Salvation Cannot be Lost

[Phil W]

I said:
"The Bible NEVER refers to believing as a work."
Not for salvation, they don't.

Or for anything else either.
So why are they even included in the bible,in so many places, if they are unnecessary?

I don't have religion. That's what people who think they are going to heaven on the basis of works have.

Too bad, as..."Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world." (James 1:27)
Without repentance and water baptism we can't keep ourselves "unspotted from the world".

As for your question, Eph 1:13,14 details how a person is in Christ.

Though being "in Christ" is mentioned, it doesn't tell us HOW to GET IN CHRIST.. per my question.

It seems you aren't familiar with English words. There is no mystery about the words "believe in Christ" or "faith in Christ". But it seems so with you.

Belief "in Christ" is of no use if one is not "in Christ".

To believe in Christ is to believe in what He did for you on the cross and what He promises to those who believe in Him. Quite simple, really.

Useless information for those who are not "IN CHRIST".
You seem to be of the group that believes what Christ did for us but not how to actually be "in Christ".
You believe in Christ from outside of Christ.

I don't know any evangelical Christians who would even think to ask such a question as you have asked about what it means to "believe in Christ".

That isn't the question I asked.
How does one get "in Christ"?

But, since you have religion instead of Christ, your question would make sense.

Pure religion and unspotted by the world, plus Christ.
You seem to be watching from outside of Christ.

 

[Phil W]

Phil,
Your view that the Holy Spirit is given at water baptism which saves the soul is refuted by Scripture.
Did you repent of that thought?

What for? as I didn't write or ever say it.

You are flat wrong. And I've already given you clear Scripture about this. But, I'm going to do it again, since it seems you aren't paying attention.

Wrong about what?
That receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost comes after repentance from sin?
That is what Peter taught in Acts 2:38.

Gal 3-
2 I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard?
5 So again I ask, does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you by the works of the law, or by your believing what you heard.
The answer is clear: by believing what they heard. In fact, Paul makes a very clear point that repentance, found in the works of the law, do NOT result in receiving the Spirit.

You are mistakenly advocating service to two masters, sin and God.
Do you have all the words the Galatians "heard"?
Why wouldn't Paul speak on repentance and baptism for the remission of sins earlier?
The Spirit will not inhabit the defiled temple of a sinner.

I've given you examples from Scripture that receiving the Spirit comes from believing in Christ.
Acts 10- the context is Peter preaching the gospel to Cornelius and his household-
44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message.
45 The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on Gentiles.

A one time event meant to show the Jews that God had also accepted the Gentiles as His own. (Acts 10:45)
BTW, what was the first thing Peter ordered them to do after hearing them speak with tongues?
He commanded them to be baptized. (Acts 10:48)

And, what is your point? {Tongues of fire and speaking in tongues) is mentioned only the first time baptism with the Holy Spirit occurred. It is never described again. Why would I assume it occurs every time a person is baptizes with the Spirit?

Speaking in tongues is also mentioned at Cornelius' and the twelve at Ephesus' reception of the gift.

I said:
"However, notice what Jesus said to His disciples during the Last Supper in John 13-
10 Jesus answered, “Those who have had a bath need only to wash their feet; their whole body is clean. And you are clean, though not every one of you.”
11 For he knew who was going to betray him, and that was why he said not every one was clean.
The red words state the fact that His disciples at the Last Supper were SAVED, and the blue words indicate not everyone was saved."

Why would you think washing feet results in salvation or reflects salvation? Do you really not understand anything that Jesus was saying to them? I even color coded His words to make his meaning more clear.

It seemed like you were saying that.
I'ld argue against the idea.

Well, of course not! Again, I know of no evangelical Christian who would even think in such terms and ideas.
Your question only reveals your ignorance in what Jesus was teaching His disciples.
I said:
"So, the 11 saved disciples were saved BEFORE Acts 1:5 occurred.
This alone proves that salvation is not based on water baptism."

You first say 'no' but then say 'yes", that they were saved before Acts 1?
You had intimated that they were saved by foot washing.

So, you're going to totally IGNORE John 13:10,11 then? Well, that's on you.
But you are stubbornly locked in your own theories and opinions and assumptions. But Scripture is clear, whether you agree with it or not.
I am certainly NOT including that. The washing of feet was an act of humility and service to one another, which you obviously have no clue. That is clear from Jesus' response to Peter, who didn't want Jesus to wash his feet. He thought it was too demeaning for Jesus to do that. So Jesus made the point that Peter would have "no part with Him" if He didn't wash his feet. Jesus was speaking of fellowship, another subject you seem totally unfamiliar with.
At that, Peter, still misunderstanding, much like yourself, asked for a whole bath. Which is what led Jesus to speak the words of v.10 and 11.
Peter didn't need a bath. He was already saved "clean".

Again, this time it's "no", "yes" they were saved before Acts 1.

I said:
"In addition, the residents of Samaria believed the gospel and were water baptized per Acts 8:12. Yet, they didn't receive the Holy Spirit until after Peter and John came and laid hands on them."

Another instance of God using an event to introduce something new...the laying on of hands.

Water baptism was ALWAYS a symbol of our union with Christ. 1 Pet 3:21, which you've already rejected.

You can forget about "symbolism" and start thinking about it being the reality of our union with Christ.
Baptism is how we are "immersed" "INTO CHRIST". (Rom 6:3-6)

What does Heb 6:2 begin with?

2. "Of the doctrine of baptisms..."
More than one.

Remember who the writer was writing to: Jews who had believed in Christ. ch 6 shows the possibility or reality of some of these saved Jewish believers returning to the levitical offerings for atonement. There was no need of this since Christ was the perfect once for all atonement for sin. Read ch 7-10 for context.

Did you catch..."For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries."
More proof that sinners are not "saved".
They are "adversaries".

 

[FreeGrace2]

Or for anything else either.
So why are they even included in the bible,in so many places, if they are unnecessary?

Please pay attention. I never said "they are unnecessary". I SAID "they are unnecessary FOR SALVATION". Don't you see any difference?

They are necessary as evidence of obedience. As are all commands. But salvation is NOT by being obedient to commands regarding lifestyle. That's the difference, which you seem unwilling to admit.

Too bad, as..."Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world." (James 1:27)
Without repentance and water baptism we can't keep ourselves "unspotted from the world".

Your comment after James 1:27 doesn't even come close to relating to the verse

The Greek word for 'religion' refers to worship ceremony. Which does NOT save anyone.

Though being "in Christ" is mentioned, it doesn't tell us HOW to GET IN CHRIST.. per my question.

Yes I did tell you. Here it is again:
Eph 1-
13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit,
14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.

Color coded explanation:

The red words speak of the HOW a person gets to be "in Christ".

The green words speak of the technicality of being "in Christ". The believer is marked with a seal, the Holy Spirit. This is the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

The blue words prove that those sealed are guaranteed an inheritance until the redemption of God's possession (sealed believers).

So we're back to the OP: Salvation cannot be lost.

Belief "in Christ" is of no use if one is not "in Christ".

It is quite apparent that you have no idea what English words mean.

We don't believe "in Christ". The words "believe in Christ" mean to trust IN what He did for you on the cross (paid your sin debt) and trusting Him alone to save you.

Do you believe in Santa Claus? Do you even know what that means? It means to believe in the person of Santa Claus.

So, to believe in Christ is to believe in the Person of Christ; who He is (Deity, Son of God), what He did (paid your sin debt on the cross), and what He will do for believers (save them by giving them the irrevocable gift of eternal life.

I said:
"To believe in Christ is to believe in what He did for you on the cross and what He promises to those who believe in Him. Quite simple, really."

Useless information for those who are not "IN CHRIST".

What a very strange comment from a professing Christian.

Not useless at all. In fact, it is QUITE USEFUL for HOW to get "in Christ". But you seem to really stuggle with these biblical concepts.

You seem to be of the group that believes what Christ did for us but not how to actually be "in Christ".

That means you have no idea what Eph 1:13,14 mean. I can only pity you.

You believe in Christ from outside of Christ.

Wrong. And your statement is stupid.

When a person puts their trust in Christ alone for salvation, (believing IN Him), they are NO LONGER outside of Christ. But again, these biblical concepts seem very foreign to you.

I said:
"I don't know any evangelical Christians who would even think to ask such a question as you have asked about what it means to "believe in Christ"."

That isn't the question I asked.
How does one get "in Christ"?

Yes, it is the question you asked. And Eph 1:13,14 answers the question.

Pure religion and unspotted by the world, plus Christ.
You seem to be watching from outside of Christ.

lol. How ridiculous. It's you who doesn't have any kind of clue about how to be in Christ. None at all.

Those who don't know how to be in Christ clearly can't be in Christ.

And you're the one who keeps asking how to "get in Christ".

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"Phil,
Your view that the Holy Spirit is given at water baptism which saves the soul is refuted by Scripture.
Did you repent of that thought?"

What for? as I didn't write or ever say it.

You had posted previously that the Holy Spirit was given at water baptism. But now you seem to have changed your mind (repented) of that idea.

Wrong about what?
That receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost comes after repentance from sin?
That is what Peter taught in Acts 2:38.

You are wrong because of the verses I have given you about HOW a person receives the Holy Spirit. But you are so focused on Acts 2:38, which was specific to people who actually and literally voted to put Christ on the cross. What Peter said to that crowd does NOT apply to anyone after that generation. But I don't expect that you will want to change your mind (repent).

Doesn't matter, though. The Bible is clear. The baptism with the Holy Spirit is given to those who believe. In the early days of the church, Gentiles didn't always receive the Spirit immediately. That is no longer the case.

By the time Paul wrote Galatians, EVERYONE received the Spirit through faith.
Gal 3:2,5 proves that. Paul wrote that epistle somewhere between 49 and 55 AD. Why do you refuse to be reasonable and stubbornly focus on a verse (Acts 2:38) that doesn't even apply to anyone after that generation? Focus on Gal 3:2,5 which DOES apply to everyone; Jew and Gentile.

I simply quoted:
"Gal 3-
2 I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard?
5 So again I ask, does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you by the works of the law, or by your believing what you heard.
The answer is clear: by believing what they heard. In fact, Paul makes a very clear point that repentance, found in the works of the law, do NOT result in receiving the Spirit."

You are mistakenly advocating service to two masters, sin and God.

I'm advocating NOTHING of the sort. It seems clear to me that you don't understand English very well if you really believe that nonsense.

How you get "service to sin" from Gal 3:2,5 is just bizarre.

Do you have all the words the Galatians "heard"?

I do have the same epistle that they read (heard).

btw, I know what you are insinuating here. Apparently you think you know what they "heard" but Paul just didn't write down. Is that it?

Why wouldn't Paul speak on repentance and baptism for the remission of sins earlier?

It was NO LONGER applicable. It was applicable ONLY to those who literally acted to put Jesus on a cross.

The Spirit will not inhabit the defiled temple of a sinner.

You don't understand anything in Scripture. And to prove that, I challenge you to cite/quote any verse that actually backs up your opinion here.

I said:
"I've given you examples from Scripture that receiving the Spirit comes from believing in Christ.
Acts 10- the context is Peter preaching the gospel to Cornelius and his household-"

A one time event meant to show the Jews that God had also accepted the Gentiles as His own. (Acts 10:45)

Nonsense. The event here is hardly a "one time event". It is called evangelism, since you seem rather unaware of this. It was an example of HOW people received the Holy Spirit.

BTW, what was the first thing Peter ordered them to do after hearing them speak with tongues?
He commanded them to be baptized. (Acts 10:48)

Sure. And they had ALREADY received the gift of the Holy Spirit. Why don't you admit that?

Speaking in tongues is also mentioned at Cornelius' and the twelve at Ephesus' reception of the gift.

So what?

I said:
"I said:
"So, the 11 saved disciples were saved BEFORE Acts 1:5 occurred.
This alone proves that salvation is not based on water baptism.""

You first say 'no' but then say 'yes", that they were saved before Acts 1?

I really can't deal with your extreme confusion with what I've posted. I NEVER said they weren't saved before Acts 1. Where in the world do you get your confusion from?

You had intimated that they were saved by foot washing.

No, I never did that. That came only from your extreme confusion.

The foot washing was an example of humility, of doing for others what was considered beneath the dignity of most people. Only the LOWEST slave did foot washing. Jesus was showing them by example what true humitity was. Doing for others what others considered way beneath them.

But since Peter was confused (much like yourself), he mistook Jesus' words and wanted Jesus to do MORE than He was doing. He wanted another bath. Jesus used the bath analogy to salvation. He told Peter that he had already had a bath and was "clean". Meaning, you are already saved. Now the issue is fellowship. If you don't let Me wash your feet, you can't have fellowship with Me.

That was the side issue that came from foot washing.

Again, this time it's "no", "yes" they were saved before Acts 1.

I'm just really sorry that you seem so totally confused, even though I've explained very clearly the point of John 13 and Acts 1.

Jesus' 11 disciples (minus Judas) WERE SAVED way before Acts 1. In fact, they were saved by John 6:69,70.

You can forget about "symbolism" and start thinking about it being the reality of our union with Christ.

Well, I would never do what you have been doing: forgetting biblical concepts.

Baptism is how we are "immersed" "INTO CHRIST". (Rom 6:3-6)

Nope, not water baptism. "having believed" is the way, according to Eph 1:13,14.

But you refuse to accept the difference between the baptism of John (water) and the baptism of the Lord Jesus (Holy Spirit baptism which SEALS the believer IN Christ).

2. "Of the doctrine of baptisms..."
More than one.

Yep. There are 7. Can you list them?

Did you catch..."For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries."
More proof that sinners are not "saved".

Not proof of that. What you didn't "catch" is the line; "no more sacrifice for sins". Do you have any idea what that means? Go back to v.18 for a clue.

They are "adversaries".

Sure. Children can be adversaries of their parents. Happens all the time. Or didn't you know that?

Being an adversary doesn't mean being unsaved. It means being in opposition.

Guess who is in opposition to God? ANYONE (look into a mirror) who rejects what the Word of God says so very clearly.

 

[Phil W]

Please pay attention. I never said "they are unnecessary". I SAID "they are unnecessary FOR SALVATION". Don't you see any difference?

No, I don't.
If they are necessary it is only because they are necessary for salvation.

They are necessary as evidence of obedience. As are all commands. But salvation is NOT by being obedient to commands regarding lifestyle. That's the difference, which you seem unwilling to admit.

You are getting wishy-washy here.
You are advocating some choice in obedience to anything said by God or His prophets.
Without obedience there is no salvation.

Your comment after James 1:27 doesn't even come close to relating to the verse
The Greek word for 'religion' refers to worship ceremony. Which does NOT save anyone.

The word you should have zeroed in on was "perfect".
And "unspotted by the world".
Sinners are not unspotted by the world, so not perfect in their religion.
God's "religion" is perfect.
Any other kind of "religion" is not of God.

Yes I did tell you. Here it is again:
Eph 1-
13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit,
14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.

Sorry, you didn't.
You are describing the result of "getting into Christ", not the method of entry.

So we're back to the OP: Salvation cannot be lost.

Agreed, as it isn't granted till AFTER the final judgement all men will endure.

We don't believe "in Christ". The words "believe in Christ" mean to trust IN what He did for you on the cross (paid your sin debt) and trusting Him alone to save you.

Both are appropriate.

Do you believe in Santa Claus? Do you even know what that means? It means to believe in the person of Santa Claus.

No, and neither do I believe from within santa fraud.

So, to believe in Christ is to believe in the Person of Christ; who He is (Deity, Son of God), what He did (paid your sin debt on the cross), and what He will do for believers (save them by giving them the irrevocable gift of eternal life.

It also means to believe "from within Christ".
You are advocating having knowledge of Christ, but from outside of Him.
Kinda like the devil does.

Not useless at all. In fact, it is QUITE USEFUL for HOW to get "in Christ". But you seem to really stuggle with these biblical concepts.

So how did you get "in Christ"?

 

[Phil W]

I said:
"Phil,
Your view that the Holy Spirit is given at water baptism which saves the soul is refuted by Scripture.
Did you repent of that thought?"
You had posted previously that the Holy Spirit was given at water baptism. But now you seem to have changed your mind (repented) of that idea.

I have never even heard of such a sequence for receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost.
It is promised to those who will turn from all sin and get baptized for the remission of sins in the name of Jesus Christ. (Acts 2:38)

You are wrong because of the verses I have given you about HOW a person receives the Holy Spirit. But you are so focused on Acts 2:38, which was specific to people who actually and literally voted to put Christ on the cross. What Peter said to that crowd does NOT apply to anyone after that generation. But I don't expect that you will want to change your mind (repent).

Sorry for your misinterpretation of God's words.
And I'm sorry for some thieve's theft of repentance from sin and baptism for the remission of sins from you.

By the time Paul wrote Galatians, EVERYONE received the Spirit through faith.
Gal 3:2,5 proves that. Paul wrote that epistle somewhere between 49 and 55 AD. Why do you refuse to be reasonable and stubbornly focus on a verse (Acts 2:38) that doesn't even apply to anyone after that generation? Focus on Gal 3:2,5 which DOES apply to everyone; Jew and Gentile.

Your information seems to come from the perverters of the gospel in later generations.

How you get "service to sin" from Gal 3:2,5 is just bizarre.

Jesus said that they who commit sin are the servants of sin, in John 8:34.
He also said no man can serve two masters, in Matt 6:24.
The basis of your POV is that sinners go to heaven..right?
They "believe" so are saved already no matter what they do in the future...right?
John 8:32-34 and Matt 6:24 nullify that belief.

Not proof of that. What you didn't "catch" is the line; "no more sacrifice for sins". Do you have any idea what that means?

Did you "catch" the results...in the next verse?
"But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries."
Those are the alternatives. No sin or fiery judgement.

Guess who is in opposition to God? ANYONE (look into a mirror) who rejects what the Word of God says so very clearly.

Words of God like..."Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect" (Matt 5:48) ????

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
" I never said "they are unnecessary". I SAID "they are unnecessary FOR SALVATION". Don't you see any difference?"

No, I don't.

And...that is the problem.

If they are necessary it is only because they are necessary for salvation.

Your view of things is extremely narrow. Apparently you don't know about blessings or discipline in this life, or eternal rewards in the next.

If everything is "necessary for salvation", then salvation is by works. Which the Bible and I reject, totally.

Without obedience there is no salvation.

Another opinion without any evidence from Scripture.

The word you should have zeroed in on was "perfect".
And "unspotted by the world".
Sinners are not unspotted by the world, so not perfect in their religion.
God's "religion" is perfect.
Any other kind of "religion" is not of God.

Christianity is NOT a religion. In fact, Christianity is DIFFERENT from every religion. Every religion claims a list of works, deeds, whatever you want to call it, for salvation.

Every religion thinks salvation is by earning God's favor.

Christianity is the total opposite. Grace is God's favor without any works.

Yes I did tell you. Here it is again:
Eph 1-
13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit,
14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.

Sorry, you didn't.
You are describing the result of "getting into Christ", not the method of entry.

I will quote the exact words that TELL how one gets "in Christ".

"you also were included IN Christ, when you believed". That's HOW.

The marking with a seal is the result. Not the entering.

What is there about "you were included IN Christ" that is mysterious to you?

I said:
"So we're back to the OP: Salvation cannot be lost."

Agreed, as it isn't granted till AFTER the final judgement all men will endure.

No, we are NOT in agreement. Not even close. If salvation was granted only after final judgment, then there would be NO NEED for the Bible to say that salvation is by faith in Christ. Or that those who have believed HAVE (as in possess) eternal life.

But both are found in Scripture. The Scripture that you are totally unfamiliar with.

I said:
"So, to believe in Christ is to believe in the Person of Christ; who He is (Deity, Son of God), what He did (paid your sin debt on the cross), and what He will do for believers (save them by giving them the irrevocable gift of eternal life."

It also means to believe "from within Christ".

Please explain this. It doesn't make any sense to me.

You are advocating having knowledge of Christ, but from outside of Him.
Kinda like the devil does.

You couldn't be more wrong.

I said:
" In fact, it is QUITE USEFUL for HOW to get "in Christ". But you seem to really stuggle with these biblical concepts."

So how did you get "in Christ"?

Your question again proves my claim about your struggle.

When a person puts their full trust in Christ for what He has done for them, they are "INCLUDED IN CHRIST" and marked with a seal, the Holy Spirit, who GUARANTEES their inheritance until the day of redemption as God's possession.

Those words are so clear, if you don't understand what they mean, I just feel sorry for you.

What I do know is that you have no clue what Eph 1:13,14 either say or mean.

 

[Phil W]

I said:
" I never said "they are unnecessary". I SAID "they are unnecessary FOR SALVATION". Don't you see any difference?"
And...that is the problem.

Not a problem for me.

Your view of things is extremely narrow.

As is the path we walk.

If everything is "necessary for salvation", then salvation is by works. Which the Bible and I reject, totally.

The works Paul refuted were the works of the Mosaic Law, ie circumcision, dietary laws, tithing, etc.
Not believing, having faith, repentance from sin, baptism for the remission of past sins, and obedience...for salvation.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I have never even heard of such a sequence for receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost.

I have no doubt about what you admit here. There are many things in Scripture that you "have never even heard of".

It is promised to those who will turn from all sin and get baptized for the remission of sins in the name of Jesus Christ. (Acts 2:38)

You can reject God's Word all you want, but Gal 3:2 and 5 is the truth. And I explained WHY Acts 2:38 doesn't apply to anyone after those who literally put Christ on the cross.

I said:
"You are wrong because of the verses I have given you about HOW a person receives the Holy Spirit. But you are so focused on Acts 2:38, which was specific to people who actually and literally voted to put Christ on the cross. What Peter said to that crowd does NOT apply to anyone after that generation. But I don't expect that you will want to change your mind (repent)."

Sorr for your misinterpretation of God's words.
And I'm sorry for some thieve's theft of repentance from sin and baptism for the remission of sins from you.

You should be sorry only for your own horrific misunderstanding of God's word.

Your information seems to come from the perverters of the gospel in later generations.

I've quoted directly from Scripture. Scripture that says exactly what I believe. Unlike yourself. So who's the perverter of the gospel?

Jesus said that they who commit sin are the servants of sin, in John 8:34.
He also said no man can serve two masters, in Matt 6:24.
The basis of your POV is that sinners go to heaven..right?

Wrong again. As usual.

The basis of my pov is that believers in Jesus Christ go to heaven. Period. Which I've proven over and over. Unlike your pov.

They "believe" so are saved already no matter what they do in the future...right?

Your use of quote marks around the word 'believe' demonstrate your animosity towards grace. The idea that someone who merely trusts in Christ to save them will enter heaven regardless of lifestyle.

That's your whole problem. It's all about lifestyle for your types. That's works, my friend. No grace in that. And the Bible says so. Over and over.

John 8:32-34 and Matt 6:24 nullify that belief.

Actually, they don't. Not even close.

Consider Rom 8:38,39
38 For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers,
39 neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Paul couldn't have been more clear. What do you think the "present or future" include? Or exclude? Obviously, nothing is excluded.

However, here's some more verses that sink your works salvation boat that has no place for grace.

Rom 3:24 - and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.

You've just claimed in this post that salvation (justification) comes only AFTER the final judgment. Paul says quite differently.

Rom 4:16 - Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham’s offspring—not only to those who are of the law but also to those who have the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all.

The "promise" here is the promise of salvation. It comes by faith and NOT by works.

Eph 2:5,8
5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved.
8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—

The red words prove that works or lifestyle has no place in getting saved.

9 not by works, so that no one can boast.

Boom! There goes your "final judgment" of lifestyle for salvation theory.

Gal 2:21 - I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!”

There it is, in black and white. Nothing about "final judgment".

2 Tim 1:9 - He has saved us and called us to a holy life—not because of anything we have done but because of his own purpose and grace. This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time,

Notice, please, the clear and obvious order here: He saved us and THEN called us to a holy life. But NOTHING about your theory of "final judgment" for salvation.

Did you "catch" the results...in the next verse?
"But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries."
Those are the alternatives. No sin or fiery judgement.

Oh, yes. I caught it. The verse speaks of God's painful discipline for His disobedient children. But there is NOTHING in that verse about going to hell, as you strongly wish it was.

Words of God like..."Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect" (Matt 5:48) ????

I've already explained it and you're apparently not interested in doing a bit of research into the meaning of the Greek word. That's on you.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"I said:
" I never said "they are unnecessary". I SAID "they are unnecessary FOR SALVATION". Don't you see any difference?"
And...that is the problem."

Not a problem for me.

You just don't know what a problem it is.

I said:
"Your view of things is extremely narrow."

As is the path we walk.

Nice try. But no cigar. You can't differentiate between grace for salvation and rewards for effort. And many other things.

The works Paul refuted were the works of the Mosaic Law, ie circumcision, dietary laws, tithing, etc.

You're just focusing on some of the ceremonial things. The Law included everything in one's life (lifestyle), so when Paul mentions the Law, he was including everything you think of in your efforts to earn salvation. Just like the Pharisees did.

Not believing, having faith, repentance from sin, baptism for the remission of past sins, and obedience...for salvation.

It's clear to me that you refuse to believe what the Bible says about salvation and eternal life. They are by believing in Christ.

You continue to think there is a lot of human effort involved in getting saved. Which is proven from your comment about salvation being granted AFTER the final judgment.

Pitiful.

 

[Phil W]

I said:
"I said:
" I never said "they are unnecessary". I SAID "they are unnecessary FOR SALVATION". Don't you see any difference?"
And...that is the problem."
You just don't know what a problem it is
I said:
"Your view of things is extremely narrow."
Nice try. But no cigar. You can't differentiate between grace for salvation and rewards for effort. And many other things.
You're just focusing on some of the ceremonial things. The Law included everything in one's life (lifestyle), so when Paul mentions the Law, he was including everything you think of in your efforts to earn salvation. Just like the Pharisees did.
It's clear to me that you refuse to believe what the Bible says about salvation and eternal life. They are by believing in Christ.

You continue to think there is a lot of human effort involved in getting saved. Which is proven from your comment about salvation being granted AFTER the final judgment.

Jesus said..."But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved." (Matt 24:13)
I'll adhere to the words of the Christ.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Jesus said..."But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved." (Matt 24:13)
I'll adhere to the words of the Christ.

The problem begins with understanding what He said. Which you obviously don't.

If you read the whole context, you will learn that the verse is about enduring to the end of the Tribulation, NOT your life. That verse has nothing to do with those who don't live during the Tribulation.

So, your failure to rightly divide the Word of God has led you into a lot of false doctrines.

In a previous post of yours, you said:
"Not believing, having faith, repentance from sin, baptism for the remission of past sins, and obedience...for salvation."

My response:
"It's clear to me that you refuse to believe what the Bible says about salvation and eternal life. They are by believing in Christ."

And you ignored my response. Why is that? Couldn't refute it? Couldn't prove your own opinion? That's why. So you just leave it alone. As if it didn't exist.

But it does exist. And it refutes your false doctrines.

 

[Phil W]

The problem begins with understanding what He said. Which you obviously don't.

With your understanding then, I don't have to endure till the end.
No thanks.
I love God above all things and my neighbor as myself.
I want to endure till the end!
I know that is just another optional command from Jesus that apparently has no measure of importance to your religion.

If you read the whole context, you will learn that the verse is about enduring to the end of the Tribulation, NOT your life. That verse has nothing to do with those who don't live during the Tribulation.

It is applicable to life, as life is a series of tribulations.

So, your failure to rightly divide the Word of God has led you into a lot of false doctrines.

"False" doctrines intent on getting men to obey God.
Somehow, "false" doesn't really seem to fit.

In a previous post of yours, you said:
"Not believing, having faith, repentance from sin, baptism for the remission of past sins, and obedience...for salvation."
My response:
"It's clear to me that you refuse to believe what the Bible says about salvation and eternal life. They are by believing in Christ."

Then believing in Christ is a work.
A duty, a chore, a deed we MUST DO.
If that seems like the works of the Law to you, so be it.

And you ignored my response. Why is that? Couldn't refute it? Couldn't prove your own opinion? That's why. So you just leave it alone. As if it didn't exist.
But it does exist. And it refutes your false doctrines.

Which "false" doctrine?
That repentance from sin and baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of past sins is necessary for salvation?
Let's just call it what it is then...faith in ALL the things Jesus and His disciples wrote instead of faith in just one verse.

 

[FreeGrace2]

With your understanding then, I don't have to endure till the end.

Do you really not understand that the verse refers to a 7 year period called the Tribulation??

I love God above all things and my neighbor as myself.

I believe the Pharisees were saying that. A lot. to anyone who was paying attention.

I want to endure till the end!

Well, good for you. If you find yourself IN the Tribulation (ala Revelation), go for it.

I know that is just another optional command from Jesus that apparently has no measure of importance to your religion.

Are you deaf, or what? I've already explained that I have NO religion. I have a relationship with God through His Son. Do you understand any of this?

btw, every single command is an option. And with every option and choice, there are CONSEQUENCES. Do you understand any of this?

It is applicable to life, as life is a series of tribulations.

Just read the chapter on that verse about "enduring to the end shall be saved". It is about the very specific 7 year period called the Tribulation.

"False" doctrines intent on getting men to obey God.

How interesting. After explaining that your entire system is based on what YOU DO for ultimate salvation, you claim to get men to "obey God".

So, just so I have it straight, you at the same time want men to "obey God", you don't even believe what God says.

Interesting.

In a previous post of yours, you said:
"Not believing, having faith, repentance from sin, baptism for the remission of past sins, and obedience...for salvation."
My response:
"It's clear to me that you refuse to believe what the Bible says about salvation and eternal life. They are by believing in Christ."

Then believing in Christ is a work.
A duty, a chore, a deed we MUST DO.

This just absolutely PROVES that you don't understand anything about Rom 4:4,5 or Eph 2:8,9 then.

A work is a "chore" or a "job" that is done FOR PAYMENT. Got it? That's the Bible's definition of "work".

And the Bible distinguishes between work and faith, which is by grace.

Can you define grace and explain it? I'm all ears.

Which "false" doctrine?

This is what I said:
"My response:
"It's clear to me that you refuse to believe what the Bible says about salvation and eternal life. They are by believing in Christ.""

iow, your view of salvation is you have to endure and work for it. You view salvation as a payment for being good.

That repentance from sin and baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of past sins is necessary for salvation?

Again, Acts 2;38 was for a very specific group of people; those who literally were present and sent Jesus to the cross.

It does NOT apply to anyone after that generation. And Gal 3:2,5 proves it.

But you ignore those 2 verses.

Let's just call it what it is then...faith in ALL the things Jesus and His disciples wrote instead of faith in just one verse.

Said the guy who singularly focuses on Acts 2:38, which isn't even applicable to anyone today and totally ignores all the verses that say plainly that salvation is by faith in Christ. Period.

Have you considered Paul's answer to the jailer's question: "sirs, what must I DO to be saved?"

Paul said, "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved."

Now, explain how Paul's answer aligns with your views.

 

[Phil W]

Have you considered Paul's answer to the jailer's question: "sirs, what must I DO to be saved?"
Paul said, "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved."
Now, explain how Paul's answer aligns with your views.

Without the knowledge of the Lord Jesus, the jailer couldn't be baptized into Him and into His death and burial, or be resurrected with Him to walk in newness of life.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"Have you considered Paul's answer to the jailer's question: "sirs, what must I DO to be saved?"
Paul said, "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved."
Now, explain how Paul's answer aligns with your views."

Without the knowledge of the Lord Jesus, the jailer couldn't be baptized into Him and into His death and burial, or be resurrected with Him to walk in newness of life.

So that's your answer??

But it fails to admit the FACTS; that Paul told him about the Lord Jesus (knowledge). And do you know what? He was water baptised AFTER he believed.

Peter taught that water baptism doesn't save, but is a SYMBOL of what does save: baptism of the Holy Spirit, which is totally different than getting wet.

Water baptism is a ceremony depicting what the believer has been identified in His death burial and resurrection.

Holy Spirit baptism is a real identification with Christ.

Period.

 

[S.ilvio]

Over half of the Book of Hebrews details how one can fall away from Grace...

 

[FreeGrace2]

Over half of the Book of Hebrews details how one can fall away from Grace...

Yep. Sure can. Now, show that those who do or have fallen away actually lose salvation, please.

But, I think you know that there are no verses that make such a statement. Your opinion has to come from a lot of assumption and presumption.

 

[S.ilvio]

Yep. Sure can. Now, show that those who do or have fallen away actually lose salvation, please.

But, I think you know that there are no verses that make such a statement. Your opinion has to come from a lot of assumption and presumption.

We only gain Salvation through the Grace of God. Chicken and egg my friend...

 

[FreeGrace2]

We only gain Salvation through the Grace of God. Chicken and egg my friend...

But what you seem to forget (or never knew) is that once given eternal life, the recipient SHALL NEVER PERISH.

That's what Jesus taught in John 10:28. "I give them eternal life and they shall never perish."

So, go back to your drawing board and figure out where your errors are.