The lie of eternal security refuted once and for all.

[Albion]

No one is without sin. Period. The point of the Gospel is that we can be forgiven.

 

[-57]

I explained what verse 13 was talking about using the actual verses that surrounded it. Clearly the topic is salvation because it contrasts the faithful servant with being rewarded and the evil servant with having their portion amongst the hypocrites. Jesus did not favor those Pharisees in whom he called hypocrites. The Bible tells us a certain way to live. If one lives contrary to that and says to follow the Bible, they are being a hypocrite because they are not doing what the Bible actually says and they are telling others to follow a book that tells them to live righteously when they are not doing so themselves.

...

Then we must be thinking about different verses.

 

[-57]

I do not live in a lifestyle of habitual sin and nor do I make excuses so as to sin in the future with the thinking I will automatically be saved if I do sin. God cannot agree with a person's thinking that they will sin at some point in the future and they can just get away with that sin. God is Holy and righteous. Yes, God understands that people can honestly struggle with sin. But there comes a point where the believer will overcome the sin in their walk with God because Jesus Christ was manifested to destroy the works of the devil in a believer's life (And not just at the cross) (See 1 John 3:8). The best analogy I can give you is that of an alcholic who joins a drug program so as to become sober and free from his addiction to alchohol. If an alcoholic who joins a program to honestly become sober and free from alcohol stumbles on his road to recovery, he is not making an excuse so as to live a life of being drunk because he will in time overcome that sin. But if the alcoholic had an OSAS mind set going into the program, they would then think they could drink the rest of their lives on occasion and still claim they are sober and free from their addiction to alcohol. But we both know that if an alcoholic were to do that, he would only be deceiving himself.

....

I'm glad you cleared that up...because it's not what you originally said.

 

[-57]

No one is without sin. Period. The point of the Gospel is that we can be forgiven.

That is true.
Another point is that as chritians we will continue to sin. Does this give us license to sin? Of course not. I think that might be Jasons point.

The question I have for Jason is....do you try not to sin to "remain saved" or do you try not to sin to glorify God?

 

[Albion]

I do not live in a lifestyle of habitual sin and nor do I make excuses so as to sin in the future with the thinking I will automatically be saved if I do sin.

That's encouraging. But neither are there people here arguing that you can sin at will and your salvation won't be in doubt.

It's somewhat of a red herring, therefore, to insist that you don't live in a lifestyle of habitual sin while making excuses with the thinking that you will automatically be saved nonetheless.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Actually, it's found in v.38-39 of that chapter of that book.

38 For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers,
39 nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing,will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

First, nowhere is a believer's sin amongst that list. Please re-read the list of the things that cannot separate you from Christ. They are all EXTERNAL things and not INTERNAL things that you choose such as "sin." Sin is something YOU choose and it has nothing to do with what angels, or death or other external things can do to you so as to separate a believer from the love of God. Nowhere is "the beleiver" or "their sin" mentioned on that list at the End of Romans. That is an assumption on your part that such words are actually there (When they are not there). Second, even if you think the text is implying that, we know that is not the case, because Romans 8:1 says they that walk after the Spirit and not after the flesh are not under the Condemnation. For verse 13 says,

"For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live."
(Romans 8:13).

So I really do not see how a sin and still be saved doctrine is being taught here.
That is something you are wanting to see in the text that is clearly not there.

iow, the future is covered by the phrase "things to come". So, NO MATTER what occurs in the future, the one who has believed will not be separated from the love of Christ.

No. "Sin" is not on that list.

But, if these verses don't convince one that sinning will NOT result in loss of salvation, consider 1 Thess 5:4-10.

4 But you, brethren, are not in darkness, that the day would overtake you like a thief;
5 for you are all sons of light and sons of day. We are not of night nor of darkness;
6 so then let us not sleep as others do, but let us be alert and sober
7 For those who sleep do their sleeping at night, and those who get drunk get drunk at night.
8 But since we are of the day, let us be sober, having put on the breastplate of faith and love, and as a helmet, the hope of salvation.
9 For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ,
10 who died for us, so that whether we are awake or asleep, we will live together with Him.

Analysis:
v.4 & 5 contrasts believers (sons of light and of day) with unbelievers, (of night or darkness).
v.6 is an admonition to NOT live as unbelievers (not sleep as others do) but to be alert and sober.
v.7 describes in general the lifestyles of unbelievers.
v.8 we are to live according to our saved state: be sober, having faith and love, and the confidence of salvation
v.9 tells us that God has NOT destined believers for wrath, but for salvation.
v.10 Paul explains that regardless of lifestyle (whether we are awake-living for Christ or asleep-living like unbelievers) we WILL LIVE TOGETHER WITH HIM

This passage is clear; our lifestyle will NOT change our destiny for salvation.

Now, for those who reject eternal security, please explain EACH verse to show how my analysis is wrong.

These verses are not talking about how one can sin and still be saved. It does not say that. Please show me specifically in that passage where a beleiver can sin and still be saved. You are making large leaps of assumptions upon what that passage is actually saying.

I mean, stop and think for a moment.

Why do you think any person sins and or remains in their sin or defends the idea of sinning?

Because sin is pleasurable to people.

"That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness."
(2 Thessalonians 2:12).

The Bible also says, all who do evil hate the light. (John 3:20).

The Bible also says he that sins if of the devil (1 John 3:8).

So how can one who does evil and hate the light be of God?

"And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness."
(2 Thessalonians 2:8-12).


....

 

[Bible Highlighter]

That's encouraging. But neither are there people here arguing that you can sin at will and your salvation won't be in doubt.

It's somewhat of a red herring, therefore, to insist that you don't live in a lifestyle of habitual sin while making excuses with the thinking that you will automatically be saved nonetheless.

Please illustrate your belief here by way of a real world example and to show me the goodness of your belief.

Your belief appears from my perspective that you are making God to agree with you in the fact that you can sin at some point in the future and it will be okay with Him. Can God agree with sin?


...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

That is true.
Another point is that as chritians we will continue to sin. Does this give us license to sin? Of course not. I think that might be Jasons point.

The question I have for Jason is....do you try not to sin to "remain saved" or do you try not to sin to glorify God?

One does not sin so as to do both. For sin has always been separation from God and man. For what do you think happened at the Garden of Eden with Adam?

...

 

[Albion]

That is true.
Another point is that as chritians we will continue to sin. Does this give us license to sin? Of course not. I think that might be Jasons point.

The question I have for Jason is....do you try not to sin to "remain saved" or do you try not to sin to glorify God?

IMHO, you've summarized the respective POVs quite accurately there.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

IMHO, you've summarized the respective POVs quite accurately there.

If a murder says he will only murder on occasion in the future does that mean he is no longer a murderer anymore?
Do you think the murderer who says they are no longer a murderer who murders only on occasion or who admits that they will murder at some point in the future is not condoning their act of murder by saying such a thing?

I am sorry. I just do not see where you are coming from.

....

 

[Albion]

Please illustrate your belief here by way of a real world example and to show me the goodness of your belief.

Real world example? Hmm. Look around you. No Christian, not even Mother Teresa, is or was without sin. Talking as though we become sinless upon conversion is a mistake.

So what about those who say they're believers but don't seem to show it--or worse, even insist that it doesn't matter? We judge them not to have been saved in the first place. That is the point of James' Epistle. All the chatter to the contrary or other twists or "hearsays" on this matter are leading us nowhere, so far as this discussion is concerned.

Your belief appears from my perspective that you are making God to agree with you in the fact that you can sin at some point in the future and it will be okay with Him.

Well then, it would be a good idea for you to get a better "appears" to work from. You're not actually commenting on what my belief "appears" to be but, on the contrary, what you would like to imagine that it is.

 

[Albion]

If a murder says he will only murder on occasion in the future does that mean he is no longer a murderer anymore?
Do you think the murderer who says they are no longer a murderer who murders only on occasion or who admits that they will murder at some point in the future is not condoning their act of murder by saying such a thing?

I am sorry. I just do not see where you are coming from.

....

Alas, I am confident that you are correct to say you don't know where I (or we) are coming from.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Real world example? Hmm. Look around you. No Christian, not even Mother Teresa, is or was without sin. Talking as though we become sinless upon conversion is a mistake.

Well, for one, I believe Mother Teresa was in a religion that does not agree with the Bible. Two, Noah was a preacher of righteousness and the world was destroyed because they lived ungodly. Meaning, if Noah preached a sin and still saved doctrine he could not be a preacher of righteousness because to teach that one can sin and still be saved is to teach that one can just remain in urighteousness and still be saved. But the world was destroyed because of their ungodly living and they are example to all who would live ungodly from that point thereafter. See 2 Peter chapter 2.

Anyways, do you think Noah looked around him as the standard of righteousness for his day (As you are doing now)? No. Only he and his family were saved; And Noah was a preacher of RIGHTEOUSNESS. Jesus said as it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be in the coming of the Son of man. In the last days, the love of many will wax cold. So today, people's moral compasses are shut off. They do not even know right from wrong anymore.

So what about those who say they're believers but don't seem to show it--or worse, even insist that it doesn't matter? We judge them not to have been saved in the first place. That is the point of James' Epistle. All the chatter to the contrary or other twists or "hearsays" on this matter are leading us nowhere, so far as this discussion is concerned.

James says faith without works is dead. So such a statement does not agree with a sin and still be saved type doctrine or belief like OSAS.

....

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Alas, I am confident that you are correct to say you don't know where I (or we) are coming from.

Then explain it to me. For I have no problem explaining my beliefs to you. For I have used both the Bible and real world examples to show you where I am coming from.


...

 

[Albion]

I think it was pretty well laid before you in posts 161, 165, 169, and 171. In response, you seem to me to have relied upon examples of something or someone, and questions you put to us, coupled with digressions about denominations you dismiss for one reason or another.

If you would go straight at what was said in these posts, I think it might help.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

The fact that you cannot answer my questions should concern you.
I will be happy to answer your posts if you answer my questions.

Anyways, to provide for you another point in regards to Post #171:
If you need a real world example of people overcoming their sin, then you just need to look at the ex alcoholic who overcame his addiction to alcohol by a drug program, etc.

For why do you think God is not powerful enough or is not concerned with a believer in overcoming their sin in this life?
For God is Holy and righteous and He tells us to be holy.
Can a person sin and be holy at the same time?
Can a person agree with sinning again at some point in the future and be holy?
Can a man say he is good if he says he will do some kind of bad thing in the future?
Jesus tells two people to: "sin no more."
Does that sound like we can sin again?

Side Note:

Granted, there is none good but God. But this is why believers are to have God living within them. For it is the works or goodness of God that flow thru us. So we cannot claim the victory or take credit for any good done in our life.



....

 

[FreeGrace2]

First, nowhere is a believer's sin amongst that list.

Sure. Because there is NO sin that will separate the believer from Christ's love. None. So why would Paul mention any sin?

Please re-read the list of the things that cannot separate you from Christ.

I would ask the same of you.

They are all EXTERNAL things and not INTERNAL things that you choose such as "sin." Sin is something YOU choose and it has nothing to do with what angels, or death or other external things can do to you so as to separate a believer from the love of God.

What you've either ignored or just rejected is that the phrase "things present or things future" covers WHATEVER MAY OCCUR, which would obviously include the action of sinning. iow, anything that can happen WON'T separate the believer from the love of Christ.

Nowhere is "the beleiver" or "their sin" mentioned on that list at the End of Romans.

Again, there is no need to. There is NOTHING that can separate us (the believer) from the love of Christ. And you've not proven otherwise.

That is an assumption on your part that such words are actually there (When they are not there). Second, even if you think the text is implying that, we know that is not the case, because Romans 8:1 says they that walk after the Spirit and not after the flesh are not under the Condemnation. For verse 13 says,

"For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live."
(Romans 8:13).

So I really do not see how a sin and still be saved doctrine is being taught here.
That is something you are wanting to see in the text that is clearly not there.

8:1 contrasts believer from unbeliever and has no relevance to the discussion about eternal security.

I said this:

"But, if these verses don't convince one that sinning will NOT result in loss of salvation, consider 1 Thess 5:4-10.

4 But you, brethren, are not in darkness, that the day would overtake you like a thief;
5 for you are all sons of light and sons of day. We are not of night nor of darkness;
6 so then let us not sleep as others do, but let us be alert and sober
7 For those who sleep do their sleeping at night, and those who get drunk get drunk at night.
8 But since we are of the day, let us be sober, having put on the breastplate of faith and love, and as a helmet, the hope of salvation.
9 For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ,
10 who died for us, so that whether we are awake or asleep, we will live together with Him.

Analysis:
v.4 & 5 contrasts believers (sons of light and of day) with unbelievers, (of night or darkness).
v.6 is an admonition to NOT live as unbelievers (not sleep as others do) but to be alert and sober.
v.7 describes in general the lifestyles of unbelievers.
v.8 we are to live according to our saved state: be sober, having faith and love, and the confidence of salvation
v.9 tells us that God has NOT destined believers for wrath, but for salvation.
v.10 Paul explains that regardless of lifestyle (whether we are awake-living for Christ or asleep-living like unbelievers) we WILL LIVE TOGETHER WITH HIM

This passage is clear; our lifestyle will NOT change our destiny for salvation.

Now, for those who reject eternal security, please explain EACH verse to show how my analysis is wrong."

These verses are not talking about how one can sin and still be saved. It does not say that.

Your denial does not make it so. v.10 clearly SAYS that regardless of lifestyle (living like a Christian or unbeliever), we still WILL LIVE TOGETHER with Him.

And you've not shown that it means anything different than my analysis.

I specifically asked those who reject eternal security to analyze the verses to show me that my analysis is wrong. All you've given is your opinion, but no explanation.

Please show me specifically in that passage where a beleiver can sin and still be saved.

v.10. As I have already explained.

You are making large leaps of assumptions upon what that passage is actually saying.

If that is true, then please do your own analysis of each verse from v.4 to v.10.

I mean, stop and think for a moment.

Why do you think any person sins and or remains in their sin or defends the idea of sinning?

Who is defending the idea of sinning? That is only in your head. Those who disagree with your view aren't defending sin. But we recognize that we still have our sin natures and need daily cleansing for fellowship (1 Jn 1).

Because sin is pleasurable to people.

"That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness."
(2 Thessalonians 2:12).

The Bible also says, all who do evil hate the light. (John 3:20).

The Bible also says he that sins if of the devil (1 John 3:8).

So how can one who does evil and hate the light be of God?

Because of what the Bible also says about our human (sinful) nature. Which you seem to keep denying.

It appears that you're unable to explain 1 Thess 5:4-10 to prove that my analysis is wrong.

"And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness."
(2 Thessalonians 2:8-12).....

The context for this passage is the Second Coming.

You've admitted that you haven't yet achieved your anticipated sinless perfection, so that means you still sin. So, how can you claim to still be saved, since you still sin? Your views are contradicted.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Sure. Because there is NO sin that will separate the believer from Christ's love. None. So why would Paul mention any sin?


I would ask the same of you.


What you've either ignored or just rejected is that the phrase "things present or things future" covers WHATEVER MAY OCCUR, which would obviously include the action of sinning. iow, anything that can happen WON'T separate the believer from the love of Christ.


Again, there is no need to. There is NOTHING that can separate us (the believer) from the love of Christ. And you've not proven otherwise.


8:1 contrasts believer from unbeliever and has no relevance to the discussion about eternal security.

I said this:

"But, if these verses don't convince one that sinning will NOT result in loss of salvation, consider 1 Thess 5:4-10.

4 But you, brethren, are not in darkness, that the day would overtake you like a thief;
5 for you are all sons of light and sons of day. We are not of night nor of darkness;
6 so then let us not sleep as others do, but let us be alert and sober
7 For those who sleep do their sleeping at night, and those who get drunk get drunk at night.
8 But since we are of the day, let us be sober, having put on the breastplate of faith and love, and as a helmet, the hope of salvation.
9 For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ,
10 who died for us, so that whether we are awake or asleep, we will live together with Him.

Analysis:
v.4 & 5 contrasts believers (sons of light and of day) with unbelievers, (of night or darkness).
v.6 is an admonition to NOT live as unbelievers (not sleep as others do) but to be alert and sober.
v.7 describes in general the lifestyles of unbelievers.
v.8 we are to live according to our saved state: be sober, having faith and love, and the confidence of salvation
v.9 tells us that God has NOT destined believers for wrath, but for salvation.
v.10 Paul explains that regardless of lifestyle (whether we are awake-living for Christ or asleep-living like unbelievers) we WILL LIVE TOGETHER WITH HIM

This passage is clear; our lifestyle will NOT change our destiny for salvation.

Now, for those who reject eternal security, please explain EACH verse to show how my analysis is wrong."


Your denial does not make it so. v.10 clearly SAYS that regardless of lifestyle (living like a Christian or unbeliever), we still WILL LIVE TOGETHER with Him.

And you've not shown that it means anything different than my analysis.

I specifically asked those who reject eternal security to analyze the verses to show me that my analysis is wrong. All you've given is your opinion, but no explanation.


v.10. As I have already explained.


If that is true, then please do your own analysis of each verse from v.4 to v.10.


Who is defending the idea of sinning? That is only in your head. Those who disagree with your view aren't defending sin. But we recognize that we still have our sin natures and need daily cleansing for fellowship (1 Jn 1).


Because of what the Bible also says about our human (sinful) nature. Which you seem to keep denying.

It appears that you're unable to explain 1 Thess 5:4-10 to prove that my analysis is wrong.


The context for this passage is the Second Coming.

You've admitted that you haven't yet achieved your anticipated sinless perfection, so that means you still sin. So, how can you claim to still be saved, since you still sin? Your views are contradicted.

I can explain 1 Thessalonians 5:4-10, but I just know you will not accept my interpretation of what that text says. Nowhere does that passage say we can sin and still be saved. You have to bring forth a verse within that passage that says that specifically. The text you quoted is too generic in it's wording and can be used to support either of our views. But if you were to keep reading on into 2 Thessalonians chapter 2, then your sin and still be saved type belief starts to crumble.

Also, Paul does mentions several times to the beliver that we are not to be deceived that the unrighteous will inherit the Kingdom of God. For Paul lists several sins that will cause one not to inherit the Kingdom of God in Galatians 5, Ephesians 5, 1 Corinthians 6, and Colossians 3, etc.. John also lists these same sins and says that these types of individuals will face the Second Death (also known as the Lake of Fire), too. (Revelation 21:8).


....

 

[Albion]

You've admitted that you haven't yet achieved your anticipated sinless perfection, so that means you still sin. So, how can you claim to still be saved, since you still sin? Your views are contradicted.

So it would seem. This may account for why he won't address what we've said but talks instead about what unknown people are supposed to have done or else demands that we answer his questions about hypothetical situations as a condition of him replying to our explanations concerning sin, freewill, and etc.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Also, there will be those who think they are serving Christ, but they really are not. These are they that worked iniquity or sin. See Matthew 7.

I mean, just stop and think a moment.

Why do you think God who is Holy could agree with your wrong thinking to do evil at some point in the future?
Also, if you are wrong, then you have everything to lose.
But if I am wrong, I will just lose rewards or whatever.
But what of the individual again who thought they were serving Christ?
What type of believer is that talking about?


....