firehill Posted March 8, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 11 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,980 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 2 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/17/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted March 8, 2007 Does God believe in once saved always saved? Being that He is all knowing then in the case where He knows that a particular someone is 'saved always saved once they were' I would say 'yes, once a particualr someone is saved, always saved'. Are you such a particular someone? God knows, and you could too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddaeus Posted March 8, 2007 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 375 Content Per Day: 0.06 Reputation: 4 Days Won: 0 Joined: 08/21/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted March 8, 2007 RCruise, Well I pray you consider and pray about it and not keep locked in to doctrines taught. Do you mind if I ask which Church you belong to? Your theologies put forth to Mutran seem familiar along Episcopal / Anglican or Catholic? The doctrines or the words of Scripture describe what the Apostles taught. To keep locked into them is being faithful to the Gospel once given. One should not resort to or attempt to reinterpret them to mean something not ever understood. I am Orthodox. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil.2:12 Posted March 8, 2007 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 5 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 161 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/06/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 10/13/1934 Share Posted March 8, 2007 RCruise, Well I pray you consider and pray about it and not keep locked in to doctrines taught. Do you mind if I ask which Church you belong to? Your theologies put forth to Mutran seem familiar along Episcopal / Anglican or Catholic? The doctrines or the words of Scripture describe what the Apostles taught. To keep locked into them is being faithful to the Gospel once given. One should not resort to or attempt to reinterpret them to mean something not ever understood. I am Orthodox. For a while, Thaddaeus, I was a professional wedding photographer. One of the weddings I covered was in the Orthodox church here in town. In the foyer, I noticed two sand boxes, one on each side of the main door into the sanctuary and about waist high. The Priest was handy and the wedding still had some 30 minutes before it started. So, I asked the priest what the purpose of the two receptacles of sand were for and he replied that this was where the people put out the candles they had brought with them. I asked what the candles signified and he said that they were used to light the path from the parishioner's home to the church and back again after the service was over. When I pointed out that we have electricity and flashlights today, he reminded me that electricity has only been around for about 100 years, so it is still quite new as compared with the age of the Orthodox church. From this, I quickly learned that change within the Orthodox church happens at a pace that would barely equal the pace of the world's slowest glacier. Not that a slow pace is a bad thing, for (when dealing with the Word of God) change for change's sake is generally a bad thing. However change that comes from a revelation given by the Holy Spirit is always good. That there is error in the doctrines and traditions of man is self evident. One only has to read boards like this one to see compelling arguments on both sides of nearly any position. However God is not the author of confusion. What He said, He meant. And it is the Holy Spirit's job to show us the Truth in what God said, not the traditions and doctrines of our denomination. Your denomination believes in the saving power of baptism, a position not supported by Scripture so yes, you would argue that the new birth into the family of God when one accepts Jesus must include baptism. May I ask you a question? Do you believe that Jesus would have done everything necessary to secure our salvation, leaving nothing undone? If you answer yes, then you are immediately faced with a dilemma, if you say no, then Jesus left the work of salvation unfinished and has never returned to finish the job. If this be the case, as Paul so eloquently stated in his first letter to the Corinthians "If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable" (1 Cor. 15:19, KJV). In other words, if our salvation was left unfinished because Jesus did not do everything necessary for our salvation, then we who are Born-Again believers in Jesus are simply duped fools leading a miserable lifestyle, especially as judged by the world's standard. But we know that Jesus did finish Salvation's work, therefore we of all men, are the most blessed. There are several denominations that teach baptism is necessary for salvation, if one is not baptized they cannot enter into the Kingdom of God. But these people are actually on the horns of a dilemma. They firmly believe that Jesus did everything necessary to ensure our salvation, that no work was left undone. Then, in reading the Word of God, they come across the Gospel of John, chapter four. This chapter starts out by saying "When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John (though Jesus himself baptized not, but His disciples) He left Judea and departed again into Galilee" (John 4:1-3, KJV). Whoa, there, before we continue reading this fascinating account of the travels of Jesus, let's go back to that parenthetical phrase that John inserted in this passage. Remember, the Word of God is fully inspired by the Holy Spirit and is the very words and thoughts of God Almighty recorded by men who wrote under the unction of the Holy Spirit. So, this parenthetical phrase John inserts in verse 2 was actually the words of God as given to John by the Holy Spirit. In other words, God is emphatically pointing our that Jesus baptized no one, as His disciples were the ones baptizing the believers. Now if Jesus did everything necessary to secure our salvation and baptism is necessary for salvation, why did Jesus not baptize anyone? If baptism has saving power, and the disciples were entrusted to apply this saving power to those who believed instead of Jesus, doesn't it follow that a disciple could have atoned for our sins on the Cross as well? Frankly I can't remember the name of any disciple who hung on a cross to pay my sin debt. The conclusion is simple, baptism has no salvation power and this is born out by the thief on the cross who asked Jesus for forgiveness and Jesus responded that the thief would be in paradise (the holding place for all going to Heaven after their sin debt had been paid by Jesus) that very day. When was this thief baptized? And who did it? Jesus is on the Cross, the disciples had scattered, except for John, so who would perform the baptism of the thief hanging on the cross? Here then are the horns of your dilemma, you who believe that water baptism has salvation power. On the one horn, you have Jesus doing everything needed to ensure your salvation, the work of salvation is complete. On the other horn, you have an eyewitness account that Jesus never baptized anyone, He delegated that act to His disciples. Now, how do you square these two horns. If Jesus did everything needed to be done to ensure our salvation yet He never baptized, how do you explain that there's salvation power in water baptism? If such were the case, wouldn't Jesus have been right there in the water baptizing as many as He could to be sure that the salvation power contained in water baptism was theirs before He paid their sin debt on the Cross? Just how do those of you who believe that baptism is necessary for salvation explain these things? Inquiring minds want to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddaeus Posted March 8, 2007 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 375 Content Per Day: 0.06 Reputation: 4 Days Won: 0 Joined: 08/21/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted March 8, 2007 Phil 2:12 However change that comes from a revelation given by the Holy Spirit is always good. He was the last Revelation. He with the Holy Spirit gave the Apostles, ALL Truth. What else would be necessary for salvation today that was not necessary for the first century Christians? The fact that there has been NO change, is the power of the Holy Spirit in preserving that Once Given Gospel within the Body of Christ. That is what your Bible says quite clearly. So why the need for change in how a person is saved, how a person comes to the knowledge of Christ today? Do you doubt that He gave us ALL Truth? Do you doubt that He is able to preserve that Truth? Or that He could not see far enough into the future and a new gospel is needed today? Here then are the horns of your dilemma, you who believe that water baptism has salvation power. On the one horn, you have Jesus doing everything needed to ensure your salvation, the work of salvation is complete. That is a dilemna created from your own misunderstanding of what Christ actually accomplished. We believed He saved ALL mankind from the judgement of Adam. All men have been redeemed from the bondage to death and sin. They are freed to do what you think Christ did on the Cross. We are freed as human beings to freely join with God in union. A union which is mandated by our being created, not anything to do with what Christ did on the Cross. This is what Paul is referencing relative to the vain hope if all we have is Christ in this life. If we desire eternal life with Him, we need to get about doing the work He requires of those who so desire to be in that union. Regenerative Baptism is refered to in Scripture. Most reformers and protestants outright deny the means God uses in this world to convey His power and glory. It is also why they all object to the bread and wine, the Eucharist being the Body and Blood of Christ. They have made themselves, mini-gnostics. The Bible as you have recieved it, itself in many instances is the interpretation of earlier teachings to those same churches, or individuals to whom it is addressed. The Bible is part of Holy Tradition. It is not set against nor apart from that Whole. That there is error in the doctrines and traditions of man is self evident. I know, it has been self evident all through history, yet that does not stop most protestants from trying to continue the trend in unlimited deposit of all kinds of new and innovative, improved gospel teachings. The Orthodox have never accepted the teachings of men, not even groups of men. It has always and only been that which was given from the beginning. It was given complete. Once for all, for all time. Explain to me why you think there should be changes made? Do you think that what Christ did on the Cross aught to be improved? Do you think more means should be available today for you than for the early Church? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil.2:12 Posted March 8, 2007 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 5 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 161 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/06/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 10/13/1934 Share Posted March 8, 2007 (edited) Explain to me why you think there should be changes made? Do you think that what Christ did on the Cross aught to be improved? Do you think more means should be available today for you than for the early Church? No, Thaddaeus, I recognize that error has crept into the traditions of men and the doctrines of denominations. It is precisely the type of thinking that you are exhibiting in this thread that reflects the position of the Orthodox church. To think that no error can be in any of your doctrines or traditions down through the centuries is either arrogance to the extreme or sheer ignorance. No denomination is perfect, including the Orthodox. Edited March 8, 2007 by Phil.2:12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddaeus Posted March 8, 2007 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 375 Content Per Day: 0.06 Reputation: 4 Days Won: 0 Joined: 08/21/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted March 8, 2007 (edited) Phil 2:12, It is precisely the type of thinking that you are exhibiting in this thread that reflects the position of the Orthodox church. To think that no error can be in any of your doctrines or traditions down through the centuries is either arrogance to the extreme or sheer ignorance. No denomination is perfect, including the Orthodox. Can you find an error? Can you find any doctrinal error that has crept in? I would be interested in knowing which one(s) you are referencing? Do you not believe that the Holy Spirit can keep His Word? When the Orthodox say the Church did not err, they are referencing Christ Himself and the Holy Spirit. The Church is Christ by definition. He is the Head, and is Head over the Body. The Body is made up of individual believers, none of whom is the Church. It is the Body that does not err, as it is Christ. That is what your Bible states. It states that because that is the understanding of the Apostles as they taught the early Church. It is that same understanding that has been faithfully handed down, and by any recording of history is quite manifest. The problem you face is that it does not align with your personal interpretation. You have a much better revelation than the Apostles, that your interpretation is better because it is more modern and fits the modern man. Man has not changed, I think God knew that and could forsee that the early Christian is no different then we. Of your arrogance statement. Why is it arrogant to believe and accept what Christ clearly pointed out, revealed to the Apostles? They individually disseminated that Gospel, amazingly the same in far distant cities throughout the first century. Do you really think that is a man-made phenonomon? Than that same teaching has not changed for 2000 years, even though placed in human beings. The difference is that it is millions within the Body, versus a single individual, namely you or any other who attempts to interpret the Bible, only the written portion in total isolation of its context and content. I think it quite arrogant that you as an individual has such a high opinion that you can actually do better than either the Apostles themselves or the Holy Spirit. If you understand the High Priestly Prayer of Christ in John 17, then you might begin to understand that it not possible to have error with Christ as Head. Yet, if you take any individual, all through history, before the Reformation, they were all declared heretical or heretics, but surely after the Reformation, not a single reformers teaching made it beyond the lifetime of the person making the teaching. In some cases they didn't even make it that far. Today, that phenonomon is so rapidly expanding, that it cannot even be called a gospel, surely not a universal gospel which is what was revealed to us by God using His means. Yet, you want to claim all this confusion as the work of the Holy Spirit. That you do not understand the Orthodox view is quite evident. That you would label Christ as a denomination. What is He a denomination of? Now, if you were referring to the many different communions that make up the Orthodox Church, I might agree with you. It has denominations, or what we call communions, but Orthodox, itself is not a denomination, nor is it an organization. You failed to answer any of the questions in the last post. Why? Can you answer those posed in this post? Edited March 8, 2007 by Thaddaeus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davve Posted March 9, 2007 Group: Members Followers: 0 Topic Count: 0 Topics Per Day: 0 Content Count: 11 Content Per Day: 0.00 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/07/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted March 9, 2007 Davve, I believe in the Eternal Security of the Believer! I don't believe in OSAS. Marriage is permanent and life long is it not? If your answer is yes, you think like a believer. If your answer is no....you think like OSAS. The marriage is a very good analogy and Paul uses it two ways, between the individual and Christ and Christ with His Church. But in particular, your analogy is not quite correct. The believer believes it to be permanent and works to keep it permanent. But, being a sinful being, that union can be broken. There is nothing in this world that makes it concrete. There can even be unfaithfulness but repentance can heal. To put it in the OSAS version, they also believe it is permanent. Permanent to such an extent that one cannot break that union. That even if one marriage ceases, partner becomes unfaithful, one is still considered married, valid as before. In some cases, one can remarry, and still be considered as having the first union. You cannot fall, falling, or ceasing a marriage is an impossibility. Thaddaeus, I believe that I understand you to be saying that once entering into relationship with Jesus, that there is absolutely no possible way that you can ever, under any circumstances loose what God has given. I believe that are ample examples of those who simply use this way of thinking to live as close to sin as possible, and even some believeing they are saved when in fact, they are not. The absolute permanency of the relationship we experince in Christ Jesus is not by "works" or "Working at it," but rather by our sensitivity to it, by our heart and desires being changed, hence we experience the permancy of the relationship we enter into with the one who will never leave us nor forsake us, and we know it. If there is no process of change occuring in the life of the one claiming Christ Jesus as Lord, holding on to the doctrine of OSAS is of no value and just legal wrangling trying to justify sin in our life. ISAS (If Saved Always Saved) Daave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddaeus Posted March 9, 2007 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 375 Content Per Day: 0.06 Reputation: 4 Days Won: 0 Joined: 08/21/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted March 9, 2007 Davve, I believe that I understand you to be saying that once entering into relationship with Jesus, that there is absolutely no possible way that you can ever, under any circumstances loose what God has given. I believe that are ample examples of those who simply use this way of thinking to live as close to sin as possible, and even some believeing they are saved when in fact, they are not. Yes, this is the view of OSAS. It is a view based solely on the promises of God, which we know will not change, but totally divorces ones own part of the covenantal agreement. That fact that man is a very sinful creature and is tossed to and fro and takes a great amount of effort and all the means that Christ has given to us in order to overcome those evils. The absolute permanency of the relationship we experince in Christ Jesus is not by "works" or "Working at it," but rather by our sensitivity to it, by our heart and desires being changed, hence we experience the permancy of the relationship we enter into with the one who will never leave us nor forsake us, and we know it. If there is no process of change occuring in the life of the one claiming Christ Jesus as Lord, holding on to the doctrine of OSAS is of no value and just legal wrangling trying to justify sin in our life. ISAS (If Saved Always Saved) Our hearts and desires is evidenced by our working faith. It is all about "being saved THROUGH faith". Faith of itself means nothing. In fact, if that is all you have, it is dead. Works must accompany faith to show the sincerity, the value, the permanence, the willful following, the willful obedience, the willful complying with the will of God in our lives. We will be judged by our works. It is the building blocks of faith. The danger here for the OSAS is that they are under the impression that if they actually do nothing they are still saved, but just out of relationship. they point to the I Cor 3:15 text and forgetting it is not the rewards but the prize that is the end of that endurance run. Paul speaks of gaining the prize, not any follow up rewards that might come. Same as any victory. You need to win before you get the accolades, the publicity, the noteriety etc. You will not get the accolades if you lose. But you are correct, in that there is no value to OSAS if no visible result in a changed life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Servus Christi Posted May 25, 2007 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 0 Topic Count: 0 Topics Per Day: 0 Content Count: 21 Content Per Day: 0.00 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 05/24/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted May 25, 2007 I am perfectly safe in the hands of the Lord... I know that .. Rom 8:38 For I am persuaded that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, Rom 8:39 nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. I must say however.... though none of these can take your salvation away, does not eliminate you from this falling away. I mean it is scrumptulescent that none of these can, this just enforces the fact that none can take your free will, not even God. So in turn you can choose to walk away. I once heard a friend say, God will never leave me. This is true, God will never leave you, but you can leave Him. Beatus Dei, ave Christos! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
methinkshe Posted May 25, 2007 Group: Senior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 32 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 679 Content Per Day: 0.11 Reputation: 14 Days Won: 1 Joined: 03/02/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted May 25, 2007 (edited) I am perfectly safe in the hands of the Lord... I know that .. Rom 8:38 For I am persuaded that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, Rom 8:39 nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. I must say however.... though none of these can take your salvation away, does not eliminate you from this falling away. I mean it is scrumptulescent that none of these can, this just enforces the fact that none can take your free will, not even God. So in turn you can choose to walk away. I once heard a friend say, God will never leave me. This is true, God will never leave you, but you can leave Him. Beatus Dei, ave Christos! If it were possible for one who has truly been born again spiritually to leave God such that he could lose his salvation, then that would imply that one could be unborn spiritually, which is illogical and unreasonable, or that the eternal life we are given in Christ when we are born again is not eternal at all and can die, for one would have to die again spiritually to lose one's salvation, since salvation IS eternal life. "For God so loved the world that he gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth on Him should not perish but have everlasting life." John 3:16 Those who backslide or stray from God after they have been born again may only be saved "as by fire" but saved they will be. "If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire" I cor 3:15 In Jesus, Ruth P.S. Jude 1:24 "Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy...." Edited May 25, 2007 by methinkshe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts