Topic: How can a save person, lose salvation? (Read 4347 times)

Joel · « **Reply #1 on:** July 04, 2007, 04:23:33 AM »

Welcome to the board luvmaybe!!!

Do you mean a *saved* person?

luvmaybe · « **Reply #2 on:** July 04, 2007, 01:37:51 PM »

Yes, a saved person. How can one lose salvation?
I read and study the bible, but I do not find losing salvation is possible.
I know you can reject salvation, but onced you are sealed there is no way.
-Ephesians 1:13 having also believed you were sealed in him with the holy spirit of promise
-1 John 2:25 this is the promise which he himself made to us eternal life
-1 John 3:2 Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be. We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is
-1 John 4:4 You are from God, little children, and have overcome them; because greater is He who is in you than he who is in the world
-Romans 8:29 For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined [to become] conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren

-Hebrews 10:26 For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins
-Matthew 13:25 But while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went away

Doesn't the parables of the wheat and tares tells us that they can grow together but they will be separated at the time of the harvest and one belongs in the barn and the other to be burn which only means they were never a wheat from the very beginning if they are not save it only means that tares always tares?

-Matthew 13:27 The slaves of the landowner came and said to him, 'Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have tares?
-Matthew 13:28 And he said to them, 'An enemy has done this!' The slaves said to him, 'Do you want us, then, to go and gather them up?
-Matthew 13:29 But he said, 'No; for while you are gathering up the tares, you may uproot the wheat with them
-Matthew 13:30 'Allow both to grow together until the harvest; and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers, "First gather up the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them up; but gather the wheat into my barn."

-Hebrews 10:27 but a terrifying expectation of judgment and THE FURY OF A FIRE WHICH WILL CONSUME THE ADVERSARIES.

rareairpug · « **Reply #3 on:** July 04, 2007, 06:46:07 PM »

Hi luvmaybe!

What about Hebrews 6:4-6?

g · « **Reply #4 on:** July 04, 2007, 07:41:28 PM »

Quote from: luvmaybe on July 03, 2007, 10:44:40 PM

I lost my keys once, but don't see a parallel to that and salvation :) Seriously, should you not argue first and prove that you are saved (whatever that means) before you debate if you can "lose" it?

Regards,
George

luvmaybe · « **Reply #5 on:** July 05, 2007, 06:12:55 AM »

Quote from: g on July 04, 2007, 07:41:28 PM

Quote from: luvmaybe on July 03, 2007, 10:44:40 PM

I lost my keys once, but don't see a parallel to that and salvation :) Seriously, should you not argue first and prove that you are saved (whatever that means) before you debate if you can "lose" it?

Regards,
George

I do not have to argue if I am save, because I am and have accepted the Lord Jesus as my Lord and Savior since I was nine.

luvmaybe · « **Reply #6 on:** July 05, 2007, 06:49:30 AM »

Quote from: rareairpug on July 04, 2007, 06:46:07 PM

Hi luvmaybe!

What about Hebrews 6:4-6?

-Hebrews 6: 4 For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit,
-5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come,
-6and [then] have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame

How about the illegitimate sons?

-Hebrews 12:8 But if you are without discipline, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate children and not sons

>all have become partakers, it does not mean they are real sons, but illegitimate> meaning they were never saved from the beginning.

How about the parables of the sower?

Matthew 13:10

It explains how the seeds were recieved; wayside, stoney, thorns, and the good ground.
>I believe some have once been enlightened and have tasted the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit or have tasted the good word of God
>But it explains in Hebrew 12:8
>they were illegitimate and not real sons
>tares always tares and wheat is always wheat
>they can grow together, but they will be separated at the harvest (end time).
>wheat belongs in His barn and tares in the lake of fire

The person who is saved will remain saved to the end and those who are not, were not really saved from the very beginning and therefore they could not remain to be saved.

Joel · « **Reply #7 on:** July 05, 2007, 03:54:05 PM »

Rare,
if you take those Hebrews passages to heart, you must believe that if one turns his back on the Lord (even if only briefly), he has no chance of getting back in good with God.

You really need to rethink this buddy.

Anthony Horvath · « **Reply #8 on:** July 05, 2007, 09:27:17 PM »

What's your solution, here Joel? NOT take the passages to heart?

Joel · « **Reply #9 on:** July 06, 2007, 04:06:02 AM »

"What's your solution, here Joel? NOT take the passages to heart?"

I am not a Hebrew.

Anthony Horvath · « **Reply #10 on:** July 06, 2007, 06:44:18 AM »

hehheh

So, let me see. Today's Jewish Christians are still under the Hebrews 6 threat? And what happens if it turns out that Paul wrote Hebrews?

Joel · « **Reply #11 on:** July 06, 2007, 08:57:39 AM »

"And what happens if it turns out that Paul wrote Hebrews?"

Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles Paul? he he? It's possible he did. That doesn't change the fact that is written to the Hebrews everybit as much as James was written to the 12 tribes.

More later.

Anthony Horvath · « **Reply #12 on:** July 06, 2007, 12:49:13 PM »

Yea, it is possible he did. That would throw a kink in the whole 'exclusively to the Gentiles' thing. Couldn't you extend this reasoning to say that the book of Romans applies only to the Romans? And what about in Galatians where Paul says there is only one gospel and argues with Peter for participating in Christian-Jew legalism? He didn't say "Peter, what are you doing. You know you're still a Jew- you must continue to conform to the Jewish law." That seemed to be the opposite of the situation.

luvmaybe · « **Reply #13 on:** July 06, 2007, 04:01:30 PM »

Isn't the bible the holy word of God and is written for all of us to know the truth? :)

Joel · « **Reply #14 on:** July 06, 2007, 04:15:18 PM »

"Isn't the bible the holy word of God and is written for all of us to know the truth?" :)

Yes, but what was true or truth for some in the scriptures isn't true or truth for everybody. I like to say it is all for us, to learn from and understand Gods dealings with mankind through the ages, it's just not all too us.

Every promise in the book is not mine, or yours.

Anthony Horvath · « **Reply #15 on:** July 06, 2007, 04:55:49 PM »

Sure, Joel. On the other hand, it seems plausible that SOME of the promises are shared, especially in regards to the fruit of Christ's death and resurrection? And also the consequences? Is Heb 6 still on the table as a 'promise' for the 'Hebrews'? If it applies only to them, does that mean I am welcome to 'taste God's goodness' and then fall away as often as I like? For me, this 'promise' doesn't apply, but for the poor Hebrew convert to Christianity, he's toast? Help me out here.

Joel · « **Reply #16 on:** July 07, 2007, 03:55:48 PM »

"Yea, it is possible he did. That would throw a kink in the whole 'exclusively to the Gentiles' thing. "

Where do you get this exclusively thing?
Paul was Chosen by God to bear the name of the Lord "before gentiles, Kings, and the Children of Israel". Acts 9:15

He did too. He preached to the Jews first, his message to the Jews was to get them to believe"that He is the Son of God" Acts 9-20, and many believed that Jesus was the promised Christ, Israels King. Paul spent a great deal of time going to the Israelites... Acts 28:17-31 tells a little of the end of his troublesome ministry to the jews.

Later, in Ephesians 3-8 for one example we learn another aspect of Pauls calling, (to the gentiles) 8 "Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;
9And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:
10To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,

Pauls message to them, the "preaching of the cross" "by grace you have been saved through faith not of works etc" "you who were far off brought near by the blood of Christ" "Christ Crucified " "God in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself"

A rather large change in sermons from someone called by God to go to different peoples you must admit.

"Couldn't you extend this reasoning to say that the book of Romans applies only to the Romans?"

Romans 1:7 tells us who it is written too "To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ."

Now since I wasn't there to recieve this letter in person, I have trusted God to have put His word into my hand here, much later. When reading our letters from God I see that my messenger is the Apostle to the Gentiles Paul, and will accept only doctrine from his writtings. The other guys had a different message for a different people. When you mix them up, you have confused Christians, religons, sharp tongued and penned know-it-alls and theologians.

gal. 2:7...But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

8(For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)

9And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

get it? Paul to the Gentiles with gospel of the uncircumcision, Peter and gang to Israelites (the circumcised) with gospel of circumcision. 2 called by God to go to 2 different peoples with 2 different messages.

Anthony Horvath · « **Reply #17 on:** July 08, 2007, 09:12:32 AM »

The exclusivity thing comes from your own posts. In our last go, I bent over backwards to show that Paul made it a habit, as seen in Acts, of going to the Jews- and then to the gentiles. This seemed to roll right off you, which I found flabbergasting. It would please me to know end to know that this isn't your position. I also showed how Paul gave into the Jews and allowed Timothy to be circumcised (Acts 16:1), how Paul did baptize (1 Cor 1), and this is important, given your claim repeated in your last post:

Quote

When reading our letters from God I see that my messenger is the Apostle to the Gentiles Paul, and will accept only doctrine from his writtings. The other guys had a different message for a different people.

I also showed how their messages were, in fact, identical.

Your passage from Ephesians already stands against you. You quoted:

"9And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery"

I have bolded the refutation.

I think choosing Ephesians 3 is the worst thing to do, as it tells us what the mystery is:

"This mystery is that through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus."

I find it positively shocking that the dividing wall between the Gentiles and the Jew that was torn down by the Gospel of Christ is in fact the same one that you manage to re-erect.

What is so ambiguous about 'heirs together' 'members together of one body' and 'sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus.'?

But back to the common message. It isn't like we can't evaluate the message from both Paul and Peter and mark off the similarities. But even more impressively, we have their own word for it, especially in regards to whether or not there are two groups....

First, start in Acts 15, where some believers who were Jews insisted that the Gentiles must be circumcised. PETER, not Paul, responds:

"Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe." PETER, NOT PAUL. "God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. He made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are."

Note the bold, all by PETER, and this passage follows with Paul finally telling his own examples of working among the Gentiles.

Earlier, PETER justifies his actions (Acts 11:17) "So if God gave them the same gift he gave us, who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to think that I could oppose God?"

Perhaps you and I have different understandings about what the words 'same' no distinction' 'all men' mean. We would almost believe that, going back to Ephesians, only the gentiles are saved by faith and not by works (2:8-9), but the Jews still have to work their tails off... except we see that while this was a struggle for the Jews (who were used to trying to work their tails off for righteousness), they eventually came down on the side of grace- the Acts passages above.

I have no objections to the notion that Paul had a mission primarily to the Gentiles and Peter primarily to the Jews. This seems to be the case, but also it seems to have been nothing more than a matter of strategy. There is no hint that there was a different message for the two groups... that would be a different gospel.

A lovely example of this at work would be in Acts 13:16-52 where Paul gives a sermon. Who heard the sermon? It tells us. "Men of Israel and you Gentiles who worship God...!"

That's both groups. By your view, we should expect a different message from Paul for each of them. Is this what we see? No.

"Brothers, children of Abraham, and you God-fearing Gentiles, it is to us that this message of salvation has been sent."

NOT messageS of salvation. THIS message of salvation. Continuing.

"Therefore, my brothers, I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. through him everyone who believes is justified from everything you could not be justified from by the law of Moses."

And what of the immediate aftermath:

"When the congregation was dismissed, many of the Jews and devout converts to Judaism followed Paul and Barnabas, who talked with them and urged them to continue in the grace of God."

One message for both groups.

Zagzagel · « **Reply #18 on:** July 10, 2007, 10:41:07 PM »

To me, the story of creation is a love story. I can and will save what I love. :)

Zagzagel · « **Reply #19 on:** July 20, 2007, 07:37:43 PM »

I just read sntj's last post. I applaud him. I think he learned a great deal from me!! haha

Author Topic: How can a save person, lose salvation? (Read 4347 times)