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

[squint]

An evil thought is only a sin if you succumb to it.

Jesus was clear that evil thoughts defile us.

You are welcome to claim that evil defilement isn't sin. I'd suggest otherwise.

We all sin in thought, word and deed. Again, a casual read of Matt. 5:28 will yield the same fact, that 'thinking' i.e. looking upon a woman with lust, that man 'hath committed.'

What an evil thought entering you mind truly is: Temptation. It is not a sin to be tempted.

Temptation is internal and of the tempter.

When the tempter tempts in mind, is there a sinner therein?

When Satan spoke from Peter's lips was there a sinner therein?

When Satan entered Judas was there a sinner therein?

ding ding ding.

The problem with the bulk of theology is that only MAN is the factor when there is obviously another party involved that is NOT MAN. And the fact of it is plastered all over the N.T. Gospels and people still don't see it. And will still see only man and will even blame only man.

If I stop there it would not be the full truth so let me explain.
A thought entering you mind is nothing but being tempted. Taking further (in thought or deed) can indeed be sin.

False notion taught by orthodoxy.

Sorry.

s

 

[Mama Kidogo]

Jesus was clear that evil thoughts defile us.

You are welcome to claim that evil defilement isn't sin. I'd suggest otherwise.

We all sin in thought, word and deed. Again, a casual read of Matt. 5:28 will yield the same fact, that 'thinking' i.e. looking upon a woman with lust, that man 'hath committed.'



Temptation is internal and of the tempter.

When the tempter tempts in mind, is there a sinner therein?

When Satan spoke from Peter's lips was there a sinner therein?

When Satan entered Judas was there a sinner therein?

ding ding ding.

The problem with the bulk of theology is that only MAN is the factor when there is obviously another party involved that is NOT MAN. And the fact of it is plastered all over the N.T. Gospels and people still don't see it. And will still see only man and will even blame only man.




False notion taught by orthodoxy.

Sorry.

s

It is not a sin if you resist it. Have you ever asked the question: Where did that thought come from?

Jesus did not say whoever has a fleeting thought of committing adultery is guilty of it. He spoke of it being in your heart not just in your head.

I'm am and have been for a few years,pretty much past the point of having many sexual thoughts. Still, they do arise when i see a certain type of man. Now it becomes sin when I take it to the next step. To actually and consciously think on it. Taking the thought into my soul to derive pleasure from it.
The physical part isn't a concern to me as I'm old enough not to woo most. Men can't tell whether my knees are swollen or if I've forgotten my bra.

 

[squint]

It is not a sin if you resist it.

Look Mama, the 'god of this world' blinds peoples MINDS to the Gospel.

That places the working of the TEMPTER within their minds to do so.

It is quite pointless to see 'just man' in ANY equations of UNbelief.

I don't care what any person does, they are not answering for the sin of unbelief when there is a powerful adversary also at work within their MINDS and HEARTS.

Therefore I will look upon the PERSON with benefit and keep a wary eye on the competition.

Get it?

No amount of white wash plaster is going to make the tempter SINLESS.

Have you ever asked the question: Where did that thought come from?

All the time. And I KNOW where it comes from by the Word. I don't have to guess.

It's internal. It's evil and it's from the tempter.

I do not see that activity as 'external in nature.' It's the MIND of the tempter that 'all' of us have been put into subjectivity UNDER.

Jesus did not say whoever has a fleeting thought of committing adultery is guilty of it. He spoke of it being in your heart not just in your head.

There is zero reason for me to see only A MAN in that activity.

Again, I can only say, DING.

I'm am and have been for a few years,pretty much past the point of having many sexual thoughts. Still, they do arise when i see a certain type of man. Now it becomes sin when I take it to the next step. To actually and consciously think on it. Taking the thought into my soul to derive pleasure from it.
The physical part isn't a concern to me as I'm old enough not to woo most. Men can't tell whether my knees are swollen or if I've forgotten my bra.

You can justify or excuse the matters any way you please.

I don't have to go there. I can condemn my own thoughts, knowing that they are intrusions by something that is not ME. And I very often remind that 'source' of it's forthcoming destruction, which very often results in even more adverse reactions.

That is part of the walk. Paul didn't wind up the chief of sinners without reason. Satan, his (and our) adversary can be a source of constant displeasure. When Paul saw himself that way, as the chief of sinners, it was an OPEN NOD to the fact of his internal tempter, Satan.

s

 

[Mama Kidogo]

Jesus was giving a nice pat on the back to Peter and then said, Get thee behind me satan. Was he calling Peter satan?
These words encourage us. To he who overcomes. I'm so glad it does not say, to he is is not tempted.
Squint I'm not totally dogmatic on this point as I'm not always able to answer that question: Where did that thought come from?" so I generally ask for forgiveness and ask God to keep my mind safe from such thoughts. I'm not one to blame the devil for everything. It's my job to resist him.

 

[squint]

Jesus was giving a nice pat on the back to Peter and then said, Get thee behind me satan. Was he calling Peter satan?

He was calling Satan Satan.

Peter was not SATAN.

The entire takeaway lesson from that encounter was that there were TWO entities being engaged there, not one whit differently than other presentations in the scriptures.

The god of this world (for the uninitiated that would be SATAN) blinds minds and does so 'within' that blinded mind.

Now, how many of you want to raise your hand to condemn blinded fallen believers?

Now, how many of you can face our adversary INSTEAD?

Good! Those of you who affirmed the second hand question have a LOT of fun work ahead of you because you now have A DIFFERENT party to blame and you can actually LOVE and possibly even RESTORE the captives.

Dig?

s

 

[Albion]

He was calling Satan Satan.

Peter was not SATAN.

The entire takeaway lesson from that encounter was that there were TWO entities being engaged there, not one whit differently than other presentations in the scriptures.

No, Christ was clearly speaking to and about Peter. You're right that he was not saying that Peter literally was Satan, but he was making a judgment about what Peter had just said to him.

 

[squint]

No, Christ was clearly speaking to and about Peter. You're right that he was not saying that Peter literally was Satan, but he was making a judgment about what Peter had just said to him.

Albion, Jesus was literally talking to Satan IN Peter.

And it happened just as Jesus taught, here:

Mark 4:15
And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts.

All unbelievers today, whether they believed or not prior, fall in exactly the same way.

When Paul turned unbelievers who was Paul turning them from?

Acts 26:18
To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

And yes, this 'power' is real and it's INTERNAL CAPTIVITY.

s

 

[Albion]

Albion, Jesus was literally talking to Satan IN Peter.

Naa. That's an interesting (if unconvincing) theory, but it doesn't square with what the passage says, and you're the only person I know who holds to it. Maybe there are some others, but I'll stick with the conventional interpretation.

 

[squint]

Naa. That's an interesting (if unconvincing) theory, but it doesn't square with what the passage says, and you're the only person I know who holds to it. Maybe there are some others, but I'll stick with the conventional interpretation.

Fat chance.

Jesus addressed Satan in Peter or Peter was Satan unless you have some other creative way to ignore it.

 

[Albion]

Fat chance.

Jesus addressed Satan in Peter or Peter was Satan unless you have some other creative way to ignore it.

I don't have anything to add to my previous post.

 

[squint]

I don't have anything to add to my previous post.

Most people don't believe the validity of Mark 4:15 so don't feel bad.

 

[Albion]

Most people don't believe the validity of Mark 4:15 so don't feel bad.

I do.

 

[squint]

I do.

Except when provided an open example in the text?

lol

 

[Albion]

Most people don't believe the validity of Mark 4:15 so don't feel bad.

I do believe the validity of Mark and I don't feel at all bad about it.

Now, move on to something else.

 

[ShouldaWouldaCoulda]

I think it is because those Christians to whom you refer elect to obey their church first. And they cower when thinking to ask their minister questions. Often enough because that minister will charge they are committing an offense for daring to, question God.

They're not questioning God. They're questioning that minister that tells them they can lose their salvation. It is a false teacher, that pastor who refuses to allow his parishioners to ask questions.
That is his duty! If he is anointed to be a pastor, his is obligated to teach the word! And the only way to teach the word is to be ready to answer the questions those who are student of the word have.

Those who believe they can lose their salvation are being led by false teachers. And at the peril of their immortal soul. However, it is not just that false teacher who is responsible for this. It is that sheep, that parishioner, who does not read the scriptures for themselves so as to realize they are being lied to in this regard.

Eternal life!
The pastor who lies and says someone can lose their eternal salvation is demonstrating they know nothing of Jesus. Nor do they know the meaning of, eternal.

But they do know how to keep the sheep beholding to that false teacher. When that teacher scares the ignorant in his flock who take him at his word and think they can lose what Jesus said he died to give them for all eternity. Salvation!


1 John 5:11-13

John 5:24

John 10:27-29
My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.

Jesus is not a liar.
But those who teach salvation can be lost are. Anyone who loses their salvation never had it in the first place. Scripture tells us it is as simple as that.

Why do some denominations, such as the Church of God, not believe in Once Saved Always Saved, even though the Bible clearly outlines that salvation is eternal? That is, salvation is by grace through faith and it is something that cannot be taken from you.

While I believe that grace covers such Christians and that they are genuinely saved for putting their faith in the Lord, Jesus Christ, it must be somewhat troublesome to think that backsliding will result in you becoming detached from the Lord. It seems like it would hinder someone's growth in the Lord rather than promote obedience.

The thing is that God chooses us and we respond. He doesn't let go of us once we're a Child of God.

Sometimes it seems like such denominations haven't viewed the Bible in its entire scope, interpreting. What is your take on this subject?

 

[squint]

I do believe the validity of Mark and I don't feel at all bad about it.

Now, move on to something else.

The case made by text is that 'another entity' that is not the person CAUSES unbelief.

Whether 'believers' understand the fact or not the fact doesn't change.

And if this is a fact, then looking only at the fallen believer and blaming them when they are not alone is worthless.

Do you understand this line of reasoning?

?

 

[bottomofsandal]

I think it is because those Christians to whom you refer elect to obey their church first. And they cower when thinking to ask their minister questions. Often enough because that minister will charge they are committing an offense for daring to, question God.

They're not questioning God. They're questioning that minister that tells them they can lose their salvation. It is a false teacher, that pastor who refuses to allow his parishioners to ask questions.
That is his duty! If he is anointed to be a pastor, his is obligated to teach the word! And the only way to teach the word is to be ready to answer the questions those who are student of the word have.

Those who believe they can lose their salvation are being led by false teachers. And at the peril of their immortal soul. However, it is not just that false teacher who is responsible for this. It is that sheep, that parishioner, who does not read the scriptures for themselves so as to realize they are being lied to in this regard.

Eternal life!
The pastor who lies and says someone can lose their eternal salvation is demonstrating they know nothing of Jesus. Nor do they know the meaning of, eternal.

But they do know how to keep the sheep beholding to that false teacher. When that teacher scares the ignorant in his flock who take him at his word and think they can lose what Jesus said he died to give them for all eternity. Salvation!


1 John 5:11-13

John 5:24

John 10:27-29
My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.

Jesus is not a liar.
But those who teach salvation can be lost are. Anyone who loses their salvation never had it in the first place. Scripture tells us it is as simple as that.

You said it in a way that leaves nothing to the imagination !

Those against OSAS know nothing of Jesus -

 

[ShouldaWouldaCoulda]

You said it in a way that leaves nothing to the imagination !

Those against OSAS know nothing of Jesus -

True. And it is a pity for a number of reasons that can't be spoken of here. Else one faces punishment for their boldness in daring to teach where others fail.

 

[Erose]

Why are you asking me? In RCC land they don't even know with certainty they are going. The are 'reasonably assured' according to the 'reasoning' and 'systems' deployed to make that determination, but it also includes the 'maybe not' possibility.

It's similar to the old hack that Jesus never leaves the believer but the believer can leave Jesus.

And they think that form of circular reasoning makes sense.

No, the person did NOT make Jesus leave them because Jesus never left them.



For what reason does God need your acceptable performances in order to reward you?

That is part of the fallacy of freewill. That it is somehow able to 'justify' itself.

s

again no straight forward answers, just more dodging. Since you keep dodging the dialog, why continue in it? I am getting the feeling that you have realized that you cannot support your positions any longer, so now you are just trying to save face?

I have to say you have some very strange notions and I am not familiar with the denomination that teaches such ideas. Would it be possible to learn of what denominations teach such things, or are these the outcome of personal interpretations?

 

[squint]

again no straight forward answers, just more dodging.

Dodging what?

Don't you know that the unbelievers are blinded by the god of this world? Doesn't your sect teach you that?

And since when did argumentum ad populous or numerum become the arbiter of truth?

Numbers of brain dead followers mean nothing.