OSAS? (An example)

[tyndale1946]

ALL the Father gave him is ALL inclusive and applies to no one else... If you want to see ALL the Father gave the Son see those dressed in robes of white in Revelation 7:9 the redeemed saints of God are ALL that is considered and no one else!

... Brother Glen

 

[Yelsew]

"My interpretation of scriptures is not that you can lose your faith but you will suffer if you do not adhere to it..."
When one who once believes in "anything", then changes their mind and ceases to believe in that "anything", one has lost faith in that "anything". It is really that simple

"Many in the scriptures shipwrecked their faith but they are still eternally saved..."
Do you have specific examples of those who lost their faith in God being eternally saved? Let's exclude the Jews as they are God's elect and receive different treatment from the earliest records.

"What you are implying Yelsew is what YOU DR DO NOT DO... SAVES YOU!..."
Then you are simply not paying attention to what I have said. I have steadfastly and clearly stated that Salvation is not of anything we "do" but is directly the result of the condition of our faith when we appear in the next life. We have this 120 year (max) period of natural life to come to faith in God (Jesus). When we leave this natural life, our faith condition is we either have faith in God or we do not have faith in God. It is our faith alone that determines whether we are judged or escape judgement because of our faith in Jesus. (John 3:18) That is completely biblical! That is God's plan.

"If that is the case why did Jesus Christ come?..."
a. To establish a new covenant of God,
b. to establish the institution, His church-based on the truth of who and what Jesus is, that would continue the remembrance of that covenant, and,
c. most importantly to deal with sins. His death on the Cross is God's means of atoning for the sins of ALL mankind in one very significant sacrificial event.

He succeeded resoundingly!

"To give you a chance at SALVATION... To give you a choice?..."
God did the work, it is now up to us to accept or reject on an individual basis, using the God given capabilities that each and every one of us has and retains to believe or not believe.

"Sorry GRACE and choice or chance or decision don't match... NEVER the twain shall meet!..."
God behaves in accordance with HIS grace toward us...believe it or not (our choices)!

That is how it works. Choice cannot exist without Grace, and Grace has no purpose without Choice.

"They are two separate points parallel into infinity and NEVER shall join... NEVER shall meet..."
Grace enables choice!
Choice cannot take place in the absence of Grace!

That is because the wage paid for sin is death, and wages, according to scripture, must be paid daily! With God behaving graciously toward mankind, the wage that is paid for sin is withheld from us, therefore we can live the full extent of the years given to each of us by God in accordance with our choices and the inherent consequences of our choices!

"My FAITH IS JESUS CHRIST... ALL OF IT!... Without it I have nothing..."
Good! Jesus is the only Savior!

"SOVEREIGN GRACE is ALL there is in the ETERNAL SALVATION domain..."
No where in scripture does it say that we are saved by sovereign grace! Scriptures, both OLD and NEW declare it is our individual Faith in the Savior through which we are saved.

"You can't buy it!... You can't purchase it because it is FREE!..."
Not of works, lest any man should boast...

"There is nothing you or I or anyone else can do to have it... IT IS A GIFT!..."
Every gift must be accepted by the recipient in order for it to be a gift. You cannot give something to someone if they refuse to accept it! It is that simple!

"Given to God's children through the sacrifice of Christ and is bought with his sinless blood."
The Sacrifice of Jesus the Christ does not bring salvation to anyone! It atones for the sins of Everyone, so that sin is not a factor in eternal life. Faith Alone is what brings eternal life (John 3:16).

As I said before, Faith could not be possible if God does not behave in accordance with HIS GRACE. There is coming a time with God withholds his grace from this heaven and earth. When that comes, this heaven and earth "shall pass away", to be replaced with a New Heaven and New Earth, with the New Earth's New Jerusalem.

"Fellowship with Jesus Christ and the Father as you live in the world is dependent upon your walk!..."
Yes that is true, and your walk is entirely and totally dependent upon what you believe and in whom you have faith! No one has a walk that is different than their internal beliefs.

"YOU SUFFER HERE!... You will NEVER suffer hereafter because you belong to Jesus Christ and he payed for ALL your sins and ALL the sins of ALL his children... There are no sins held against you as Jesus Christ stood where you could not and payed the price you could not because your blood is polluted and you are from the loins of Adam!... Question... Will Jesus Christ SAVE ALL the Father gave him?... If not why not when the Bible explicitly states none will be eternally lost in HELL!... Brother Glen [Smile]"
The scripture does not say that Jesus' atonement for sin was only for "all his children" It says for the "sins of the world". Why do you have difficulty understanding clear and plain scripture? The answer to your question is of who will be saved is that Whosoever believeth in Him shall have eternal life (salvation from the second death). Both the OLD and the NEW Testaments declare it is individual FAITH in God that pleases God therefore, whosoever has Faith in the Father IS A CHILD OF GOD! God himself declares that He has but ONE begotten son. That is one Son having the life essence (spirit) of God. All that the rest of us can have is the Holy Spirit of God through our faith! Jesus had the Spirit of God through the conception process! And that is why the conception of Jesus is called the Immaculate Conception.

 

[Frogman]

"Let's exclude the Jews" what kind of qualification is that? So a Jew does not have to be quickened? Was Nicodemus a Jew?

If the Jew is automatically the elect of God the why did Christ come [go] to the Jew first? Why did he not simply go to the Gentiles and preach? Why did he say it is not meet to give the bread of the children to the dogs?

You dig a deeper hole each time you try to make these distinctions. No man woman or child regardless of bloodline {ethnicity} will come to God in any other way except by the Blood of Christ, and not one will come through that door except the Father draw him.

BTW, Bro. Glen, you are right. I have reached a place of stagnation in my current place and cannot 'gain' any weight for all practical purposes much of it is now no more than fodder [filler].

God Bless
Bro. Dallas

 

[Frogman]

Yelsew,
IMHO you are listening too much to what men teach. But I want you to know this is just my opinion.

Bro. Dallas

 

[Eladar]

Originally posted by tyndale1946:
ALL the Father gave him is ALL inclusive and applies to no one else... If you want to see ALL the Father gave the Son see those dressed in robes of white in Revelation 7:9 the redeemed saints of God are ALL that is considered and no one else!

... Brother Glen

I'm assuming that this was in response to my post....

If so, then I believe what I said still applies. Our view is one of pre-judgement. We do not know who was given to Jesus.

 

[Frogman]

Hey Eladar,

Good to have you on here I haven't seen you posting before. Welcome.

How long have you been teaching? I am a senior at WKU and will be doing my student teaching next fall. My certification will be in Social Studies also Secondary Ed.

Well, all this is way off topic so I will shut up now. I just saw you were a HS teacher and just saw the other day that Ky's and OK's certification were reciprocal and thought I would say hello. I use to live in Poteau as a young child.

God Bless
Bro. Dallas

 

[Eladar]

Frogman,

I've recently changed my screen name. I used to go by Tuor. I've been teaching for about 10 years now. Good luck landing a job teaching social studies. If you can coach a sport or two that should help.

Thanks for the welcome!!

 

[Frogman]

Boy I feel stupid. Well I have been away from the board for a while. Thanks for the good luck wishes. I have coached basketball and can put that on my resume; and I am currently working [not teaching] in an ITV classroom on WKU's extended campus in Glasgow, this will look good on a resume I suspect. I have also been surfing Dept. of Ed. sites by state and have found that many are posting jobs for Sec. Soc.Studies for someone willing to be an assistant coach. I could do this; it seems districts around here are putting all new teachers in more 'leadership' positions. Well, I am sure there is a place for me somewhere. I would like to stay in this area of Ky, but I am willing to go to where the work is going to be at.

Next time I will pm you so neither of us will get reprimanded for being so far off topic. Let me try to relate the two topics:

Is it true that once you are a teacher you are always a teacher, or is a teacher just a non traditional student?

Regardless of our differences in belief concerning this topic it is always great to meet someone now in the classroom...my hat's off to you brother, I have great respect for educators, especially those in the trenches.

May God Richly bless your learning and teaching each day.

Bro. Dallas

 

[Yelsew]

I exclude the Jews, because it seems none of us are Jews in direct lineage. We are all Gentiles, brothers to the Jews through our Faith in God. The message that Jesus brought to the Jews was subsequently given to the Gentiles because of the hardness of the Jews as an ethnicity. There are scriptures that deal specifically with the fate of the Jews, that do not necessarily apply to the Gentiles. The age of the gentiles is distinctly defineable in scripture by the Hardness of the Jews. When the hardness of the Jews is taken away by God, the age of the gentiles is over.

Like the Gentiles, Jews are also required to come to the Father in FAITH. So the fact that their hearts are hardened to Jesus does not change that simple truth. It was for the Jews that Jesus is the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. It was for us Gentiles that the Jews were hardened.

Frogman, I do take offense at your snide remark about me listening to the teachings of others. How, pray tell, did you get your opinions? Are they yours exclusively, with no 'outside' influence, or were they formed by the "teachings" of others. Do you read the bible? do you not think the bible is written by "others"? Yes! Inspired by God, but written by men. My "opinions" are inspired by God, influenced by excellent teachers, and even though I may have first heard them from other men, I, like the Beraeans, search the scriptures to see that what I have heard from the teachings of "others" is true to the messages of God's Holy Word.

By making your remark about me, you indicate that you think I do not have the intelligence necessary to read the scriptures and understand them for myself. That would simply violates scriptures itself, because God's word is made simple for even the "most simple" of God's created men can understand His word. Yet, it confounds the wise, as it seems to have done to you.

 

[tannerml]

Originally posted by Yelsew:
And that is why the conception of Jesus is called the Immaculate Conception.

The Immaculate Conception is a RCC doctrine and it has nothing to do with the conception of Jesus. The doctrine states that Mary, the mother of Jesus was free from original sin. Get your facts straight.

 

[Frogman]

I cannot help what offends you. But friend you are not reading from the word of God when you proclaim that the reconciliation through Christ can be undone.

Neither are you reading from the word of God when you differentiate what is needed for salvation of a Jew in contrast to what is needed for a Gentile.

All this is not a game to God that we must figure out how we can justify the only eternal Holy being in our universe.

Your post disregards the fact that Jesus was speaking to a Jew when he discussed the need for being born again, I pointed this out.

In fact, I only did this after you first stated your beliefs were Spirit inspired, [an insinuation that mine were not]. You are correct, both of us cannot be right. Despite this you explain to me in the best intellectual capacity the mind of man possesses how our Lord and Savior can declare what He gives to be eternal life yet it can be lost, these are two inconsistent concepts and you will never make them compatible.

I have spoken to you about the perfect love of God having no fear; to fear losing that which is not even yours or mine but a gift and an eternal one, is far from perfect love.

You and I disagree, we each know this truth. As a result of each of our preconceived notions regarding what debate is we continually [though not always] but heads because we focus on the position and not the issues leading to that position.

You say the gift of eternal life is by Grace, but you also say that we can't have if we don't have faith. I say eternal life is by Grace and that we cannot have it until God gives us faith.

In your view it can be lost because it is something you found along the way and picked up a possession you acquired for yourself by your faith.

In my view it is something I cannot lose because I did not find it along the way, it was given me by the Holy Spirit and because it is based not upon anything I can, will or even wanted to do before I received it, it cannot be harmed by anything I do, don't or won't thereafter. It is based completely upon the Work of Christ who through the eternal spirit offered Himself.

From beginning to end it is of an eternal nature and no less. Can I add another minute to my life, another hair to my head, or can I take either away? No, why not, because even these are bounded by God and they cannot pass the bound he has set for them. Can I add to myself faith when I have none? No. Can I add to my faith when I have it? yes through obedience, yet even this is by Grace. Can I remove from my faith? No. Cast me into the ditch, wollow me in the mud, remove all my kin, friends and possessions and I remain what God has declared me.

Again, do all that is in me to do morally, can this change what God has declared me? No. Nothing I do, say, or omit will make me anything God has not written of me. To say more is to say man is greater than God.

If that is offensive to you I am sorry, I do not wish to offend you, but I will not cease to speak what I believe because it is offensive to someone who tells me they can choose, but refuses to choose to not be offended. That is a choice that as a child of God each of us can make and should practice making more often.

Now I am finished with this post. I suspect because of its length you have chosen not to read it in its entirety, that is your choice, you are free to make it.

But please do not let me offend you; there are people claiming the name of Christ wishing to remain in the sin of abomination to the Lord and this would be a more righteous indignation for you and I each to pursue.

BTW, the Bible is God Breathed, it is written 'by' the hand of men, but not filtered through the social or cultural biases of men, it is the word of God, or it is nothing more than what I have written above.

God Bless
Bro. Dallas

 

[Yelsew]

I cannot help what offends you. But friend you are not reading from the word of God when you proclaim that the reconciliation through Christ can be undone.

God does not fail, but man can because man looks to "other Gods".

Neither are you reading from the word of God when you differentiate what is needed for salvation of a Jew in contrast to what is needed for a Gentile.

You obviously cannot read or you, in your bias, elect to overlook what I say.

All this is not a game to God that we must figure out how we can justify the only eternal Holy being in our universe.

It never has been, God established the way He does business, but he does allow us to choose for ourselves.

Your post disregards the fact that Jesus was speaking to a Jew when he discussed the need for being born again, I pointed this out.

Please take the time to read my post.

In fact, I only did this after you first stated your beliefs were Spirit inspired, [an insinuation that mine were not]. You are correct, both of us cannot be right. Despite this you explain to me in the best intellectual capacity the mind of man possesses how our Lord and Savior can declare what He gives to be eternal life yet it can be lost, these are two inconsistent concepts and you will never make them compatible.

Touche! Now that that is out of the way, may we never revisit the arena of putdowns!

I have spoken to you about the perfect love of God having no fear; to fear losing that which is not even yours or mine but a gift and an eternal one, is far from perfect love.

As a gift, it must be received and retained. Again, it is not God who fails it is man!

You and I disagree, we each know this truth. As a result of each of our preconceived notions regarding what debate is we continually [though not always] but heads because we focus on the position and not the issues leading to that position.

No, you are wrong, We disagree because we have differing "revealed perceptions of the truth". It has nothing to do with "preconceived notions". We debate because we willingly expose our inner beliefs for debate!

You say the gift of eternal life is by Grace, but you also say that we can't have if we don't have faith. I say eternal life is by Grace and that we cannot have it until God gives us faith.

I have never said that the gift of eternal life is by GRACE! I have always and consistantly said that eternal life is the result of our FAITH which is enabled by Grace. Eternal life is the Promise given to those who believe in Jesus, even on his Name. The condition of our faith when we depart the flesh determines whether or not we receive the Gift of Eternal life or the judgment and second death.

In your view it can be lost because it is something you found along the way and picked up a possession you acquired for yourself by your faith.

No again you are wrong. All faith that the human develops can be lost. Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God. Faith is not something that God must have, He is not in need of faith, He is omniscient...Knows ALL! There is nothing he must learn! It is we humans that learn to have faith in what we read, hear, see, taste, feel, and sense with our spirit. If we can believe it, we can unbelieve it! If at first we believe based on "superficial" or "cursory" evaluation, we can unbelieve due to further "in depth" evaluation, and we can have our initial belief confirmed and strengthened through further evaluation. Is faith a gift? No, it is the substance of the perception of truth hoped for, the evidence that things not seen exists. If what is hoped for does not exist, one's faith is vain!

In my view it is something I cannot lose because I did not find it along the way, it was given me by the Holy Spirit and because it is based not upon anything I can, will or even wanted to do before I received it, it cannot be harmed by anything I do, don't or won't thereafter. It is based completely upon the Work of Christ who through the eternal spirit offered Himself.

If that is what you believe, OK! But I have explained what the scriptures say about faith and how we get it. I have also explained the faith process in human existance. It is not something that is induced into us but something that develops in us through our senses, all six of them.

From beginning to end it is of an eternal nature and no less. Can I add another minute to my life, another hair to my head, or can I take either away? No, why not, because even these are bounded by God and they cannot pass the bound he has set for them. Can I add to myself faith when I have none? No. Can I add to my faith when I have it? yes through obedience, yet even this is by Grace. Can I remove from my faith? No. Cast me into the ditch, wollow me in the mud, remove all my kin, friends and possessions and I remain what God has declared me.

Can you not remove your hair or kill yourself thus controlling those aspects of life? True, you cannot add hair where no hair exists without moving it from some other place on your body, and you cannot extend you life beyone the limit God sets for man, but faith is not physical like hair and life. Faith is transient, it can strengthen and it can wane. What we do with our faith determines which.

Again, do all that is in me to do morally, can this change what God has declared me? No. Nothing I do, say, or omit will make me anything God has not written of me. To say more is to say man is greater than God.

First, God did not make gods! He established the parameters within which man can live his life, both physically and spiritually. God gave man the latitude to live and expects man to know Him, after all we are made in the image of God, and it is His will (not order, but rather desire) that man will want of his own free will to submit to Him. He made us with the ability to choose to do so.

If that is offensive to you I am sorry, I do not wish to offend you, but I will not cease to speak what I believe because it is offensive to someone who tells me they can choose, but refuses to choose to not be offended. That is a choice that as a child of God each of us can make and should practice making more often.

I would not have chosen to take your comment personally if you had not deliberately targeted me in your comment! Apology accepted, forgiveness given!

Now I am finished with this post. I suspect because of its length you have chosen not to read it in its entirety, that is your choice, you are free to make it.

But please do not let me offend you; there are people claiming the name of Christ wishing to remain in the sin of abomination to the Lord and this would be a more righteous indignation for you and I each to pursue.

BTW, the Bible is God Breathed, it is written 'by' the hand of men, but not filtered through the social or cultural biases of men, it is the word of God, or it is nothing more than what I have written above.

How can you say that the bible is not filtered through the social and cultural biases of men? It was written over 1600 years by over 40 different authors. It cannot help but contain social and cultural biases. For example, in the New Testament, blood sacrifice was not the practice in the temples as is described in the Old Testament! Our present society is not dependent animal blood sacrifices but upon the one sacrifice of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. The Corinthian Christians were subject to social conditions different than the Romans, and the Ephesians, etc. Paul addressed his letters to each of them with their social and cultural biases in mind as well as his own. You are simply not looking my friend! Each of the prophets wrote out of their own biases, etc. David certainly wrote out of his own biases. What they had in Common was their faith in Almighty God and obedience to HIS "breathings".

 

[Yelsew]

Originally posted by tannerml:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Yelsew:
And that is why the conception of Jesus is called the Immaculate Conception.

The Immaculate Conception is a RCC doctrine and it has nothing to do with the conception of Jesus. The doctrine states that Mary, the mother of Jesus was free from original sin. Get your facts straight. </font>[/QUOTE]You believe it your way, I'll believe it mine.

The fact that God who is spirit, did not have sexual relations with the virgin maid, Mary, who is human, yet conceived the life of His ONLY begotten Son in her womb, makes Jesus conception completely immaculate! The Spirit of Deity in the flesh of Humanity! How much more immaculate can it be by any other description?

 

[Frogman]

Below is a link to what anyone believing the immaculate conception believes. It is a Catholic doctrine and it is error, even this article admits to this. It states the mother of Jesus was exempt (her soul) from the original sin. The article continues beyond the excerpt below to say this doctrine is not found in scripture and it even changes the words "he" to "she" in Genesis 3.15.


Catholic Encyclopedia

Immaculate Conception
THE DOCTRINE
In the Constitution Ineffabilis Deus of 8 December, 1854, Pius IX pronounced and defined that the Blessed Virgin Mary "in the first instance of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the human race, was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin."
"The Blessed Virgin Mary . . ." The subject of this immunity from original sin is the person of Mary at the moment of the creation of her soul and its infusion into her body.
". . .in the first instance of her conception . . ." The term conception does not mean the active or generative conception by her parents. Her body was formed in the womb of the mother, and the father had the usual share in its formation. The question does not concern the immaculateness of the generative activity of her parents. Neither does it concern the passive conception absolutely and simply (conceptio seminis carnis, inchoata), which, according to the order of nature, precedes the infusion of the rational soul. The person is truly conceived when the soul is created and infused into the body. Mary was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin at the first moment of her animation, and sanctifying grace was given to her before sin could have taken effect in her soul.
". . .was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin. . ." The formal active essence of original sin was not removed from her soul, as it is removed from others by baptism; it was excluded, it never was in her soul. Simultaneously with the exclusion of sin. The state of original sanctity, innocence, and justice, as opposed to original sin, was conferred upon her, by which gift every stain and fault, all depraved emotions, passions, and debilities, essentially pertaining to original sin, were excluded. But she was not made exempt from the temporal penalties of Adam -- from sorrow, bodily infirmities, and death.
". . .by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the human race." The immunity from original sin was given to Mary by a singular exemption from a universal law through the same merits of Christ, by which other men are cleansed from sin by baptism. Mary needed the redeeming Saviour to obtain this exemption, and to be delivered from the universal necessity and debt (debitum) of being subject to original sin. The person of Mary, in consequence of her origin from Adam, should have been subject to sin, but, being the new Eve who was to be the mother of the new Adam, she was, by the eternal counsel of God and by the merits of Christ, withdrawn from the general law of original sin. Her redemption was the very masterpiece of Christ's redeeming wisdom. He is a greater redeemer who pays the debt that it may not be incurred than he who pays after it has fallen on the debtor.
Such is the meaning of the term "Immaculate Conception."

Bro. Dallas

[ September 12, 2003, 07:41 AM: Message edited by: Frogman ]

 

[Frogman]

Yelsew,
If I believed the Bible was remotely affected by the attitudes of the men God inspired to write His Words, the first doctrine I would reject would be equal to the nation of Israel has rejected.

For the Bible to have been affected by the attitudes of the writers of the Gospel then it follows the saying of the Jews concerning the stealing of the body of Jesus could be true.

And this is based upon my intellectual reasoning, thus involves 0% faith.

Bro. Dallas

 

[Yelsew]

Then, with the exception of the historically provable items in the bible, virtually all of the bible requires faith to accept and trust the validity. Therefore you should not trust any of it because you do not have the evidence. . . BUT YOU DO! Don't you!

You do because once you first believed the first part of it, the spirit of God confirmed the validity to you.

 

[Yelsew]

As far as "immaculate conception" is concerned, I have taken a phase, from what ever source, and applied it with my own definition. The conception of Jesus in the womb of Mary by the power of the most High God who is spirit is truly immaculate! Never before and never again has there been or will there be another like it.

Just like 'easter' which was a pagan celebration that Christianity adopted and set straight. Immaculate Conception is a concept to which I adapted my own meaning. Who cares that it was Catholic false doctrine? My way makes it good!

Besides, it is not Mary who conceived, it was Jesus who was conceived in Mary's womb. Mary's conception occured when her parents got together.

 

[Frogman]

The whole point of this thread is that once we are in possession of faith we do not lose it. We may have fears and doubts, but not to the point that we fall from our salvation.

Next, concerning the conception of Christ I agree with you that there has never and never will be another just like it at least in its purpose and effects.

However, the O.T. does record at least one other miraculous birth brought about in the womb of Sara, Abraham's wife. The Bible says her womb was dead.

Not the same situation but similar: Rachel's womb was blessed. Hannah also.

But fundamentally, I agree with you on the miraculous birth of Christ, I just would not associate it in any form with what is termed the 'immaculate conception' simply because the understanding of the vast number of people who would understand that term is that Mary was born without sin as a result and this is falsehood.

If you wish to hold to this that is fine with me, just be careful who you talk to about it and always be sure they understand fully the Catholic teaching is false. If you do not and they are confused even slightly I don't see any good coming from their knowledge of it if and when they attempt to discuss it with a Catholic who rightly understands what is meant by it.

This could cause great harm in many ways, not the least they may even develop a mistrust of your teaching.

I would advise against using this type of independently assuming false doctrines and assigning definitions, though your intentions are undoubtedly good, the results could be more detrimental than any good that could be done.

Bro. Dallas

 

[Jude]

I've not read all the responses here, but, it does seem to me that salvation is something that one could lose. Judas would be my first example-an apostle, one who did ministry in Jesus' Name and authority, yet, sold-out over a few silver coins. Ananias and Sapphira would be another. They were members of the church, but were "stopped dead in their tracks," so-to-speak. (sorry). Salvation is not a 'one-time process', not a 'one-time event', but a life-long one, whereby, by Grace alone, we become worthy to enter the Kingdom of heaven. OSAS is a dangerous doctrine, IMHO.

 

[Frogman]

I don't believe Judas is a valid example because Christ said in John 17 that he had lost none whom the Father had given him except the son of perdition. And Peter speaks likewise in Acts 2, I don't believe Judas was ever saved.

Physical death does not mean one is lost. If it does then there are alot of "martyrs" through the centuries who are now in Hell. The judgement that fell on Ananias and Sapphira was not unto condemnation. Our problem is that we view physical life as a proof or evidence of eternal, at least in this case.

Bro. Dallas