Once Saved Always Saved

[Eternally Grateful]

You can believe what you want about that. But the point is, saved people have faith. Behold says you do not have to have faith to be a saved person. You only needed to have it in a single moment of conversion. You don't need it from then on to be saved when Jesus comes back. That's what he teaches. Ask him. I showed him the Bible says you are God's household if you are continuing in faith. He says you are God's household if you DON'T continue in faith, too. I know you don't believe that so please explain to him why he's teaching a falsehood.

Then he does not understand what faith is,

no one will enter heaven who dies in unbelief

he who believes is not condemned, he who does not believe is c damned already, it is an ongoing unbelief which has continued

 

[Eternally Grateful]

No, I'm not even touching the osas subject. That's a waste of time. James is explaining that empty, dead faith (faith with no works) is not the faith that saves. The faith that saves is the faith that can be seen in it's obedience to love (Galatians 5:6). No obedience to God shows you are not saved. Surely you agree with that.

By this the children of God are distinguished from the children of the devil: Anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is anyone who does not love his brother. 1 John 3:10​

Again, like I said, James is NOT saying salvation can be lost, he speaks of a claimed which is dead (not real)

he is not even even telling us to determine someone else’s salvation, he is telling them to search their heart, if YOU claim to have faith, but have no works, can faith save YOU.

people misrepresent this passage and try to make it say what it does not, not saying you do, just making an observation of what I have witnessed

 

[Eternally Grateful]

They refuse to see it!


My Lord, what does it take for you to see?

my God can you ever talk to someone without this nonsense? You act as if your God and your always right, humble yourself if you want to be heard,

Read this verse carefully and you will see that a righteous person (saved) can lose his salvation.

He does it through going back to the sins he committed before he was saved, thereby proving he no longer believes.

This is NOT a person who backslides, he no longer believes in Christ!

Ezek. 18:24

"But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die."

Now what does it mean "to die in your sins?"

If this is true, we are under law not under grace,

John said a child born of God can’t do this, why do you continue to insist he can?

whoever sins has never seen or known god, NEVER!

I am amazed of the lack of faith you have in the power of God to change the life of a person he saved.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

I don't know why that's so hard for people to accept or see. When I originally started talking about this subject (predestination or lack thereof) and Hebrews 10:26 I had a few things that I thought were important to note. First, the sinning wilfully is speaking of one particular sin: wavering faith, which includes forsaking the assembling. In doing that, you trodden under foot the Son of God, count the blood covenent and unholy thing and do spite the spirit of grace.

From there I backed it up with Matthew 7:22-23 and I John 2:19, which explain fully why those in Hebrews 10:26 never had salvation to begin with... Even if they had "epignosis" knowledge.... Speaking of which, you don't need to look up the definition in Strong's or Thayer's to know what "knowledge" is in that verse. The context of the passage tells you what's going on: they walked and lived amongst the other saints, they for a while didn't waver, they assembled (which is a lot more important than most people realize) and they exhorted one another. they basically had a "hands on" knowledge based on being there and experiencing it. Then, for whatever reason, they left. They didn't just hear about it, they lived it and still walked away. But again, as the other two passages I mentioned (and there are more) they were never really part of "them", even from the beginning. (and I got all that from simply reading the Bible... Not looking up definitions and listening to "world renouned" theologians...)

It's really not that difficult at all to understand, so I am glad to read that someone else gets it.

They left because they were never of us.

they sinned (like the world) because they never knew God

as a dog returns to his vomit because he was still a dog, he was never made a new creature, so he returned to his true nature the nature of sin

 

[Charlie24]

my God can you ever talk to someone without this nonsense? You act as if your God and your always right, humble yourself if you want to be heard,

If this is true, we are under law not under grace,

John said a child born of God can’t do this, why do you continue to insist he can?

whoever sins has never seen or known god, NEVER!

I am amazed of the lack of faith you have in the power of God to change the life of a person he saved.

When are you going to come to your senses?

Man can choose Christ for salvation and he can for whatever reason reject that salvation by no longer believing!

No faith = no salvation! How hard is that to understand?

We have shown you over and over again, but you will not accept it!

But really I don't care if you accept it or not!!!

 

[Triumph1300]

When are you going to come to your senses?

But really I don't care if you accept it or not!!!

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

Well....if I was attending a church where the pastor would say what you just did,
I would walk right out the door.

What an attitude!

 

[Charlie24]

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

Well....if I was attending a church where the pastor would say what you just did,
I would walk right out the door.

What an attitude!

The pastor probably would say what I've said, when he sees the rebellion in some folks to accept the truth!

 

[Wrangler]

Epignosis is a more generic word than that. It's certainly more than just knowing, and connotates a deeper understanding

Great point! And again, I go back to English translators. One pastor put it this way. It is one thing to know OF a world famous person. It is another thing to have a deep, personal relationship with that person.

Intellectual v experiential knowledge. That that hard to grasp. Our God is not just powerful but personal.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

When are you going to come to your senses?

Man can choose Christ for salvation and he can for whatever reason reject that salvation by no longer believing!

No faith = no salvation! How hard is that to understand?

We have shown you over and over again, but you will not accept it!

But really I don't care if you accept it or not!!!

Your right.. no faith equals no salvation

where your wrong is that a person who has been born again, made a new creature, given EVERY spiritual blessing, have witnessed a change in their thinking, victory over the things that led them to Christ in the first place. Assured they have been saved, has a God who has never let them down, who every time they take a step of faith and trust God, god always is proven faithful, and his ways are always proven just and far better than anything they ever imagined

would suddenly turn and say Christ is a fraud, this new life was fake, and turn completely back to the life which because of pain they fled from to begin with.

maybe your not saved? And that’s why you can not see this? I do not know and will Not judge, but as a child of God, who even left as a prodigal son due to life circumstances for 5 years, I never stopped believing, I never rejected God, I turned to some sin, and did not deceleration right doing it, and God, who left the flock, came to me, and when I was ready, I returned, as all true believers do (unless they die before they get to that point)

so you can try to convince me of things, but I have witnessed not only in myself but in others reality, a reality you deny,

 

[Taken]

"Full, experiential and relational knowledge."
This is the definition of Epignosis. It's NOT just a passing fancy.

Full knowledge, Experienced Knowledge and Rational Knowledge... Equals What?

A Converted man?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

The pastor probably would say what I've said, when he sees the rebellion in some folks to accept the truth!

Which means the pastor has refused to humble himself. And is proud, and is not worth listening to. Because he can’t be taught,

 

[BreadOfLife]

The "cult of the virgin" denied Catholics their right to read a bible.
This is why the Catholic caused DARK AGES existed for hundreds of years.
In 1961, the "cult of the virgin" relented and decided to allow their victims the right to finally read their bible, instead of only coming to the Cult for more deception.

Also, the Greek is the Greek.
The Bible is the English.

Listen carefully, water cultist....
God, is smarter then you, but you might not believe it..
See, God is involved with FOREKNOWLEDGE, and in the foreknowledge of God, He knew the ENGLISH Language would be the UNIVERSAL application and not the "dead koine greek" that is barely remembered, or spoken.
So, God had ENGLISH BIBLES become the MAIN WORD, because God knows the end from the beginning.

As for the entire first part of your whiny rant - again, you're simply changing the subject because you're losing the debate.
Stick to the topic . . .

Regarding your arrogantly asinine claim above in RED - there is not a SINGLE English translation of the Bible that does NOT have linguistic errors and inconsistencies. One glaring example is the NWT reading of John 1:1, wherein it says "a God" instead of "God".

And, as I've more than amply illustrated - there are MANY words n Greek that do NOT have an English equivalent, so the translators simply inserted what THEY felt would best fit. "Knoweledge" for "Epignosis" is one of those situations. ALL of the denials and resistence I'm getting from all of you anti-Catholics speaks VOLUMES . . .

 

[marks]

Please provide the SAME types of scholarly evidence for YOUR claim that I provided for mine.
I want to see quotes and excerpts from scholarly linguistic sources like the ones I provided.

THEN, we can have an intelligent conversation - instead of just a barrage of simplistic denials . . .

We can use yours.

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).

Richard doesn't comment on epignosis, only on "epi".

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).

Greater knowledge, but not faith.

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).”

Same . . . knowledge, not faith.

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).

A more thorough knowledge, he says. Not faith.

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

Knowledge, knowledge, down the line he goes, knowledge, but not faith.

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 . . .

So here you've got one source that without explanation defines knowledge as faith and makes your case for you.

I'd be curious to hear their justification for defining the word that way, considering it's not what it means.

Just the same, as all your other sources must have shown you, gnosis is to know, and epignosis is knowing upon knowing, as it were. Greater, deeper knowledge.

Much love!

 

[Eternally Grateful]

A good commentary on the hebrews passage. If anyone wishes to see. (Believers Bible commentary)


Hebrews 10:26–29 (BBC): Now the writer introduces his fourth grim warning. As in the previous cases, it is a warning against apostasy, here described as a deliberate sin.
As has been indicated, there is considerable disagreement among Christians as to the real nature of this sin. The problem, in brief, is whether it refers to:
1. True Christians who subsequently turn away from Christ and are lost.
2. True Christians who backslide but who are still saved.
3. Those who profess to be Christians for a while, identify themselves with a local church, but then deliberately turn away from Christ. They were never truly born again, and now they never can be.
No matter which view we hold, there are admitted difficulties. We believe that the third view is the correct one because it is most consistent with the over-all teaching of Hebrews and of the entire NT.
Here in verse 26 apostasy is defined as sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth. Like Judas, the person has heard the gospel. He knows the way of salvation; he has even pretended to receive it; but then he deliberately repudiates it.
For such a person, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins. He has decisively and conclusively rejected the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ. Therefore God has no other way of salvation to offer to him.
There is a sense in which all sin is willful, but the author here speaks of apostasy as a willful sin of extraordinary seriousness.
The fact that the author uses we in this passage does not necessarily mean that he includes himself. In verse 39 he definitely excludes himself and his fellow believers from those who draw back into perdition.
10:27 Nothing remains but a certain fearful expectation of judgment; there is no hope of escape. It is impossible to renew the apostate to repentance (6:4). He has knowingly and willfully cut himself off from God’s grace in Christ. His fate is a fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries. It is pointless to haggle over whether this means literal fire. The language is obviously designed to denote punishment that is dreadfully severe.
Note that God classes apostates as adversaries. This indicates positive opposition to Christ, not a mild neutrality.
10:28 The doom of the lawbreaker in the OT is now introduced to form a backdrop against which to contrast the greater doom of the apostate. A man who broke Moses’ law by becoming an idolater died without mercy when his guilt was proven by the testimony of two or three witnesses (Deut. 17:2–6).
10:29 The apostate will be counted worthy of much worse punishment because his privilege has been much greater. The enormity of his sin is seen in the three charges that are leveled against him:
1. He has trampled the Son of God underfoot. After professing to be a follower of Jesus, he now brazenly asserts that he wants nothing more to do with Him. He denies any need for Christ as Savior and positively rejects Him as Lord.
In Japan there is a crucifix which was used by the government in days of persecution. It was placed on the ground, and everybody had to tread on the face of the Crucified. The non-Christians did not hesitate to tread on His face; the real Christians refused and were killed. The story goes that the face of Jesus was worn down and marred by people trampling on it.
2. He has counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing. He counts as useless and unholy the blood of Christ which ratified the New Covenant. He had been set apart by this blood in a place of external privilege. Through his association with Christian people, he had been sanctified, just as an unbelieving husband is sanctified by his believing wife (1 Cor. 7:14). But that does not mean that he was saved.
3. He has insulted the Spirit of grace. The Spirit of God had illuminated him concerning the good news, convicted him of sin, and pointed him to Christ as the only Refuge of the soul. But he had insulted the gracious Spirit by utterly despising Him and the salvation He offered.

 

[marks]

They refuse to see it!


My Lord, what does it take for you to see?

Read this verse carefully and you will see that a righteous person (saved) can lose his salvation.

He does it through going back to the sins he committed before he was saved, thereby proving he no longer believes.

This is NOT a person who backslides, he no longer believes in Christ!

Ezek. 18:24

"But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die."

Now what does it mean "to die in your sins?"

You are attempting to apply the terms of Covenant of Law between God and Israel to the New Covenant children of God.

The one who keeps the Law will live by that.

However, in the New Covenant, we are saved through faith in Christ, and not by any works we have done.

If you carefully examine Ezekiel 18, you will see this describes a person under the covenant of Law. There is nothing there in the chapter about faith in Christ, rebirth, imputed righteousness, nothing of those.

Salvation under the covenant of Law was a very different thing from salvation in the New Covenant. Scripture tells us the New Covenant is built on "better promises".

Much love!

 

[Wrangler]

there is not a SINGLE English translation of the Bible that does NOT have linguistic errors and inconsistencies. One glaring example is the NWT reading of John 1:1, wherein it says "a God" instead of "God".

Did you admit the original language lacks grammar? The original language is not spoken here. It makes no sense for you to keep harping on it.

In my forced Spanish class, I learned they put the adjective after the noun. House big whereas we say big house. What you call errors and inconsistencies in the translators judgment. Maybe 'large' works better. Perhaps it is swollen that is the best word for word replacement.

Let me guess; you favor literal translations. Funny that you reference a figurative verse in complaining about a literal translation. Oops. I used the word 'a'. Guess what? There are numerous linguistic errors and inconsistencies in the original language manuscripts. One glaring example is the 3 different endings for the Gospel of Mark.

 

[Charlie24]

Your right.. no faith equals no salvation

where your wrong is that a person who has been born again, made a new creature, given EVERY spiritual blessing, have witnessed a change in their thinking, victory over the things that led them to Christ in the first place. Assured they have been saved, has a God who has never let them down, who every time they take a step of faith and trust God, god always is proven faithful, and his ways are always proven just and far better than anything they ever imagined

would suddenly turn and say Christ is a fraud, this new life was fake, and turn completely back to the life which because of pain they fled from to begin with.

maybe your not saved? And that’s why you can not see this? I do not know and will Not judge, but as a child of God, who even left as a prodigal son due to life circumstances for 5 years, I never stopped believing, I never rejected God, I turned to some sin, and did not deceleration right doing it, and God, who left the flock, came to me, and when I was ready, I returned, as all true believers do (unless they die before they get to that point)

so you can try to convince me of things, but I have witnessed not only in myself but in others reality, a reality you deny,

Let's see, I'm a false prophet in need of repenting, and now I'm not saved.

All because I don't agree with you, hmmmm, seems I've seen this kind of thing before!

 

[Charlie24]

You are attempting to apply the terms of Covenant of Law between God and Israel to the New Covenant children of God.

The one who keeps the Law will live by that.

However, in the New Covenant, we are saved through faith in Christ, and not by any works we have done.

If you carefully examine Ezekiel 18, you will see this describes a person under the covenant of Law. There is nothing there in the chapter about faith in Christ, rebirth, imputed righteousness, nothing of those.

Salvation under the covenant of Law was a very different thing from salvation in the New Covenant. Scripture tells us the New Covenant is built on "better promises".

Much love!

We are saved the same way they were saved! The verse says, "when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness....."

What makes one righteous? If he turns from that, what has he done? So simple but you will not admit it!

 

[marks]

We are saved the same way they were saved!

Actually, I'm not keeping the covenant of Law that God gave to Israel, and they weren't trusting in Jesus to impute to them righteousness.

So I don't think your statement really gives the right idea.

If you were to qualify it to, we are all saved by trusting in God's word to us, then I'd agree.

Remember . . . Abraham believed God, and that belief was counted to him as righteousness. What was it Abraham believed? That he'd have lots of children.

Much love!

 

[Taken]

Let's expand the context of the passage. We see that he is in fact talking about actual, real believers sinning by uniting Christ in them to a prostitute....

In fact Paul is speaking to A Divided group;
1Cor.1
[1] Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother,
[2] Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours:
[3] Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

And: About them:
[6] Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you:
[7] So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:
[8] Who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.

And speaking TO: Jews, To babes, To beginner learners, expanding their knowledge, Warning.

1 Cor 5:
[1] It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife.

15Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? Never! 16Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, “The two will become one flesh.” b 17But whoever is united with the Lord is one with him in spirit. c

18Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body. 19Do 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; 20you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your bodies. 1 Corinthians 6:15-20 ​

​

Your interpretation of the passage would mean that just having a prostitute among the believers is the sin of sexual immorality. But, no, we see he is saying that an actual member of Christ (someone who has Christ in them) is sinning when they join themselves to a prostitute.

No. I already Have said;
I am not a Jew, and certainly not a Jew having historical generations of fathers under 4,000 years of Jewish Law and A Hebrew Covenant and Beginning to Learn about a new covenant, from a new discovery of Jesus being their Messiah.

Prostitution definitely was A Sin under Jewish Law...and here they are still learning the basics.

How long have you heard, been preached to and read and studied Scripture?...and did you have a long historical Religion you were switching from?

Think about these people...a long religious history...and what?...a few times a traveling preacher and FEW letters...and an expectation they instantly forgot all their Mosaic laws and Knew all the details of this new religion...?

There are People who have listened for years in Christian churches and still do not know some of the basics.

As I said...what applies to me in Scripture, is what I apply to me.

You do know the majority of The New Testament was written For Jews??
The Men Jesus chose and Sent out were Jews, TO the Jews.

Jews were suppose to be Grasping the information and inturn Teaching the Gentiles.
Why that didn't happen is a long study initself.

My SIN had Nothing to do with OT Mosaic Law.
A Jews Sin had Everything to do with Mosaic Law, and WHY you continue to See Jews teaching Jews in the NT and such a primary thing (as SIN), a great concern for Jews, learning how it fits in with this new Covenant.