Do You Believe in "Once Saved, Always Saved"

[Guest shiloh357]

If they do not state that Judas was once saved, then the Bible is full of errors.

It is not the Bible that would be full of errors, but rather your method of interpretation.

Many will stand before God who did great things in His Name including casting out demons, and He will say to them "I never knew you." He will not say, "I once knew you," but rather "I NEVER knew you."

There is nothing revealed in the Scripture of Judas' character that ever described Him as a Christian. It may also be that some of the other disciples did not necessarily believe in Jesus until after His resurrection. This was certainly true of even his own half-siblings.

It seems that you are really reaching with the whole Judas thing.

If Judas was not a saved man, and if he could have done all these miracles as a lost sinner, then it would seem that the modern Christians who claim to be saved regardless of what they do should be able to do as much as Judas did whom they say was never saved.

Hfow do you know that such is not happening even in our day? I am not judging anyone but how do we know? We might be very surprised to find out the true spiritual condition of some of the great Christian miracle workers of our day.

It is insulting to Jesus Christ Himself and His Father in Heaven to accuse them of choosing an unsaved man to preach repentance and holiness, to heal the sick, to cast out demons, and the represent the Kingdom of God among men.

That is an emotional argument and nothing more than a subjective value that you are assigning to the issue. God can use whomever He wants, for whatever purpose He sees fit.

JUDAS, BY TRANSGRESSION FELL (Acts 1:15-25) The apostle Peter stated: "Men and bretheren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit by the mouth of David spoke before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus" (Acts 1:16); "For he was numbered with us, AND HAD OBTAINED PART OF THIS MINISTRY" (Acts 1:17). The Words Peter mentioned that David spoke of were (Psalms 41:9 and 55:12-13).

The Holy Spirit through Luke records for us that JUDAS "BY TRANSGRESSION FELL" (Acts 1:15-25). Judas not only had a moral fall but "sin" caused it. Judas was not always a "devil" and a "thief." He became both after he had been saved for quite some time. Judas's weakness was the love of money and this caused his fall (John 12:6; Luke 22:5; Matt. 26:14-16). If he had refused to be treasurer of the first Christian disciples and had told them that money was his weakness, he would have been better off. Judas had seen Jesus escape the mob many times and he had no doubt the Lord would escape again and he would be thirty pieces better off.

Actually, Judas was an unbeliever from the beggining because it says from the beginning that Jesus knew who would and would not believe in Him. Judas got progressively worse, to be sure, but that there is NO evidence that Judas ever believed in Jesus. Furtthermore, Judas fell from the apostleship, not from salvation, because he never had salvation to start with. He was never a believer.

Jesus Christ Himself spoke these words to the Father: Jesus testified that to EVERY ONE [including Judas] the Father had given Him, He had given ETERNAL LIFE (John 17:2). Jesus gave Judas eternal life just as He gave the other apostles eternal life.

You are including Judas in there, but that is just your opinion. There is no evidence that Jesus included Judas in that prayer. Jesus prayed for Peter, because He knew that Peter would deny Him.

And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.

(Luke 22:31-32)

For some reason, Jesus did not pray for Judas.

There is no reason to believe that Jesus gave eternal life to Judas after calling Him a demon, after Judas had for the last three years, been skimming from the disciple's treasury, and especialy since by the time this prayer was being uttered, Judas had already conspired to betray Jesus. You need to remember that this prayer was uttered at the Last Supper when Judas had already gone out to betray Jesus.

There is no real evidence that Judas was ever a believer, and his three year long thievery and greed is proof of that.

[Thaddaeus]

Primed Minister,

There are of course, as you now many arguments in regards to apostacy and Judas Iscariot. As far as Judas Iscariot, there's nothing clear cut in scriptture that indicates Judas was ever saved (genuine believer, believed the revelation of Jesus as the Son of God). Luke 10:20 and Mark 4:10-11 may be the closest, but the Apostle Paul himself wrote/spoke to the various churches identifying them as believers knowing that wolves in sheep's clothing were among them, thus being also recipients of his message.

Many arguments but ONLY ONE Gospel Truth. By the fact that you move to Paul speaking to Churches, we know that they were all believers. Paul specifically warned of those from WITHIN, as well as those from without. His is specifically targeting believers who became false teachers, thus unbelievers. Judas cannot apostacise unless he was of Christ. You can use all the twisting you want to try to get out of it, but there is absolutely nothing in scripture that every supports a guaranteed salavation upon a single ascent of belief. Here you are attempting to change every single word which clearly shows and inside existance, or being IN Christ for a time.

You seem to think that it is you that must determine just who is a believer and who is not. That is up to God to determine in the end. Your premise is incorrect, so that every time a person is shown to have changed while being part of Christ ministry, a member of the early Church, that someone actually was never saved. False premise. no one is actually saved the way you are phrasing it until you are actually dead. Until then we possess it on CONDITION . Condition that we remain faithful. Judas was not. Many of the false teachers were bishops, were believers for a very long time before they began to teach a false concept and in some cases were excommunicated and their teachings declared heretical. Every single one of them was a member of the Body of Christ. Not a single exception.

Judas was noted as being a devil and was termed 'the son of perdition', a dishonour given only to him and the anti-christ.

Yes, but this is just a little look into the foreknowledge of God. Jesus chose him just to fulfull the prophecy. But are you going to tell me that Judas knew he would be called a "son of perdition" and that God knew this even before Jesus selected him.

How do you know the same might even apply to you right now?

"Little children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists come, by which we know that it is the last hour.

They went out from us, but they were not of us, they would of continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us".

Yes, a text always used by OSAS proponents but it sinks it as well as many others. It clearly indicates that they were part of them. The fact they actually physically left just made it manifest that they were not actually believers any longer. It is not for us to judge, that is Christ's job. If a member enters by baptism they are a full fledged member of the Body of Christ. Unless that person personally states unbelief, or his actions are so indicative of not beint IN Christ, one might assume, but could still be wrong in the end. The Bible never requires us to make that judgement, as it is not ours to make.

All we know is that the Bible clearly warns that it can happen and to be on guard against it. It makes the warning so often it is almost monotonous.

All indications in scripture pointed towards unbelief as far as Judas was concerned.

eventually unbelief, and confirmed by Jesus Himself regarding God's foreknowledge of the eventual event. But that is the whole point. Believers falling to unbelief.

[Thaddaeus]

Primed Minister,

There are of course, as you now many arguments in regards to apostacy and Judas Iscariot. As far as Judas Iscariot, there's nothing clear cut in scriptture that indicates Judas was ever saved (genuine believer, believed the revelation of Jesus as the Son of God). Luke 10:20 and Mark 4:10-11 may be the closest, but the Apostle Paul himself wrote/spoke to the various churches identifying them as believers knowing that wolves in sheep's clothing were among them, thus being also recipients of his message.

Many arguments but ONLY ONE Gospel Truth. By the fact that you move to Paul speaking to Churches, we know that they were all believers. Paul specifically warned of those from WITHIN, as well as those from without. His is specifically targeting believers who became false teachers, thus unbelievers. Judas cannot apostacise unless he was of Christ. You can use all the twisting you want to try to get out of it, but there is absolutely nothing in scripture that every supports a guaranteed salavation upon a single ascent of belief. Here you are attempting to change every single word which clearly shows and inside existance, or being IN Christ for a time.

You seem to think that it is you that must determine just who is a believer and who is not. That is up to God to determine in the end. Your premise is incorrect, so that every time a person is shown to have changed while being part of Christ ministry, a member of the early Church, that someone actually was never saved. False premise. no one is actually saved the way you are phrasing it until you are actually dead. Until then we possess it on CONDITION . Condition that we remain faithful. Judas was not. Many of the false teachers were bishops, were believers for a very long time before they began to teach a false concept and in some cases were excommunicated and their teachings declared heretical. Every single one of them was a member of the Body of Christ. Not a single exception.

Judas was noted as being a devil and was termed 'the son of perdition', a dishonour given only to him and the anti-christ.

Yes, but this is just a little look into the foreknowledge of God. Jesus chose him just to fulfull the prophecy. But are you going to tell me that Judas knew he would be called a "son of perdition" and that God knew this even before Jesus selected him.

How do you know the same might even apply to you right now?

"Little children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists come, by which we know that it is the last hour.

They went out from us, but they were not of us, they would of continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us".

Yes, a text always used by OSAS proponents but it sinks it as well as many others. It clearly indicates that they were part of them. The fact they actually physically left just made it manifest that they were not actually believers any longer. It is not for us to judge, that is Christ's job. If a member enters by baptism they are a full fledged member of the Body of Christ. Unless that person personally states unbelief, or his actions are so indicative of not beint IN Christ, one might assume, but could still be wrong in the end. The Bible never requires us to make that judgement, as it is not ours to make.

All we know is that the Bible clearly warns that it can happen and to be on guard against it. It makes the warning so often it is almost monotonous.

All indications in scripture pointed towards unbelief as far as Judas was concerned.

eventually unbelief, and confirmed by Jesus Himself regarding God's foreknowledge of the eventual event. But that is the whole point. Believers falling to unbelief.

It's still pretty interesting how persistant God will react towards one who is owned by him.

Since He owns every soul, having paid a great price of redemption, just so no man would be condemned unjustly through Adam. That is love. But He will persist, even against man's will, because He desires that all men be saved.

Consider, the man in just about one of the worst case scenarios in 1 Corinthians 5. Paul's instruction indeed was to have him removed from fellowship. However if God has to allow the devil to physically destroy one of His own as a tool for that person to be saved, then so be it. The man may of had a very short time span of free will, but God will not withhold chastisement of a child of His. Chastisement, by the way, doesn't seem to be a subject discussed much.

Yes, this was chastisement meted out by the Church by Paul's instructions. Excommunicate the person, leave him to his own devices and the devil. Let him sink to the bottom of the well, until there is only one way to look. And hopefully that person will repent and return. It is still his free will to return. I don't see any loss of free will here but a chastisement to turn. But God is not making the turn. Return in order to save his soul before he dies and eliminates any chance of repentance. We do not know if this man repented, but many we know throughout history have not repented.

[Guest shiloh357]

Matthew 10:2Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother;

3Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus; 4Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.

Judas was an apostle.

It doesn't say, "the name of the 11 apostles were....and oh by the way, Judas Iscariot was there too..."

Judas was personally ordained by Jesus.

Mark3:14And he ordained twelve, that they should be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach,

15And to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast out devils:

16And Simon he surnamed Peter;

17And James the son of Zebedee, and John the brother of James; and he surnamed them Boanerges, which is, The sons of thunder:

18And Andrew, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus, and Simon the Canaanite, 19And Judas Iscariot,

Jesus specificly chose Judas Iscariot as an APOSTLE. See below for Biblical definition of Apostle.

Luke 6:13And when it was day, he called unto him his disciples: and of them he chose twelve, whom also he named apostles;

14Simon, (whom he also named Peter,) and Andrew his brother, James and John, Philip and Bartholomew,

15Matthew and Thomas, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon called Zelotes, 16And Judas the brother of James, and Judas Iscariot

Judas was called to the ministry and apostleship, and fell.

Acts 1:25

That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.

So unless you think the Lord had a habit of naming unbelievers apostles, Judas WAS a born again believer, and at some point turned, and died lost.

Apostle is a specific term used of a specific God-ordained ministry. this isn't some bogus label being thrown around here.

1 Corinthians 12:28

And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

Ephesians 4:11

And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

got that? apostle is before prophets, teachers, or any other calling or gift of the spirit. THAT is the position Judas is REPEATEDLY said to have had in scripture. to deny this is just plain dishonest. to suggest that an unbeliever would be called an apostle by Jesus himself is just plain ridiculous nonsense.

Therefore, it is perfectly correct to say that Judas was a Holy Spirit annointed believer at some point, and that he then turned from God and died lost.

I'm sorry but none of that proves that Judas was a believer. You are really reaching, and it is almost humorous to see people grasping at every straw they can to make Judas, one who was a thief the entire time He was with Jesus, a Christian. Can a person be a Christian and live a life of thievery at the same time? Judas lived in sin, but you folks will violate your own method of reasoning to make Judas a Christian while he was living sin. Unbelievable! It would be be nice to debate with people who's theology possessed an ounce of internal consistency.

[Guest shiloh357]

I'm sorry but none of that proves that Judas was a believer. You are really reaching, and it is almost humorous to see people grasping at every straw they can to make Judas, one who was a thief the entire time He was with Jesus, a Christian. Can a person be a Christian and live a life of thievery at the same time? Judas lived in sin, but you folks will violate your own method of reasoning to make Judas a Christian while he was living sin. Unbelievable! It would be be nice to debate with people who's theology possessed an ounce of internal consistency.

Ok question:

Was Judas an apostle?

Being an apostle and being a Christian are not the same thing. Many people in ministry positions will one day stand before the Lord and He will say to them that He never knew them. They were never believers even though they did exploits for the Lord, even cast out demons in His Name, and yet Jesus has Never known them. It is not a case of knowing them and losing, them. He never knew them in the first place.

So really trying to equate apostle with "Christian" despite the fact that Judas NEVER believed in Jesus to start with is a nonstarter.

[Thaddaeus]

Shiloh,

The metaphor that Peter uses does not accord with one who was transformed, but one who was unconverted returning to his old ways.

Your own wording defeats your argument. On cannot return to anything unless they had left it to begin with. An unbelever cannot return to being an unbeliever, unless there is a middle step. He was, was not, but now is again.

The metaphor that Peter uses does not accord with one who was transformed,

We are never transformed, we are always being transformed. This is a continuous process, a journey in this life. If you really want it to be past tense, then one is no longer in the land of the living.

He is still a sinner, and just like the dog who cannot help but act like a dog, the sinner cannot help but act like a sinner.

And that is precisely what we are, sinners. That status has never changed. We still possess our fallen human natures, we still sin, thus sinners.

A sinner who simply reforms his behavior to emulate "religion," cannot, and will not maintain that facade forever. He has no anchor, no root.

Really, you better look around you. the best substitute today for Christianity, relative to some of the bad habits is such things as AAA. People have kicked the habit for very long times. Many are not christians by their own admission. But the very sad fact is that many beleivers who entered into the Kingdom, did very little to end such habits. Some for a short time and fell back into that habit. A prime example of a believer falling from grace.

When times of trial and tribulation comes, his religious facade is exposed for what it is.

You are describing bone-fide believers who are falling, or unable to maintain their faith. They are like the first three seeds of the Parable of the seeds. Believed for a time, but never took root. Could not stand the hot sun of trial. Could not withstand the temptations and got overwhelmed. That is the most indicative of believers, and not unbelievers.

As for whether or not the false prophets were once believers or not, your assertion that they were, has no foundation. It is up to you to provide the foundation, and demonstrate that THIS passage is specifically referring to false teachers who are former believers. If you cannot, then the only position left is the default position, that is, that we are not talking about fallen Christians but of false teachers who have infiltrated the flock, and are posing as Christians.

We know that they will come from without and from within. Paul is concerned more of those from within because of the subleness of them. But one does not need to hide in the Body just to be a false teacher.

But the fact is, the metaphor of sheep in wolves clothing can only be referenced to those from within. Those that were believers. History has proven this beyond any shadow of a doubt.

In the early Church there were two false religions running parallel to Christianity. Judaism and Gnosticism. Both are outside false teachings.

However every single heresy that has come, and all heresies by definition, must come from within, have come from within the Church. All the false teachings were based on scripture. You can start with Arius, Nestorius, and go on. Every single one of these persons were believers. They were all baptised into the Body of Christ. That is the experience of the Church. It is the confirmation of what Paul warned about. It is the confirmation of other texts in scripture.

The "new creation" experience precludes a person from running back into sin.

Really. Look around you. the evidence is quite to the contrary. That would make Stalin a saved man, since he cannot possibly be lost due to his actions. Impossible to turn back.

The fact that we have so many professing Christians living in sin is not evidence of being backslidden, it is evidence of a false profession.

There is no such thing as a false profession. The profession is sincere, is heartfelt, is reliable, but it just may not last. That is the whole point. You have here another example of the parable of the sower. Those 'professions' were sincere as any of those who endured to the end.

You are using a lot of redefined words to support a supposition that just not exist in scriptue. You need to qualify defined words to skirt what they really mean just to make a square peg fit a round hole.

There are a lot of people who play church on Sunday, but live like the devil all during the week, and they are going to VERY surprised on the other side of the grave. I personally feel (and I cannot judge anyone) that there are much, much fewer Christians in the world than we think.

You don't even need to do it that way either, skip church altogether and live like saints during the week. Unbeleivers do it as well. Some of our best model citizens are not christians. Look around you. We are not the judge of who is or who is not. It may be clear that some are not, but we still cannot judge, unless they manifest it themselves, look at the text of Paul you used. Otherwise we need to take them as they are. They believed, confessed, repented and were baptised. They entered into the Kingdom, the Body of Christ. They are a believer as far as the Bible is concerned.

I think n where you and I differ, is that I don't believe a true Christian will abandon the Lord for the pleasure of sin.

There is that qualifier again. There is no such thing as a TRUE Christian in the sense you want to use it. The only TRUE one is a dead one. It can be confirmed by Christ himself and that individual upon death.

I believe that those who profess Christ, but live in sin are not Christians, and most likely never were. I do not believe that a person can be a Christian and enjoy sin.

You may be very right. But if they at any time professed and were baptised they are a believer until it either becomes apparant or until they declare it themselves.

Actually "falling from grace" has nothing to do with salvation. It is ironic that you would use this term, because Paul used "fallen from grace" to refer to the Galatians who felt their works determined their eternal destiny.

It is just one way to fall away. Thinking that you can save yourself, when Christ already accomplished it. It spoke to Judaizers who wanted to leave the early Christian faith. A very difficult transition to make, if you stop to think about it for moment.

Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

Yes, a very specific form of leaving the Body of Christ. Actually going back to another religion but in this case trying to accomplish what Christ did for mankind, which is only referenced in scripture as being saved by Grace. It specifically is speaking of Christ's work on the Cross. But there are many other ways to fall from Grace respective of our personal salvation that does not infer or require one to change religions.

Your own wording shows you do not understand the difference between the Gift and the persons response to that Gift. OSAS has nothing to do with the salvation of mankind, but only the saving of ones soul. The individual accepting the Gift of Christ which is offered to every person. One accepts or rejects. It is a free choice into, and man is free to change anytime before death.

These were people trying to be justified by the law in addition to believing in Jesus. These were not fornicators and adulterers. These were "law keepers" who were trying to please God in their own misguided way by keeping the law, by doing good works, thinking that they were insuring their salvation. By trying to be saved by their works, they had fallen from grace.

You are right about the justification, but that is still only one way to reject Christ. There are many beleivers who returned to those forms of sin as well. You cannot be saved when you fall into that kind of sin, habitually, causually, or otherwise.

One would think that you don't believe you need to keep the law either. Let me ask you about just one of these. Adultery is for the most part a reasoned event in the lives of those who commit this sin. Why is it that the rate of divorce today, in the US anyway, is the same percentage as it is outside of the Churches claiming Christianity? You said earlier that any sincere, TRUE, sincerely professed Christian cannot ever fall into this kind of sin. They just cannot do it and be a christian. Yet, the statistics of these is that they were members, and since most churches do use baptism as entrance, then all of these people carry the biblical definition of believers. Seems to speak volumes against your view.

[Guest shiloh357]

So let me get this straight. You are saying JESUS HIMSELF called Judas an apostle and a disciple, gave him power over unclean spirits, etc, and yet Judas wasn't a believer.

Yep.

That would make Jesus a liar. Because it is NOT POSSIBLE to be an apostle and not be a believer.

No, it just means that you don't know as much as you think you do. You always come off like you are going to set everyone else straight. Well I got news for you, bubba...

Friend, it is you who are reaching at straws and twisting the word to say what your dogma tells you it says.

Really... does a Christian also live as a thief? Nothing in Judas' character in any of the gospels ever demonsrated the heart of a believer. He was a man consumed with greed. Judas, was upset that Mary anointed Jesus' feet with expensive perfume in John 12.. If He was a believer, why would he be offended at an act of worship and adoration for Jesus?

Jesus called Judas a devil AFTER He had alreadly sent Judas out with the other apostles on their journey. Judas continuously proved through the gospel accounnts that he was a man consumed by greed. There is not one positive reference to Judas, nor one positive virtue displayed by Him anywhere in the Bible.

The story of Judas is the greatest story of missed opportunity, ever told. On the night that Judas betrayed Jesus, he was seated next to Jesus at the "seat of honor" at the Passover table. Jesus made sure that Judas was seated next to Him. Jesus knew what Judas would do, but Judas a man with the heart of satan himself, was allowed to get close to Jesus, to eat with Him, and even albeit temporarily have power over demons. It shows the mercy of the Lord that He would allow such a man in His circle. Judas was an imposter, and a thief who fooled and robbed the other disciples, but He did not fool Jesus. The Bible says nothing good about Judas. Jesus calls him a demon, meaning that his heart was filled with the things that filled satan's heart. He was a liar, a murderer, and a deciver.

And yes, God can even use a man like Judas. God is sovereign. He uses who He will for His purposes.

[Thaddaeus]

Shiloh,

It seems that you are really reaching with the whole Judas thing.

Hardly, Hazard did a great job of presenting the issue with even more evidence than I gave earlier.

On the other hand you have not presented one sentence of scripture that states explicitly that he was NEVER a believer, a disciple.

I think were your view gets skewered is the definition of what constitutes a believer based on scripture. You are simply trying to determine which might have made it to the end therefore confirmed that they only had a sincere profession, that all the rest who did not endure, were never saved in the first place. Since you don't really know, you must just play the judge and assume whith no solid evidence one way or the other.

It goes right back to a false premise. No one in the OSAS proponent group has ever shown, that I have seen, any evidence that we are saved, as in past tense, irrevocably in this life. None can find any text that overthrows the texts dealing with faith and that fact that we are saved through faith as believers.

Also, that this initial faith is a trust , held by God as a security to recieve it until the end when the full promise will be delievered as promised.

But the biggest error is not in understanding what defines a believer in the first place. Thus all this talk of losing salvation and the gymnastics to attempt to show who might have endured, thus sort of confirm it.

There is no real evidence that Judas was ever a believer, and his three year long thievery and greed is proof of that.

Wow, that is a real indictment of 100% of christians along with some other sins as well.

This leaves me with the obvious question. Do you beleive that Christians cannot sin?

[Guest shiloh357]

Your own wording defeats your argument. On cannot return to anything unless they had left it to begin with. An unbelever cannot return to being an unbeliever, unless there is a middle step. He was, was not, but now is again.

You are misquoting me. I did not say an unbeliver returns to being unbeliever. I said that an unbeliever who simply reforms his behavior will return to His sin. Try using my wording instead of making up nonsense and attributing to me.

We are never transformed, we are always being transformed. This is a continuous process, a journey in this life. If you really want it to be past tense, then one is no longer in the land of the living.

No, we are transformed instantly when we become New Creations, AND we are continuously, being changed/transformed more and more into the image of Christ on daily basis. I did not say that the transformation was a one time thing. The thing is that the Christian life is a daily renewing, a daily change of things in our lives that do not look like Jesus. The point I have made over and over again is that salvation is about transformation, from the old to the new. If this does not happen, then there is no basis for anyone to claim they are a Chistian. We cannot rely on empty professions.

Really, you better look around you. the best substitute today for Christianity, relative to some of the bad habits is such things as AAA. People have kicked the habit for very long times. Many are not christians by their own admission. But the very sad fact is that many beleivers who entered into the Kingdom, did very little to end such habits. Some for a short time and fell back into that habit. A prime example of a believer falling from grace.

No, it is prime example of a false profession.

You are describing bone-fide believers who are falling, or unable to maintain their faith. They are like the first three seeds of the Parable of the seeds. Believed for a time, but never took root. Could not stand the hot sun of trial. Could not withstand the temptations and got overwhelmed. That is the most indicative of believers, and not unbelievers.

No, I am describing people who had a false profession.

There is that qualifier again. There is no such thing as a TRUE Christian in the sense you want to use it. The only TRUE one is a dead one. It can be confirmed by Christ himself and that individual upon death.

Wrong again. I know I am a true Christian, because I have the Holy Spirit living in me. I know for a fact that when I die, I will be with Jesus. I am sorry you don't have that assurance. That is what trumps your position for me. I know I am saved, and I have the guarantor living on the inside of me. The Bible says that I can know I am saved (John 5:24, 1 John 5:11-13) I am sealed with the Holy Spirit, and I have the power of God at work on the inside of me. I don't have to wait and see where I will end up.

I am sorry that you don't have that assurance. You are trusting in your works, your flesh, your goodness (what the Bible calls "filthy rags), your effort, your strength, and maybe, just maybe you might make it in, but you'll never know. You'll never know if you have ever done enough. You don't know if you good enough, or not. What if your good enough today, but not good enough tomorrow. It is nothing but a crapshoot for you. You have to hope you die on a "good enough day." That is a lot of pressue, I mean any minute, one false move, and you have blown it. What if you forget about a sin to confess? Are you sure you got 'em all? You can't repent of a sin you forgot about, and according you folks, unrepented of sin is the ticket to hell. You have to sit hope that the scales tip in your favor, cause you don't know what will happen to you on the other side of the grave, do you? If I were you, I wouldn't be in any hurry to die, that is for sure.

Why in the world, would I want what you have? I have the full assurance based on the Word of God, that if I die tonight, I will be with Jesus. Why would I want to backwards and live in your world? You have no assurance that you are even saved this very minute, much less if you die later on tonight. I would never trade the assurance I have for the messed up "wait and see theology" you've got going on.

You can trust in your works, your strength, your effor, your flesh, if you want. I am a Christian, a TRUE Christian, and I will trust in Jesus, cause that's what true Christians do.

One would think that you don't believe you need to keep the law either. Let me ask you about just one of these. Adultery is for the most part a reasoned event in the lives of those who commit this sin. Why is it that the rate of divorce today, in the US anyway, is the same percentage as it is outside of the Churches claiming Christianity? You said earlier that any sincere, TRUE, sincerely professed Christian cannot ever fall into this kind of sin. They just cannot do it and be a christian. Yet, the statistics of these is that they were members, and since most churches do use baptism as entrance, then all of these people carry the biblical definition of believers. Seems to speak volumes against your view.

Your question starts off about adultery and then goes off into divorce. I did not say anything about divorce. I said adultery. I am talking about men and women going out on their spouses, and specifically I was referring to people who can do these kinds of things without any moral compunction about it. We can have a better debate when you learn how to correctly frame my position. I am getting tired you misprepresenting what I have said. Are you an adult? If so, do you think you could try to debate like one?

[Guest shiloh357]

You always come off like you are going to set everyone else straight. Well I got news for you, bubba...

Personally I think you are a hypocrite for this and the rest of your post. Its borderline blasphemy.

In fact, it directly contradicts Jesus' own teaching in another place, since he said satan can't cast out satan, else his kingdom would be divided.

---------------------------

But what is your response to this?

1 Timothy 4:1

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

The specific greek word translated "depart" here is:

aphistemi - to remove, instigate or revolt, desist, desert, depart(10x), draw away(1x), fall away(1x), away(1x) refrain(1x) withdraw self(1x)

Obviously one cannot desert/depart/revolt against something they aren't a part of to begin with.

No doubt you will now use your usual "I'm a better authority than your concordance" argument. But alas, I tried.

When you learn to grow up and act like adult, I will respond to you. From here on out I will not respond to your immature small minded garbage. You are a waste of time, and a waste of intelligence.