Once saved, always saved??

[Craigbythesea]

Craigbythesea (alias Seventh-day Adventist)

Please tell us where we can subscribe to an SDA forum like BaptistBoard.com as HONEST Baptists and discuss your SDA their theology in detail?

Please stop the charade! Ellen G. White never instructed SDAs to infiltrate other churches to subvert their doctrines.

Russ,

I have never been to a Seventh-day Adventist Church and I have never personally known anyone who is a Seventh-day Adventist. As you may recall, what I said was that I own the works of Ellen G. White and I have them shelved with my hundreds of volumes of writings by members of non-Christian cults. I also said that evidence has been published that strongly suggests that Ellen G. White was guilty of plagiarism. The mere fact that I have a good education and know the details of the belief structure of various denominations does not at all mean that I am a member of each one of them.

The world is full of fools who blabber all kinds of nonsense without checking out the facts for themselves . We see some of this even in this thread. I own the works of Ellen G. White so that I can correctly say what she did and did not write. I own the works of the Ant-Nicene Church Fathers so that I can correctly say what they did and did not write.

 

[Russ Kelly]

Craig
As I asked you in the thread of 7th Day
Adventists, "Tell us, if you are a 'Conservative Baptist,' and not an SDA, then what part of SDA doctrine do you disagree with? Do you admit that Ellen White was a false prophet since you admit that she plagarized?

I am a Conservative Baptist. You claim to be a Conservative Baptist. What makes you proud to be a Conservative Baptist? I dare say that, while there are a few Arminian Baptists, the vast majority are nor Arminian.
Amn I corret, or not?

If I am correct, then why do you seem to enjoy confusing people who ask sincere questions in search of God's truth?

 

[Trotter]

One cannot fall away from a place they never were. Falling away, by definition, means they WERE in Christ. ~Natters

Did you know that there are only about 18 inches between heaven and hell?

'Head' knowledge vs. 'Heart' knowledge. Intellectual agreement vs. wholehearted belief.

True, one must believe through faith. But, where does one get that faith? From themselves? Absolutely not! Faith is a gift of God.

The closest we get to "doing" anything to be saved is to say a mental "uh-huh" to the fact of who Jesus is, what Jesus did, and where Jesus is now.

18 inches. That's all that stands between heaven and hell. That's all that stands between 'falling away' (head knowledge) and 'abiding in Him' (heart knowledge).

It is really that simple.

In Christ,
Trotter

 

[Craigbythesea]

As I asked you in the thread of 7th Day
Adventists, "Tell us, if you are a 'Conservative Baptist,' and not an SDA, then what part of SDA doctrine do you disagree with? Do you admit that Ellen White was a false prophet since you admit that she plagarized?

I have answered those questions in some detail in the SDA thread. To sum it up here—the SDA church has some very serious theological problems, not the least of which is identifying E. G. White as a prophet of God.

I am a Conservative Baptist. You claim to be a Conservative Baptist. What makes you proud to be a Conservative Baptist?

I enjoy being a Conservative Baptist because they encourage me to study the Bible and learn for myself what it has to say rather than trying to jam down my throat a particular interpretation of Scripture.

I dare say that, while there are a few Arminian Baptists, the vast majority are nor Arminian.
Amn I corret, or not?

There are more than just a few, but nonetheless they are the minority. Most of them, however, reject at least some of Calvin’s theology.

If I am correct, then why do you seem to enjoy confusing people who ask sincere questions in search of God's truth?

I don’t enjoy confusing people; I enjoy ministering to people who are confused. It was you who accused me of being a Seventh-day Adventist, not knowing anything about me. In my profile I state very clearly that I am a Conservative Baptist—you do not. The doctrine of eternal security was first fully formulated in the 16th century and totally unknown prior to 325 A.D. If the Bible really teaches it, why did it take people so long to figure that out? Is the Bible really that difficult to understand? The doctrine of conditional security is a minority view in my denomination, but it is the majority view of the Church today, and it always has been.

 

[Russ Kelly]

Craig
I place my faith in God's Word, not the Ante-Nicean Fathers. I also possess the CD library you mention plus the books of the Fathers, and I have read every word of at least the first volume of the Ante-Nicean Fathers. It is immediately apparent why the early church did not include them in God's Word -- many of their theological ideas ae really off the wall.

As far as eternal security goes, I discover about 10 te4xts which seem to teach it for every one that seems to go the other way. I rest in God's promise of Romans 11:29 which I have already quoted. "The gifts and calling of God are irrevocable."

Only the Roman Catholic Church treats the Church Councils as infallible teaching.

 

[natters]

When my brother was married, I gave him a gift. I will never revoke that gift. He, however, is free to keep and use the gift, put it in storage, throw it away, etc.

 

[Trotter]

But that gift is the adoption into the family of God.

So, you can choose to leave it, but you are still God's child.

In Christ,
Trotter

 

[natters]

Many people have children that, after serious circumstances, want nothing to do with them. Those people cannot force their children to stay with them or return to them, even though they are still their offspring.

 

[GODzThunder]

did you know that american law states that if you adopt a child you can never disinherit them, no matter what?

You can disinherit your own flesh and blood child but you can never cut off the inheritance of an adopted child.

If america has such laws then I find it hard to imagine that God would cut off his adopted family.

 

[natters]

An adopted child, if he has chosen to cut himself off from his family, can also choose not to accept his inheritance.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by GODzThunder:
did you know that american law states that if you adopt a child you can never disinherit them, no matter what?

You can disinherit your own flesh and blood child but you can never cut off the inheritance of an adopted child.

If america has such laws then I find it hard to imagine that God would cut off his adopted family.

Amen, Brother GODzThunder -- Preach it!

 

[Craigbythesea]

Craig
I place my faith in God's Word, not the Ante-Nicean Fathers.

I do too! But it does seem to me that if the doctrine of eternal security is really taught in the Bible, at least one of the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers would have understood the Bible to teach that. After all, it was the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers that God used to canonize the New Testament and to formalize the doctrine of the Trinity. And most of the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers saw and understood that we are saved by grace through faith apart from the works of the Law.

I also possess the CD library you mention plus the books of the Fathers,

I did not mention a CD library.

and I have read every word of at least the first volume of the Ante-Nicean Fathers. It is immediately apparent why the early church did not include them in God's Word -- many of their theological ideas ae really off the wall.

Yes, some of the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers believed things that are not commonly believed today, and some of them believed things that were simply wrong. BUT MANY OF THEM DID HAVE THEIR HEADS SCREWED ON STRAIGHT.

As far as eternal security goes, I discover about 10 te4xts which seem to teach it for every one that seems to go the other way.

The key phrase here is “seem to teach.” Calvin invented a pair of spectacles with five colored lenses through which he read and interpreted the Bible. Most Baptists wear a pair of spectacles that include at least two of those lenses, and some as many as five. I have never cared to wear tinted lenses because I enjoy seeing the world that God created in the true colors that He created it. Therefore, I have never worn Calvin’s spectacles nor a pair of spectacles that include any of his lenses. Of course neither did Jesus, Paul, James, John, nor any of the other New Testament writers or the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers.

I rest in God's promise of Romans 11:29 which I have already quoted. "The gifts and calling of God are irrevocable."

One thing that Calvin was famous for was taking verses out of their true context and placing them in an entirely different context. Look at Romans 11:29 in its true context and you will be better able to see what Paul was saying. He is speaking of the gifts and calling pertaining to the Israeli people. This verse has nothing at all to do with the security of the Christian believer.

Only the Roman Catholic Church treats the Church Councils as infallible teaching.

I said nothing at all about the Church Councils. My point is that researches have not found any pre-Reformation writers who taught the doctrine of eternal security, but we do have very many thousands of pre-Reformation writings in which the doctrine of conditional security is taught. If the doctrine of eternal security is really taught in the Bible, surely SOMEONE would have noticed that detail before the Reformation.

Some posters to this message board have the idea that pre-Reformation means Roman Catholic, but that is not at all the case. Not one of the doctrines that are unique to the Roman Catholic Church was taught before the 5th century, and most of them were not taught before the 10th century, and some of them are of much more recent origin.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Craig
I place my faith in God's Word, not the Ante-Nicean Fathers.

I do too! But it does seem to me that if the doctrine of eternal security is really taught in the Bible, at least one of the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers would have understood the Bible to teach that. After all, it was the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers that God used to canonize the New Testament and to formalize the doctrine of the Trinity. And most of the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers saw and understood that we are saved by grace through faith apart from the works of the Law.
</font>[/QUOTE]But "we are saved by grace through faith apart from the works of the Law"
is the doctrine of Eternal Security. You
are talking like they are two different things.
Once Saved, Always Saved (OSAS) teaches about
the Fidelity of God, not the infidelity of humans.

The Holman Christian Standard Bible

John 3:16 (HCSB):
"For God loved the world in this way:
He gave His only Son, so that everyone
who believes in Him will not perish
but have eternal life.

Eternal Life that gets interrupted is NOT
eternal but temporal. Security of the Believer,
Once Saved, always saved (OSAS), are just
modern ways of saying "eternal life".

 

[natters]

Ed Edwards, what kind of belief? That verse says belief is required, but what if that belief doesn't last?

 

[Russ Kelly]

Craig
You wrote:
"Look at Romans 11:29 in its true context and you will be better able to see what Paul was saying. He is speaking of the gifts and calling pertaining to the Israeli people. This verse has nothing at all to do with the security of the Christian believer."

You sound like a full-fledged dispensationalist in support of God's unconditdional promises to national Israel (but I don't think you are).

Why would God's gifts and calling to national Israel be irrevokabel, but not his gifts and calling to individuals?

According to Acts 2:38, the GIFT is the indwelling Holy Spirit which is also God's SEAL of adoption and GUARANTEE of ultimate total salvation (Eph 1:13; 4:30). That gift can be ignored, but it is a permanent implant (compate 2 Cor 3:15).

Even more so, 1 Cor 6:19,20 says "you are not your own" and "you are bought with a price." Think carefully --- God now OWNS the believers' body and the Holy Spirit now dwell in His own (the Spirit's own) property. The believers body is no longer his own property to choose to reject God -- so how can he tell the Spirit to leave His (the Spirit's) property????

Somebody mentioned American law forbiding disinheriting of adopted children. This is also true of ROMAN LAW which Paul's readersship knew well.

 

[Artimaeus]

Originally posted by natters:
Ed Edwards, what kind of belief? That verse says belief is required, but what if that belief doesn't last?

BTW, I'm not Ed. The point is that it says man can have it and when he does have it, that that life lasts for an eternity.

 

[natters]

Artimaeus said "The point is that it says man can have it and when he does have it, that that life lasts for an eternity."

It doesn't say he can have it, it says he will have it. This is a future tense, and therefore might depend on an belief that lasts rather one that doesn't.

 

[woodyR]

i agree when jn 3 16 says "but have everlasting life" i believe it

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by woodyR:
i agree when jn 3 16 says "but have everlasting life" i believe it

Amen, Sibling woodyR -- Preach it!

Romans 10:9 (eternal believer version):
if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord,"
you will be saved
as long as you believe in your heart that God raised Him
from the dead,

Sorry, all that my Bible says is that you need to
believe when you confess that Jesus is your Lord.
The rest is up to Jesus. And BTW, you will continue
to believe in Jesus, your Lord and Savior.

 

[aPirate]

Originally posted by HeLeft9941:

For me, once you are saved, you are God's child. Yes, you will make mistakes, yes, you will fall, but you are God's child. Just as when you make mistakes towards your earth father, that doesn't make him stop being your father. Now, if you are living in continual sin, using 'salvation' as your free ticket, I would have to question if your conversion were real. But I don't believe that you can lose your salvation.

I was looking through these posts and even though you started this thread you seem to have not commented for several pages.

I would say that the Holy Spirit has given you a firm grasp of what real salvation consists of and you have been given a gift that many never understand.

Many people believe they can lose their salvation for a very good reason. They want manmade religion. Manmade religion relies on yourself WORKING your way to heaven. Many people like the idea that they can do this. Talk to most Mormons and Catholics, and most other world religions that are not Christian and they will tell you that they must do this or that to obtain nirvana, heaven, or whatever paradise they are seeking.

The reality of Christ is that He is NOT a manmade religion, but the only true way to salvation, the only true intercessor between God and man. He does the opposite of what man would think to do; He gives freely the gift of life to anyone who will repent and believe upon Him. This goes against what the world thinks, I have actually had adults laugh when I told them the plan of salvation, and they just think it is too easy.

Yet you see it really is not all that easy, because it is so deceptively easy that they reject the gift. You on the other hand accepted the gift and know that it will never be taken from you. The New Testament is chalked so full of verses that talk about the wonderful gift of God, the wonderful fact that it is an eternity given gift that I would have to write page after page of verses.

Hebrews 13:5 Let your conversation be without covetousness; and be content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.

Luke 15:10 Likewise, I say unto you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth.

Luke 19:9 And Jesus said unto him, This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham.
10 For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.

[ August 09, 2004, 11:07 PM: Message edited by: aPirate ]