Question about Once Saved Always Saved

[Hammster]

What it always comes down to is, if you lose your salvation by your bad works, then you keep your salvation by your good works and you end up earning your salvation every day.

I've never spoken to anyone who denies the Biblical doctrine of eternal security that did not eventually have to admit that they believe in salvation by works.

Good point.

 

[Skala]

What it always comes down to is, if you lose your salvation by your bad works, then you keep your salvation by your good works and you end up earning your salvation every day.

I've never spoken to anyone who denies the Biblical doctrine of eternal security that did not eventually have to admit that they believe in salvation by works.

Excellent point!

 

[bling]

What it always comes down to is, if you lose your salvation by your bad works, then you keep your salvation by your good works and you end up earning your salvation every day.

I've never spoken to anyone who denies the Biblical doctrine of eternal security that did not eventually have to admit that they believe in salvation by works.

That is a straw man argument.

You do not accidentally leave (lose) your salvation on the side of the road.

Your “salvation” is a birthright and no one can “take” your birth right away.

You are not “working” to “keep” or payback your salvation it is yours already in the form of a birthright.

The problem is, because it is yours you can give it up (like Esau gave up his birthright, the Hebrew writer uses Esau in warning us about this).

 

[Skala]

A person who could develop the desire at all to, as you say, "give up their birthright" doesn't sound like a person who has been radically changed by the Holy Spirit.

It seems that the element of conversion itself is missing from this argument. You are arguing as if the regenerate and unregenerate are capable of acting the same way and capable of desiring to reject Christ.

Doesn't sound like conversion at all to me

 

[Publius]

That is a straw man argument.

You do not accidentally leave (lose) your salvation on the side of the road.

Your “salvation” is a birthright and no one can “take” your birth right away.

You are not “working” to “keep” or payback your salvation it is yours already in the form of a birthright.

The problem is, because it is yours you can give it up (like Esau gave up his birthright, the Hebrew writer uses Esau in warning us about this).

Where does the Bible ever say that we can give up the new nature we received upon regeneration? And why would a person who had received this new nature want to give it up? Isn't the formost characteristic of the new nature that it is spiritual and not carnal?

And, for that matter, what replaces the new nature if one can give it up, since the old nature is dead? Do you get a new old nature? And, if so, how?

How does one give up this nature? Is it like an Islamic divorce, where you just announce, "I divorce you" three times? Is there a document to sign or a ritual to perform?

I've posted this several times but, in this case, I think it deserves repeating:

Think about the consequences of rejecting the Biblical doctrine of eternal security for a moment. If we could really lose (or choose to give up) our salvation, then Hebrews 6:4-6 says that if we ever sin after being saved, we'll be lost forever with no way back, because the Lord would have to be crucified all over again to retrieve us. BTW, it only takes one sin to fall away, right? I mean, one sin before we're saved was enough to condemn us, so one sin after we're saved is enough to condemn us, right? Doesn't this make the New Covenant worse than the Old? Under the Old Covenant, the Israelites were condemned for their actions, but we'd be condemned for our thoughts.

Under the Old Covenant, under the law, the Israelites couldn't murder. We couldn't even be angry. They couldn't commit adultery. We couldn't even have a lustful thought. If you're right, then we lose our salvation by doing less in following the law than the Israelites did!

Is this really the Good News of Jesus Christ? Are these the riches of His Grace, that we have to live in fear of sinning? Are we saved by grace only to be placed under the constraints of an even more severely administered law?

And what of Romans 8:29-30, which says that God predestined those whom He foreknew to be conformed to the image of Christ. If we can lose our salvation and, thus, our conformity to the image of Christ, then does this mean that God's foreknowledge is wrong? That's open theism, which has historically been condemned as heresy by the Church.

How about Jude 24, which says that Christ is able to keep us from falling? If we can lose our salvation, does this mean that Christ is able to keep us from falling, but is merely unwilling? How is that consistent with the Biblical description of Christ?

What do you make of Colosians 3:1-4, which promises that if we have been save, we will appear with Christ in glory? It doesn't say "you might appear with Christ in glory, if you don't lose your salvation". It says "you will appear with Christ in glory". Done deal.

Philipians 1:6 promises us that if Christ has begun a good work in us, that He will finish it. How does He keep that promise if you believe you can lose your salvation?

How do you explain 1 Peter 1:23, which tells us that when we are born again, we are born of incorruptable seed? If we can lose our salvation, then this seed is corruptable and that promise is not true.

Like Colosians 3:1-4, 1 John 3:2 says that we are sons of God now and that when Christ appears, we will be like Him. There is no qualifier. There is no "...if we don't lose our salvation".

Titus 1:2 says that God has promised us eternal life and that He never breaks a promise.

In John 10:27-29, Jesus promises us that He has given us eternal life, that we will never perish, and that we are not only in His hands, but in the Father's hands. How is Jesus' promise in John 10:27-28 consistent with the idea that we can lose our salvation? Is Jesus really incompetent to keep those whom the Father has given Him?

John 5:24 says that if we are saved, we will not come into condemnation but will have eternal life? How can Jesus promise that we will not come into condemnation if He knows we can lose our salvation?

Romans 11:6 tells us that salvation is not by works. If we cannot be saved by works, then how can we lose our salvation by works?

John 14:16-17 tells us that when we are saved, the Holy Spirit indwells us forever. How can the Holy Spirit indwell in us forever if we lose our salvation? Since when does the Holy Spirit dwell in the unsaved?

Ephesians 1:13, 4:30 tells us that we are sealed unto the day of redemption. If we lose our salvation, then how can we still claim to be sealed?

1 Peter 1:4 says that our salvation is "imperishable, undefiled, and unfading". If our salvation is imperishable, how can we lose it? If our salvation is promised by God to be undefiled, how can we defile it?

"The question isn't - can Christians lose their salvation? The question should be - can Jesus lose Christians?" - Mark Driscoll

I think that's a pretty accurate assement of the situation. [/quote]

Therein lies the rub: Either you believe Jesus is competent to keep us from falling and to keep that which the Father has given Him or you don't. There's no middle ground and one simply cannot deny the Biblical doctrine of eternal security without admitting they do not believe He is able to do this.

 

[AndOne]

"The question isn't - can Christians lose their salvation? The question should be - can Jesus lose Christians?" - Mark Driscoll

I think that's a pretty accurate assement of the situation.

 

[Hammster]

A person who could develop the desire at all to, as you say, "give up their birthright" doesn't sound like a person who has been radically changed by the Holy Spirit.

It seems that the element of conversion itself is missing from this argument. You are arguing as if the regenerate and unregenerate are capable of acting the same way and capable of desiring to reject Christ.

Doesn't sound like conversion at all to me

You have to understand that his entire view of salvation can be summed up by his misuse of the parable of the prodigal son.

 

[Skala]

You have to understand that his entire view of salvation can be summed up by his misuse of the parable of the prodigal son.

True.

He views salvation as a mere mental decision. A physical choice that the human brain makes as the neurons fire.

Has nothing to do with spiritual conversion, the Holy Spirit, raised from deadness to life, etc.

Very sad view of salvation.

 

[Merlin]

I am curious about the doctrine of 'Once Saved Always Saved', AKA 'Eternal Assurance'. I am an Anglican and there are a variety of views in the Anglican Church about salvation.

If a person accepts Jesus Christ into their heart as their personal Saviour, is there really anything they can do that can cause them to lose their salvation? What if Hitler had knelt down and accepted Christ just before drawing up the orders for Kristallnacht?

Say a young man is exposed to the Gospel and he decides to receive Christ as his personal Saviour. He prays with real, true faith and asks Christ to come into his life. He starts to attend church and read the Bible every day. However, he is also living with his girlfriend and engaging in sexual relations with her, and he doesn't see anything wrong with that. He continues to live with her and have a sexual relationship, yet he prays daily and trusts in Christ for his salvation. Does the fact that he is committing fornication mean that he is not saved since he has received Christ with faith?

There is more to Christianity than salvation.
Salvation keeps you out of hell.
But then your life with Christ begins.

Everything else affects your reward, but not your salvation.

 

[thegospelisgoodnews]

What it always comes down to is, if you lose your salvation by your bad works, then you keep your salvation by your good works and you end up earning your salvation every day.

I've never spoken to anyone who denies the Biblical doctrine of eternal security that did not eventually have to admit that they believe in salvation by works.

So let me ask you a question, will the liars, fornicators, homosexuals, and the sexually immoral enter the kingdom of God, or will their works keep them out

 

[Publius]

So let me ask you a question, will the liars, fornicators, homosexuals, and the sexually immoral enter the kingdom of God, or will their works keep them out

Yes. There is no question sin will keep the unregenerate out of the Kingdom of God. However, we're talking about whether or not someone who is a saved believer can lose his salvation.

Paul makes this distinction in 1 Cor 6:9-11.

 

[bling]

A person who could develop the desire at all to, as you say, "give up their birthright" doesn't sound like a person who has been radically changed by the Holy Spirit.

It seems that the element of conversion itself is missing from this argument. You are arguing as if the regenerate and unregenerate are capable of acting the same way and capable of desiring to reject Christ.

Doesn't sound like conversion at all to me

Being converted does not turn you into a robot.

You still have free will and it is your will in action when you sin after conversion.

There are those that are converted that are rock soil and those that are converted that are among weeds.

 

[Publius]

Being converted does not turn you into a robot.

You still have free will and it is your will in action when you sin after conversion.

There are those that are converted that are rock soil and those that are converted that are among weeds.

Any verses for this?

 

[Skala]

Being converted does not turn you into a robot.

You still have free will and it is your will in action when you sin after conversion.

There are those that are converted that are rock soil and those that are converted that are among weeds.

A converted will is free from the slavery to sin, thus it is more free than an unconverted free will.

You view free will backwards: thinking that free will means to be free to either choose sin or obedience equally. But the ability to choose to sin as equally as to obey is not a form of freedom, but a form of bondage to the corruption of sin. It is slavery, not freedom.

A truly free will is free from the influence of sin. So to argue for "Free will" actually works against your position and argument, Bling.

 

[Publius]

A converted will is free from the slavery to sin, thus it is more free than an unconverted free will.

You view free will backwards: thinking that free will means to be free to either choose sin or obedience equally. But the ability to choose to sin as equally as to obey is not a form of freedom, but a form of bondage to the corruption of sin. It is slavery, not freedom.

A truly free will is free from the influence of sin. So to argue for "Free will" actually works against your position and argument, Bling.

Good post. I think people who think like bling confuse will and nature.

Everytime I walk my dog, he looks up at birds flying by and barks. I know, if he could, he'd fly away and chase them. But he's a dog. He has the will to fly, but not the nature.

We are born with a sinful nature. We may have the will not to sin, but we do not have a nature that allows us not to sin.

We have neither the nature nor the will to seek (or, God forbid, accept) Christ.

When we are regenerated by the Holy Spirit, we receive a new nature and, gradually, through sanctification, a new will. Even if our new will wanted to reject Christ, our new nature would not allow it.

The new nature, being spiritual and not carnal, is drawn to Christ the way our old nature is drawn to sin.

Having said that, if your dog could fly after the birds then it would and unfortunately for us we ARE able to sin.

No one is arguing otherwise, Ian. My point is that the poster is confusing nature and will. They are not the same thing.

 

[1an]

Good post. I think people who think like bling confuse will and nature.

Everytime I walk my dog, he looks up at birds flying by and barks. I know, if he could, he'd fly away and chase them. But he's a dog. He has the will to fly, but not the nature.

We are born with a sinful nature. We may have the will not to sin, but we do not have a nature that allows us not to sin.

We have neither the nature nor the will to seek (or, God forbid, accept) Christ.

When we are regenerated by the Holy Spirit, we receive a new nature and, gradually, through sanctification, a new will. Even if our new will wanted to reject Christ, our new nature would not allow it.

The new nature, being spiritual and not carnal, is drawn to Christ the way our old nature is drawn to sin.

Having said that, if your dog could fly after the birds then it would and unfortunately for us we ARE able to sin.

 

[crimsonleaf]

And if dogs did what pigeons do we'd all be in BIG trouble...

 

[thegospelisgoodnews]

Yes. There is no question sin will keep the unregenerate out of the Kingdom of God. However, we're talking about whether or not someone who is a saved believer can lose his salvation.

Paul makes this distinction in 1 Cor 6:9-11.

your right, in these passages Paul says at the end in verse 11 11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. But some folks don't want to leave these sins, they believe Jesus is the Son of God, they believe that Jesus died on the cross for their sins and rose the third day and is now sitting in Heaven at the right side of God the Father, This is what the gospel is believing in Jesus as the Son of God and the atonement for sins, was His crucified body and poured out blood. So the dilema is not whether they believe the gospel, you can talk to these folks and they will tell you they believe, your arguement that they are not true believers, is pretty lame......what I contend is what the bible teaches they are led astray by false teachers and false doctrine. It would be senseless to warn the people of God of such things, if they had no effect on true believers. I always go to the end of the story and see how Jesus reacts to believers that are heading down the wrong path, in false doctrine, does He say "I guess you were predestined to fail, and or were not really saved.......or does He say over and over repent and turn back to your first works, repent and overcome these sinful ways.......Its in six of the seven churches, why is Jesus telling saved people to repent.....and if there not saved why is He telling people who are tares to repent......doesn't He know its impossible for tares to repent, when their not called to be saved................or would it make more sense believing Christians could be misled, fooled, and even corupted in their faith by cunning and clever false teachers and prophets, who we see the bible clearly warning us about over and over

 

[1an]

And if dogs did what pigeons do we'd all be in BIG trouble...

Not half!

 

[1an]

your right, in these passages Paul says at the end in verse 11 11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. But some folks don't want to leave these sins, they believe Jesus is the Son of God, they believe that Jesus died on the cross for their sins and rose the third day and is now sitting in Heaven at the right side of God the Father, This is what the gospel is believing in Jesus as the Son of God and the atonement for sins, was His crucified body and poured out blood. So the dilema is not whether they believe the gospel, you can talk to these folks and they will tell you they believe, your arguement that they are not true believers, is pretty lame......what I contend is what the bible teaches they are led astray by false teachers and false doctrine. It would be senseless to warn the people of God of such things, if they had no effect on true believers. I always go to the end of the story and see how Jesus reacts to believers that are heading down the wrong path, in false doctrine, does He say "I guess you were predestined to fail, and or were not really saved.......or does He say over and over repent and turn back to your first works, repent and overcome these sinful ways.......Its in six of the seven churches, why is Jesus telling saved people to repent.....and if there not saved why is He telling people who are tares to repent......doesn't He know its impossible for tares to repent, when their not called to be saved................or would it make more sense believing Christians could be misled, fooled, and even corupted in their faith by cunning and clever false teachers and prophets, who we see the bible clearly warning us about over and over

Amen!