Poll - Once Saved Always Saved

[beloved57]

What do you do with John 3:15,16; 11:25; Actss 10:43; 1 John 5:1?

what do you do with the verse I gave you ? besides ignore it.

 

[Dispy]

Could those of Israel have been saved by NOT doing the deeds/works of the Law? If not, What were they to put their FAITH in? Are believers today, members of the Church, the Body of Christ, required to do the deeds/works of the Law, even if done in FAITH.

They stumbled over the very stumbling-stone --- that is Jesus. By refusing to receive Jesus-the-Messiah, they forsook the New Covenant of Grace, and clung to "Law" (works). Today, we are not apart from "Law" --- but in the Old Covenant, they obeyed the Law to be saved; we practice righteousness because we ARE saved. Jesus said, "I came not to ABOLISH the Law, but to FULFILL it."

Israel, as a nation, did not recognize Jesus as their Messiah. That (HE) was national Israel's stumpling block. Jesus and His disciples NEVER preached "the gospel of the Grace of God." Thos of Israel that did recognize Jesus as the Messaiah still kept and practised the Law. So, NOW ANSWER MY ABOVE QUESTION.

Read Gal. 3:1-5 in context. Paul is writing to believers. Nowhere does it indicate that they lost their salvation. If they did, point it out to me.

In 4:9, they were "known by God; but turned BACK to weak/worthless things" (turned away from God). In 5:7 they were running well, but were HINDERED from obeying the truth --- they no longer obeyed the truth. 5:4 says "apo-katargeo-SEVERED-from-Christ" (become-no-effect), and ekpipto-charis-FALLEN-from-grace.

The weak and beggarly elements that they desired again to be in bondage with were the deeds/works of the Law. These believers left the better things under Grace to return again to the Law, which put them in back inbondage of the Law. The foresook the liberties that they have in Christ. They did not lose their salvation.

Do you really assert that "turned away from God", "not obeying the truth", forsaking Jesus' Gospel of grace in lieu of LAW/WORKS salvation, "severed-from-Christ" and "FALLEN-FROM-GRACE", is still SAVED? If so, what would it have to say for you to accept "no longer saved"?

They did not turn away from God. They turned away from the liberty they had in Christ. Nowhere do I find that they were "severed-from-Christ." "FALLEN-FROM GRACE" (the liberty we have in Christ) yes.

There is nothing you can say to me that they were "no longer saved." If you can show me that they never trusted Christ as saviour, they I will agree that they were never saved. Once they were saved, they were sealed by the holy Spirit of promise until/unto the day of their redemption (Eph. 1:13,14).

Even though those Galatians were saved on the grounds by FAITH, they were still living as thought they were under the Law. This did not nulify their salvation.

Please see my previous statement; and please accept that Paul is conveying movement. "WERE running well", and "WERE obeying the truth", and "WERE begun in the Spirit", and "WERE known by God" --- conveys true salvation. But now they are turning BACK to Law and forsaking Christ.

I have. Now read my response to it.

What part of "Was not Abraham our fther justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar" (James 2:21) don't you understand? Would Abraham been justified by NOT offering up Isaac? You no doubt will not answer those questions either. You'll just make a comment as usual.

Why the disrespect, Dispy? James reflects Paul, like in Philip2:12-13: "Therefore WORK out your salvation with fear and trembling; for it is GOD who is at work IN you, both to will and to work according to His good purpose."

We do good works, not to be saved, but because we are. Through faith, He works in and through us.

Make sense?

NO disrespect was shown. I asked you a direct question which you failed to answer. You are trying to explain Peters statment, by what Paul said. I don't buy that.

Philippians 2:12 "Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my present only, but now much more in my absence, work out you won salvation with fear and terembling.
13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure."

Just as a farmer has land, he must "work" the land for it to be productive. There are certian labors he must do to produce a good harvest. We as Christians have an obligation to "work out our salvation" by doing what is expected of a Christian to be productive in his/her Christian walk. We must rely on God to aid us in our Christian walk.

What you have posted to me does not "Make sense." It is pure wrongly dividing the Word of truth.

 

[beloved57]

Anyone believing one can loose their salvation is not a true believer and is trusting in themselves..

Jesus sheep will never perish..

jn 10:

28And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

 

[mattlock73]

They stumbled over the very stumbling-stone --- that is Jesus. By refusing to receive Jesus-the-Messiah, they forsook the New Covenant of Grace, and clung to "Law" (works). Today, we are not apart from "Law" --- but in the Old Covenant, they obeyed the Law to be saved; we practice righteousness because we ARE saved. Jesus said, "I came not to ABOLISH the Law, but to FULFILL it."
In 4:9, they were "known by God; but turned BACK to weak/worthless things" (turned away from God). In 5:7 they were running well, but were HINDERED from obeying the truth --- they no longer obeyed the truth. 5:4 says "apo-katargeo-SEVERED-from-Christ" (become-no-effect), and ekpipto-charis-FALLEN-from-grace.

Do you really assert that "turned away from God", "not obeying the truth", forsaking Jesus' Gospel of grace in lieu of LAW/WORKS salvation, "severed-from-Christ" and "FALLEN-FROM-GRACE", is still SAVED? If so, what would it have to say for you to accept "no longer saved"?
Please see my previous statement; and please accept that Paul is conveying movement. "WERE running well", and "WERE obeying the truth", and "WERE begun in the Spirit", and "WERE known by God" --- conveys true salvation. But now they are turning BACK to Law and forsaking Christ.
Why the disrespect, Dispy? James reflects Paul, like in Philip2:12-13: "Therefore WORK out your salvation with fear and trembling; for it is GOD who is at work IN you, both to will and to work according to His good purpose."

We do good works, not to be saved, but because we are. Through faith, He works in and through us.

Make sense?
Hi, "Mattlock". This post is also written to you.

I like D.L. Moody's example:
The great evangelist D. L. Moody illustrated this point by quoting an old former slave woman in the South following the Civil War. Being a former slave, she was confused about her status and asked: Now is I free, or been I not? When I go to my old master he says I ain’t free, and when I go to my own people they say I is, and I don’t know whether I’m free or not. Some people told me that Abraham Lincoln signed a proclamation, but master says he didn’t; he didn’t have any right to. Many Christians are confused on the same point. Jesus Christ has given them an “Emancipation Proclamation,” but their “old master” tells them they are still slaves to a legal relationship with God. They live in bondage because their “old master” has deceived them.

Was she still free? Sure, even if she went back to her old master and placed herself back into bondage, she was still legally free. I feel it is much the same with the church in Galatia. They were saved, but they put themselves back into bondage to the law. This in no way negates their legal standing before God, just their liberty in Christ.

Peace

 

[beloved57]

I like D.L. Moody's example:
The great evangelist D. L. Moody illustrated this point by quoting an old former slave woman in the South following the Civil War. Being a former slave, she was confused about her status and asked: Now is I free, or been I not? When I go to my old master he says I ain’t free, and when I go to my own people they say I is, and I don’t know whether I’m free or not. Some people told me that Abraham Lincoln signed a proclamation, but master says he didn’t; he didn’t have any right to. Many Christians are confused on the same point. Jesus Christ has given them an “Emancipation Proclamation,” but their “old master” tells them they are still slaves to a legal relationship with God. They live in bondage because their “old master” has deceived them.

Was she still free? Sure, even if she went back to her old master and placed herself back into bondage, she was still legally free. I feel it is much the same with the church in Galatia. They were saved, but they put themselves back into bondage to the law. This in no way negates their legal standing before God, just their liberty in Christ.

Peace

dl moody was a heretic..

 

[mattlock73]

dl moody was a heretic..

I didn't say I agreed with everything he said, I said I liked the way he phrased this one example. I also like some of the the books that Tom Clancy wrote, it doesn't mean I am going to base my theology on it. Good grief!

 

[yashualover]

Anyone believing one can loose their salvation is not a true believer and is trusting in themselves..

Jesus sheep will never perish..

jn 10:

28And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

Amen to that!

It's a good thing, if I had to rely on my works I would surely be going to hell.

 

[AndOne]

dl moody was a heretic..

Why do you say that?

Just curious...

 

[Ben johnson]

Could those of Israel have been saved by NOT doing the deeds/works of the Law? If not, What were they to put their FAITH in? Are believers today, members of the Church, the Body of Christ, required to do the deeds/works of the Law, even if done in FAITH.

We obey law today, because we are saved; they obeyed Law under the Old Covenant, to be saved.

Israel, as a nation, did not recognize Jesus as their Messiah. That (HE) was national Israel's stumpling block.

And as Jesus plainly said, "If God were your Father, then you would love Me; for I have come from the Father." Jn8:42

Jesus and His disciples NEVER preached "the gospel of the Grace of God." Those of Israel that did recognize Jesus as the Messaiah still kept and practised the Law. So, NOW ANSWER MY ABOVE QUESTION.

There is salvation in no one else, but Jesus; by rejecting the Gospel of Grace, they were rejecting God Himself.

The weak and beggarly elements that they desired again to be in bondage with were the deeds/works of the Law. These believers left the better things under Grace to return again to the Law, which put them in back inbondage of the Law. The foresook the liberties that they have in Christ. They did not lose their salvation.

They turned away from God and back towards "works-salvation"; they forsook Christ.

They did not turn away from God. They turned away from the liberty they had in Christ. Nowhere do I find that they were "severed-from-Christ."

Verse 5:4 clearly says "severed/become-no-effect". Separated in other words.

"FALLEN-FROM GRACE" (the liberty we have in Christ) yes.

Please analyze exactly what it is to be "fallen-from-liberty-in-Christ".

Salvation, is an indwelt fellowship with Christ; nothing less. They were "known by God, but turned back to weak/worthless things". You're espousing a kind of "middle-ground"; a "less-than-fully-encompassed-salvation". While I see salvation as "all, or nothing"...

There is nothing you can say to me that they were "no longer saved." If you can show me that they never trusted Christ as saviour, they I will agree that they were never saved.

By turning back to works, they were 100% not-trusting-Christ.

Once they were saved, they were sealed by the holy Spirit of promise until/unto the day of their redemption (Eph. 1:13,14).

Can we discuss the prospect of the Spirit being grieved, insulted, quenched? Will the Spirit in such cases, still abide?

Even though those Galatians were saved on the grounds by FAITH, they were still living as thought they were under the Law. This did not nulify their salvation.

Then why did Christ die on the Cross, to begin a New Covenant? The old one is still capable of saving, right?

What part of "Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar" (James 2:21) don't you understand? Would Abraham been justified by NOT offering up Isaac? You no doubt will not answer those questions either. You'll just make a comment as usual.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben johnson
Why the disrespect, Dispy? James reflects Paul, like in Philip2:12-13: "Therefore WORK out your salvation with fear and trembling; for it is GOD who is at work IN you, both to will and to work according to His good purpose."

We do good works, not to be saved, but because we are. Through faith, He works in and through us.

Make sense?

NO disrespect was shown. I asked you a direct question which you failed to answer. You are trying to explain Peter's statment, by what Paul said. I don't buy that.

Peter and Paul (and James, Jude, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) all said the same things....

Philippians 2:12 "Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my present only, but now much more in my absence, work out you won salvation with fear and terembling.
13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure."

Just as a farmer has land, he must "work" the land for it to be productive. There are certian labors he must do to produce a good harvest. We as Christians have an obligation to "work out our salvation" by doing what is expected of a Christian to be productive in his/her Christian walk. We must rely on God to aid us in our Christian walk.

Yet if we do NOT have good deeds, can we still be saved?

What you have posted to me does not "Make sense." It is pure wrongly dividing the Word of truth.

Perhaps we can work towards agreement.

 

[Ben johnson]

Was she still free? Sure, even if she went back to her old master and placed herself back into bondage, she was still legally free. I feel it is much the same with the church in Galatia. They were saved, but they put themselves back into bondage to the law. This in no way negates their legal standing before God, just their liberty in Christ.

Jesus died on the Cross that whosoever believe not perish, but have eternal life. You're proposing that one can reject the Cross, but still be saved.

Can't be possible...

 

[Ben johnson]

Anyone believing one can loose their salvation is not a true believer and is trusting in themselves..

That might be true, if not for James5;19-20.

And 2Pet2:20-22.

And 2Jn1:7-9.

And 1Tim6:10, & 25.

And many others.

Jesus' sheep will never perish..

True; as long as they remain "His sheep".

jn 10:

28And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

Verse 10:9, states that "anyone who enters Jesus shall be saved, shall go in and out and find pasture" --- clearly this means "shall BECOME His sheep".

"Pluck", as we have oft discussed, is "harpazo" --- sieze/remove forcibly. Plenty of verses assert that "we can come to disbelief, and be cast out". Indeed --- in John15, if anyone does NOT abide in Christ, he is cast off as a branch ...and burned.

Speaking of "abiding" --- how do you read 1Jn2:26-28? Will you assert that "shrink-in-shame" is either not possible, or "still saved"?

The concept of being cut off for unbelief, is well established in Scripture; and while Rom11:29 promises us that "God will never repent/revoke our calling or gifts", clearly WE can repent of HIM.

"Do not be conceited, but fear; for if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will He spare you. Behold then the kindness and severity of God. To those who FELL, severity; to you, kindness --- if you CONTINUE in His kindness otherwise YOU ALSO will be cut off. And if they do not continue in unbelief, they will be grafted in again..." Rom11:21-23

There it is, clearly stated, in absolute terms.

How can we deny it???

 

[beloved57]

Why do you say that?

Just curious...

He teaches jesus christ loved and died for everyone, when He did not..

 

[wmc1982]

Read the Gospel of John, should clear things right up.

 

[Dispy]

Could those of Israel have been saved by NOT doing the deeds/works of the Law? If not, What were they to put their FAITH in? Are believers today, members of the Church, the Body of Christ, required to do the deeds/works of the Law, even if done in FAITH.

We obey law today, because we are saved; they obeyed Law under the Old Covenant, to be saved.

No answer to my question, as per usual. Hey, there are 613 "Laws of Moses." Being you claim to be saved, (I will accept you ared) How many of those Laws do you keep? (REALLY DON'T EXPECT AN ANSWER FROM YOU, as you do not like to answer questions.)

Israel, as a nation, did not recognize Jesus as their Messiah. That (HE) was national Israel's stumpling block.

And as Jesus plainly said, "If God were your Father, then you would love Me; for I have come from the Father." Jn8:42

Yes, but there were those of Israel that did believe that Jesus was their Messiah. Jesus was speaking to those you did not recognize them.

They stumbled over the very stumbling-stone --- that is Jesus. By refusing to receive Jesus-the-Messiah, they forsook the New Covenant of Grace, and clung to "Law" (works). Today, we are not apart from "Law" --- but in the Old Covenant, they obeyed the Law to be saved; we practice righteousness because we ARE saved. Jesus said, [COLOR=blue"I came not to ABOLISH the Law, but to FULFILL it."[/COLOR]

Jesus and His disciples NEVER preached "the gospel of the Grace of God." Those of Israel that did recognize Jesus as the Messaiah still kept and practised the Law. So, NOW ANSWER MY ABOVE QUESTION.

There is salvation in no one else, but Jesus; by rejecting the Gospel of Grace, they were rejecting God Himself.

WHEN DID JESUS OR HIS DISCIPELS EVER PREACH "THE GOSPEL OF THE GRACE OF GOD" that Paul preached??????????? So how could they reject it??????? PLEASE ANSWER MY QUESTIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The weak and beggarly elements that they desired again to be in bondage with were the deeds/works of the Law. These believers left the better things under Grace to return again to the Law, which put them in back inbondage of the Law. The foresook the liberties that they have in Christ. They did not lose their salvation.

They turned away from God and back towards "works-salvation"; they forsook Christ.

They did not turn away from God. They turned away from the liberty they had in Christ. Nowhere do I find that they were "severed-from-Christ."

Verse 5:4 clearly says "severed/become-no-effect". Separated in other words.

Gal. 5:4 "Chris is become of no effect (i.e. of no experimental effece; the sen of liberty is lost. [Gal. d2:21, Col. 1:23])unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

"FALLEN-FROM GRACE" (the liberty we have in Christ) yes.

Please analyze exactly what it is to be "fallen-from-liberty-in-Christ".

Salvation, is an indwelt fellowship with Christ; nothing less. They were "known by God, but turned back to weak/worthless things". You're espousing a kind of "middle-ground"; a "less-than-fully-encompassed-salvation". While I see salvation as "all, or nothing"...

"Fallen-from-liberty-in-Christ" to going back to observing the Law requirements. The moment one places their trust in Christ for their salvation, that one is securly sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise. There is no "middle-ground" of salvation.

The moment one places thier FAITH ALONE in the Cross work of Christ for their salvation, that one receives all of the Holy Spirit that that one will ever get.

There is nothing you can say to me that they were "no longer saved." If you can show me that they never trusted Christ as saviour, they I will agree that they were never saved.

By turning back to works, they were 100% not-trusting-Christ.

I say again. THEIR SALVATION IS SECURE, but their doctrine is wrong. My salvation does not depend upon my doctrine being 100% correct. It is based upon my relationship with Christ. If my doctrine is not correct, it may/or may not effect my Christian walk; which could possibly effect my rewards in heaven.

Once they were saved, they were sealed by the holy Spirit of promise until/unto the day of their redemption (Eph. 1:13,14).

Can we discuss the prospect of the Spirit being grieved, insulted, quenched? Will the Spirit in such cases, still abide?

Yes, it is very very possible that a believer can grieve, insult and quench the Spirit. Yes, the Spirit will still abide in the believer. It is the Holy Spirit of promise that seals us unto/until the day of our salvation.

Even though those Galatians were saved on the grounds by FAITH, they were still living as thought they were under the Law. This did not nulify their salvation.

Then why did Christ die on the Cross, to begin a New Covenant? The old one is still capable of saving, right?

The New Covenant is with the house of Israel, and the house of Judah. NOT with the Church, the Body of Christ. I am not a Jew or spiritual Jew.

What part of "Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar" (James 2:21) don't you understand? Would Abraham been justified by NOT offering up Isaac? You no doubt will not answer those questions either. You'll just make a comment as usual.

Why the disrespect, Dispy? James reflects Paul, like in Philip2:12-13: "Therefore WORK out your salvation with fear and trembling; for it is GOD who is at work IN you, both to will and to work according to His good purpose."

We do good works, not to be saved, but because we are. Through faith, He works in and through us.

Make sense?

NO disrespect was shown. I asked you a direct question which you failed to answer. You are trying to explain Peter's statment, by what Paul said. I don't buy that.

Peter and Paul (and James, Jude, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) all said the same things....

If what you say is true, then SHOW ME where James, Jude, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John ever preached "the gospel of the Grace of God," i.e."...the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began" (Romans 16:25), prior to Paul's conversion. Also, SHOW ME where Paul ever preached "the gospel of the kingdom." James, Jude, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John spoke of an earthly kingdom for believers. Paul speaks of a heavenly home for members of the Body of Christ, and never promises members of the Body of Christ an earthly home.

Reconcile that for me if you will.

Philippians 2:12 "Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my present only, but now much more in my absence, work out you won salvation with fear and terembling.
13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure."

Just as a farmer has land, he must "work" the land for it to be productive. There are certian labors he must do to produce a good harvest. We as Christians have an obligation to "work out our salvation" by doing what is expected of a Christian to be productive in his/her Christian walk. We must rely on God to aid us in our Christian walk.

Yet if we do NOT have good deeds, can we still be saved?

YES!!!"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast, For we are His workmanshop, created in Christ Jesus UNTO good works, which God hat before ordained that we should walk in them". (Eph 2:8-10)

"NOT BY WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS WHICH WE HAVE DONE, BUT ACCORDING TO HIS MERCY HE SAVED US, BY THE WASHING AND REGENERATION AND RENEWING OF THE HOLY GHOST" (Titus 3:5).

What you have posted to me does not "Make sense." It is pure wrongly dividing the Word of truth.

Perhaps we can work towards agreement.

It can be very easily done if you would rightly divide the Word of truth by reading/studying it in its proper context.

p.s. I like, and agree, D.L. Moody's example that Mattlock posted.

 

[yashualover]

This teaching by John MaCarthur is the end part of: http://www.biblebb.com/files/MAC/obedience.htm


How Is Christian Obedience Different from Legalism? ​

It has become fashionable in some circles to pin the label of legalism on any teaching that stresses obedience to Christ. At the beginning of this chapter I quoted someone who stated that "the whole difference between legalism and true Christianity" is sewn up in the issue of whether we view obedience as a duty.
Biblically, there is no basis for such thinking. The Christian is still obligated to obey God, even though we know our obedience in no sense provides grounds for our justification. That is precisely why our obedience should be motivated primarily by gratitude and love for the Lord. We are free from the threat of eternal condemnation (Rom. 8:1). We are free from the law of sin and death (v. 2), and empowered by God's grace both to will and to do of His good pleasure (Phil. 2:13). We have every reason to obey joyfully—and no true Christian will ever think of obedience as something optional.
We are not under law, but under grace. Far from being a manifesto for antinomianism or a authorization for licentious behavior, that important truth teaches us that both our justification and our obedience must properly be grounded in Christ and what He has done for us, rather than in ourselves and what we do for God.
The doctrine of justification by faith therefore provides the highest, purest incentive for Christian obedience. As Paul wrote to the Romans, the mercies God displays in our justification provide all the reason we need to yield ourselves to Him as living sacrifices (Rom. 12:1). Freed from the penalty of the law—loosed from the threat of condemnation for our disobedience—we are thus empowered by grace to surrender to God in a way we were powerless to do as unbelievers. And that is why the Christian life is continually portayed in Scripture as a life of obedience.
<DIV class=Section1>
<B>Added to the John MacArthur Collection located at:
Bible Bulletin Board
Box 119
Columbus, New Jersey, USA, 08022
Our Websites: www.biblebb.com and www.gospelgems.com
Email: tony@biblebb.com
Online since 1986<SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">

 

[heymikey80]

No cigar!! That doesn't the conditions God set down. A child should know that. That fact they were obstinate changed nothing, unless you believe God didn't mean what He said?

They're facts that the prior proposed conditions aren't met.

Cigars all around.

(A child did realize that.)

 

[Ben johnson]

No answer to my question, as per usual. Hey, there are 613 "Laws of Moses." Being you claim to be saved, (I will accept you ared) How many of those Laws do you keep? (REALLY DON'T EXPECT AN ANSWER FROM YOU, as you do not like to answer questions.)

Scripture says "if we break ONE law, we are guilty of the WHOLE". The New Covenant is not about "keeping law"; no one here is asserting that, and I never have...

Yes, but there were those of Israel that did believe that Jesus was their Messiah. Jesus was speaking to those you did not recognize them.

True that; and He was rebuking them for refusing to believe. Best rebuke probably John5:29-47.

WHEN DID JESUS OR HIS DISCIPELS EVER PREACH "THE GOSPEL OF THE GRACE OF GOD" that Paul preached??????????? So how could they reject it??????? PLEASE ANSWER MY QUESTIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What do you think Jesus meant when He said "you must be born again"? That's the "Gospel of the grace of God", defined.

The weak and beggarly elements that they desired again to be in bondage with were the deeds/works of the Law. These believers left the better things under Grace to return again to the Law, which put them in back in bondage of the Law. They foresook the liberties that they have in Christ. They did not lose their salvation.

They forsook Christ, but did not lose salvation.

Then why bother believing in Jesus and His sacrifice, if forsaking Him doesn't mean condemnation?

They did not turn away from God. They turned away from the liberty they had in Christ. Nowhere do I find that they were "severed-from-Christ."

I see; by turning back to Law, they disregarded the CROSS. With respect, then why did Jesus bother?

Gal. 5:4 "Christ is become of no effect (i.e. of no experimental effece; the sen (?) of liberty is lost. [Gal. d2:21, Col. 1:23])unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

"FALLEN-FROM GRACE" (the liberty we have in Christ) yes.

I'm at a loss how to respond. We are saved by grace through faith; you perceive that one can be fallen from grace but still saved. How do I convince you that "saved-by-grace", cannot be "fallen-from-grace"?

"Fallen-from-liberty-in-Christ" to going back to observing the Law requirements.

And what does that mean, "Dispy"? It means rejecting the Cross.

The moment one places their trust in Christ for their salvation, that one is securely sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise. There is no "middle-ground" of salvation.

Wait --- that's exactly what you ARE proposing. A "middle-ground", that can exist "fallen-from-grace-but-SAVED".

Do you accept that "turning back to Law", they are (by definition) no longer trusting in Christ?

The moment one places thier FAITH ALONE in the Cross work of Christ for their salvation, that one receives all of the Holy Spirit that that one will ever get.

True that; but if one CEASES to believe, he/she ceases to have the Holy Spirit.

Look at 2Jn1:7-9; he who goes too far and does not abide in the teachings of Christ, has not God --- do you think that "has-not-God", does not also mean "has-not-the-Holy-Spirit"?

There is nothing you can say to me that they were "no longer saved." If you can show me that they never trusted Christ as saviour, they I will agree that they were never saved.

I think my position is well established...

I say again. THEIR SALVATION IS SECURE, but their doctrine is wrong. My salvation does not depend upon my doctrine being 100% correct. It is based upon my relationship with Christ. If my doctrine is not correct, it may/or may not effect my Christian walk; which could possibly effect my rewards in heaven.

What kind of "relationship" is it, if we DENY the Cross and RETURN to "Law"?

That's what "return to Law" means --- to forsake the Cross and Jesus' sacrifice.

Once they were saved, they were sealed by the holy Spirit of promise until/unto the day of their redemption (Eph. 1:13,14).

"Unto", not "until"; the language is quite clear.

Yes, it is very very possible that a believer can grieve, insult and quench the Spirit. Yes, the Spirit will still abide in the believer. It is the Holy Spirit of promise that seals us unto/until the day of our salvation.

By definition, "grieving/insulting/quenching" means "WALKING IN SIN". Which, if a person is still indwelt by the Holy Spirit, makes Him PARTICIPATOR in sin.

Will He? Never, Dispy.

Just as a farmer has land, he must "work" the land for it to be productive. There are certian labors he must do to produce a good harvest. We as Christians have an obligation to "work out our salvation" by doing what is expected of a Christian to be productive in his/her Christian walk. We must rely on God to aid us in our Christian walk.

You're proposing a position of "No-good-fruit-BUT-SAVED". This denies Jesus' statement in John15:2, "every branch IN ME that does not bear fruit, is removed."

Yet if we do NOT have good deeds, can we still be saved?

YES!!!"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that no of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast, For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus UNTO good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. (Eph 2:8-10)

And if we do NOT walk in them, then we are not "in Christ". John15:2-6 says something more --- those who bear fruit, are in Christ; those who do NOT bear fruit, are removed --- "If anyone DOES NOT ABIDE, he is cast off as a dried branch ....and burned."

"NOT BY WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS WHICH WE HAVE DONE, BUT ACCORDING TO HIS MERCY HE SAVED US, BY THE WASHING AND REGENERATION AND RENEWING OF THE HOLY GHOST" (Titus 3:5).[/b]

Correct; but Jesus' principle in Matt7:18 cannot be denied --- "no good tree produces bad fruit".

It can be very easily done if you would rightly divide the Word of truth by reading/studying it in its proper context.

Tell me how I'm "not rightly dividing it". In this post especially, everything I've said is quite clear, and consistent; and supported by Scripture.

 

[Ormly]

WHEN DID JESUS OR HIS DISCIPELS EVER PREACH "THE GOSPEL OF THE GRACE OF GOD" that Paul preached??????????? So how could they reject it??????? PLEASE ANSWER MY QUESTIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jesus preached it with and by His Life. How else do you suppose Paul would know anything about the gospel of Grace that he could preach it???????? Go figger!

 

[Dispy]

Tell me how I'm "not rightly dividing it". In this post especially, everything I've said is quite clear, and consistent; and supported by Scripture.

Yes, everything you have said is quite clear. It is clear that you do not like to answer question, and that you do not "rightly divide the Word of truth. You have consistentaly demonstrated that, and supported it by scripture taken out of its context.

After going back over several posting between you and I, I have come to the conclusion that you do not like to answer questions. You will only respond to "selected" portions of a paragraph that I have written, and then it is just a brief comment, and usually out of context.

IMHO, you are not "rightly dividing the Word of truty" by mixing prophecy/gospel of the kingdom to Israel (Law); with the mystery/gospel of the Grace of God to the Church, the Body of Christ (Grace).

By doing that, you are claiming to be a spiritual Jew, and claiming its promises.

It is my contention that when one mixes the doctrine of the Law (to Israel), and the doctrine of Grace (to the Body of Christ), that is proclaiming "a scrambled egg doctrine."

Also, it is my contention that when one embraces a scrambled egg doctrine, it only leads to confusion, and denominations.

Let me explain what I call "a scrambled egg doctrine. The egg, like the Bible, is one unit. In the egg, you will find two components; i.e. the yoke (yellow), and clear liquid (white). The Bible is also one unit. It contains two primary doctrines, The doctrine of Law (instruction in righteousness to the children of Israel), and the doctrine of Grace (instruction in righteousness to member of the Church, the Body of Christ.)

An egg can be cooked where each component maintains its identity. Or, it can be scrambled and mixed with other elements.

The Bible can be studied and each doctrine (Law & Grace) can be studied in their proper context. Or, as denominationalist do, They mix the mix the two doctrines, according to their own receipe, and each serve up their scrambled egg doctrine (omlet) to their liking.

You will notice that I have responded to everything you have written. You, on the other hand, HAVE NOT. You do not even have the courtesy to answer most of my question. Therefore, unless you respond to everything I have written, and answer my questions, I feel I am wasting my time with you. IMHO, I feell it is a "one way" dialogue.

 

[Dispy]

WHEN DID JESUS OR HIS DISCIPLES EVER PREACH "THE GOSPEL OF THE GRACE OF GOD" that Paul preached??????????? So how could they reject it??????? PLEASE ANSWER MY QUESTIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jesus preached it with and by His Life. How else do you suppose Paul would know anything about the gospel of Grace that he could preach it???????? Go figger!

What did Jesus preach??? Answer: Matthew 4:17 "From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."

What did Jesus command His disciples to preach? Answer: Matthew 10:5 "These twelve dJesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
6 But go reather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
7 And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Did Paul ever preach "the kingdom of heaven at hand?" NO!!!

What did Paul preach? Answer: Romans 16:25 "Now to him that is of power to stablish lyou according to my gospel, and the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,"

2 Cor. 12:1 "...I will come to visions and revelation of the Lord."

Gal. 1:11 "But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached to me is not after man.
12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ."

Ephesians 3:2 "If ye have hard of the dispensastion of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:
3 How that by revelation he made know unto me the mystery;(as I wrote afore in few words,
4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)
5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit."

When did Jesus and the 12 preach what Paul preached. Chapter and verse PLEASE.