Do You Believe in "Once Saved, Always Saved"

[apothanein kerdos]

I think you are reading way more into it than it says. The work of Christ will be completed, His plans cannot be stopped, they come to past, but we have to choose to come into agreement with the work He started in us. We all know God will follow through with His part of the agreement, but we must endure, and if we do wander we need to be brought back into repentance before death.

Where is this in the passage? Keep in mind that salvation is a covenant relationship. Salvation is not saying a prayer and then from then on we're thrown into the pool and by God we better learn to swim. By entering into this covenant we are allowing God to sanctify us (bring us back into the complete image of God). This passage states that He is faithful to begin a good work that HE STARTED in us. In other words, your theory is off the moment you think this covenant is two way. It's not - we respond, and God takes over from there. If our works have anything to do with us losing our salvation, then we believe in a works based salvation.

as you stated above...We must allow him...

and....

All covenants are two sided...both sides agree to something as in a contract or a marriage. Both sides agree to the terms. If one side fails to meet their part, they may have consequences. Gods promises come with a big "IF"

IF we confess and repent, he is faithfull and just to forgive us.

So how do you explain the passage I used? You keep avoiding that, and for good reason, you can't use your theory on this passage without abusing it's context.

Likewise, the contract we enter into, as I have shown, is for God to take over and sanctify us, to being the good work in us. There is no leaving this covenant.

[apothanein kerdos]

I think you are reading way more into it than it says. The work of Christ will be completed, His plans cannot be stopped, they come to past, but we have to choose to come into agreement with the work He started in us. We all know God will follow through with His part of the agreement, but we must endure, and if we do wander we need to be brought back into repentance before death.

Where is this in the passage? Keep in mind that salvation is a covenant relationship. Salvation is not saying a prayer and then from then on we're thrown into the pool and by God we better learn to swim. By entering into this covenant we are allowing God to sanctify us (bring us back into the complete image of God). This passage states that He is faithful to begin a good work that HE STARTED in us. In other words, your theory is off the moment you think this covenant is two way. It's not - we respond, and God takes over from there. If our works have anything to do with us losing our salvation, then we believe in a works based salvation.

I've looking at the greek of covenant and it says nothing about it being one way . . . most definitions indicate it is a two way agreement.

Mate...covenant is an idea, not a definition. Try again.

[TomPJr]

I think you are reading way more into it than it says. The work of Christ will be completed, His plans cannot be stopped, they come to past, but we have to choose to come into agreement with the work He started in us. We all know God will follow through with His part of the agreement, but we must endure, and if we do wander we need to be brought back into repentance before death.

Where is this in the passage? Keep in mind that salvation is a covenant relationship. Salvation is not saying a prayer and then from then on we're thrown into the pool and by God we better learn to swim. By entering into this covenant we are allowing God to sanctify us (bring us back into the complete image of God). This passage states that He is faithful to begin a good work that HE STARTED in us. In other words, your theory is off the moment you think this covenant is two way. It's not - we respond, and God takes over from there. If our works have anything to do with us losing our salvation, then we believe in a works based salvation.

as you stated above...We must allow him...

and....

All covenants are two sided...both sides agree to something as in a contract or a marriage. Both sides agree to the terms. If one side fails to meet their part, they may have consequences. Gods promises come with a big "IF"

IF we confess and repent, he is faithfull and just to forgive us.

So how do you explain the passage I mistranslated? You keep avoiding that, and for good reason, you can't use your theory on this passage without abusing it's context.

Likewise, the contract we enter into, as I have shown, is for God to take over and sanctify us, to being the good work in us. There is no leaving this covenant.

I'm not sure which passage you are refering to...I will be glad to read it and translate it for you...

God does not take over us unless we allow him to, and even then we still have the option of taking back the steering wheel.

If you cannot break the covenant, then why does God talk about breaking it? It's just like Marriage. you can commit adultery and break your marriage covenant. Gods relationship to us is a marriage, and we are the bride. We have the free will to commit adultery.

[AMB]

I think you are reading way more into it than it says. The work of Christ will be completed, His plans cannot be stopped, they come to past, but we have to choose to come into agreement with the work He started in us. We all know God will follow through with His part of the agreement, but we must endure, and if we do wander we need to be brought back into repentance before death.

Where is this in the passage? Keep in mind that salvation is a covenant relationship. Salvation is not saying a prayer and then from then on we're thrown into the pool and by God we better learn to swim. By entering into this covenant we are allowing God to sanctify us (bring us back into the complete image of God). This passage states that He is faithful to begin a good work that HE STARTED in us. In other words, your theory is off the moment you think this covenant is two way. It's not - we respond, and God takes over from there. If our works have anything to do with us losing our salvation, then we believe in a works based salvation.

I've looking at the greek of covenant and it says nothing about it being one way . . . most definitions indicate it is a two way agreement.

Mate...covenant is an idea, not a definition. Try again.

Are you serious? all that we are discussing is surrounded by the use of words, a common language. if we don't have the same basis or foundation of meaning how could we ever get anywhere . . . lol, as if we are getting anywhere. Thanks for the enlightened response, obviously we look at covenant differently and your view of it is so clear, or should I say your "idea" of it is so clear from your response that it is much clearer to me now. thank you for that.

in reality it would be nice if you could show me differently so I can grow. Thanks Mate.

So why are we referred to as the bride if we have no part after the wedding . . . He just completes it all, without any choice, even in adultry. Wouldn't that be taking the power from God, I am saved and I deny Christ for whatever reason I cannot fathom, but He's got to complete what He started.

Have any of you long term members ever had any "major" revelations or changes to your beliefs while you've been on here? I am not talking about just new information but actual changes in how you thought about a something with conviction. you could pm me on that if you would like so as not to side track this discussion

thanks I've enjoyed enjoyed the comments from both sides that have been in the spirit of teaching and in learning.

[apothanein kerdos]

I'm not sure which passage you are refering to...I will be glad to read it and translate it for you...

Philippians 1:6...the one that I already interpreted.

God does not take over us unless we allow him to, and even then we still have the option of taking back the steering wheel.

So we're more powerful than God.

If you cannot break the covenant, then why does God talk about breaking it? It's just like Marriage. you can commit adultery and break your marriage covenant. Gods relationship to us is a marriage, and we are the bride. We have the free will to commit adultery.

This assumes God allows the split. As we have seen, He does not.

[apothanein kerdos]

in reality it would be nice if you could show me differently so I can grow.

Name one covenant in the Bible where the person or people had the choice in accepting it once they had entered in, or at least accepted the initial point of coming into the covenant. Israel is a perfect example - no matter how much they sinned and rejected God, He FORCED them to come back to Him.

When you enter into a covenant with God, you lose your right to walk away....THAT is love. The reason He does that is that, because we are fallen, we would reject Him on a daily basis.

[Thaddaeus]

apothanein kerdos,

Name one covenant in the Bible where the person or people had the choice in accepting it once they had entered in, or at least accepted the initial point of coming into the covenant. Israel is a perfect example - no matter how much they sinned and rejected God, He FORCED them to come back to Him.

Every single covenant in the Bible is a two way, mutual agreeement. It is the very meaning of the word, covenant. If it were not a covenent then some other word would be used as, forced arrangement, a slave relationship, or dictatorship, etc.

Yes, Isreal departed many times. The fact they departed speaks against the view that it cannot happen. God calls back, but not all Isreal came back. It eventually got so bad that we have a dark age of almost 400 years of no revelation until Christ comes on the scene.

Then in in front of the temple He explains quite vividly what will happen to that Temple because of unbelief, stubborness, outright rejection of Christ. If you think that the fall of Jeruselem is God simply calling Jews back, and that the staving of thousands of heads along the wall is chastisement, I think you better revisit history and the Bible regarding what constitutes chastisment and punishment.

It never says God forced them back. They were sent off to Babylon to think about their wayward ways. I'm sure many repented, but many did not. Even, the wandering in the desert for 40 years is not chastisement, but punishment for disobedience. Again, many repented, but not all.

When you enter into a covenant with God, you lose your right to walk away....THAT is love. The reason He does that is that, because we are fallen, we would reject Him on a daily basis.

Words are used because they convey meaning. The meanings don't change the context, but context can sometimes change meanings. But if what you say is true, I really like that meaning. I can take out a contract, a mortgage with the bank and as soon as I make it with them, they take it over. I don't need to contribute anything to that covenant. In legalize, that word is still used more often than not for legal agreements. Do you know of any that are not mutual, that do not have conditions for BOTH sides?

The bible never speaks of losing salvation. It never speaks of having it guaranteed either. But salvaton of our souls is through faith. No faith, no salvation. Thus when we read of losing faith, you have lost salvation. If you do not abide in Christ, you do not have salvation. Only two books in the NT does not have some verse in it that chides believers to hold faith, to guard faith, to persevere or to instruct to do something or lose either faith, or God's love, or God's support.

One cannot hate His brother and love God.

And you call bondage love? Have you ever read I Cor 13. Is there any force in that whole chapter. Who holds you in a marriage contract. It is the wife or the husband by your view? Once entered into, someone must hold the other by force, that is love, so you say.

So we're more powerful than God.

Hardly. God created us free. It is the way we are supposed to be. That is why it is so unbiblical to say otherwise. God created us free, in His Image. To love freely, to serve, to work with Him. This is what Adam was doing freely.

The problem is that Adam used that freedom to reject and plunged the world into death and sin. In that state man's union, working, having any communion with God was precluded. But Christ freed mankind from the bondage to death and sin, the judgment against Adam, just so you could be free again, to fulfill your created mandate, to be free and choose freely to love or reject God. You will be held accountable for that free choice. It is what the judgment is based on. Nothing else.

If our works have anything to do with us losing our salvation, then we believe in a works based salvation.

It has nothing to do in getting it nor losing it. In fact man has no imput whatsoever in his salvtion from the fall. The Bible distinquishes between salvation from the fall, because the fall precluded the spiritual union with God, (the thing we fell from, due to the fall.) Christ corrected the fall, so that we could continue as humans to work with Him through faith, freely. We were created to save ourselves. The ultimate goal of God through Christ was to correct the fall, so we as humans could be in union once again. We do this through faith and it is freely made, accepted, and rejected at any time. Our human natues does not flip between having a will and not having one. That is an impossibility. If we ever had one, we always will have one. The fall did not destroy anything in man, it simply distorted, clouded our ability. We never lost the ability completely.

[AMB]

apothanein kerdos,

Name one covenant in the Bible where the person or people had the choice in accepting it once they had entered in, or at least accepted the initial point of coming into the covenant. Israel is a perfect example - no matter how much they sinned and rejected God, He FORCED them to come back to Him.

Every single covenant in the Bible is a two way, mutual agreeement. It is the very meaning of the word, covenant. If it were not a covenent then some other word would be used as, forced arrangement, a slave relationship, or dictatorship, etc.

Yes, Isreal departed many times. The fact they departed speaks against the view that it cannot happen. God calls back, but not all Isreal came back. It eventually got so bad that we have a dark age of almost 400 years of no revelation until Christ comes on the scene.

Then in in front of the temple He explains quite vividly what will happen to that Temple because of unbelief, stubborness, outright rejection of Christ. If you think that the fall of Jeruselem is God simply calling Jews back, and that the staving of thousands of heads along the wall is chastisement, I think you better revisit history and the Bible regarding what constitutes chastisment and punishment.

It never says God forced them back. They were sent off to Babylon to think about their wayward ways. I'm sure many repented, but many did not. Even, the wandering in the desert for 40 years is not chastisement, but punishment for disobedience. Again, many repented, but not all.

When you enter into a covenant with God, you lose your right to walk away....THAT is love. The reason He does that is that, because we are fallen, we would reject Him on a daily basis.

Words are used because they convey meaning. The meanings don't change the context, but context can sometimes change meanings. But if what you say is true, I really like that meaning. I can take out a contract, a mortgage with the bank and as soon as I make it with them, they take it over. I don't need to contribute anything to that covenant. In legalize, that word is still used more often than not for legal agreements. Do you know of any that are not mutual, that do not have conditions for BOTH sides?

The bible never speaks of losing salvation. It never speaks of having it guaranteed either. But salvaton of our souls is through faith. No faith, no salvation. Thus when we read of losing faith, you have lost salvation. If you do not abide in Christ, you do not have salvation. Only two books in the NT does not have some verse in it that chides believers to hold faith, to guard faith, to persevere or to instruct to do something or lose either faith, or God's love, or God's support.

One cannot hate His brother and love God.

And you call bondage love? Have you ever read I Cor 13. Is there any force in that whole chapter. Who holds you in a marriage contract. It is the wife or the husband by your view? Once entered into, someone must hold the other by force, that is love, so you say.

So we're more powerful than God.

Hardly. God created us free. It is the way we are supposed to be. That is why it is so unbiblical to say otherwise. God created us free, in His Image. To love freely, to serve, to work with Him. This is what Adam was doing freely.

The problem is that Adam used that freedom to reject and plunged the world into death and sin. In that state man's union, working, having any communion with God was precluded. But Christ freed mankind from the bondage to death and sin, the judgment against Adam, just so you could be free again, to fulfill your created mandate, to be free and choose freely to love or reject God. You will be held accountable for that free choice. It is what the judgment is based on. Nothing else.

If our works have anything to do with us losing our salvation, then we believe in a works based salvation.

It has nothing to do in getting it nor losing it. In fact man has no imput whatsoever in his salvtion from the fall. The Bible distinquishes between salvation from the fall, because the fall precluded the spiritual union with God, (the thing we fell from, due to the fall.) Christ corrected the fall, so that we could continue as humans to work with Him through faith, freely. We were created to save ourselves. The ultimate goal of God through Christ was to correct the fall, so we as humans could be in union once again. We do this through faith and it is freely made, accepted, and rejected at any time. Our human natues does not flip between having a will and not having one. That is an impossibility. If we ever had one, we always will have one. The fall did not destroy anything in man, it simply distorted, clouded our ability. We never lost the ability completely.

Amen.

[AMB]

in reality it would be nice if you could show me differently so I can grow.

Name one covenant in the Bible where the person or people had the choice in accepting it once they had entered in, or at least accepted the initial point of coming into the covenant. Israel is a perfect example - no matter how much they sinned and rejected God, He FORCED them to come back to Him.

When you enter into a covenant with God, you lose your right to walk away....THAT is love. The reason He does that is that, because we are fallen, we would reject Him on a daily basis.

"You lose your right to walk away" . . . did you hear what you just wrote? "THAT is love" . . . please show me one scripture that says "THAT" is love. wow.

[apothanein kerdos]

Two words that answer this whole "free will" and "God lets you walk away from the covenant, it's a two way street":

Abraham

Gomer

God FORCED Israel to come back, whilst punishing them in the process as well. The covenant is still alive. Imagine if He didn't force Israel to keep their covenant...Jesus never would have been born.