Why do some denominations not believe in Once Saved, Always Saved?

[Erose]

Yes, I am quite familiar with the 'word play' involved in this matter.

Yes, me to, so please stop. I really don't know what else to say, or show. You ignore the teaching of Scripture, and how can you then possibly see its wisdom.

Why is it that you do not see that the unbeliever is blinded by the god of this world, a more powerful blinding force? See 2 Cor. 4:4. See Romans 11:8. See Mark 4:15. See every seed parable in the N.T.

Yet you see only man. You do not see Gods Providence in this matter. You do not see the blinder.

You are giving the adversary way too much power. The devil is not god. He is not God's equal, and he does not control you or anyone else, unless you let him.

You blame and accuse the blinded, in the case of fallen believers. You do not even perceive the involvement of either God or of Satan. And you blame only man.

I blame and accuse no one. We are speaking of the process of salvation, not those who are saved. Like I said before I judge no one. It isn't my place to do so, and thank God it will never be. Judging others is just plain foolish, for Scripture says the measuring stick that you use to judge others you yourself will be judged by. So me I stay away from that business altogether.

IF some devil blocks some poor believers ears and causes them to fall is that not a testimony to the reality of the blinder and a confirmation of Gods Words? Why then do you toss such to the eternal flames?

Then I take it you believe that a demon is more powerful than God's grace.

Do you think some blinded believer is even close to capable of eliminating the Word and Work of God in Christ?

again, this question makes no sense, unless you first believe that a devil is stronger than God's grace, and that I don't believe in.

I don't because there is more than 'just a mere mortal' involved with all these matters. Why is it that you can't see this?

Because you start off with a false premise.

Your sect has assuredly NOT ruled out the possibility of prevailing Grace. Those of you who go past that FAIR MARK by your sect are in fact treading where you do not belong. It is only unfortunate that the board here is so filled with fear that they will not even allow a deeper discussion of this matter so I'll leave it at that....

What a strange and utterly false observation. Nothing in this paragraph is true. Not even the first sentence as has been shown multiple times.

As much as you want to believe that my Church teaches, what you want it to teach, and it in reality it doesn't, doesn't mean that it is going to change what it teaches for your sake.

BUT as it pertains to fallen believers, God Is and remains TRUE to His Own Word, He will not abandon or torture them in fire forever, period. The blinded will not usurp the very real work of Christ for the believers regardless of their falling. They may well be tossed in this current life. Are we not all tossed when we sin? Why then do you deride them for the sin of unbelief when we all sin? I'd say you are partially inclined to favor your own sins and the methods to get yourself off the hook and very unkind to the fallen blind, that's ALL.

His own word says otherwise. If you don't want to believe in Scripture, I don't know what else to say.

So what else is new in the world of threats and condemnation of religion? What do you expect to fall into when you play that game?

s

Your questions make no sense whatsoever, so I want attempt to answer them.

 

[Erose]

I am one who doesn't believe in once saved always saved for the following reasons. Jesus clearly stated that "I am the vine, and you are the branches." He indicated that if you remain in me and I in you then everything is fine, but if you do not "remain," you will be cut off. Jesus also states that there will be many who come saying "I am he," which in other words testify that Jesus is the Messiah, but he goes on to say "I never knew you." Paul cautioned several churches that there were those who had begun falling away and would be lost.

Wise observations.

 

[squint]

Yes, me to, so please stop. I really don't know what else to say, or show. You ignore the teaching of Scripture, and how can you then possibly see its wisdom.

I am familiar with the term redeemed 'but not really' scenario.

You are giving the adversary way too much power. The devil is not god. He is not God's equal, and he does not control you or anyone else, unless you let him.

the god of this world who blinds the minds of every unbeliever can be trivialized and ignored all the while he continues.

I blame and accuse no one. We are speaking of the process of salvation, not those who are saved. Like I said before I judge no one. It isn't my place to do so, and thank God it will never be. Judging others is just plain foolish, for Scripture says the measuring stick that you use to judge others you yourself will be judged by. So me I stay away from that business altogether.

Whilst every believer now blinded by the god of this world unbeliever is tossed to the flames? No, no judgment there.

Then I take it you believe that a demon is more powerful than God's grace.

I believe that's your presentation.

again, this question makes no sense, unless you first believe that a devil is stronger than God's grace, and that I don't believe in.

I've made the exact opposite case for quite some time now.

If anyone get's blinded after belief, it is Gods Will to do so by the placement of the spirit of slumber upon them. It happened to an entire Nation called Israel. And they were so in our behalf.

->Would you see and promote them to burn alive forever for that action of God?

???
???
!!!!

s

 

[FireDragon76]

Arminianism, or Finneyism, teaches that salvation is initiated, completed, and kept, by man until he gets bored with it and decides to go off and try something else.

Arminianism and Finneyism are two different things. Please don't be so polemical to the point you engage in distortions of what other people truly believe.

Arminius also believed the elect were "chosen before the foundation of the world", but God chose them on the basis of their faith.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

Arminianism and Finneyism are two different things. Please don't be so polemical to the point you engage in distortions of what other people truly believe.

Arminius also believed the elect were "chosen before the foundation of the world", but God chose them on the basis of their faith.

Could you elaborate on how you see the difference between 'chosen before the foundation of the world' and 'chosen on the basis of their faith' Also how you reconcile scripture on that?

 

[Gregory Thompson]

once saved, always saved bases the salvation on the text of the bible

I base my salvation on the sufficiency of Christ

 

[Erose]

I am familiar with the term redeemed 'but not really' scenario.

But you are not familiar with the understanding of redemption??? Squint, the Bible is very very clear that not all people will be in heaven. It is extremely clear on this matter. Even the very least words of the John's Revelation is clear on the matter:



Rev 22: [11] He that hurteth, let him hurt still: and he that is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is just, let him be justified still: and he that is holy, let him be sanctified still. [12] Behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to render to every man according to his works. [13] I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end. [14] Blessed are they that wash their robes in the blood of the Lamb: that they may have a right to the tree of life, and may enter in by the gates into the city. [15] Outside are dogs, and sorcerers, and unchaste, and murderers, and servers of idols, and every one who loves and makes a lie.

[16] I Jesus have sent my angel, to testify to you these things in the churches. I am the root and stock of David, the bright and morning star. [17] And the spirit and the bride say: Come. And he that heareth, let him say: Come. And he that thirsteth, let him come: and he that will, let him take the water of life, freely. [18] For I testify to every one that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book: If any man shall add to these things, God shall add unto him the plagues written in this book. [19] And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from these things that are written in this book. [20] He that giveth testimony of these things, saith, Surely I come quickly: Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.

Not all are able to enter into the New Jerusalem. Only those who have washed themselves in the Blood of the Lamb.

the god of this world who blinds the minds of every unbeliever can be trivialized and ignored all the while he continues.

Here is the problem I see in modern Christianity today. When it comes to the devil, people are either on one end of the extremes. Either they give him too much power, and they don't he has any power at all, or even think he doesn't exist. Both extremes are dangerous.

Whilst every believer now blinded by the god of this world unbeliever is tossed to the flames? No, no judgment there.

I've made the exact opposite case for quite some time now.

Well this statement and the statement just above are in conflict. You need to reconcile them; because they are in conflict.

If anyone get's blinded after belief, it is Gods Will to do so by the placement of the spirit of slumber upon them. It happened to an entire Nation called Israel. And they were so in our behalf.

->Would you see and promote them to burn alive forever for that action of God?

Squint, I will never ever judge God. God can do with us as He pleases. The problem I think that you are having is that you see God as a merciful God which is true; but you have rejected the fact that He is a JUST God as well. This I believe is the flaw in your logic, and perhaps you should spend time meditating upon the fact that God is both a just and merciful God. I emphasize the AND. It is not nor can never be either/or.

 

[Erose]

once saved, always saved bases the salvation on the text of the bible

That is still haven't been displayed as of yet here.

I base my salvation on the sufficiency of Christ

Amen.

 

[squint]

But you are not familiar with the understanding of redemption??? Squint, the Bible is very very clear that not all people will be in heaven. It is extremely clear on this matter. Even the very least words of the John's Revelation is clear on the matter:

As stated prior. I am familiar with the word play employed in the matter.

I also rather enjoy give and take in discussions and questions, which has fallen behind from your end.

So, for lack of interest...perhaps another day.

s

 

[Albion]

once saved, always saved bases the salvation on the text of the bible

I base my salvation on the sufficiency of Christ

I consider the Bible to be the word of God and so don't have to take sides.

(and that's to say nothing of the fact that, if it were not for the Bible, the Crucifixion and everything surrounding it would come to you only as a legend with multiple variations)

 

[keembo]

"What that refers to is people who only give lip service to the Lord and were not actually saved. If they fell away, it doesn't refute OSAS."

I might respectfully disagree with you on this one Albion. When you say it doesn't refute OSAS, I believe it does for the simple reason that the statement "they fell away" is included. They had to fall away from somewhere...that being their salvation. In a way it is similar to being saved. You can't be just saved...you must be saved from something to something else. If the OSAS were valid, then there would have been no point for Jesus to have said "If you remain in me and I in you, as OSAS pretty much says that it is impossible to not remain in him. That being said..God clearly stated that who are we to understand his ways, as our ways are not his ways nor our thoughts his thoughts. May God bless your day.

 

[Albion]

"What that refers to is people who only give lip service to the Lord and were not actually saved. If they fell away, it doesn't refute OSAS."

I might respectfully disagree with you on this one Albion. When you say it doesn't refute OSAS, I believe it does for the simple reason that the statement "they fell away" is included. They had to fall away from somewhere

That's how we'd describe any change of heart, I think.

that being their salvation

On the contrary, I'd say that it's an outward adherence to the Christian religion or to Jesus as the Savior that is indicated.

If the OSAS were valid, then there would have been no point for Jesus to have said "If you remain in me and I in you, as OSAS pretty much says that it is impossible to not remain in him.

But on the other hand, saying "IF you...." could be nothing more than describing a person who doesn't have faith but claims it and then gives it up. If the person gives it up, it demonstrates that there was no saving Faith.

Anyway, I agree with you that this can be read two ways.

I just think that all these verses that describe a person falling away are simply statements of fact (those who don't have real Faith are the ones who will be seen falling away), whereas other people say that they are warnings (don't do the following or all bets are then off).

 

[Gregory Thompson]

I consider the Bible to be the word of God and so don't have to take sides.

(and that's to say nothing of the fact that, if it were not for the Bible, the Crucifixion and everything surrounding it would come to you only as a legend with multiple variations)

I consider Jesus to be the word of God . the bible tends to change the number of books each time the church has a major schism .

 

[Albion]

I consider Jesus to be the word of God .

Jesus is "the Word." The Bible is the "Word of God." There is no place in the whole of Scripture where Jesus is called the "Word of God," although there is a reference in John's highly symbolic Apocalypse that is usually thought to refer to him. As has been said before, the Pope has called the Bible the "Word of God," and the Rev. Billy Graham has called the Bible the "Word of God." For any of us ordinary mortals to claim more expertise in these matters than BOTH of those men is quite something, therefore.

the bible tends to change the number of books each time the church has a major schism .

Am I to take it that you don't take the Bible very seriously, then? That would explain things.

 

[keembo]

"Jesus is "the Word." The Bible is the "Word of God." There is no place in the whole of Scripture where Jesus is called the "Word of God," although there is a reference in John's highly symbolic Apocalypse that is usually thought to refer to him."

Perhaps there is just a bit of confusion with the early part of gospel of John where it states "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God." It then goes on to state that the "Word became flesh and dwelt among us." It is all very interesting. May the peace of God be with you this day. He's AWESOME.

 

[BobRyan]

What that refers to is people who only give lip service to the Lord and were not actually saved. If they fell away, it doesn't refute OSAS.

The OSAS argument waters down the Bible texts of Matt 18, Romans 11, Gal 5:4, Ezek 18 so that instead of this being a warning to "you who stand only by your faith" Romans 11 - it s a warning to "you who are in fact lost and going to hell" and is the warning that those going to hell might just become "lostER" if they are not careful.

That alone should be a huge clue that OSAS is a flawed tradition of man that does not stand up to the sola-scriptura test of the Bible.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Albion]

The OSAS argument waters down the Bible texts of Matt 18, Romans 11, Gal 5:4, Ezek 18 so that instead of this being a warning to "you who stand only by your faith" Romans 11 - it s a warning to "you who are in fact lost and going to hell" and is the warning that those going to hell might just become "lostER" if they are not careful.

That alone should be a huge clue that OSAS is a flawed tradition of man that does not stand up to the sola-scriptura test of the Bible.

in Christ,

Bob

You can fashion an argument like that...and use some prejudicial wording, but it is easy to prove Predestination from Scripture. The idea that it was new in the 1500s or "a tradition" (and it couldn't be both) or manmade are just non-starters in my book.

 

[South Bound]

"What that refers to is people who only give lip service to the Lord and were not actually saved. If they fell away, it doesn't refute OSAS."

I might respectfully disagree with you on this one Albion. When you say it doesn't refute OSAS, I believe it does for the simple reason that the statement "they fell away" is included. They had to fall away from somewhere...that being their salvation.

So then, tares and false converts are saved?

If the OSAS were valid, then there would have been no point for Jesus to have said "If you remain in me and I in you, as OSAS pretty much says that it is impossible to not remain in him.

Jesus isn't saying those who are in Him will not remain in Him. He is explaining the end result of remaining in Him.

 

[NorrinRadd]

I prefer blue, but you know what they say, don't look a gifted horse in the mouth.

Well if we're stating preferences...

You Win a Cookie - YouTube

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Jesus is "the Word." The Bible is the "Word of God." There is no place in the whole of Scripture where Jesus is called the "Word of God," although there is a reference in John's highly symbolic Apocalypse that is usually thought to refer to him. As has been said before, the Pope has called the Bible the "Word of God," and the Rev. Billy Graham has called the Bible the "Word of God." For any of us ordinary mortals to claim more expertise in these matters than BOTH of those men is quite something, therefore.

Which "the bible" is the word of God?

Am I to take it that you don't take the Bible very seriously, then? That would explain things.

no, you can let God do the judging of his servant and stop putting yourself in his seat.