Eternal Security

[J. Jump]

No, no, I didn't quote that Scripture to prove I'm right; I quoted that Scripture to show that I expect to be attacked. I expect to be called a false teacher etc., etc.

Ah okay. My apology .

Why would the Holy Spirit teach us that we can sin, but not die?

He doesn't. And I never said that you can sin and not die. The wages of sin is death. That's the same for the saved and the unsaved alike!

A person who has "ESCAPED" the pollutions of the world, can become entangled in them "AGAIN".

Ken all that is saying is that a saved person can sin. It doesn't say that a person becomes unsaved because they sin. If that is the case then you could be saved and unsaved hundreds of times a day. Is that what you think? Do people fall in and out of the state of salvation several times a day?

By the way just another question out of curiousity. Do you think a person has to be baptized in order to be saved?

 

[J. Jump]

The way you build OSAS doctrinal notions out of the mere verb text of a foreign language of a specific word, proclaiming that it must mean "completed" in the past never to reoccur and the results of which carry out into the future” is simply amazing.

That's not made up. That's simply what the perfect tense verb means in Greek. There's nothing to make up. We either believe what is said or we don't.

 

[DQuixote]

Iamodd4god, Ken, OSAS has been debated on the BB since it was created. There are thousands of posts about it. When the dust settles, no one has changed his/her mind. Arguments for and against OSAS are a HUGE waste of time, time that could be spent in prayer and Bible study. If we'd do that, we'd all come to the same understanding of scripture. As it is, it is hopeless. Well, maybe not hopeless, but a staggering misuse of the time God has given us to worship, praise, and adore Him. :wavey:

 

[Darron Steele]

...

The eternal security teaching condones sin, ...

How?

Does it take fear of losing salvation to motivate you to serve the Lord? Do you serve the Lord to keep yourself out of Hell? Do you not really want to, but do so because you have to?

Many Christians want to serve the Lord out of their desires. They serve because they want to please HIM, and expect to do it for the rest of their natural and eternal lives.

...where the Bible DOES NOT condone any sin.

The Bible condones WILLING, EAGER, THANKFUL, CHEERFUL, LOVING service for the Lord.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

JJ: That's not made up. That's simply what the perfect tense verb means in Greek. There's nothing to make up. We either believe what is said or we don't.

HP: The tense of the verb is not what is made up. What is manufactured is the way you engineer the use of language that employs parts of speech.

Let me illustrate. Lets say that I am a benevolent dictator, and decide to will to you a certain parcel of land. I tell you that the land is to be considered as yours forever, but stipulate that you must in the meantime remain a loyal subject of my kingdom. Regardless of the tense of verbs I employ in the decree of granting you the land, are you now to come to me and tell me that because I used certain tenses of verbs in the original decree that it does not matter if you remain a loyal subject or not, that it was a forever deal and regardless of your conduct if I fail to remove all conditions, I am a liar, a cheat or a scoundrel?

Deny it as you may, God has set forth certain conditions the without which you or I will never see or inheritance into the kingdom come to fruition. We must reamin fathful unto the end. Yes we have received forgiveness of sins that are past, and have received the earnest of our inheritance, but the conditions of final reception into the kingdom of heaven is still yet to come for those of us living.

 

[Iamodd4God]

Duh … If he is not a convert, then he is not a new convert. Again, at the risk of repeating myself, the qualification is for spiritual maturity. I didn’t “resort” to saying he was never saved. At least I don’t think appealing ot the teaching of Scripture as a “resort.” Perhaps you do.

"The condemnation with relation to 1 tim 3:6 is probably a fall. It may also be that the man was never truly saved since he was not given time to prove himself."

That is what you said about the man the apostle Paul spoken of in 1Timothy 3:6. The apostle Paul said: "Not a novice, LEST being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil."

The reason (LEST) a bishop is not to be a new convert is because if he is lifted up with pride, he will fall into the condemnation of the devil. This says nothing about the bishop not being truly saved (converted); YOU said that.

How does it not make sense? I don’t see what is confusing about that.

You claim that the condemnation is the fall itself. But the fall is actually "INTO" the "CONDEMNATION" therefore, the fall cannot be the condemnation itself; the fall is the mode of transportation to the condemnation.

Holy Spirit is his correct title.

Matthew 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

In all the New Testament has 89 verses that has Holy Ghost in them. In the entire Bible there are 7 verses that has Holy Spirit in them. Isn't either title correct or are the 89 passages of Scripture wrong?

What do you mean by “godly”? Saved? The Holy Spirit resides in all saved people. At times in history, he has given his power to unsaved people, but that was primarily a theocratic issue in Israel’s kingdom.

Well, can an unsaved person be a godly person? My question was can the Holy Ghost reside "IN"

The Holy Spirit doesn’t leave once he comes. (See you tried to smuggle your conclusion in there. It doesn’t work.)

Let's see, the Holy Spirit doesn't leave once he comes???

Psalms 51:11 Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me.

If the Holy Spirit doesn't leave once he comes, then why did David pray to God not to take the Holy Spirit from him? What about Saul the Spirit of God left him (1Samuel 16:14).

No.

It is clear that God was going to take away the Holy Spirit from David, because he became ungodly (2Samuel 12:9-12; Psalm 51:1-19). David faced the same condemnation as Saul, but David unlike Saul repented. But what if David didn't repent? Wouldn't he have shared the same condemnation as Saul?

Faith can be overthrown but that doesn’t mean they lose their salvation. I think you are confused because you start with a false premise and then read everything in light of that.

How can faith be overthrown when it is "IMPOSSIBLE" for a believer to stop believing? If it is impossible for a believer to stop believing, then it would be impossible to overthrow their faith, as they would remain unmoved.

Would that false premise be my belief that a person who is saved can become guilty of sin again? That a person who is following Christ can stop following Christ again? That a person who believes in God, can stop believing in God again?

I agree. But you deny that the life he “has” is “everlasting.” So you do deny the teaching of this verse. You think he can be given life that is everlasting and then lose that life the next day. Therefore, it is not everlasting. You don’t believe he has everlasting life, because you think he can lose it. If he can lose it tomorrow, then it is only “one day” life.

Don't misrepresent me; I have never denied that the life he (the saved) has is everlasting. What I deny is that he (the saved) cannot give up that everlasting life by returning to sin. Eternal life is just that, "ETERNAL", but a person can give up their eternal life in exchange for sin. Do you NOT see that in 2Peter 2:20-21?

If you are going to use Jesus’ name, then say what he says. Don’t make your own stuff up.

I have not changed what God's Word says, so how have I made anything up?

I think perhaps one of the problems here is that we disagree on the authority of Scripture. I do not believe that we are permitted to make up our own doctrine and explain away passages we don’t like. I think Scripture is the authority and it must be honored whether we like it or not. It appears to me that you are perfectly comfortable otherwise. That makes it hard to have a discussion.

Let's test your theory...

I say that in order for a person to enter the kingdom of heaven he/she must obey the commandments...

Matthew 19:16-17 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

...right away people will jump to conclusion and say that's salvation by works, but this has nothing to do with salvation. After one is saved, which is forgiven of their past sins; they are to obey God's commandments...

Revelation 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

I say that whoever lives in Jesus does not sin...

1John 3:6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.

...of course a person who is living in Christ wouldn't be sinning, because he/she ought to be living as Christ lived (1John 2:6), and by obeying the commandments you won't be sinning, because sin is transgression of the law (1John 3:4). And anyone who is transgressing the law will not have right to the tree of life (Revelation 22:14).

How are you holding up to the authority of the Scripture?

In the name of Jesus,

Ken

 

[J. Jump]

Deny it as you may, God has set forth certain conditions the without which you or I will never see or inheritance into the kingdom come to fruition.

THAT'S IT! God has placed conditions on ENTRANCE into the kingdom, which is also referred to as our INHERITANCE!

Entrance into the kingdom/Inheritance is not the gift of everlasting life. Inheritance is an inheritance not a gift.

You are mixing contexts. And that was my whole point to Ken earlier. It's wonderful that you all see the warnings and the conditions. As it is easy to see in this thread alone a great many in Christendom do not or simply ignore them and go on about their business.

But when we see them we must correctly apply them. And the application is not to the gift of everlasting life, but to entrance into the kingdom/inheritance.

 

[DeafPosttrib]

Iammodd4God,

Keep it up! :thumbs:

Myself former eternal security. I was taught eternal security doctrine from baptist churches and colleges. I thought eternal security is truth and doctrine. But, later I learned more from the Bible, I can easily see conditional in BIble. THere are tooooooo many conditionals throughout in the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. There is not a single verse shown of unconditional security salvation.

Matthew 25:14-30 caused me left eternal security camp. Because verse 30 tells us that, a unfaithful servant shall be cast away into the lake of fire. Verse 30 shows conflict with eternal security doctrine. The context of Matt. 25:14-30 is very clear apply to us as servants. Anyone of us could be cast away into the lake of fire, if we fails to obey Christ. This passage is serious warning.

You are not alone who don't believe in eternal security. There are many people at Baptistboard don't believe in eternal security. Keep it up! :thumbs:
Tomorrow or during week, I will make posts on this with scriptures to prove that eternal security doctrine have lot of errors.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

[steaver]

(Larry)....How would a person who has been given spiritual life by God stop believing? They can't. The fundamental issue here is what you believe about spiritual life. It is impossible for those given spiritual life to turn away from believing.

Amen brother Larry!

It all rest in "born again". Jesus could not have declared a more perfect unchangeable act of God. If one cannot grasp "born again" one will never understand their "eternal" security in Christ.

How can one stop believing that which they have been given absolute knowledge is truth?

(Jump)...THAT'S IT! God has placed conditions on ENTRANCE into the kingdom, which is also referred to as our INHERITANCE!

The only condition on entrance into the kingdom of God (or Heaven) is "born again".

God Bless! :thumbs:

 

[Iamodd4God]

How?

How does eternal security condone sin? The wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23) but eternal security teaches that sin committed by the "saved" are not punishable by death. To put that in perspective let me give you an actual illustration...

A woman told me that I could be in the very act of adultery and if the rapture was to happen I would be taken in the rapture.

Donald Cole told a woman whose husband had left her for another woman that if he was a genuine believer before he left to be with this other woman, then he is on the road to heaven, and cannot be taken off that road.

The Bible "CLEARLY" tells us that no adulterer will inherit the kingdom of heaven (1Corinthians 6:9-10). So yes, the eternal security doctrine condones sin; where the Bible does not.

Does it take fear of losing salvation to motivate you to serve the Lord? Do you serve the Lord to keep yourself out of Hell? Do you not really want to, but do so because you have to?

In all honesty I want to please my flesh. Does that mean serving God is grievous? Not at all; that only means I have to choose who to live for, myself or God. Live according to the Spirit or live according to my flesh. If I live according to my flesh it's smoking section for all eternity (Galatians 6:8).

As for having fear of losing my salvation, you better believe I have that fear. The devil is on the attack (1Peter 5:8). Not just the devil, but my own desires attacks me (James 1:12-15). This is why Jesus said we are to take up our cross "DAILY" and follow him (Luke 9:23).

Now is it because of that fear of losing my salvation that makes me want to serve God? No; I want to serve God, because I know where I will go if I don't. So am I serving God to stay out of hell? Isn't that the whole idea? Serve God or go to hell?

Many Christians want to serve the Lord out of their desires. They serve because they want to please HIM, and expect to do it for the rest of their natural and eternal lives.

Well, if I didn't want to please God, I wouldn't serve Him. And as mentioned above it is a daily service, which I expect to do for the rest of my natural and eternal life. Of course it will be MUCH easier in eternal life, because we won't have our sinful flesh or the devil tempting us.

The Bible condones WILLING, EAGER, THANKFUL, CHEERFUL, LOVING service for the Lord.

I agree whole heartedly.

In the name of Jesus,

Ken

 

[Iamodd4God]

Iammodd4God,

Keep it up! :thumbs:

Myself former eternal security. I was taught eternal security doctrine from baptist churches and colleges. I thought eternal security is truth and doctrine. But, later I learned more from the Bible, I can easily see conditional in BIble. THere are tooooooo many conditionals throughout in the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. There is not a single verse shown of unconditional security salvation.

Matthew 25:14-30 caused me left eternal security camp. Because verse 30 tells us that, a unfaithful servant shall be cast away into the lake of fire. Verse 30 shows conflict with eternal security doctrine. The context of Matt. 25:14-30 is very clear apply to us as servants. Anyone of us could be cast away into the lake of fire, if we fails to obey Christ. This passage is serious warning.

You are not alone who don't believe in eternal security. There are many people at Baptistboard don't believe in eternal security. Keep it up! :thumbs:
Tomorrow or during week, I will make posts on this with scriptures to prove that eternal security doctrine have lot of errors.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

I love the little smileys :type:

Anyway, yes I was a slave to the eternal security doctrine myself being raised in the Baptist faith. I know EXACTLYhow they are seeing the Scriptures, but it isn't the Scripture they are accepting, it is the interpretation of man they are accepting. The ol' "this is what the Bible says, but this is what it means" sort of thing.

I was released from the eternal security lie by the Holy Ghost Himself, and I mean that literally. Nobody said "Hey eternal security is false look at this passage of Scripture." I was playing my Playstation and all of a sudden the word "salvation" came to mind, and the book of James. So I figured when I would do my daily Bible reading/study I would look up in James anything regarding salvation. But the thought got stronger and kept getting stronger until I couldn't concentrate on the game.

So I go to the dining room table, (not sitting) and I open my Bible, and flip through to James. Once I came to James I started reading the first thing I seen, which was...

James 5:19-20 Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him; Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.

...that just floored me, because eternal security crumbled just like that. I went back over and turned off my video game and started looking at other Scriptures looking for more truth. Suddenly all these eternal security supporting passages no longer supported eternal security.

Yes, the Bible is filled with conditions, and I thank God for showing me that truth. As an eternal security believer I smoked cigarettes, did drugs, got drunk, committed adultery, told lies. And it was so easy to do, because hey OSAS right? We're only human right? God knows we will sin right? HA! I look back and do this :BangHead: because how could I have been so easily blinded?

In the name of Jesus,

Ken

 

[Darron Steele]

How does eternal security condone sin? The wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23) but eternal security teaches that sin committed by the "saved" are not punishable by death. To put that in perspective let me give you an actual illustration...

A woman told me that I could be in the very act of adultery and if the rapture was to happen I would be taken in the rapture.

Donald Cole told a woman whose husband had left her for another woman that if he was a genuine believer before he left to be with this other woman, then he is on the road to heaven, and cannot be taken off that road.

The Bible "CLEARLY" tells us that no adulterer will inherit the kingdom of heaven (1Corinthians 6:9-10). So yes, the eternal security doctrine condones sin; where the Bible does not.

I do not see how any of these beliefs teach that sin is okay. Do they actually say that God will not be displeased by these actions? Not that I can see.

Even Eternal Security believers believe there is lessening of reward or earthly chastisement -- or should if properly instructed. No one believes sin is without consequences or okay.

Now is it because of that fear of losing my salvation that makes me want to serve God? No; I want to serve God, because I know where I will go if I don't. So am I serving God to stay out of hell? Isn't that the whole idea? Serve God or go to hell?

It is not my idea since I learned the Gospel and became a Christian -- not to say that you are not.

Now, I serve God because I want Him to be pleased by me -- I want to make Him happy. My idea is `I hope God is pleased by this-or-that.'

 

[Iamodd4God]

Ah okay. My apology .

No apology needed. No worries. I love these smileys LOL :wavey:

He doesn't. And I never said that you can sin and not die. The wages of sin is death. That's the same for the saved and the unsaved alike!

Now it is I that must apologize :thumbs:

A question out of curiosity of my own. The death spoken of in Romans 6:23is it physical or spiritual?

Ken all that is saying is that a saved person can sin. It doesn't say that a person becomes unsaved because they sin. If that is the case then you could be saved and unsaved hundreds of times a day. Is that what you think? Do people fall in and out of the state of salvation several times a day?!

So in other words, are you saying that a saved person doesn't lose their salvation because of sin? A sow that is washed, remains clean although it returned to wallowing in the mud? If so, wouldn't that make God a respector of persons, which the Bible says He's not (Romans 2:11)? I mean if you have a saved person telling lies, and you have a non-saved person telling lies, why would God pardon the saved person and condemn the non-saved person? To say the saved person has Jesus, then that makes Jesus a license to sin, which is what the eternal security doctrine does.

By the way just another question out of curiousity. Do you think a person has to be baptized in order to be saved?

Let me ask you a question...

If a person who "CAN" be baptized refuses to be baptized is he saved or not saved? If you say he is saved, then you are saying that a person can willfully disobey Jesus' commandments, and still be saved. If you say he is not saved, then you would be saying he needs to be baptized to be saved.

In the name of Jesus,

Ken

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

JJ: THAT'S IT! God has placed conditions on ENTRANCE into the kingdom, which is also referred to as our INHERITANCE!

HP: When Scripture speak of our entrance into the kingdom, it is speaking concerning our entrance into the New Jerusalem, heaven, reserved for those that remained faithful and have kept their first estate.

JJ: Entrance into the kingdom/Inheritance is not the gift of everlasting life. Inheritance is an inheritance not a gift.

HP: Says who? JJ? You are in error. Our inheritance is in fact a gift and a conditional one at that, eternal life in particular.

JJ: You are mixing contexts. And that was my whole point to Ken earlier. It's wonderful that you all see the warnings and the conditions. As it is easy to see in this thread alone a great many in Christendom do not or simply ignore them and go on about their business.

HP: Changing the import of their meaning as you do is just as wrong and just as harmful.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Darron Steele: I do not see how any of these beliefs teach that sin is okay. Do they actually say that God will not be displeased by these actions? Not that I can see.

HP: To remove the penalty of sin, eternal separation from God, in any degree, is removing the Scriptural motivation to avoid it. No one has any right to change the penalty of sin. Loss of rewards is never said to be the penalty of sin for anyone, saint or sinner.
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?

Pay close attention to the words, ‘wherewith he was sanctified.” Is the sinner sanctified?

When we preach a gospel that tells us that no amount or degree of sin will separate one from God, we are preaching a sinning religion, and as such are teaching that sin will not be punished by God with the punishment He said was the rightful and only punishment for sin. What we are saying to the congregation is, God would prefer that we do not sin, but if you do you will still make it into the kingdom, i.e., enherit eternal life. Loss of rewards is not a Scriptural punishment for sin, and even if it was it would serve little to no deterrent to sin in this present temporal world.

 

[Darron Steele]

...HP: To remove the penalty of sin, eternal separation from God, in any degree, is removing the Scriptural motivation to avoid it. ...

My reason to avoid sin is that Christ tells us to. As His follower, I think that alone ought to be enough.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DS: My reason to avoid sin is that Christ tells us to. As His follower, I think that alone ought to be enough.

HP: You sound like a genuine follower of Christ Darron.

Not only that, but God desires us to obey Him because we love Him, just as we desire our children to obey us out of love, not simply to avoid punishment.

 

[Darron Steele]

Thank you, Heavenly Pilgrim. Hopefully, my life accords with my words.

There is one thing about threads like this that really, really, really bothers me. People come here to this board and to others and bash Eternal Security and those who believe it. The premise: `its believers simply want to live in wanton sin.'

For one thing, that is just plain mean. It is a blanket reviling of character of persons known and unknown. I know personally not even one single Eternal Security Christian who thinks it is okay to sin -- period. The accusations against those Christians are typically both uncharitable and false, and are against servants of Christ.

Second, it says `When fear of loss of salvation is gone, there is no reason to live obediently for Christ.' The implication is: `The only reason I can think of to serve the Lord is to avoid eternal barbecue for myself.' The implication: `I really do not really desire to serve the Lord, but it beats going to eternal barbecue' -- and that makes me sad.

 

[J. Jump]

A question out of curiosity of my own. The death spoken of in Romans 6:23is it physical or spiritual?

Great question. After eternal salvation is complete the life and death that Scripture talks about is in relation to one's soul. So it's neither phyiscal death or spiritual death, but soulical death.

If you lose your life (same Greek word for soul) now you will find it. If you save your life now you will lose it.

This is all in conjunction with the gospel of the kingdom that Christ preached.

What does the apostle Peter mean by saying: "the latter end is worse with them than the beginning." How can the latter end be worse than the beginning? Hell is hell right? I mean in the beginning (before they escaped) they were on their way to hell. So how can the latter end be worse than hell?

To whom much is given much is required. It would have been better for them to not have know the Truth regarding the salvation of their soul than to know the Truth and turn back.

Luke 12 - And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

I think you answer to my last question got cut off. Do you believe a person has to be baptized to be saved?

 

[J. Jump]

When Scripture speak of our entrance into the kingdom, it is speaking concerning our entrance into the New Jerusalem, heaven, reserved for those that remained faithful and have kept their first estate.

Well it "says" kingdom, so I think I'll stick with that.

Says who?

Says Scripture. Unless you have some that says an inheritance is a gift. I haven't seen it.

Our inheritance is in fact a gift and a conditional one at that, eternal life in particular.

Gifts are undconditional or they wouldn't be gifts they would be wages.

Changing the import of their meaning as you do is just as wrong and just as harmful.

Context tells us the meaning not the other way around.