Salvation in this lifetime only?

[menageriekeeper]

Where do we get this doctrine? The answer is probably locked deep in my brain, but at the moment, I can't think of any scriptural basis for it. (no I'm not a Universalist)

So, bring me into the light.

 

[psalms109:31]

Eternal meaning in Hebrew

Eternal

e-tur'-nal (`olam; aionios, from aion):
The word "eternal" is of very varying import, both in the Scriptures and out of them.
1. `Olam:
In the Old Testament, the Hebrew word `olam is used for "eternity," sometimes in the sense of unlimited duration, sometimes in the sense of a cycle or an age, and sometimes, in later Hebrew, in the signification of world. The Hebrew `olam has, for its proper New Testament equivalent, aion, as signifying either time of particular duration, or the unending duration of time in general. Only, the Hebrew term primarily signified unlimited time, and only in a secondary sense represented a definite or specific period. Both the Hebrew and the Greek terms signify the world itself, as it moves in time.
2. Aion, Aionios:
In the New Testament, aion and aionios are often used with the meaning "eternal," in the predominant sense of futurity. The word aion primarily signifies time, in the sense of age or generation; it also comes to denote all that exists under time- conditions; and, finally, superimposed upon the temporal is an ethical use, relative to the world's course. Thus aion may be said to mean the subtle informing spirit of the world or cosmos--the totality of things. By Plato, in his Timaeus, aion was used of the eternal Being, whose counterpart, in the sense-world, is Time. To Aristotle, in speaking of the world, aion is the ultimate principle which, in itself, sums up all existence.. In the New Testament, aion is found combined with prepositions in nearly three score and ten instances, where the idea of unlimited duration appears to be meant. This is the usual method of expressing eternity in the Septuagint also. The aionios of 2 Corinthians 4:18 must be eternal, in a temporal use or reference, else the antithesis would be gone.

 

[rbell]

"It is appointed unto man once to die...and after that, the judgment..."

 

[percho]

Where do we get this doctrine? The answer is probably locked deep in my brain, but at the moment, I can't think of any scriptural basis for it. (no I'm not a Universalist)

So, bring me into the light.

I don't know but think about this. If the sea gives up the dead in it and death gives up the dead in it and hell gives up the dead in it and death and hell are cast into the lake of fire. Are all them buried at sea saved?

 

[menageriekeeper]

Is that it, Rbell? Is that the only scripture we have that points to us having to trust Christ before we die or all is lost?

Do we usually base our doctrines on just one passage?

 

[olegig]

Where do we get this doctrine? The answer is probably locked deep in my brain, but at the moment, I can't think of any scriptural basis for it. (no I'm not a Universalist)

So, bring me into the light.

I don't fully understand what you are asking. Could you elaborate a bit on your question?

 

[pinoybaptist]

I don't fully understand what you are asking. Could you elaborate a bit on your question?

I second the motion.
Please elaborate.

 

[rbell]

Is that it, Rbell? Is that the only scripture we have that points to us having to trust Christ before we die or all is lost?

Do we usually base our doctrines on just one passage?

If the one passage is clear on the issue...isn't that enough?

 

[menageriekeeper]

To clarify:

I've always heard preachers say, "Get saved now before you enter eternity without Christ." In other words, if you don't accept Christ before you die, then you have lost any chance for salvation.

Where do we get that idea? Is it explicit or have we inferred it from scriptures such as Rbell has posted?

 

[Tom Bryant]

Just off the top of my head, there's the story of the rich man and Lazarus. Abraham didn't give him another chance.

 

[rbell]

Where do we get that idea? Is it explicit or have we inferred it from scriptures such as Rbell has posted?

Seems to me that the Scripture I posted is pretty plain-spoken on the subject.

 

[percho]

Well it's going to go the way of a lot of the other threads. When the Bible speaks of the elect or predestined it only talks about the ones saved and many assume that means all others are lost. Can we make that assumption?

That is the reason I thought my first post was relative.

 

[menageriekeeper]

Seems to me that the Scripture I posted is pretty plain-spoken on the subject.

You would think, just looking at it. But lets look closer:

Heb 9:24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:
Heb 9:25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;
Heb 9:26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.
Heb 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
Heb 9:28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

The passage is speaking of how often Christ had to bear the sin of man. How often was that? Just once for all. Why? Because only ONE man had to sin for all to become defiled, so that ONE man, Christ, had to died for all.

I'm not so sure we can use this to say that men go directly to judgement after their death as the context seems to be Adam's first sin and subsequent judgement that affected the entirety of mankind.

So what other evidence is there that man must be saved before he dies?

Just off the top of my head, there's the story of the rich man and Lazarus. Abraham didn't give him another chance.

This is better. I have to admit though, that this parable has always confused me some. Neither Lazarus nor the rich man were said to be believers. There is no reason given for Lazarus to have made it to Paradise other than he was poor and miserabe during his life, nor is there any reason for the rich man to be in torment, except he had been rich in life and perhaps compassionless. Neither are said to have had any faith in God whatsoever until after their death.

Considering that Christ was speaking to a crowd of mocking Pharasees, I am of the opinion that He was telling them, that they were the rich man. They owned the truth of God, but yet kept it to themselves. Lazarus then is a metaphor for the world who wishes to know the fullness of God, but believes they can never acheive that knowledge though they beg at the gates of temple for any little crumb of faith/knowledge that they can glean.

I'm not sure this passage makes for a good foundation for the OP either.

Well it's going to go the way of a lot of the other threads.

No its not. This is not a C/A thread as both sides believe that NOW is the day of salvation. (hmmm, did I just give myself a hint? no time to follow up at this minute)

 

[Benjamin]

...many assume that means all others are lost.

Can we make that assumption?

I can’t; too many reflections to consider about the lessons learned in this life and their purpose(s), questions about the ability of the spirit to reason, have sorrow and repentance after the death of the flesh, and the time, if any, (not to mention what is time after death?) between physical death and the judgment.

Many treads? Yes, could be; a very deep subject, and oh how the accusations could/would fly here on this one.

Regardless, better to believe in the Truth and go with faith in the promise of grace in the Lord "now", in this life. My only hope is in Him alone.

 

[Iconoclast]

23And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.

24I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

47He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God

3Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

18He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

37And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.

38And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not.

39Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

40And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.

41I receive not honour from men.

42But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you
22For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

23But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming
there are verses all over that teach what hebrews 9 teaches.

If the Father only accepts the sacrifice of the Son,and someone dies without it, they diein their sins

22And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission

 

[percho]

Once upon a time long long ago I went to a museum in Chicago and there was a mummy there I'm sure died before Christ lived and died on the earth. I remember thinking you know sometime in the future that person is going to be resurrected. Do you think he/she will be resurrected to be cast into the lake of fire or to be taught and judged by the Lord and those upon his name is called?

This is taking under consideration that Jesus died for this mummy as well as for you and me and that he was raised in order to give life.

If the Passover pictured this death of Jesus. John 1:29 1 Cor. 5:7. If the feast of unleavened bread pictured repentance and Christ putting sin out of our lives. 1 Cor. 5:6,8. If the feast of firstfruits pictured God calling out a people for his name and giving them the firstfruits of the Spirit. The first of election. Acts 15:14 Romans 8:23. Do you think the rest of the feast of God have anything to do with salvation of both the living and the dead? Acts 15:17 ???

Write the things you have seen before the day of the Lord. The things that are on the day of the Lord. The things hereafter the day of the Lord.

 

[pinoybaptist]

You would think, just looking at it. But lets look closer:

Heb 9:24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:
Heb 9:25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;
Heb 9:26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.
Heb 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
Heb 9:28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

The passage is speaking of how often Christ had to bear the sin of man. How often was that? Just once for all. Why? Because only ONE man had to sin for all to become defiled, so that ONE man, Christ, had to died for all.

I'm not so sure we can use this to say that men go directly to judgement after their death as the context seems to be Adam's first sin and subsequent judgement that affected the entirety of mankind.

So what other evidence is there that man must be saved before he dies?



This is better. I have to admit though, that this parable has always confused me some. Neither Lazarus nor the rich man were said to be believers. There is no reason given for Lazarus to have made it to Paradise other than he was poor and miserabe during his life, nor is there any reason for the rich man to be in torment, except he had been rich in life and perhaps compassionless. Neither are said to have had any faith in God whatsoever until after their death.

Considering that Christ was speaking to a crowd of mocking Pharasees, I am of the opinion that He was telling them, that they were the rich man. They owned the truth of God, but yet kept it to themselves. Lazarus then is a metaphor for the world who wishes to know the fullness of God, but believes they can never acheive that knowledge though they beg at the gates of temple for any little crumb of faith/knowledge that they can glean.

I'm not sure this passage makes for a good foundation for the OP either.



No its not. This is not a C/A thread as both sides believe that NOW is the day of salvation. (hmmm, did I just give myself a hint? no time to follow up at this minute)

You're looking at the wrong scripture in Hebrews. Try verse 12 of the same chapter.
that verse tells us eternal life is something Christ already obtained.
Who did He obtain it for ?
Definitely not for himself, because He IS eternal life.

 

[J.D.]

You would think, just looking at it. But lets look closer:

Heb 9:24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:
Heb 9:25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;
Heb 9:26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.
Heb 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
Heb 9:28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

The passage is speaking of how often Christ had to bear the sin of man. How often was that? Just once for all. Why? Because only ONE man had to sin for all to become defiled, so that ONE man, Christ, had to died for all.

I'm not so sure we can use this to say that men go directly to judgement after their death as the context seems to be Adam's first sin and subsequent judgement that affected the entirety of mankind.

So what other evidence is there that man must be saved before he dies?



This is better. I have to admit though, that this parable has always confused me some. Neither Lazarus nor the rich man were said to be believers. There is no reason given for Lazarus to have made it to Paradise other than he was poor and miserabe during his life, nor is there any reason for the rich man to be in torment, except he had been rich in life and perhaps compassionless. Neither are said to have had any faith in God whatsoever until after their death.

Considering that Christ was speaking to a crowd of mocking Pharasees, I am of the opinion that He was telling them, that they were the rich man. They owned the truth of God, but yet kept it to themselves. Lazarus then is a metaphor for the world who wishes to know the fullness of God, but believes they can never acheive that knowledge though they beg at the gates of temple for any little crumb of faith/knowledge that they can glean.

I'm not sure this passage makes for a good foundation for the OP either.



No its not. This is not a C/A thread as both sides believe that NOW is the day of salvation. (hmmm, did I just give myself a hint? no time to follow up at this minute)

It seems to me that the emphasis in Hebrews is the finality of Christ's sacrifice as opposed to the ongoing animal sacrifices which did not satisfy God's wrath in finality. This is paralleled to the finality of men's death, and the appointed judgment.

This finality of judgment weighs heavily against your premise. It is explicit.

 

[percho]

You're looking at the wrong scripture in Hebrews. Try verse 12 of the same chapter.
that verse tells us eternal life is something Christ already obtained.
Who did He obtain it for ?
Definitely not for himself, because He IS eternal life.

I have to ask. Do you think with God being God and as awesome and powerful as He is that if He wanted to He could become non-eternal or is eternal more powerful than even He.

I ask this because if flesh and blood, and I mean all flesh and blood is corruptible and can not inherit the kingdom of God and the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us and poured out his life's blood for us would he not have to receive it back from some source say the Father in order to give it to us? See Acts 2:32,33 John 16:7 Also John 5:26 and Hebrews 5:9 When did he become the first cause/author. When was he made perfect non-corruptible at his resurrection. Paul like Jesus taught the gospel of the kingdom of God. Why do you think he taught from the OT scriptures that the Christ must die and be raised again.

 

[pinoybaptist]

I have to ask. Do you think with God being God and as awesome and powerful as He is that if He wanted to He could become non-eternal or is eternal more powerful than even He.

I ask this because if flesh and blood, and I mean all flesh and blood is corruptible and can not inherit the kingdom of God and the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us and poured out his life's blood for us would he not have to receive it back from some source say the Father in order to give it to us? See Acts 2:32,33 John 16:7 Also John 5:26 and Hebrews 5:9 When did he become the first cause/author. When was he made perfect non-corruptible at his resurrection. Paul like Jesus taught the gospel of the kingdom of God. Why do you think he taught from the OT scriptures that the Christ must die and be raised again.

I don't know what you're talking about in relation to what I said.
I may be an ape, but I know how to count bananas.