"Once saved, always saved"--Fact or Fiction?

When you are a Christian, whether are you are acting carnal or not, you are aware of the presence of God. You are aware of whether or not you have or have not displeased Him. You are aware of His love in your life.

To those who say, "You can lose salvation," I ask, when have you felt that you lost the love of God?

NOT- when did you sense His disappointment, or when did you turn away from Him, or when did you feel He was angry with you.

The question is, when, after you became a Christian, did you ever feel that the presence of God was totally gone from your life?

 

I think you meant translation.

Yes, the old KJV translates it convert, but look how that is used in other places. It always means "to turn to" or "to cause to return, to bring back".

Check out the NKJV, NAS, ESV, and yes NIV. They all pretty much agree. The NJKV, NAS, and ESV are certainly not "paraphrases". I agree with your feelings and caution toward the NIV. But, to imply that all these translators had an agenda on this verse is not sensible.

The same word is used in Luke 22:32, when the Lord prayed for Peter that his faith would not fail and when he returns (is converted, in the KJV) to strengthen the brethren.

Usually, the word just means to turn but it can mean return, such as Matt 10:13, "And if the house is worthy, let your peace come upon it, but if it is not worthy, let your peace return to you."

James 5:19-20 My brothers, if anyone among you wanders from the truth and someone brings him back, let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from his wandering will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.

James clearly says, "if anyone among you". He is talking to the whole group, not a select segment.

If there were any doubt, he talks about wandering from the truth and bringing back or turning him from the path he is on which leads to death.

James uses that word death one other time, found back in Chapter 1 verse 15 "Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death."

Does this agree with Chapter 5? Certainly it does. Does bringing one back save his soul from physical death? Of course not.

If one reads James 5:19-20 for what it says, and removes all prejudice and former teaching, the meaning is obvious!

Do you see all the mental gymnastics that are required to explain away this clear teaching? I haven't seen a real attempt to even try and explain away II Pet 2:20-22, but I'm not surprised if someone does. It can't mean what it actually says, can it?

 

I have known people who quit trying.

I John 1:7-10, "But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. 8If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us."

Notice, we are required to walk in the light to be protected by the blood. Does that mean we are sinless? No, verse 7 says the blood keeps on cleaning us from all sin. If we were sinless, there would be nothing to clean. Verse 9 says we must confess our sins. What if we don't? What if we give up and quit trying? What if we don't have fellowship with Him?

Just like the pig that was washed that returns to the mud and gets dirty, so can a person.

II Pet 2:20-22, "For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. 21 For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment delivered to them. 22 What the true proverb says has happened to them: "The dog returns to its own vomit, and the sow, after washing herself, returns to wallow in the mire."

If OSAS is true, please explain to me how it is possible for one to escape the defilements of the world through knowing Jesus, and it would have been better for them to have never known Jesus.

 

You said you know people who quit trying.

Paul stated that we can be assured that if anyone continually ignores the will of God they were never a brother to begin with.

When I was a new Christian, I actually doubted that because I didn't understand it.

40+ years later, I understand it totally. When God lives within a Christian, God continually pulls that person back to fellowship with Him, just as God always pulled David back, even though David committed some very serious sins.

It is Christ in us that offers us the full assurance of salvation.

On top of that, to say that you have lost your salvation is to call Christ a liar.

Christ said that anyone who believes on Him is saved. He said that His forgiveness was for all sins. He does not say, "My forgiveness is until you screw up and ask again." In fact, He does NOT say, "You must be sinless to be saved," nor does He say, "You must repent to be saved." He says, "BELIEVE IN ME."

If salvation required purification, and repeated conversion, salvation would be fully dependent upon timing, and it would be better to accept Christ, beg forgiveness and hop in front of a fast moving train. That isn't how God set up salvation.

It is a gift of grace because we need grace, before and after we accept Him as Lord and Savior, we need His grace.

 

Hey brother mman! I thought you might have retired.

Hey, back on page 13, last post, it is for you to respond to. When you get the time please correct me if and where I go wrong.

Thank You! God Bless!

 

I wish I was retired

Sorry, I haven't had much time recently. I have to pick and choose what I can address.

It will be tomorrow before I can possibly get to it. Actually, I started a response last week, but didn't get to finish it, so I didn't post it. Sorry.

 

Paul didn't say that.

See comments above to James 5:19-20, about a brother straying from the truth that results in the death of the soul.

Also your explaination does not fit with II Pet 2:20-22.

 

Greetings

Our sins are removed as far as the east is from the west (Psa 103:12). The word "removed" is a Hiphil Perfect designating a completed event.

If our sins are forgiven, how can any charge be brought against one of God's children who now sin? DUH. This is a rhetorical question! No condemning charge can be brought (Rom 8:1, 33-34)!

This is OSAS!
Lloyd

 

James 2:24 tells us that "...by works a man is justified, and not by faith only."

How can you consistently, and repeatedly contradict such a clear statement from God's word?</font>[/QUOTE]I consistently and repeatedly use CONTEXT to show that justification BEFORE GOD by faith alone leads to vindication BEFORE OTHERS by faithful works.

Have you seen my study on justification in the Event vrs Process Justification thread?

These verses in James 2 (21 & 25) are in the aorist passive. James 2:24,25 are present passives. None of these verses are in the present indicative.

When one pays attention to the Greek and CONTEXT, then one sees that human activity in justification is strictly passive. Jesus specifically denies self-righteous activity of the Pharisees who would justify themselves before others (Luke 16:15).

The key is that faith in Jesus activates God's imputation of righteousness apart from works. This is justification. Only then, do works come to bear in the process of purification into the image of Jesus Christ (sanctification).

You, like BobRyan, desperately need to understand the lexical conclusions of justification and sanctification. Theology must be built upon God's Word - not human standards of payback.

I think Bob is terrified of the above referenced lexical analysis. You might also for it is quite damaging to your view.

But our goal should be to put Christ foremost at any cost!
Lloyd

 

Hey bmerr

Even our present and future sins are forgiven. Col 2:13 shows that our sins were nailed to Jesus Cross. 1 John 2:2 shows that Jesus is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world, especially true for God's children (1 John 2:12).

Rom 6:7 shows that one is permanently freed from sin by trusting in Jesus.

I have a hard time seeing how you can miss this clarity.
Lloyd

 

Hey bmerr

The Rom 3:25 sins of the past describes how God could be just and the justifier of OT saints BEFORE the Cross.

It is like a credit account. God put the sins of the OT saints on charge. Even better for us, God paid in advance for all the sins of NT saints. He got 'em all at that one shot and then SAT DOWN (Heb 1:3; 10:12). So if Jesus missed anything, then we are in trouble for He won't ever again stand up to perform a sacrifice for sins.

If you are right, we all go to hell.
Lloyd

 

Folk remember,,,,,It was Paul by the leading of the Holy Spirit (God being the author) who wrote Hebrews 6.

 

Hey Frances

Hebrews 6 is a great warning that is customarily abused by human-centered self-righteousness.

The word “impossible” is the death knell for this Christ-denying view. If you take it to its natural conclusions then it shows a ONE-SHOT salvation after which everyone goes to hell. The natural conclusions of the word “impossible” should make anyone see that salvation is not being discussed. This is a good example of how an unclear verse should not be allowed to nullify an already clearly established doctrine.


Verses 7-8 show us what is being discussed by using an analogy to farmland. The land wasn’t productive. Nothing but thorns grew on it and the owner had to bear its fruitlessness. Today, many people burn their lawns to eliminate dead stuff and enhance the new growth. Burning only prepares it for the next cycle of cultivating, sowing and reaping so that it can bring fruit in its due time. The ground properly burned and prepared will produce fruit NEXT YEAR!


In verse 9, the readers receive BETTER things than the apostates. Better is a comparative word. Both apostates and the faithful receive the same type of judgment differing only in a comparative degree. The faithful receive a better reward than the apostates; not a different destiny as in heaven or hell. Here again, if a different type of judgment was in mind the author had other choices of words such as: artavtos or heteros (Gal 1:6) or nearly 100 other words artavto or heteros (Gal 1:6) or nearly 100 other such words.


In context, the Jewish Christians suffering from intense Roman persecution had determined to return to the faith of their fathers. They thought that God was still pleased with the Old Covenant system. Their mind was made up – it would be impossible to return them to the faith. The author was writing to say that God had abandoned the Old Covenant in favor of the New. The author used strong words because they were actually turning their backs on the Majestic God to Whom they thought they returning.

There is no mention of eternal damnation. Either the author was terribly incompetent to say Corner was right OR the issue of losing one’s eternal life was never considered because the author believed in OSAS! Clearly God isn’t incompetent; so OSAS is biblical.

I don't actually know your theological position - but I do hope that you aren't a Christ-denier who thinks that Jesus can't save to the UTTERMOST (Heb 7:25).

Lloyd

 

Mman, I felt like I needed to include the whole chpt. Of 2 Peter 2. Read the whole chapter. The they at the end is the same they as the beginning. This is speaking about false prophets. Those who were teaching and will teach a different gospel. And those who pervert the true gospel. They know about God, they know about Christ probably, but they neglect the true teaching. They were only prophets in the sense that they spoke as ones who said they had God's authority, as many do these days. They lead people away from placing their faith in Christ. Some even have had conviction for the truth and now will be worse off at their judgment because the regret will be worse. Peter is brutal to these folks. He calls them brute beasts and goes on and on about them. These were never Christian brothers of Peter and he does not say that in the earlier verses but you are assuming he means that at the end of the chapter. These were evil men even though they fancied themselves as prophets. These people will "utterly perish in their own corruption. To try to say that Peter was speaking of the man whose wife dies and he loses his heart for God for a season is just a case of trying to make verses say what you want them to say. This is about people that we see on TV now, sharing a non-gospel version of God and His salvation.
2Pet.2
[1] But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
[2] And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.
[3] And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.
[4] For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;
[5] And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;
[6] And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;
[7] And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked:
[8] (For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds
[9] The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:
[10] But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.
[11] Whereas angels, which are greater in power and might, bring not railing accusation against them before the Lord.
[12] But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;
[13] And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you;
[14] Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children:
[15] Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness;
[16] But was rebuked for his iniquity: the dumb ass speaking with man's voice forbad the madness of the prophet.
[17] These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is reserved for ever.
[18] For when they speak great swelling words of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error.
[19] While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage.
[20] For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
[21] For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
[22] But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.

I told you before on James that there is a lot of possibilities. I like the way the KJV translates it because there is no guessing, the words are just placed in the correct order. It seems that many newer translations will try to re-word verses to make the meaning more cleaor to try to make a verse read nicer. That can be a danger. I always return to the KJV when I think a verse is being translated poorly. I like the NAB and NKJV and use them but I always look at the KJV as well. This time the KJV got it right. James was writing to a whole group (you said that) He was writing the words at the end of the book to believers about helping to convert non-believers (you also admitted the Greek word is "turn" more often then "return". Clearly James is using 5 chapters to show us how important our works are. He finishes the book with the best news of all. Our works can lead a soul away from death. Just to highlight the audience of James, look at some other James verses below. "Ye Kill" he says. Well so much for the audience being just Jewish Christians, no, he knew his audience consisted of his "brethern", many saved but some not

James 4:
[1] From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members?
[2] Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not.
[3] Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts.
[4] Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

In Christ,
Brian

Lloyd, Steaver, webdog, TexasSky Great job!!

 

Hey mman:

This appeal to "death" must not be redefined as "lose one's eternal life." Even Moses' died in the desert for his act that broke a type that God wanted to set up. We know Moses was saved for he appeared with Jesus at the Transfiguration. Death is something God does to the believer who needs to be taken home right then.

Briguy did a wonderful job expounding on II Pet 2. I would like to add a wee bit more.

First, Chapter 1 describes holy men of God who accepted God’s Word and were used by God to do marvelous things. Chapter 2 is a vivid contrast to chapter 1. The false teachers in chapter 2 did the opposite of the holy men of God in chapter 1. You miss the contrast and wrongly assume that both chapters talk about the same teachers. A partial knowledge of the context now allows the error that supposes that these were once Christians who are now doomed to hell.
The context of chapter 2 demands that the chapter is speaking of “false teachers” (2:1) The Lord will cast these false teachers into hell (2:4) but yet knows how to deliver the godly (2:7-9). Verse 10 begins a lengthy discussion of these false teachers. They are presumptuous (10), shall receive the reward of unrighteousness (13), have forsaken the right way and are gone astray (15). While they promise liberty, they are servants of corruption (19).

Second, Verse 22 sets the context. A dog is a dog. A pig is a pig. They do what they do because of their natures. Since a Christian has a changed nature, this passage is not talking about Christians. Your view twists the context using fear and partial exegesis to force your view upon the text.

Does the Bible ever refer to a Christian as a dog? These unsaved professing teachers can escape the damage of the world’s moral pollutions … to some extent. They are the equivalent of the moral people in Romans 2 that God condemns. Righteous living always yields benefits whether or not the person is truly saved. The clear teaching is of those who have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of Jesus who nevertheless do not have a changed nature. Many untold thousands have lived in Christian homes, heard daily Bible readings, weekly sermons and even professed Christ without having a changed nature. They can look and sound rather Christian without being a Christian. They are still dogs.

Third, the word "knowledge" (v20) is from the Greek epignosis which means knowledge or recognition. To get the full meaning one should know that the root gnpsis means knowledge in general and the preposition epi means around. Hence the word epignosis is only a surface knowledge. These people are around the truth, they know about Christ, but they don’t know him personally. They are still dogs. Greek is nice but context is better!

Fourth, notice what isn’t said. Peter never refers to hell, damnation, or the Lake of Fire. Notice also that Peter never says that the dogs are free from their sins. Because of their false conversion, when these false teachers are again entangled in unrighteousness, it is far harder to bring them to saving faith since false pride and foolish ego thinks that they already have been saved. One can only resist God’s grace by digging deeper into the pits of sinful pride. Those who willfully knowingly reject God’s light come into a far greater condemnation than those who have no understanding of the truth. The latter end of these false professors is far worse than the beginning.

Everything in CONTEXT argues against your view. Everything in CONTEXT argues for OSAS

Lloyd

 

Thanks Lloyd, that obviously raised the bar for 2 Peter 2 a lot higher then I had put it. Thanks for applying the Greek, that is very helpful!!

In Christ,
Brian

 

mman, How about a scripture argument from our side this time. The verses below show a picture of the person who belongs to Christ. We see in these verses from Hebrews that we do not cling to our salvation. We have someone doing that for us. In this picture we see an anchor in the bottom of the Ocean floor. The ship can't move because the anchor is "sure and steadfast". Do you get this picture? Our soul is anchored in by Jesus. It can't move away, it is held by a perfect Son, who is God. Our soul is held by Jesus both sure and steadfast. Not one but two words of certainty used to describe the grip Jesus has on our soul. Our flesh may pull on the anchor in the storms of life but the anchor is sure and steadfast. This example gives no exceptions. The verses do not say that we can over power Jesus and move our soul. No, the picture is clear that whether the winds of life blow or whether we make our own wind, the anchor is sure and steadfast. I will leave it at that until you respond. Possibly Lloyd or steaver may want to had some further comments.

Bob,mman,bmer, I have a question/s for you. Are you the anchor of your soul? or is Jesus the anchor of your soul? If you say Jesus, why do you think that the anchor is less then perfect and can't hold through any storm?

17] Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath:
[18] That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us:
[19] Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil;
[20] Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

In Christ,
Brian

 

These words are actually correct. Two things must be clarified though. 1) What is the gift ? 2) When is it given?

Jesus said..."If thou knewest the gift of God , and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water ." (John 4:10)

You cannot deny that the gift of God is living water .

It does not say " a " gift, it says " the " gift a God. Perfectly distinguished as something very important and singled out by Jesus Christ as "the gift" among all gifts.

"In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink.
He that believeth on me , as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water ". (John 7:37-38).

As you can see, this happens upon belief, not at a later judgment.

Now thank God that John explains what this means otherwise folks would attempt to explain it away as something that occurs at a future judgment, after death or something...

He goes on... "( But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should recieve: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified .) (John 7:39)

You cannot deny that the living water that Jesus spoke of was the Holy Ghost .

..." the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord". (Romans 6:23)

Jesus Christ our Lord has said that the gift of God is living water .

Jesus Christ our Lord said that the living water is the Holy Ghost .

Jesus Christ our Lord said that those who believe will recieve the gift of God . The gift of God is living water. Living water is the Holy Spirit. The gift of God is eternal life. Eternal life is through Jesus Christ our Lord who gives us the Holy Spirit which is the living water. The living water is the eternal life because it is of Jesus Christ who is Eternal life.

Once given, it is as you said, unconditional and will never be revoked.

"There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit"

" Now " not later!

"For ye have not recieved the spirit of bondage again to fear ; but ye have recieved the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry Abba, Father."

No fear having the Spirit of Christ . I bet you do not have any fear of actually losing your salvation even though you cannot reconcile the scriptures against that notion.

"The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God."

" Are " not "will be".

"But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life ". (John 4:14)

Living water =everlasting life

Living water is given upon belief

Living water is the gift of God.

Living water is the Holy Ghost

Living water is eternal life.


Do you have this living water mman?

God Bless! </font>[/QUOTE]I almost don’t know where to begin. First, nowhere does it say the living water IS eternal life, rather , “The water that I will give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life."

The water Jesus gives will lead to eternal life, but is not equal to eternal life.

John 7:39, speaks that the living water was the Holy Spirit which was not yet given, because Jesus had not yet been glorified. When was the Holy Spirit given? On the day of Pentecost, in Acts 2:4.

What was the result of this giving of the HS? People believed (Acts 2:37), the repented (Acts 2:38), they were baptized for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38,41), the SAVED were added to the Church (Acts 2:41,47).

In John 4:10, Jesus said, “If you knew the gift (dorea) of God”. That word gift (dorea) is not found very many times in the NT. In fact, the very next time it is found is in Acts 2:38, “And Peter said to them, "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”

While there is much discussion as to what this “gift of the Holy Spirit” is, there is little debate that here it is plainly said to occur after belief, repentance and baptism.

The next time it is found is in Acts 8:20, “But Peter said to him, "May your silver perish with you, because you thought you could obtain the gift of God with money!

This is interesting. Here is a baptized believer trying to buy this gift (dorea). What was he trying to buy? The ability to pass on the HS just like the Apostles could do (Acts 8:18-19). This was something visible because Simon could “see” it.

This baptized believer was told he was going to perish. Why? Because he thought he could buy this free gift with money.

Another time it is found is in Heb 6:4-6, “For it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they then fall away, since they are crucifying once again the Son of God to their own harm and holding him up to contempt.

Remember, Jesus talked about drinking the water and here we have someone who tasted the heavenly gift (dorea). When you read this passage, do you really get the feeling that OSAS is correct?

The word translated as gift in Rom 6:23, “the gift of God is eternal life”, is a different Greek word, “charisma” and is usually associated with grace or some specific “gift” of the HS.

As far as the discussion of OSAS, there are many clear passages that refute this doctrine, such as James 5:19-20, II Pet 2:20, the example is Acts 8, Demas, and every conditional statement regarding the subject.