Once Saved Always Saved

[BloodBought 1953]

You escape on a technicality. I have shown that the concept of repenting of your sins to be saved is indeed found in holy scripture. Because you require the exact words you don't have to pay up. But you lose the argument; because the concept is there in holy scripture.

I don’t need to use any technicality to “escape”.....many people , perhaps you, are Repenting their way to Hell....
We are Saved by our Faith in the Shed Blood Of Jesus Plus Nothing......
Repentance is Great....Saved people do it quite often .....it never Saved these people nor did it Keep them Saved......
If you are putting your Faith in your ability to Repent Of Sins instead of putting your Faith in Christ Alone.....you are Damned.....

 

[BloodBought 1953]

According to you, if someone repents of their sins they are lost because of it...this kind of thinking is highly skewed.


Yeah ,right.Even “YOU” know that I ain’t “ that” stupid......Here is the TRUTH—-AGAIN!
If somebody Repents Of their Sins, they have done a positive thing....it just doesn’t Save them.....Anybody can “turn over a New Leaf” and the only thing that will happen is that the person will become more Moral.....never a bad thing, but Hell is Chock- Full Of “ Moral” men and women....
I bet you are a VERY Moral man......congrats ! That is Good News! The BAD News , however is that “ moral” just wont get it......You must be PERFECT to get to Heaven.....of course , Nobody is “ perfect”, but God will “Consider” you Perfect if you Trust Him Alone to Save you....that means you must exclude such “ ADD-ONS” like “ Lucky Repentance”......

 

[Wrangler]

What DID change, was, the LAW WAS FULFILLED, and VIOLATIONS AGAINST the LAW, carry NO PUNISHMENTS. (For those not under the law)....
Scripture is Clear, Converted men CAN NOT SIN

I am shocked at some of the doctrinal things I read on this forum.

 

[BloodBought 1953]

If just seeing a hot chick wasn't a sin for Jesus, then it isn't for me either. But I guess if you think it is for you, then so be it. Just don't project that on the rest of us, okay? I'm going with Jesus on this one, thank you.


I never said that.Neither did Jesus .He said to LOOK with LUST was committing Adultery in one’s heart One again , the point is this —- and this “ point” was directed at self- Righteous Pharisees in the crowd that thought that they were “ good to go” because they never committed Adultery.....Jesus was busting “ self-Righteous balloons” in His Sermon .....revealing to them the True Jeopardy that they were in.....they were very well- versed in keeping the Letter Of The Law.....they failed to understand that the Spirit Of The Law was just as important....
Anybody that left that Sermon that day that did not feel “Convicted Of Sin” was Spiritually Blind and had a REAL Problem.....it was the entire purpose of the Sermon .....to get people off of their self- Righteous pedestals and on their knees......They were ALL Sinners who needed a Savior.....That Savior was Right there with them.....they needed to Believe in Him, or continue to live in the “ Fool’s Paradise” —- that place where people think they are “ good enough”to merit Heaven because they have done a good job of Keeping the Law.....Jesus preached His Sermon to set them Straight....People STILL need to be “ set straight” .....Has it happened to you?

 

[FHII]

OSAS is not calvinist. thats your FIRST mistake

FINALLY SOMEONE GETS THAT!!! I'VE BEEN WAITING FOR YEARS!!!!

Now EG... Is epigosis in Hebrews 10:26 a "moot" point or is is a "mute" point? I wait with giddy anticipation!

 

[BloodBought 1953]

I dont need protection from them.
I didnt get lost in them.
But many have., and that is why they teach you that you can lose your salvation.
See, when you get lost in those 3 Epistles, you never come out again, as anything other then a devout "fallen from Grace", Galatians 1:8 LEGALIST.

Hey Behold, my good friend.....What does “ Fallen From From Grace” mean to you.....Some say that It is a loss of Salvation....some say the ones that “TEACH” False , Perverted so- called Gospels are damned and I Buy that because Gal 1:8 clearly say that they are “Accursed”—- a polite way to say one is damned. On the other hand , those that merely “ fall “ for Gospel Additions are not Damned but just go on to live a “ Crippled” Faith Walk—- Some say they are damned also.....I have always been curious as to what your “ take” on all of this is.....got time to respond? God has blessed you—- May He continue to do so.....

 

[BloodBought 1953]

His sin is his rejection of Christ.

Got any evidence for that ?

 

[BreadOfLife]

Concerning epignosis.

It should be clear that if anyone believes on Jesus they have everlasting life (John 6:47).

Nevertheless, in Luke 8:13, we find the example of someone who "believes for a while and then falls away".

Does a person who falls away continue to have everlasting life?

I think that to say that they do would be to teach heresy.

So, there must be a different reconciliation for this apparent contradiction (because if they have everlasting life, they have life that can never come to an end...otherwise it would have been defined as temporal).

The answer is that the Luke 8:13 believer has mere mental assent...a nominal, lukewarm, or shallow faith.

While the person who has everlasting life (John 6:47) has a heart faith that is unto righteousness (Romans 10:10) and enduring to the end (Matthew 10:22, Hebrews 3:6, Hebrews 3:14).

No - a person who falls away no longer has everlasting life.

If somebody gave me a brand new car - it's a gift and it's mine.
HOWEVER - if I wreck that car - then I no longer have a beautifaul car.

Similarly, Paul speaks of those who make a "shipwreck of their faith" (1 Tim. 1:19).

It's not rocket science: Either you REMAIN faithful to the end - or you don't (Matt. 7:19-23, Matt. 10:22, Matt. 24:13, Matt. 25:31–46, John 15:1-6, Rom. 11:22, 1 Cor. 4:4, 1 Cor. 9:27, 1 Cor. 10:12, 1 Tim. 4:1, 1 Tim. 4:16, 2 Tim. 2:12, Heb. 3:6, Heb. 3:12-14, Heb 6:4-6, Heb. 10:26-27, 2 Pet. 2:20-21, 2 Pet. 3:17, 1 John 2:24, 1 John 5:13, Rev. 3:5, Rev. 22:19)

 

[Taken]

Here's where Paul talks about believers sinning....

Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body. Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your bodies. 1 Corinthians 6:18-20​

I don't think he's lying. Believers can sin.

I do not think Scripture is at all a lie, and have never said it was.

In Context...
If you have ever listened to a preacher speak to "a crowd", "a congregation", do you consider...
One Speaker...speaking to every age, every gender, believers, doubters, converted, nonbelievers, etc.
Do you think every word spoken by one person applies to every person listening?

It appears every time "sin" is mentioned in Scripture, you claim it for yourself.

I don't. I claim what the Lord God Offered and I Elected to Receive and He IS Faithful and Gave to me.

1 John 3:
[9] Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

The Lord Offered I could be ^ That Whosoever, and I accepted His Offer.

So do you think this verse is a lie?

All Scripture is True, but All Scripture does not Apply to All Persons.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Taken]

I am shocked at some of the doctrinal things I read on this forum.

1 John 3:
[9] Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

I'm shocked that people make claims as if every verse in Scripture applies to them.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Nothing to bone up in.

Your interpretation is still lacking. Epignoses says they have RECEIVED the knowledge of truth (epignosis fits. Because they have heard there word of truth the gospel of their salvation or the complete gospel which is the knowledge of truth)

it still says they RECIEVED (lambano - to receive, to lay hands on. to take.)

nothing in the passage says they actually entrusted their eternity to it. ie. the word faith is not in the passage.

You think you have a slam dunk, even the greek does not support your slam dunk.

And your talking about one passage. When your ready to talk about the whole of scripture. (because far to many other passage reject your notion) Come talk to me (we have been here before remember?)

WRONG.

As I have shown repeatedly - the very word, "Epignosis" already connotes that the person had FAITH.
This is the FOURTH time I have had to present this scholarly linguistic evidence - so pay attention:

Richard Chenevix Trench
“In comparing epignosis with gnosis, the “epi” must be regarded as an intensive use of a preposition that gives the compound word a greater strength than the simple word alone possesses” (Synonyms of the New Testament, page 300).

Quoting Culverwell, he writes, “Epignosis and gnosis differ. Epignosis is the complete comprehension after the first knowledge (gnosin) of a matter. It is bringing me better acquainted with a thing I knew before; a more exact viewing of an object that I saw before afar off. That little portion of knowledge which we had here shall be much improved, our eye shall be raised to see the things more strongly and clearly” (Synonyms of the New Testament, page 300).

He goes on to say on the same page, “All Paul’s uses of epignosis justify and bear out this distinction. This same intensive use of epignosis is confirmed by similar passages in the New Testament and in the Septuagint. It also was recognized by the Greek fathers. Thus Chrysostom stated: ‘You knew (egnote), but it is necessary to know thoroughly (epignonai).”

J.B. Lightfoot
“The compound epignosis is an advance upon gnosis, denoting a larger and more thorough knowledge...Hence also epignosis is used especially of the knowledge of God and of Christ, as being the perfection of knowledge” (St. Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and Philemon, page 138).

Vine's Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words
“epignosis, akin to A, No. 3, denotes "exact or full knowledge, discernment, recognition,"

The New Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon (page 237):
1. Precise and correct knowledge
2. Knowledge of things ethical and divine
3. Of God, especially knowledge of His holy will and of the blessings which He has bestowed and constantly bestows on men through Christ
4. Of Christ, i.e., the true knowledge of Christ’s nature, dignity, benefits
5. Of God and Christ, i.e., to keep the knowledge of the one true God which has illumined the soul

Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament, volume 2, page 25:
1. Knowledge as recognition of the will of God that is effective in the conduct of the one who knows God
2. Christian faith

This LAST definition from the Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament calls Epignosis "CHRISTIAN FAITH".
You don't have a linguistic leg to stand on here . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

There is no "original" Greek.
There are 30 Greek Manuscripts, (Completed New Testaments, in Koine Greek).
None of them are "original".
The "original" would be the Apostle's letters, FIRST TRANSLATED, into Greek.
This does not exit.
All we have are copies of copies of copies.
So, when you try to contradict the bible with the lie : "original greek", you are only exposing yourself as false, once again.

The original Greek LANGUAGE, in context.

Had you been paying attention to the conversation - you would have known that this is what we were talking about (Greek vs. English).
But context has never been something YOU pay much attention to . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

First off, your accusation is baseless. Second, whether its simply knowledge or "super duper" knowledge... It doesn't change the verse's meaning and it doesn't support or oppose the concept of predestination or OSAS. My whole point is that most people entirely misunderstand the verse to begin with.

I didn't give my "rudimentary" definition. I gave the Strong's Greek Concordance definition (you know... The one you didn't see fit to give). I look at the definitions of each and all the mumbo jumbo of the Protestant guys you prop up as long as they support your belief, and yes... I can give you a simpler and more correct definition. I get it from the Bible! But... I sincerely doubt you care. Somebody else wants to know, I'll tell them. What you need to know, BOL, is that it still doesn't support or deny predestination.

And please... Who are you trying to fool? You have no respect for these "Protestant" scholars. You even said so yourself. I have respect for anyone who sincerely studies the Word of God, but whether they are Catholic or Protestant doesn't matter to me, because I am neither! When they are right, I applaud them. When they are wrong, I point it out.

It's a rudimantary definition - which simply means "basic".
The treatises I resented were FAR more in depth.

And once again - it's irrelevant as to whether or not I have respect for these scholars. They are world-reknowned linguistic scholars who are quotes by some of the most world-renowned Theologians - Protestant ones, at that.

Face it - you LOST this debate the minute you argued that the English was equivalent to the Greek . . .

 

[FHII]

It's a rudimantary definition - which simply means "basic".
The treatises I resented were FAR more in depth.

Yet it doesn't have to be. You are trying to make a simple verse complicated because it doesn't agree with your belief.
Hebrews 10:23-27 KJV
Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised;) [24] And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works: Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is ; but exhorting one another : and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching. [ For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.

But you want to say, "hold up, everyone! We have to examine a word here!" You are critical of one tree without looking at the forest.

And once again - it's irrelevant as to whether or not I have respect for these scholars.

Well I agree with that... Much of your opinion is pretty irrelevant. But it does show your character doesn't it?

I really don't care what they say... I care what the Bible says.

Face it - you LOST this debate the minute you argued that the English was equivalent to the Greek . . .

I lost the debate? Really? Hey... Tell me EXACTLY when I said English was equivalent to the Greek!

I actually believe it has been properly translated and understand what Hebrews 10:26 says without having to google a defense like you probably did.

I am not the one who is saying, "let me tell you why the Bible doesn't mean what it says!"

And what EXACTLY do yo believe my argument? My stance is that this verse has nothing to do with predestination, pro or con!

You are simply arguing because you picked a fight and don't know how to get out of it.

 

[justbyfaith]

In Galatians 3:14, we find that we receive the Holy Spirit through faith in Jesus Christ.

In Galatians 5:22-23, we find that if anyone bears the fruit of the Spirit (which is love, the bond of perfectness, Colossians 3:14), that there is no law in existence that will condemn their behaviour.

In other words, those who bear the fruit of the Spirit become law-abiding citizens of the kingdom of heaven.

It is a righteousness apart from the law that is nevertheless attested to by the law and the prophets that it is righteousness indeed (Romans 3:21).

Because we do not obtain this righteousness through attempting to obey a set of do's and don'ts.

The righteousness of the law is fulfilled in those who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit (Romans 8:4).

The one who is born of God "cannot sin" (1 John 3:9) and the one who doeth the will of God abideth ("sinneth not", 1 John 3:6) for ever (1 John 2:17).

I do believe that if someone is not circumcised of heart (i.e. they have not yet been perfected in their walk), that righteousness is still imputed to them if they have faith in Jesus Christ (Romans 4:11).

But why would anyone who has the Holy Spirit want to continue to live a lifestyle that is characterized by Romans 7:14-25? According to Romans 7:24, the attitude of someone in that state who is born again or about to become born again, is that they are discontented with such a lifestyle.

I may not seek entire sanctification because of the possibility of condemnation if I do not obtain that benefit. But I might seek it because of the "chastening of the Lord"...in that my conscience afflicts me when I don't measure up to what the Lord desires for me in the way of holiness. I am discontented with being in such a state; and therefore the doctrine of entire sanctification is good news to me (found in such verses as 1 Thessalonians 5:23-24 (kjv), Hebrews 10:14 (kjv), 1 John 3:9; 1 John 3:7, 1 John 3:3, 1 John 2:6; Jude 1:24, 2 Peter 1:10, 1 John 2:10; 1 John 3:6, 1 John 2:17; Romans 6:6 (kjv), Colossians 2:11 (kjv), (NLT)).

And there is the possibility that those who have not received the second benefit are not saved at all. I know that Bible scholars more intelligent than myself have made that conclusion.

So, why would anyone want to take a chance on the idea that they can make it into the kingdom of heaven apart from entire sanctification? While there are verses that might seem to say that I can have righteousness imputed to me apart from that benefit, they do not present an airtight case for that concept.

 

[justbyfaith]

No - a person who falls away no longer has everlasting life.

Then their life came to an end...and therefore it was never everlasting, but was always temporal.

 

[justbyfaith]

According to you, if someone repents of their sins they are lost because of it...this kind of thinking is highly skewed.


Yeah ,right.Even “YOU” know that I ain’t “ that” stupid......Here is the TRUTH—-AGAIN!
If somebody Repents Of their Sins, they have done a positive thing....it just doesn’t Save them...

The main thing that I might “ Consider” to be True is that you are in serious Jeopardy of being Lost...

Why am I in serious jeopardy of being lost? In your opinion, is it not because I believe that God requires repentance? So, if I repent because I believe that it is the requirement, I am lost for ever?

If I believe that I am saved because I have availed myself of Christ as the remedy for my sin; and because I have turned away from wickedness and relied on Christ to deliver me from wickedness:

That this means that I am not saved from wickedness and from the fate of being cast into everlasting fire?

It should be clear from holy scripture that those who work iniquity, Jesus will say to them, I never knew you; depart from me (Matthew 7:23)...

And that those who work iniquity will be cast into the furnace of fire (Matthew 13:41-42).

So, how are you going to cease to be a worker of iniquity unless you repent?

This in and of itself appears to me to be incontrovertible proof that repentance is necessary for salvation. I don't think that anyone can prove otherwise.

So, if I believe what the holy scriptures say on this matter, according to my adversary I am preaching and believing a FALSE and PERVERTED gospel and have "FALLEN FROM GRACE"...

This is nothing more than the devil's tactic of intimidation on people so that they would not have the courage to preach the truth.

The devil uses fear tactics in order to attempt to put to silence those who preach the truths of holy scripture.

But the reality is that I, for one, am not going to be intimidated by such tactics.

For I have a very great assurance of my salvation.

I pray that the Lord might strengthen in assurance those who have done what it takes to find entrance into the kingdom (that is, repent and rely on Christ Jesus as being the remedy for a lifestyle of sinning) so that they might have the courage to preach the truth in the face of these tactics of fear and intimidation that are employed by the devil in these instances.

 

[Ferris Bueller]

See, the heretic is this......>"im being saved by my faith"

Saved people continue to have faith. They have to, or else they are not part of God's house....

we are his house, if indeed we hold firmly to our confidence and the hope in which we glory. Hebrews 3:6​

 

[Ferris Bueller]

James is not talking about the context of Salvation, in your verse.
He's talking about Discipleship and Fruit bearing.

He's very plainly talking about salvation....

What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? James 2:14​

The claim to be saved is false if it does not have works to back up the claim.

Anyone who does not do what is right is not God’s child... 1 John 3:10​

 

[Ferris Bueller]

Jews who are not born again, that were "broken off" is not a good verse to try to use that you can lose your salvation.

I don't care about that. I'm showing you that your claim that people who don't have faith can be saved people too is false. All saved people have faith. If you do not have faith, you do not belong to God's house.

we are his house, if indeed we hold firmly to our confidence and the hope in which we glory. Hebrews 3:6​