Why Believe One can Lose Salvation??

I like your attitude, nofightd just thoughts.

My thought is this.

i am not inteested in loosing my salvation.

Why would Anyone want to.

When ak this question i always respond ,"who would want to loose their salvation?"

 

Hi Cara, You just declared in your heart OSAS and you don't really recognize it!

Can you tell me (knowing what you know about God's FREE Gift) for what reason would you tell God you no longer wanted to be saved?

God Bless!

 

If the time was spent enjoying our salvation instead of debating wheither we cn loose our salvation I believe we could be more fruitful.

 

Very true!

The enemy wants us to doubt (just like he made Eve doubt) so he can destroy our joy and our fruits. If I were to think that I could lose the gift God has given me, then I would spend most of my time thinking about my own well being and neglect the needs of others around me. Second, it would silence my witnessing of the "good news", because I would have to admit that no one can be sure they will make it to heaven until judgment day. This isn't "good news".

God Bless!

 

This is not dealing with losing justification, but sanctification. The greek for "falling away" does not mean to lose your salvation. </font>[/QUOTE]The problem is that you are reading a certain idea of justification back into the text, namely that justification is a once-for-all one time event. However, Scriptures teach otherwise. Plus you separate justification from sanctification, which is also something Scriptures don't do. The two are inseparable. Christ indeed says that the one(s) in question "believed for a while". However, continued justification and sanctification are both contingent on continued belief/faith. If one "falls away"--ie, he no longer believes after believing for "a while"--then he is no longer justified or sanctified.

Umm...they can't be discarded as branches if they were never branches to begin with. Also as fruitless branches they will be gathered and burned. Also Christ clearly states that "every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He takes away" in John 15:2. In v.4 it is those branches that abide in Christ (continuous) that bear fruit, that those branches that don't do so are taken away and burned (v.6). So ultimately those branches who don't continue to abide and Christ and become fruitless are cast off as branches and burned.

The text does not say he was dead or lost...he knew exactly where he was, in the hog pit. If he were dead, how could he do anything anyway? This makes no sense.</font>[/QUOTE]The father himself clearly says (to the other son): "your brother was dead and is alive again, and was lost and is found. (Luke 15:32)

And I applaud your effort to twist the passage to try to make Christ say something He really wasn't saying. The context of the passage clearly indicate Christ is referring to those external to the believer. Throughout ch.10 Christ is speaking in the context of Him being the good Shepherd in contrast to "thieves", "strangers", "hirelings", and "wolves". Those believers who are actively and presently listening to and following Christ (the good Shepherd) are assured that they don't have anything to fear from these others. He is not saying that believer himself cannot stop listening, following, and/or believing and thus never fall away, because He clearly said that such was indeed possible elsewhere in Scriptures.

 

[/QUOTE]Hi Cara, You just declared in your heart OSAS and you don't really recognize it!

Can you tell me (knowing what you know about God's FREE Gift) for what reason would you tell God you no longer wanted to be saved?

God Bless! [/QB][/QUOTE]

I don't think I have declared it in my heart, at least the way I understand the use of the term, which, by many, is believed to mean that, as we can do nothing to earn salvation, neither can we do anything to lose/reject it. (If that is a misunderstanding of the true meaning of OSAS, please correct me.) I do believe that nothing (IOW, no thing/person) can take it away from us, but we can reject it.

Now, as to your question, I can't think of one good reason why I would tell God that I no longer want to be saved, but cannot know that I (same as some others) would not one day do so, as unlikely as that scenario is to imagine.

I tend to agree with the poster above who wrote that time is more fruitfully spent when not using it to debate the legitimacy of OSAS as doctrine.

 

Justification and sanctification ARE separate. Justification is an event, while sanctification (being set apart for God's work) in ongoing. The Bible calls salvation a "gift". YOu are looking at the "gift" as something physical, while the "gift" is an event, and future events. If I took you to a football game as your birthday gift, tell me how you would lose that gift, or give it back. You can't.

It is not wise to base a theological position on a parable. The text does not say they were branches. If I said I drank water like a fish, does that mean I'm a fish? Faulty reasoning.

Hyperbole. So the son passed away, was miraculously raised got lost (even though he knew perfectly well where he was) and then someone found him?

Sigh...no man means no man. Why can't you just accept that? It is because you would have to continue to hold on to your view of Salvation by works.

 

No they aren't separable, and justification is not merely a one time event. It too is ongoing if one continues to have ongoing faith.

And gifts can be neglected or forfeited, whether they are "physical" or otherwise.

But this gift is not fully realized until the end of life. Only those who abide in Christ, continue to stand firm in the faith, and endure to the end will be (finally) saved.

Yes it does. I'll quote it again: "Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He takes away". (John 15:2)

Sigh...no man means no man. Why can't you just accept that? It is because you would have to continue to hold on to your view of Salvation by works. </font>[/QUOTE]Sigh...and I guess the reason you can't accept what Christ is really saying given the contextual considerations is because you want to continue to hold to your "doctrine of men" known as "OSAS", which is nothing more than a false hope for antinomian 'fire-insurance'.

 

Tell me how you can neglect or forfeit your gift of being taken to a football game AFTER you have already gone?

Justification
JUSTIFICA'TION, n.

1. The act of justifying; a showing to be just or conformable to law, rectitude or propriety; vindication; defense. The court listened to the evidence and arguments in justification of the prisoner's conduct. Our disobedience to God's commands admits no justification.

2. Absolution.

I hope, for my brother's justification, he wrote this but as an essay of my virtue.

3. In law, the showing of a sufficient reason in court why a defendant did what he is called to answer. Pleas in justification must set forth some special matter.

4. In theology, remission of sin and absolution from guilt and punishment; or an act of free grace by which God pardons the sinner and accepts him as righteous, on account of the atonement of Christ.

An "act" is a one time event.

It would help to quote the proper verse we were discussing...John 15:6

I know exactly what He said... "NO MAN". You are the one in denial.

 

Hate to say it, but if there's no "insurance", then there's no certain promise. Considering Cara's point that we do not know if we will remain faithful to the end, then there is no real "good news", only a fear based walk of works-justification.

well, yes they do, if they can easily forfeit salvation by turning from Christ, and one of these false leaders might come in His name, and teach them a compelling false doctrine that leads them astray. So what we end up with, is once again, the good news promise is really not for anybody alive now, because nobody has yet remained faithful till the end.

I don't know if the concept of sacrifice being "unapplied" is recognized in God's plan. There was no such thing in the OT, but since the blood of bulls and goats did not really take away sins, the people remained under condemnation even after offering sacrifices.
Of course, I am averse to the idea that a person is now forced to be saved even if he later changes his mind, and that this will encourage "antinomianism"; but then to object on this is to use our own reasoning. The consistent conclusion of the AD70 idea is Comprehensive Grace (in which all mean are unconditionally saved after that event). Of course, this is a way radical position, and I would think there would need to be a whole additional "testament" outlining the Church[if any]'s new mission, being that we are no longer steering people from Hell. "Losing salvation" would be completely moot, then. Still, at least part of the AD70 theory seems to explain the passages on falling away.

This would be for those who lived back then, ans saw Him and all His works (or at least the disciples, when they continued in His works, including the supernatural —Mark 16:17,18), yet fell back under the Law regardless. This would explain "trodden underfoot the Son of God, and counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing..." (Heb.10:29). Someone today who falls away most likely won;t think of the blood as "unholy". It's obviously talking about those back then going back under the Law, due to persecution from the Temple system.

I basically always held this position, but still, there is a point that salvation is ultimately up to us, then.

You seem to draw that conclusion from a universal application of the prodigal son to everyone. Actually, the prodigal represented originally those in Israel (such as the "publicans and sinners") who had gone astray. The jealous brother is the Jews who continued in the Law, and thought themselves righteous (of course, they really weren't, but that is covered elsewhere by Jesus. And of course, the brother would be one who as steaver pointed out, "spend most of my time thinking about my own well being [keeping myself justified by my works] and neglect the needs of others around me" [the prodigal]).
But a person is either "made just", or not "made just". There is no back and forth. Justification and dsanctification can be made synonymous if you understand them as "imputational" (God looks at us and sees Christ's holiness, hence "sanctification), and then "justifies" us based on that, not our works of "living holy" and then "remaining holy". So many people seem to be trusting in this (in practice), and that is why there is so much confusion. Nobody could keep themselves sanctified if it were really based on our works. Once again, it comes out to "I'm doing the best I can, so God must be filling in the rest".

 

There is no reason! No one would receive a pardon from hell and then decide "well, maybe I would like to go there and burn day and night".

As for the definition of OSAS, you have to understand what it means to be "saved" biblically.

"Saved" means you have received the indwellment of the Holy Spirit through a rebirth. Your spirit is joined with the Spirit of Christ creating a new creature, the old is past the new has come forth. This new creature is declared a "child of God" because he/she has been born of God, of the will of God, not the will of man. This new creature has the laws of God written on their heart and mind via the Holy Ghost. Two become one just as Jesus is one with the Father all of those born of God are one with Christ. There is no escaping it and there is no such thing as one changing their mind. Their mind and heart is set towards God and now belongs to Christ and God. There is no reason for one to change their mind! You are given everything Christ has and are loved eternally and infinitely. You have been given the heart and mind of Christ Himself. It is not within your new nature to reject such love, mercy and grace. That would be just plain dumb!

God Bless!

 

There is no reason an Angel would leave perfect peace and harmony and choose hell.

There is no reason that Adam would choose to leave paradise and suffer disease and death.

If SINLESS PERFECT beings can make "bad choices" how much MORE sinful fallen faulty humans!!

Hence Christ's example of that very thing in Matt 18. The servant comes to the king UNFORGIVEN.

Then after being convicted in judgment and seeking restitution the servant is FORGIVEN by the King.

Then the servant refuses to continue on in the full implication of that new walk of gratitude and thanks - so the King say "I FORGAVE YOU- so you should have forgiven your fellow servant AS I forgave you" then he revokes that forgiveness.

Notice that the servant did not go out saying "PLEASE revoke my forgiveness" as you have suggested.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Just because Satan rebelled seemingly out of the blue, and then led the sinless Adam to fall, doesn't mean that is the way it is for us now. I think part of the Gospel promise is that it is no longer like that, (God is not going to keep repeating that problem, that was then, and now we have something better); and from the perspective of the NT, the full promise of security would be what would come at the final "end" of th[at] "age" (i.e. "the Law", the temple system)

 

If the believer remains in Christ then there is the promise. However, Christ didn't come to offer fire insurance to those who didn't continue to follow Him or abide in Him. The promise is conditional on those who are actually abiding in Christ. If one sins and then confesses/repents then Christ also promises forgiveness and cleansing.

well, yes they do, if they can easily forfeit salvation by turning from Christ, and one of these false leaders might come in His name, and teach them a compelling false doctrine that leads them astray. </font>[/QUOTE]Christ's point was that if they continued to listen to His voice then they wouldn't have to worry about being snatched away from Him. He wasn't offering any false insurance to those who would quit listening to Him and turn from Him. If we do turn from Him we must confess and repent.

I don't know if the concept of sacrifice being "unapplied" is recognized in God's plan.</font>[/QUOTE]Christ's sacrifice is efficacious only for those who are walking in the light:
"But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses (present tense) us from all sin". (1 John 1:7)

If/when we do sin then we need to confess so that He will forgive us and cleanse us. (1 John 1:9). That cleansing and forgiveness is contingent on our confession.

So we must continue to walk in the light for His blood to cleanse us. If/when we stumble we need to confess and resume walking in the light(ie repent). His blood does not cleanse (present tense) those who are unrepentently walking (present tense) in darkness.

This would be for those who lived back then, ans saw Him and all His works (or at least the disciples, when they continued in His works, including the supernatural —Mark 16:17,18), yet fell back under the Law regardless.</font>[/QUOTE]Actually it's referring to anyone who doesn't continue to abide in the Vine and bear fruit.

I basically always held this position, but still, there is a point that salvation is ultimately up to us, then.</font>[/QUOTE]As far as how we respond to His grace, it is indeed "up to us".

Actually, justification refers to one being considered or reckoned righteous. It evokes courtroom imagery. If one is having faith in God he is indeed justified, declared/considered ("vindicated as") righteous at that point in time. If one continues to have faith in God, he will continue to be justified. If one ceases to have faith then that one is no longer justified--he wouldn't be reckoned/considered righteous in God's "courtroom" at that point in time. Ultimate justification, of course, occurs at the final judgement--God's ultimate "courtroom"--for those who have abided in the faith. So justification in this earthly life is not a "once-for-all" occurance but is describing a real standing of a believer at any given point in time based on his present tense faith (which of course must be accompanied by works or else that faith cannot truly justify). One actually has to be in Christ to be "justified". We can only "become the righteousness of God in Him" (2 Cor 5:21). The bottom line is that "he who has (present tense) the Son has (present tense) life; he who does not have (present tense) the Son of God does not have (present tense) life" (1 John 5:12) since this life--eternal life--is in the Son (1 John 5:11).

 

Once again, in your system, it is all so shaky, and no one can know if they will "make it" in the end. We don't even know if there is any sin we may have "missed" in committing once, or perhaps even committing continuously (like in the past, when there was all sorts of prejudice, persecution of heretics, etc. and the entire Church was totally unaware that that was sin)
Just as I said, there is NO promise now for anyone still alive. Nobody has lived and remained faithful till the end yet. So the whole notion of a "promise" is illusory. Or you just have to be righteous in your own eyes. You know; I don't kill anybody, haven't committed adultery, etc so I must be "walking" with God pretty well. If anyone is honest with themselves, they will admit this is never the case.

No, as I showed, the context of all such passages was the people back then. They could still fall back under the Law.

If it's up to us, we're doomed. You all admit that you don't know for sure if oyou will always remain faithful. I guess you just presume or "plan to", but who knows what will come up in the future. So you would agree with the Campbellists that God's grace is just "instructions" as one used to put it here.(—on how to work yourself into Heaven, basically). You can toss a drowning man instructions on how to swim, but that won't save him.

If you're justified of one crime, and go and commit another, you don't then become guilty of the crime you were cleared for. We were condemned by our sins, which spring forth from our sin nature. IF Christ covers past sins, then he must also cover all sin, for all time. Else, once again, you don't know if you missed or even were unaware of some sins in your lifem, and there is no warrant for anyone to think he is making it. What you have done is basically resurrect and spiritualize the old atonement system, where each sin requires one animal apiece. Christ then becomes no better than that old system; only more convenient, physically.

How do we "become the righteousness of God in Him", and then fall out and in and out of Him again and again every time one lapses in faith, or misses some sins? No once-for all occurence, but instead just a sea of total uncertainty, and hoping you will make it in the end. —Or just presuming you are doing good enough.
Once again, being "the righteousness of God" can only be imputational No man, save the human nature of Christ, can ever attain the righteousness of God through his own works, and it is the height of arrogance for anyone to think they can. Once again, the only way to do that is to bring God's righteousness down to something we can reach.

No, ultimately it is placed in the hands of the person, as you admitted.
And of course, he would would then have the Son would then have life, and he who would then have the Son would then not have life. But my point is that I think now that the thing promised to the people "shortly", "in that generation", etc. included a more stable salvation once the system of the Law (the temple) was gone. That is the only other way to explain all this other than your system where we keep ourselves saved by living up to a standard no one could ever live up to (Acts 15:10)

 

TO ALL:

The entire problem is that so many Christians, in an effort to try to justify their rebellion against God and their holding onto sin... they have painted a false picture of God, they have lied about God.

They have tried to help Satan out in his false accusations against God in insinuating that God is some kind of a tyrant and that He is just standing there waiting to condemn us, which He is not.

When God commands us to obey Him, this does not mean that we need to take the extreme view of everything because of it.

We are not to say, "oh God tells us to keep the commandments, but God lied, BECAUSE WE CANT".

Now what kind of thing is this to say about God?


Lk:1:6: And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

Apparently, SOMEBODY kept the commandments just as well as God expected, dont you think? Or else the Bible wouldnt of said that some walked in all the commandments, blameless. Isnt this correct?

And so this notion that "oh God told us to keep the commandments but we all know He doesnt mean it because it is impossible" .... well all you are doing is helping out Satan in his lies about God. God doesnt ask us to do something we cant possibly do.

Of course we will often fall and fail, but the Bible says:

1Jn:2:1: My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous

Let's get this straight once and for all and stop straining at gnats!

God desires the HEART, God desires OUR LOVE, God desires us to want with all our heart, mind and soul to obey Him because we LOVE HIM... Just like if you love your husband or wife you will WANT to please them, but if you sometimes fail, that doesnt need to mean that you have forfeited the entire thing.

Jn:14:15: If ye love me, keep my commandments.

In effect, you are calling Jesus a cruel LIAR, saying He commands you to do something that you cannot possibly do.

Stop making God out to be a legalistic tyrant.

Stop lying against God just in order to justify your desire to sin and break His commandments.

Put the blame where it really belongs, on your rebellious self-centered self.


Claudia

 

Eric, that last post was especially for you.

 

1Jn:2:4: He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, IS A LIAR, and the truth is not in him.

1Jn:4:20: If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, HE IS A LIAR: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?

You see, WE are the LIARS if we do not do as God asked us to do, which is plainly... keep the commandments.

God IS NOT a liar when He tells you to keep His commandments. He doesnt play any games with us, asking us to do something that it is impossible for us to do and then condemn us if we dont keep His commandments and call us liars and saying we dont even KNOW HIM...

I mean, REALLY, do you even realize what you are charging God with?

You are claiming that God commands us to keep His commandments. Then if we do NOT keep the commandments, God calls us liars and says we prove do not even know Him if we dont keep His Law.

Exactly what kind of Being are you accusing God of being?


IN saying all of this, you are FALSELY ACCUSING GOD ...Let's get THAT straight as well.


Claudia

 

Tazman says overcoming is necessary.

Stever says overcoming is assured.

Both are true.


Tom B.