can we loose salvation ......

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

I have challenged BR to show us in Scripture where his ‘escrow theory’ is established. I need to be fair here. I have actually asked what no man can in actuality do, and that is to establish ones view of the atonement by Scripture alone.

Few doctrines presented are as important as the doctrine of the atonement, yet Scripture alone does not directly establish any particular view of it. Scripture does not directly establish the Calvinistic ‘literal payment theory, BR’s ‘escrow theory’ or the governmental substitution and pardon theory I present. This is an area again of extreme theological importance, yet cannot be established with hard evidence from ‘Scripture alone.’ God gave men reasoning powers of discernment that must be employed if we are to understand and comprehend the truth surrounding this crucial area of theology in a manner consistent with truth.

Forgive me BR.

 

[BobRyan]

HP: Here is where we completely disagree. The penalty for sin fro one person is eternal separation from God. The penalty for two people sinning is two individuals eternally separated from God.

The suffering-torment penalty is "finite" -- Though death in the case of the 2nd death is forever because as we see in Matt 10:28 God destroys both body and soul in fiery hell once the torment and suffering due -- is paid.

Luke 12:50-55 "the one who did not know his master's will - will receive FEW lashings, the one who KNEW his master's will will receive MANY"

In Heb 2:9 we are told that on the cross Christ endured the "sufferings of death" for every man.

I is logically impossible for one person to ‘quantitatively’ in a literal sense pay for any other sins than their own.

That is an argument against the "substitutionary" attribute in the concept of "substitutionary atonement".

In Is 53 "He took the stroke (suffering) that was DUE to us"

in 2Cor 5 end of chapter "He made Him to be sin FOR US".

Christ could not have, in the flesh, ‘literally’ paid the sin debt of the entire world as you say. If He did, we have more than one problem. Not only is it completely illogical for Him to be able to do so,. It makes Christ suffering far more than He needed to, with much if not the largest portion of His suffering rendered ineffective to secure its intended end.

False conclusion.

The law's penalty "consisting of decrees against us" -- the "certificate of Debt" was nailed to the cross to Col 2.

"He is the Atoning Sacrifice for our SINS and not for OUR SINS only but for the SINS of the ENTIRE world" 1John 2:2.

And hence my objection to 4 and 5 point Calvinism's "limited atoning sacrifice" doctrine where Christ's payment of the debt owed IS NOT sufficient to encompass the ENTIRE world.

What you call "wasteful" others call "lavish" God has over abundantly provided for the salvation of the world such that NNE may falsely claim "I am not saved because Christ did not die for me".

It makes every man women and child as being born with the payment literally made for their sins

But not in the "grocery store model" you are suggesting - rather in the ATONEMENT model where the "Lord's goat is sacrificed" but the High Priests work of APPLYING that to the case of the sinner is individual and "specifc" involving thie life of the sinner JUST as Romans 2 states clearly.

If all sins have ‘literally’ and ‘quantitatively’ been paid for, sin could not be accounted to their account period.

Again - the "grocery store model" claims to completely ignore God's word in Lev 16 showing that BOTH the sacrifice of Christ AND THE HIGH Priestly work of Christ must be accomplished in the FULL scope of atonement.

HP: Where does Scripture speak or imply that the forgiveness and penalty paid for sin is in ‘escrow?’ That is a concept unknown to Scripture as far as I am aware of.

Not so.

In 1John 2:2 we have already admitted that the "Atoning SACRIFICE" was sufficient "for OUR sins and NOT for OUR SINS only but for the SINS of the WHOLE WORLD".

In Lev 16 we SEE that BEFORE the High Priestly intercession of the spilt blood BEGINS in the Most Holy Place - the Lord's Goat is FIRST sacrifice - in the ATONING Sacrifice.

In Heb 9 we SEE that the High Priestly work of Christ in the Heavenly sanctuary (not made with hands Heb 8) involves the APPLICATION of HIS OWN sacrifice.

When Christ died for the sins of the entire world, it simply means that Christ suffered as a substitute for them, in such a way that God saw His sufferings as sufficient to set aside the penalty for all sins under certain conditions.

Hmm so the SUFFERINGS owed by ALL mankind as determined by God's Law was SEEN to be sufficiently met in the supernatural sufferings of Christ for ALL of the sins of the WHOLE World.

Funny - I thought we were dead set on differing on that point.

The amount suffered -- the quantity or SIZE of the payment EQUALED what the LAW stated was "owed".

It was a governmental action that made possible forgiveness for all sins, yet by no means ‘literally’ paid for all sins ‘quantitatively’ as you say.

You seem to be mixiing concepts freely here as if that makes sense.

The fact that the QUANTITY (the size of the amount owed and the size of the payment offerred at the cross) is "a match" does not mean that we can ignore the FOLLOWING work of the High Priest in case-by-case application.

Christ’s sufferings made it ‘possible’ that all sins could be forgiven, but no specific sin is forgiven until the sinner meets the conditions for forgiveness, which are to repent and have faith in the shed blood of Jesus Christ.

That statement now swings back to the point where we agree.

Still, in common parlance, it can be said that ‘in a sense’ He indeed paid for the sins of the entire world on the cross, IF one clearly understands that to say it in that way is not speaking of any sin in particular

"paid" as in PROVIDED the payment equal to the debt owed.

Not "paid" as in going to the books of record for each individual and marking for that person "forgiven and paid" the individual transaction that takes place as part of His Role as High Priest and Intercessor - case-by-case.

, yet the means by which the penalty for all sins that could possibly be committed had indeed been accomplished, once for all. Christ became our substitute for the penalty and debt we incur when we sin, and is applied to our account as we fulfill the conditions of forgiveness. That by no means implies that any future infractions of the law by one once forgiven will not be fully charged to our account apart from renewed repentance and faith. That would not be so much ‘forgiveness revoked’ as it would be ‘new penalties incurred.’

Agreed but those "new penalties" were also covered at the cross for in fact all of us living today were "future to the cross" and yet the cross takes in the scope of ALL penalties owed by ALL mankind in ALL of time.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

Few doctrines presented are as important as the doctrine of the atonement, yet Scripture alone does not directly establish any particular view of it.

Stick to the Bible. Leave Calvin out.

Romans 5:10-11 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.
11 And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.

This is the only time in the NT where the word "atonement" is actually used. The Geneva Bible translates it "reconciled" which it means. Atonement is the means to reconciliation, not the result. It means "satisfaction," "propitiation."

1 John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
--Christ atoned for our sins.
He atoned for the sins of the whole world. This is a clear statement of the extent of his atoning grace. The word propitiation here literally means "satisfaction." In the atonement God was literally and legally satisfied with the payment of the blood of Christ for the wages of our sin.

"The wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. We deserve eternal separation from God. It is our wage, what we deserve. Christ paid the penalty which we deserve. He paid it with his blood. He satisfied the legal requirements that God the Father had set forth. It was the only way that mankind could be "reconciled" to God. Thus the atonement was accomplished. God accepted the payment for our sins. We were reconciled.

However not all were reconciled. Those who refused to be reconciled on the basis of that payment will forever remain unreconciled, and will suffer eternal separation from God--eternal death--the wages of sin; that wage that Christ atoned for.

It was substitutionary. He died in my place. He died in the place of all men of all ages. It was both personal and collective. If I were the only person on the face this earth Jesus Christ loved me enough that he would have come and died just for me. It was an intensely personal love. It was collective. He made a propitiation for the sins of the whole world, and not just for ours.
His life was substituted for mine. It was substitutionary.
It was literal. It was his blood that was shed. It was a literal payment that was made. Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins. There had to be a literal payment to satisfy the demands of God.

When God sees the blood of Christ as a covering over the believer, just as he saw the blood of Christ marking the houses of Israelites during the time of the Exodus, he passes over them. Eternal life, instead of condemnation has been granted to them.

There is now therefore no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus--none.
Their sins: past, present, and future, have all been atoned for. The price has been paid in full. The blood of Christ was sufficient in God's eyes. He doesn't need any other payment: not baptism, confirmation, not any other work. All of our sins have been atoned for.

 

[TCGreek]

DHK, I don't think I can believe otherwise. :thumbs:

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: "The wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. We deserve eternal separation from God. It is our wage, what we deserve. Christ paid the penalty which we deserve. He paid it with his blood. He satisfied the legal requirements that God the Father had set forth. It was the only way that mankind could be "reconciled" to God. Thus the atonement was accomplished. God accepted the payment for our sins. We were reconciled.

However not all were reconciled…

HP: My question to you is when is one reconciled to God? Did God or did He not reconcile to Himself the sins of the entire world at the cross?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Originally Posted by Heavenly Pilgrim

HP: Here is where we completely disagree. The penalty for sin for one person is eternal separation from God. The penalty for two people sinning is two individuals eternally separated from God.

BR: The suffering-torment penalty is "finite" -- Though death in the case of the 2nd death is forever because as we see in Matt 10:28 God destroys both body and soul in fiery hell once the torment and suffering due -- is paid.

HP: You assume without proof that to ‘destroy’ is to end ones existence. You have never established that point yet you assume it without proof consistently.

BR: In Heb 2:9 we are told that on the cross Christ endured the "sufferings of death" for every man.

HP: That is indeed true in a sense. Just the same, from your perspective Christ has to suffer death 'quantitatively.' How many deaths ‘quantitatively’ did God suffer? Show us how a man can die eternally more than once 'literally.' Then you can show us that can be multiplied towards billions of human beings, again, literally.

 

[DHK]

HP: My question to you is when is one reconciled to God? Did God or did He not reconcile to Himself the sins of the entire world at the cross?

2 Corinthians 5:18-19 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

1. Reconciliation has already been made according to these verses. The word atonement is akin to reconciliation. God's hand reaches down in reconciliation drawing men unto himself. He says the penalty for your crime has been paid. You were once my enemy. You don't have to be any more. You now can freely accept my love. That which separated us before has been taken care of. You were in jail. Your fine has been paid. Will you accept the offer of freedom that I am providing for you. I have paid it. You can walk free, or you can remain forever in that jail. The choice is yours. But this realize: I have paid the price for your freedom. All you have to do is accept it and walk free. It is there for your wanting. You just have to take it and walk free. You don't have to do a thing. Just walk out. Believe me. Have faith that I am telling the truth. I have paid the penalty for you.

 

[Amy.G]

2 Corinthians 5:18-19 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

1. Reconciliation has already been made according to these verses. The word atonement is akin to reconciliation. God's hand reaches down in reconciliation drawing men unto himself. He says the penalty for your crime has been paid. You were once my enemy. You don't have to be any more. You now can freely accept my love. That which separated us before has been taken care of. You were in jail. Your fine has been paid. Will you accept the offer of freedom that I am providing for you. I have paid it. You can walk free, or you can remain forever in that jail. The choice is yours. But this realize: I have paid the price for your freedom. All you have to do is accept it and walk free. It is there for your wanting. You just have to take it and walk free. You don't have to do a thing. Just walk out. Believe me. Have faith that I am telling the truth. I have paid the penalty for you.

I like your analogy.
Couldn't we also say that even though the penalty has been paid, you must walk out of the jail through the "door"? And the door is Jesus. You can't get out of jail through any other door.


Jhn 10:1 "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door, but climbs up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.

Jhn 10:9 I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture.

 

[DHK]

I like your analogy.
Couldn't we also say that even though the penalty has been paid, you must walk out of the jail through the "door"? And the door is Jesus. You can't get out of jail through any other door.


Jhn 10:1 "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door, but climbs up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.

Jhn 10:9 I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture.

Yes, I believe that is what Jesus had in mind.

 

[Amy.G]

Yes, I believe that is what Jesus had in mind.

I had never thought of it that way until I read your post. Thanks.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: Corinthians 5:18-19 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

1. Reconciliation has already been made according to these verses. The word atonement is akin to reconciliation. God's hand reaches down in reconciliation drawing men unto himself. He says the penalty for your crime has been paid. You were once my enemy. You don't have to be any more. You now can freely accept my love. That which separated us before has been taken care of. You were in jail. Your fine has been paid. Will you accept the offer of freedom that I am providing for you. I have paid it. You can walk free, or you can remain forever in that jail. The choice is yours. But this realize: I have paid the price for your freedom. All you have to do is accept it and walk free. It is there for your wanting. You just have to take it and walk free. You don't have to do a thing. Just walk out. Believe me. Have faith that I am telling the truth. I have paid the penalty for you.

DHK: However not all were reconciled…

HP: So are all reconciled at the cross, or are we only reconciled when our wills decide to accept the offer? Are you denying election and predestination and making our wills and deeds (in this case our acceptance of a gift) what really saves us? Your Scripture states that God was ‘in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself’, ‘not imputing their transgression unto them’….. yet in another place you say that ‘not all were reconciled.’ Who was and who wasn’t that was reconciled at the cross? Who’s transgressions were not imputed and whose still are imputed? Can God not impute ones transgressions to their account, and they still not be reconciled?

Are we really all reconciled at the cross and our sins no longer imputed…….until reconciliation is revoked when our wills fail to accept the free gift? When our reconciliation is revoked due to our refusal to accept the gift, are our original sins once ‘not imputed’ ‘re-imputed’ to us at that time? Would you have any Scriptural support for this notion if that is what you believe?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

I am having some trouble understanding DHK’s position. He talks of all sins being ‘eternally’ forgiven at the cross’ yet clearly implies that our sins are not really forgiven until we accept the free gift. We are told that all past present and future sins have BEEN reconciled and that if not God is a liar, and then we find that in actuality NO sin is really forgiven or reconciled until we activate our wills in the acceptance of the free gift. Either all sins ‘have been’ or they have not been forgiven. Either our wills must be active in acceptance to receiving reconciliation or it ‘has already’ (past tense) been accomplished on the cross.’ If it ‘has been’ accomplished, our wills could have absolutely nothing to do with it being accomplished, having it now accomplished, or seeing anything accomplished in the future.

DHK tries to have it both ways, He tries to say it is all eternally done for all sin on the cross, yet tries to inject the notion that in reality it cannot be accomplished until we decide to either accept or reject the offer.

Is forgiveness of sins, the reconciliation that Scripture states was accomplished on the cross, ‘eternal,’ or does it just carry with it the ‘hope of being eternal’ IF we decide to make it eternal by our own wills acceptance?? If our wills are involved as DHK clearly states, could the possibility our wills might change, rejecting that forgiveness once given, and as such be found turning away from the Living God once again? If not why not? If our forgiveness is conditioned upon our wills acceptance, why could not our wills be involved in the rejection of any such former acceptance?

 

[DHK]

HP: So are all reconciled at the cross, or are we only reconciled when our wills decide to accept the offer? Are you denying election and predestination and making our wills and deeds (in this case our acceptance of a gift) what really saves us? Your Scripture states that God was ‘in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself’, ‘not imputing their transgression unto them’….. yet in another place you say that ‘not all were reconciled.’ Who was and who wasn’t that was reconciled at the cross? Who’s transgressions were not imputed and whose still are imputed? Can God not impute ones transgressions to their account, and they still not be reconciled?

The atonement is finished. The sacrifice is finished. The blood has been offered and accepted as the legal payment for our sins. It has been accepted by God and has satisfied his demands. It is the propitiation for our sins and not for ours only but for the sins of the whole world. Thus, as my illustration shows, reconciliation has been provided for.

The problem is that a number of people don't want to be reconciled. They don't want to be reconciled for the same reason that a thief doesn't want to find a policeman. They have a sin nature. The thief in someway must be convinced that he must go to the police. In many cases his conscience bothers him. Guilt fills his heart. In the same way a sinner becomes convicted of his sin by the Holy Spirit. When he realizes what Christ has done for him, understanding the gospel message he turns to him in faith. What does the Bible say:

Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved.
--Faith alone is required.

For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
--Faith alone is required.

Acts 10:43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.
--Faith alone is required.

Romans 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:
--Faith alone is required.

We are saved by faith.

You don't need to confuse salvation by bringing in the issues of election and predestination. God does not elect some to heaven and some to Hell. I count that as a false doctrine that has caused the confusion of many. Salvation is simple. As simple as the verses stated above.

Are we really all reconciled at the cross and our sins no longer imputed…….until reconciliation is revoked when our wills fail to accept the free gift? When our reconciliation is revoked due to our refusal to accept the gift, are our original sins once ‘not imputed’ ‘re-imputed’ to us at that time? Would you have any Scriptural support for this notion if that is what you believe?

Don't be offended, but your post sounds like Satan in the Garden putting doubts in Eve: "Are we really..."

Yes, indeed. At the cross the one who believes is reconciled to God and his sins are put under the blood never to be remembered again. There is no such thing as "reconciliation revoked." That is an unbiblical concept nowhere found in the Bible. A believer doesn't doesn't refuse to accept the gift. The gift has already been accepted and will never been taken away. I assume you are speaking about believers because you are including yourself: Are we...

Our reconciliation can never be revoked. What do you mean, and what are you talking about. Don't you believe in eternal security? Can eternal become temporary? Can born become unborn? Can child of God become child of the devil? Does God disown his own? Does God lie?

A believer has accepted the gift. How can a believer refuse to accept the gift? You are not making sense.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Quote:
HP: Are we really all reconciled at the cross and our sins no longer imputed…….until reconciliation is revoked when our wills fail to accept the free gift? When our reconciliation is revoked due to our refusal to accept the gift, are our original sins once ‘not imputed’ ‘re-imputed’ to us at that time? Would you have any Scriptural support for this notion if that is what you believe?

DHK: Yes, indeed. At the cross the one who believes is reconciled to God and his sins are put under the blood never to be remembered again.

HP: Why do you now say ‘one that believes’ is reconciled to God? Are you now saying that not all sins have been reconciled at the cross?

When is one actually forgiven and reconciled to God? Is it at the cross or when one believes and accepts the free gift? Are all sins reconciled at the cross and does God forget all of them, never to be remembered again from the cross forward?... or does God reconcile all sins on the cross and only remembers some of them while forgetting others? If all sins are forgotten at the cross when you indicate they we all reconciled, will God remember any sins committed by those that in the end will be lost? If so, how many or which ones will He suddenly remember that He had forgotten?

DHK: There is no such thing as "reconciliation revoked."

HP: If God reconciles all men to Himself at the cross, but find themselves as one that you indicate will not be reconciled, there is a time when reconciliation becomes non-reconciliation. Call it whatever you so desire, but it is reconciliation revoked, lost, or whatever.

DHK: Our reconciliation can never be revoked.

HP: Tell me once again just whose sins are reconciled on the cross. If you tell me that all sins are reconciled yet hold to your statement that ‘all are not reconciled,’ what happened to it? Why can it not be properly spoken of as 'reconciliation revoked?' Something had to happen to it.

DHK: A believer has accepted the gift. How can a believer refuse to accept the gift? You are not making sense.

HP: Neither do you make sense when you tell us that we must accept a gift, (obviously of our own free will,) yet cannot reject it once it is accepted. Does free will end at the acceptance of the free gift?

PS: If you do not mind, I believe I would be less likely to take offense if you told me what I stated was 'garbage' instead of comparing my question to that of Satan's.

 

[Havensdad]

The Bible says we have (present tense) eternal life. How can it "eternal life" be lost? If it is lost, it was not "eternal life".


I think anyone who believes you can lose your salvation failed Greek in seminary...:laugh:

 

[trustitl]

The problem is that a number of people don't want to be reconciled. They don't want to be reconciled for the same reason that a thief doesn't want to find a policeman. They have a sin nature. The thief in someway must be convinced that he must go to the police. In many cases his conscience bothers him. Guilt fills his heart. In the same way a sinner becomes convicted of his sin by the Holy Spirit. When he realizes what Christ has done for him, understanding the gospel message he turns to him in faith.

Some people don't want to be saved? Some have a sin nature? So God only saves the ones that want to be saved and don't have a sin nature?

We are saved by faith.

Actually we are saved by grace THROUGH faith. My faith is worthless and so is yours. It is the object of our faith that determines its value. Additionally, Peter makes it clear that we are KEPT by the power of God through faith.

"I Peter 1:5 Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time."

Our reconciliation can never be revoked. What do you mean, and what are you talking about. Don't you believe in eternal security? Can eternal become temporary? Can born become unborn? Can child of God become child of the devil? Does God disown his own? Does God lie?

Do you believe in "unconditional" eternal security? Why is it so hard to say we just need to keep believing. You rightly said we needed faith to get saved. I believe in "ONEconditional" eternal security. Belevers are eternally secure, unbelievers aren't.

Col. 1:21-23 "And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight: If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel"

A believer has accepted the gift. How can a believer refuse to accept the gift?

It would be better to ask "Can a belever stop believing" despite the Spirit of Grace.
Why would God give such warnings?
Heb. 10:29 "Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?"
Rom. 11:20-21 "Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee."

 

[trustitl]

The Bible says we have (present tense) eternal life. How can it "eternal life" be lost? If it is lost, it was not "eternal life".


I think anyone who believes you can lose your salvation failed Greek in seminary...:laugh:

I can lose my keys, but I don't think I can lose my salvation. Does that mean I pass Greek?

However, I can stop believing.

Rom. 11:20-21 "Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee."

Heb. 10:29 "Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?"

 

[Havensdad]

I can lose my keys, but I don't think I can lose my salvation. Does that mean I pass Greek?

However, I can stop believing.

Rom. 11:20-21 "Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee."

Heb. 10:29 "Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?"

Bro,

You cannot proof text. Paul is referring to the Nation of Israel, not saved believers.

Rom 8:38 For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers,
Rom 8:39 nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Are you "in Creation"?

1Jn 2:19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they all are not of us.


Mat 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

The Greek:

Never: oudepote
oo-dep'-ot-eh
From G3761 and G4218; not even at any time, that is, never at all: - neither at any time, never, nothing at any time.


:laugh:

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

TrustitL: Some people don't want to be saved? Some have a sin nature? So God only saves the ones that want to be saved and don't have a sin nature?

HP: Excellent posts by the way. :thumbs: DHK’s statement you refer to here also begs the question as to why some have a desire of salvation and others must not. Who or what gives them the desire? Can one have a desire for something they have never heard of? It also begs the question as to who has heard of the gospel hope. Have all heard as BR claims, or does the clear probability exist that all have not in the past, nor will all hear in the present, the gospel of hope?

DHK has to be either believe or is leaning very hard in the direction of BR’s conjecture that all have heard. I believe Scripture clears up that point very succinctly. Ro 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

I would Ask DHK, how can one have a ‘want to be saved’ that has not nor may never hear of salvations plan?

 

[BobRyan]

I can lose my keys, but I don't think I can lose my salvation. Does that mean I pass Greek?

However, I can stop believing.

Rom. 11:20-21 "Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee."

Heb. 10:29 "Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?"

You can not be "saved while broken off" because the Gospel is never said to be the condition of "separated from Christ - fallen from Grace".

In Romans 11 the unbelieving Jews are "broken off" because of unbelief and then the believing Jews and Gentiles are warned that "they too" may be broken off if they do not continue in belief. If you are claiming that the unbelieving Jews who were "broken off for unbelief" are in fact "experiencing the broken-off-from-christ kind of Gospel" then there needs to be some "proof" from scripture that "broken off from Christ" is another Gospel offerred in scripture.

Without that kind of Bible based evidence - the conclusion remains that "broken off" from Christ - "severed from Christ" and "fallen from Grace" are all references to "becoming lost" after being in a saved condition.

in Christ,

Bob