Do You Believe in "Once Saved, Always Saved"

[TomPJr]

Tom....do you even know what exegesis means? I'm asking that in all sincerity.

ex

[Thaddaeus]

to all,

Just a note regarding the comment relative to history.

If you are at all interested at what history has to say on the topic we can end the discussion and come to a final acceptance quite quick.

You will find not a shred of evidence relative to even an implication of OSAS. It was not even broached by some other individual all through history even as an eventually false teaching. The Church to this day has remained consistant and constant in the view that man is free, in fact Christ died to make you free just so you can have the free choice. A freedom you were created with. It is one of the primary faculties of man which separates us from animals and permits man to have communion with other. Not just with God but with our fellow man.

OSAS is quite a modern approach. It probably as a term has a couple of hundred years but with as many variations of interpretations as the number of people attempting to make that interpretation. None of the first Reformation reformers used the terminology. It developed from some of their doctrines. That is about as much history as you will find on the subject.

My guess is that it will continue to be formulated, reformulated and this view will never become anything but a hybrid for very small numbers of those who choose to accept it.

It surely is not the Gospel given as Jude says in verse 3. The Gospel given ONCE and for all, for all time.

[TomPJr]

I BET HALF THE PEOPLE WHO RESPOND TO THIS QUESTION DONT REALLY KNOW THE ANSWER DO THEY?

I was just reading in Hebrews today and was surprised to read something scarey in chapter 6, verse 4-6. "For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame." I am from a Mormon background, but am rediscovering God and so it may not be true, but this does appear to suggest that we can lose our salvation if we do it to ourselves. Does it not?

Shalom!!

First off... praise the L-rd that you came out of Mormonism and found the true G-d!

Secondly, yes, this means exactly what it says...we CAN walk away from our salvation and harden our hearts to reject Jesus and receive eternal damnation.

However, if we keep ourselves close to Jesus, walk in His Spirit and not harden our hearts, we need not fear, He will help us abide in Him and walk out our salvation unto eternal life.

Amen....

Satan wants us to think that we are eternally secure once we acknowledge Chirst. He wants us to have that security blanket that makes us feel like nothing we do can remove our names from the book of life.

man...he is pretty good at getting people to relax, and ignore the warnings in the bible! How clever...he can influence people to believe in God, and remain in their sins as an ultimate insult to God.

[TomPJr]

to all,

Just a note regarding the comment relative to history.

If you are at all interested at what history has to say on the topic we can end the discussion and come to a final acceptance quite quick.

You will find not a shred of evidence relative to even an implication of OSAS. It was not even broached by some other individual all through history even as an eventually false teaching. The Church to this day has remained consistant and constant in the view that man is free, in fact Christ died to make you free just so you can have the free choice. A freedom you were created with. It is one of the primary faculties of man which separates us from animals and permits man to have communion with other. Not just with God but with our fellow man.

OSAS is quite a modern approach. It probably as a term has a couple of hundred years but with as many variations of interpretations as the number of people attempting to make that interpretation. None of the first Reformation reformers used the terminology. It developed from some of their doctrines. That is about as much history as you will find on the subject.

My guess is that it will continue to be formulated, reformulated and this view will never become anything but a hybrid for very small numbers of those who choose to accept it.

It surely is not the Gospel given as Jude says in verse 3. The Gospel given ONCE and for all, for all time.

Satan is working hard to decieve the nations, so they will not be truly converted in their hearts.

[Ovedya]

to all,

Just a note regarding the comment relative to history.

If you are at all interested at what history has to say on the topic we can end the discussion and come to a final acceptance quite quick.

You will find not a shred of evidence relative to even an implication of OSAS. It was not even broached by some other individual all through history even as an eventually false teaching. The Church to this day has remained consistant and constant in the view that man is free, in fact Christ died to make you free just so you can have the free choice. A freedom you were created with. It is one of the primary faculties of man which separates us from animals and permits man to have communion with other. Not just with God but with our fellow man.

OSAS is quite a modern approach. It probably as a term has a couple of hundred years but with as many variations of interpretations as the number of people attempting to make that interpretation. None of the first Reformation reformers used the terminology. It developed from some of their doctrines. That is about as much history as you will find on the subject.

My guess is that it will continue to be formulated, reformulated and this view will never become anything but a hybrid for very small numbers of those who choose to accept it.

It surely is not the Gospel given as Jude says in verse 3. The Gospel given ONCE and for all, for all time.

Time is not the measure of authenticity. For centuries Christians gave exaltation to Mary - to equal stature and Christ - and yet in tems of history the Reformation is not that long ago.

Size and popularity is not the measure of authenticity. All the major reformations and signficant recoveries of vital Scriptural truths began with small unpopular groups of believers, many of whom were persecuted for their beliefs.

[Ovedya]

First, I know of only two groups, in total, in scripture relative salvation. They are believer and unbeliever. There is no gray area,. not in between. you either are or you are not.

The Scriptures are clear that one can call themselves a Christian and yet not posess the life that is consistent with being a true believer. Yes, there are only believers and unbelievers, but the tares in the kingdom are nominal Christians. They are Christians in name and in appearance, yet without the Triune God. (Matt. 13:25; 38; cf. 2 Pet. 2:13-14; 17-22; 2 Tim. 2:16-21)

Those you refer to as "not truly His followers" I would need to assume you actually mean unbelievers. If you are a follower of any kind, you are still a follower. You can be a weak follower, a new follower, a long term follower, a short term follower, but they are all followers. To say true follower, means absolutely nothing. All are true followers until they show otherwise, then they become a follower who has fallen away, no longer a follower, but has actually become an unbeliever. Can an unbeliever still be saved having once been a follower?

A true follower of Christ is one who follows Him because he is "of Him." Everybody knows the difference between having another life and being obedient to that life, and not having the life of God at all and simply following out of intellectual agreement. Going to church does not make one a Christian. Yet there are perhaps millions of people in the world that go to church because they believe it's "the right thing to do."

You are also correct in that Jesus never, NEVER, stated one can walk away from salvation. What He did say, is that no one has it guaranteed, UNLESS they remain faithful to that first initial faith. He does speak quite a bit on losing faith. Since we are saved THROUGH faith, faith is much more important than salvation. One leads to the other. Without faith, one does not inherit the promise. It is being reserved for you to see if you will be faithful to the end. I Pet 1:4-5.

What the Lord spoke about was those being faithless, those not having faith at all in the first place. The endurance of the saints produces eternal rewards, it does not produce salvation itslf. Salvation is secured the moment someone believes into the death of Christ.

Oh, but you just contradicted yourself by saying that "choice" is the thing that the sacrifice of Jesus is beholden to. Our "choice" to "walk away from salvation" is more powerful than the blood of Christ to save us despite ourselves. So the sacrifice of Christ must be weak.

First that is not what she stated. You are even paraphrasing her incorrectly. The Work of Christ on the Cross is a finished work. That man is able to choose either to be In Christ or without Christ has no bearing on the gift. The Gift, nor the power of the Gift is not relevant to what man does with that Gift.

The fact of the matter is, that He saved you as He did all of mankind, just so you could walk away or accept Him. That is His mercy, to save all, and justice so that you could determine your eternal fate, with or without Him.

Then that ability to make the determination - with or without the gift is superior to the gift itself - if that is true. Eternal life is either eternal or it is not. It has the power to save absolutely or it does not. If God's power to save is greater than man's flawed ability to choose Good (which it is), then there is no choice involved at all. God cannot be all-merciful and all-powerful if His eternal life (Which is His nature) is limited by man's flawed ability to choose.

[Openly Curious]

IF i remember correctly his covenant was to lead them to the promised land. He did that. They could see it. It didn't however say that that generation would take the promised land. That commandement was given at the river and was not followed. His covenant was fulfilled. He never promised moses that he would enter the promised land.

The Lord's covenant with Israel was to give them the promised land for their inheritance not just to lead them to it and not give it to them. The story is in Numbers. The Lord even gave them laws before hand to follow once they got into the promise land in how to live and all kind of things in the book of Leviticus. But that older generation did not believe they could take the promise land and chose to believe the evil report of the ten spies instead of believing and having faith that God would fight for them. For God even told them that he would drive them out little by little for them but no they would not believe and because of it that generation was completely cut off and disinherited never entering into the promise land because of their own unbelief. And because they broke their end of the covenant with God God did not honor His side of the covenant with them and God breached his covenant with that generation. Numbers 15:34

This very story in the book of Numbers was used in the New Testament for our example today if you will read in

1 Corinthians 10:1-13 as it says in verse #5 that some of them were "overthrown" in the wilderness being disinherited. Some of them were "overthrown" disinherited before they even got to the wilderness. Nadab and Abihu were two who were cut off when they offered up the strange fire on the altar of incense. You had the ones who were bitten by the serpents. The ones who were tricked by into fornication that was slain. Those ones that murmured were disinherited along the way never entering into the promised land. Verse #11 of the text says, "Now all these things happened unto them for examples "and they are written for our admonition" upon whom the ends of the world are come."

Also in Hebrews 3:7-19 it talks of that generation once again that was cut off in the wilderness and says of them in verse #19 "So we see that they could not enter in "because of unbelief." as God was grieved with that entire generation for 40 years and God swore they would never enter in because of their sin and broke his covenant with them as it told us in Numbers 15:34 you can read further in Hebrews 4 about entering into the rest of God.

Hebrews 3:11-12--"So I sware in my wrath, They shall not enter into my rest. Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God."

To depart one has to walk away from the Lord in unbelief.

OC

[EricH]

Ecclesiastes 12:13-14 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.

Our duty on this earth is to fear God and keep his commandments. This is the will of God.

Romans 12:1-2 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

Where a Christian will lose their salvation is when they do not live upto these two verses and others like them.

Maybe I am being dense here, but I do not see a statement about salvation, or the loss of it< in the immediate context of the passages you have cited here?

[Vickilynn]

God cannot be all-merciful and all-powerful if His eternal life (Which is His nature) is limited by man's flawed ability to choose.

Shalom Ovedya,

This is what I find so confusing. It is the OSAS that continually says G-d's power is limited, not the NOSAS.

In fact, those of us of NOSAS have said repeatedly that choice does not, limit, diminish, negate or in any way affect G-d's power. It simply is impossible to limit G-d's power. It cannot be done. G-d is all-powerful, there is nothing or no one that diminishes His power.

Choice is simply the ability to accept His salvation and abide in it or reject it. If one rejects G-d's gift of eternal life, that decision in no way changes G-d's power. The person simply refuses to take the gift. It doesn't make it any less powerful.

[EricH]

Ecclesiastes 12:13-14 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.

Our duty on this earth is to fear God and keep his commandments. This is the will of God.

Romans 12:1-2 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

Where a Christian will lose their salvation is when they do not live upto these two verses and others like them.

Maybe I am being dense here, but I do not see a statement about salvation, or the loss of it< in the immediate context of the passages you have cited here?

Hello Eric,

Usually what needs to be done to get a clearer understanding is correlating scriptures together. Now, if we look at Romans 12:1,2 we can see what the will of God is. When look this scripture -

Matthew 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

We can see that those who make it into are those who do the will of God. What happens to the Christians who don't do the will of God?

As I am looking at the Romans 12:1,2 passage and the Matthew 7:21 passage, I am struggling to see on what textual grounds you have made the logical connection.

The Matthew passage is a discussion of the expected results of the Christian life. Jesus begins the section by stating that the way to salvation is not the road most people take (Matthew 7:13-14). He then states that it is not only external adherance to a standard the defines one who knows Jesus, but a changed nature (Matthew 7:15). The expected result of this changed nature, according to Jesus, is the bearing of "good fruit" (Matthew 16-17). Jesus maintains that it is impossible for a bad tree (one who has not been changed by Jesus) to producer good fruit. It is also impossible for one who has been transformed by Jesus to bear bad fruit (Matthew 7:18-19). The verb for produce is in the present indicative active in the greek, indicating ongoing production of fruit.

Jesus now says in Matthew 7:21 that not everyone who calls Him lord, will enter the kingdom of heaven. It is rather those who do the will of God that will so inherit it.. Matthew not begins to define what doing God's will is and is not:

1. It is not simply accomplishing things for God (Matthew 7:22). Many believe that by doing things like prophesying, casting out demons, and perfroming miracles, that they are guaranteed a place in the Kingdom.

2. Jesus states that the primary way we accomplish God's will is by Knowing Jesus:

Then I will announce to them, 'I never knew you! Depart from Me, you lawbreakers!'

Matthew 7:24 HCSB.

Notice also that it says that those who do not do God's will, were "never know by God. It does not say - depart from me, I quit knowing you. It says I never know you.

So, you connecting of Matthew 7:21 and Romans 12:1,2 is not really supported from the text itself. We should really allow Matthew to define what he means by "the will of God". So, I don't really see how you could legitimately connect the 2. The only connection is that Romans gives us a method for determining God's will (renewing our minds). it does not say that this is a prerequisite for being saved. It says it is a method for discerning that will