thus --- a natural man can suffer CONVICTION, and believe. Just as those did in Acts2:37.

Belief is man's choice, not God's; and men receive the consequence of their choices.

Faith is a gift and so is repentance, regeneration preceeds faith. Remember, the natural man recieves not the things of God, so he will not all of a sudden one day decide to recieve Christ, he is DEAD in sins and is a God hater.

Mankind is born filled with pride and is sitting on the throne as his own god. Satan or (the god of this world) has blinded his eyes, the veil of blindness must be removed BEFORE he will recieve Christ, this is a supernatural work done by the Holy Spirit BEFORE one can see that he is vile in the eyes of God (Law breaker) so that he then can repent and put his trust in Jesus Christ.


Joh 3:36 The one who believes in the Son has eternal life, but the one who disobeys the Son will not see life. Instead, the wrath of God remains on him.

 

[yashualover]

Both is true Ben.... what happens if God does not get Satan out of the way... 2 cor 4:3-6 they do not believe

Without the Father seed which marks the elect ... 1 jn 3:9, eph 1:4 for the Holy Spirit His part

Without the Holy Spirit ... Conviencing work ...john 16:7-11
without the Holy Spirit Telling Satan to get out of the way...

thus making John 6:65 ... so true...

Very true ... thus we do sin even after believeing ... 1jn 1:8-10 ... 2 cor 3:18 [/color]
Yet in 1 cor 1:2 states that they have been set apart in Christ... making them believers who are carnal 1 cor 3:1-3

how were they carnal they were looking at people how they were on this earth... instead of how God sees them in Christ : perfect ...

by doing this they were being a respecter of certain men ... thus choosing not to love the unacttractive believer according to this world .. 1cor 2:9, jn 13:34-35



Yet when any man believes ... they do not recieve what they deserve .... romans 4:2-5

Amen! Very well said.

 

[Charis kai Dunamis]

Yes. Do you really need scripture for that?

Still need scripture? For starters, read John 17 and ponder it.

Yes, I need scripture, because I don't know where you are getting the idea from a biblical standpoint that God's ultimate purpose in creation is that we reign with Christ. John 17 doesn't state anything having to do with God's ultimate purpose. I am not debating that this is a purpose of God, that we reign with Christ. But how was that the purpose in which God, in eternity past, willed that we come into existence? How does the idea that we reign with Christ exist as the sole purpose for God's creation, within the mind of God, the core of His being?