can we loose salvation ......

[Danny Hurley]

Can we loose salvation?

When Jesus told Nicodemus, you must be born again, he asked how he could enter his mother womb again. Jesus explained this to him. Now if we can loose our salvation or be unborn would there ever be any possible way to be reborn again. Just as impossible as the question Nicodemus asked Jesus.

 

[DHK]

DHK, have you ever posted your beliefs as to how the Calvinistic eternal security differs in your opinion from what you say you believe in, i.e., the security of the believer?

Check post #134, and you will find the Biblical view of eternal security well explained.
Check Calvin's Institutes for his view on the Perseverance of the Saints. I have already explained my position. I don't see any need of explaining someone else's.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: Check post #134, and you will find the Biblical view of eternal security well explained.
Check Calvin's Institutes for his view on the Perseverance of the Saints. I have already explained my position. I don't see any need of explaining someone else's.

HP: Your post does not answer the question in the least. Please do not tell me to go read Calvin for you have not the slightest what I have read and studied.

You have made the remark that your view of eternal security is not to be likened to Calvin’s view of the Perseverance of the Saints. I say there is no great difference if any between them. You openly charged me with slander so I asked you to show us how your view is different. The burden of proof is upon you to show us that proof you indicate will prove you do not hold to Perseverance of the Saints as is commonly understood among Calvinists. Why would you not be more than willing to show us how your idea of eternal security is any other than the same old Calvinist view under a different name?

 

[DHK]

HP: Your post does not answer the question in the least. Please do not tell me to go read Calvin for you have not the slightest what I have read and studied.

If you have understood what I have posted, and you say you know what Calvin beleives, and you can't tell the difference, then the only conclusion is that you do not understand Calvinism or have not read it. So tell me, which is it? Yes I am able to make those assumptions.
But for your learning I will quote Calvin and another well known Calvinist for your learning, which you should have already done--if you had known what the Calvinist belief about Perseverence of the Saints is.

Calvin wrote, “Those who do not persevere unto the end belong not to the calling of God.” (Calvin’s Calvinism, pg. 41)

Calvinist, A. W. Pink taught, “If there is a reserve in your obedience, you are on the road to Hell.” (Practical Christianity, Grand Rapids, Guardian Press, 1974, p. 16)

Is this your belief? It is not mine. I believe in the eternal security of the believer.

 

[CarpentersApprentice]

I failed to copy the source down when I was perusing through some of their writings. It would take me a long time to find that exact quote again, so you will have to excuse me on that one.

OK

... I don't understand why you don't accept the inspired Word as God's Word, and that it should be all sufficient for you.

I do accept the inspired word of God. What I'm not so sure about are some people's interpretations of that inspired word.

These fallible men cannot really do much for your understanding of it.

On this point I would disagree. It seems to me that the people closest to the Apostles (like, for example, Clement of Rome and Justin Martyr) would have a better idea of what the writers of the NT meant than I, 20 centuries removed, would.

Their perspective is, I think, especially helpful in discussions like this where there is disagreement between the General/Free Will Baptists and the OSAS Baptists about the nature of salvation.

Therefore, I would not consider it a "fruitless exercise" to be made aware of those ECF who had an OSAS view. (You mentioned going "through that fruitless exercise again." If you could link me to where you have already provided this information - that would be great.)

CA

 

[DHK]

On this point I would disagree. It seems to me that the people closest to the Apostles (like, for example, Clement of Rome and Justin Martyr) would have a better idea of what the writers of the NT meant than I, 20 centuries removed, would.

Their perspective is, I think, especially helpful in discussions like this where there is disagreement between the General/Free Will Baptists and the OSAS Baptists about the nature of salvation.

Therefore, I would not consider it a "fruitless exercise" to be made aware of those ECF who had an OSAS view. (You mentioned going "through that fruitless exercise again." If you could link me to where you have already provided this information - that would be great.)

CA

Many of the greatest and most serious heresies developed in the first two centuries after Christ. Thus I disagree with you. Time is irrelevant. Being close in time to the Apostles doesn't guarantee truthfulness and accuracy in the interpretation of God's Word.

 

[BobRyan]

Many of the greatest and most serious heresies developed in the first two centuries after Christ. Thus I disagree with you. Time is irrelevant. Being close in time to the Apostles doesn't guarantee truthfulness and accuracy in the interpretation of God's Word.

indeed Paul says "After my departure" not "500 years after my departure".

Acts 20
28 ""Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock[/b], among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.
29 ""[b]I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you[/b], not sparing the flock;
30 and from among your own selves men will arise[/b], speaking perverse things, to [b]draw away the disciples after them.

 

[BobRyan]

When Jesus told Nicodemus, you must be born again, he asked how he could enter his mother womb again. Jesus explained this to him. Now if we can loose our salvation or be unborn would there ever be any possible way to be reborn again. Just as impossible as the question Nicodemus asked Jesus.

Jesus makes no reference to being "unborn" in John 3. Nor does he speak of being "unborn" when he insists upon "Forgiveness revoked" being a very real danger for the followers of God who later refuse to forgive others.

Neither does he speak of "being unborn" when we warns us about those who are IN the vine of Christ being pruned and later removed and burned in the fire.

Adam does not get "uncreated" to become lost even though he was CREATED as " son of God" according to Luke 3 in that he was in the family of beings created by God - who fellowshipped with God and were in family relationship to him (though not ontologically God of course - we trust Luke to get it right).

 

[soninme]

my , my , oh dear , isnt it as clear as the nose on your face ,once grace is given to you , you are saved always , he will always be father , a birth can never be undone , thank you jesus that your mercy has overcome judgement , amen . :godisgood:

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

BR: Jesus makes no reference to being "unborn" in John 3. Nor does he speak of being "unborn" when he insists upon "Forgiveness revoked" being a very real danger for the followers of God who later refuse to forgive others.

Neither does he speak of "being unborn" when we warns us about those who are IN the vine of Christ being pruned and later removed and burned in the fire.

Adam does not get "uncreated" to become lost even though he was CREATED as " son of God" according to Luke 3 in that he was in the family of beings created by God - who fellowshipped with God and were in family relationship to him (though not ontologically God of course - we trust Luke to get it right).

HP: Excellent point BR. :thumbs:

 

[DHK]

Jesus makes no reference to being "unborn" in John 3. Nor does he speak of being "unborn" when he insists upon "Forgiveness revoked" being a very real danger for the followers of God who later refuse to forgive others.

"Forgiveness revoked" is a false doctrine not taught in Scripture but forced out of a parable by a an interpretation that is totally against any kind of Biblical heremeneutic. The doctrine is not taught anywhere in Scripture but is fabricated just as much as the doctrine of Purgatory is fabricated.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

In place of ‘forgiveness revoked’ one might say it is ‘new guilt incurred.’ Certainly God will not bring up sins that have once been forgiven, but one can indeed incur new guilt, and for that find that their standing before the Lord and the hope we once enjoyed is no longer sure.

If one is looking for a false notion DHK, look no further than the false notion that any sins one commits subsequent to salvation have already been forgiven and that they cannot cost one their hope of eternal life. Now there is a false notion that is without Scriptural support.

 

[DeafPosttrib]

DHK,

You say "Forgive revoked" is a dangerous, and you saying of Matthew chapter 18 is a parable. I ask you, what is the PURPOSE of Matthew chapter 18 on 'forgive'? Whose of Matthew chapter 18 apply to?

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

[DHK]

DHK,

You say "Forgive revoked" is a dangerous, and you saying of Matthew chapter 18 is a parable. I ask you, what is the PURPOSE of Matthew chapter 18 on 'forgive'? Whose of Matthew chapter 18 apply to?

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

Matthew 18:21 Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?

He was speaking to Peter, who even though he would deny Christ three times, would never lose his salvation.
No believer will ever lose his salvation. That was not the point of the parable. The point of the parable was a teaching on forgiveness. Too much is read into this parable.

 

[DeafPosttrib]

Christ's point is, we ought to forgive person much often, not just limited 490 times (7 x 70 =490)only, but much often we have to forgive them no matter what, show our love to them. If we won't forgive them, so, therefore God would NOT forgive us. Matthew 18 is a matter to us, because this is clear apply to us as Christians.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

[DeafPosttrib]

Also, truly, Peter was deny Christ three times, because Christ told him of his predicted during at the Lord's Supper. Peter doesn't believe him. Till Christ got arrested, and Peter fled away, he was hide somewhere in Jerusalem, in a small group. They asked him, "Are you with Jesus?" He deny them three times. And also, Peter was reminded that Christ told him, that he will hear the crow from rooster in the morning after he deny Christ. When he heard rooster crowed, he shocked and realized that he did actual deny Christ, he wept and REPENTED. He was a truly saved. Understand, he have little faith while he was with Jesus, he already saw Jesus in fesh. We have greater faith than Peter, because we never see Jesus in person. WE have to faith in Christ.

During in our lifetime, we COULD deny Christ while facing people asking questions to us, by the time we died while deny Christ without repent, then Christ would DENY us before the angels and Father at the judgment day - Matt. 10:33. That mean, Christ shall disown us, and send us away to lake of fire!

That's scary!

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

[DHK]

"I give unto you eternal life"
Eternal always means eternal.
Eternal never means termporary
If eternal always means eternal, then Christ said what he meant and he will never take away that which he gave us.
Thus if eternal life is always eternal (for by definition it is), then if it was ever lost, Christ would be a liar.
All those who believe that salvation can be lost make Christ a liar.

 

[Danny Hurley]

Can we loose salvation?

In Matthew 18 Jesus was teaching us to forgive one anothers trespasses not wilful sins such as adultry, lying, stealing, etc. We nor the Church can forgive wilful sins such as these, thats why he summed it up that if a man was stubborn and would not hear the offended alone, and then with witnesses, nor the Church the he manifested he has not been born again. And would be cast out. We can and should forgive each other for offending us, but we cannot forgive wilful sins. Thats why there is a sin unto death and a sin not unto death.

 

[CarpentersApprentice]

Many of the greatest and most serious heresies developed in the first two centuries after Christ. Thus I disagree with you. Time is irrelevant. Being close in time to the Apostles doesn't guarantee truthfulness and accuracy in the interpretation of God's Word.

Well, would you agree then that Clement of Rome and Justin Martyr (the two people you quoted) are reliable witnesses for the Baptist point of view?

CA

 

[DHK]

Well, would you agree then that Clement of Rome and Justin Martyr (the two people you quoted) are reliable witnesses for the Baptist point of view?

CA

I don't know. I doubt it. I haven't read all their writings. I am not an authority on the ECF. I tend to avoid them. I prefer the inspired writings of the Lord, the Apostles, and the Prophets, summarily called the Bible.