How does one lose their salvation? [Archive]

View Full Version : How does one lose their salvation?

Tenken07

21st January 2007, 09:59 PM

For the sake of arguement, lets say you can lose it. Now how would one lose it?

arunma

21st January 2007, 10:13 PM

I suppose one could "lose" their salvation by apostacizing from the Christian faith, which would involve rejecting that Jesus Christ is Lord and the Son of God.

Seeker of the Truth

21st January 2007, 10:22 PM

daveleau

21st January 2007, 10:53 PM

Tenken07

21st January 2007, 11:03 PM

1 John 2:19b
if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.

Who (even ourselves) can rip us from the grip of God Almighty?
Joh 10:29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand.

I personally have a hard time believing in OSAS. Probably just the demons though. Ive asked a couple of people about it, still have a hard time with it though.:sigh:

daveleau

21st January 2007, 11:08 PM

Look at Scripture. Don't take my word for it, or anyone else's, whether it is for or against OSAS. Here's a pointer, although I may have already posted this in one of your thread.

http://www.leaumont.com/theology/Eternal_Security.pdf

I grew up in a strong Pentecostal church teaching OSNAS. I sat down, did my own study, and am now utterly convinced. The Word pointed me to a change in belief, despite my strong previous conviction that one could lose their salvation.

Tenken07

21st January 2007, 11:20 PM

the one thing about that that im iffy on is where it mentions we are still saved even if we become lawless.

Seeker of the Truth

21st January 2007, 11:26 PM

What of my previous post?

Does that not mean anything?

daveleau

21st January 2007, 11:36 PM

Hebrews 12 discusses what occurs to people that do this. As does 1 John 2:19. There are two forms of people that sin while saved. The majority are simply chastized (Heb 12), as we all still sin. The key here is to know that ALL Christians still sin after we are saved. If one can backslide into an unsaved state through sin, then where is the line drawn? If this is the case, and people who sin are no longer saved then any unconfessed sin at the time of death would result in damnation. This includes sins of commission (acts of sin) and sins of omission (neglecting to do things for God.)

Regarding breaking part of the Law and breaking all of it:
Jam 2:10 For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it.
Jam 2:11 For he who said, "Do not commit adultery,"also said, "Do not murder." If you do not commit adultery but do commit murder, you have become a lawbreaker

Jesus died for your sins. But, which sins did He die for? Was His act complete, or do we have to add to it by living by the Law?

Now, the problem comes when we see people who claim salvation, yet continue to sin. The question is of their initial state of salvation. God knows their heart. Did they turn from their sins and believe, or not? Only God can tell. But, that is where 1 John 2:19 comes in. Those who left from us were never part of us.

The key to salvation is grace through faith, not adherance to the Law. Galatians speaks at length about this. If we are saved by faith, then can our sins after we are saved condemn us? What about the promise of God to never leave us? What about God's statement here:

Rom 8:28 And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.
Rom 8:29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.
Rom 8:30 And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.
Rom 8:31 What, then, shall we say in response to this? If God is for us, who can be against us?
Rom 8:32 He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all--how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things?
Rom 8:33 Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies.
Rom 8:34 Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus, who died--more than that, who was raised to life--is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us.
Rom 8:35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword?
Rom 8:36 As it is written:
"For your sake we face death all day long;
we are considered as sheep to be slaughtered."[12]
Rom 8:37 No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us.
Rom 8:38 For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers,
Rom 8:39 neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

My friend. Work for God. Make that your primary goal. Never stop. At the same time, do not worry about your salvation. Take God at His Word. Salvation is there for those who believe in Jesus as Messiah, and confess with their mouths that He is Lord.

God bless you,
Dave

daveleau

21st January 2007, 11:45 PM

What of my previous post?

Does that not mean anything?

I see here that's it's possible-

Revelation 22:19

"And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."

Absolutely, it means something. It's a tough question. The question is whether one who is saved is capable of this act. It does not say that one who is saved can do this. If one assumes that a Christian can commit this act, then one must balance this against the rest of scripture, which overwhelmingly states that one cannot lose their salvation. One verse does not a theology of salvation make...especially when there are so many that talk of God's irreversible salvation. From early on (2nd/3rd century), this passage was interpreted to talk of false prophets. While that is not incontrovertible evidence, it is great supporting evidence when the rest of the Word of God is taken into account.

In Him,
Dave

Matthan

22nd January 2007, 12:08 AM

I see here that's it's possible-

Revelation 22:19

"And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."
I believe the verse from Revelation that you cite is part of a stern warning from the Holy Spirit through John to us. It does not mean that it will happen, but only that it could happen. Since true believers have no reason either to add to Scripture or remove anything from it, they will not do either. But, the warning is for all persons and for all times, so it is put there in that harsh manner.

Matthan

mesue

22nd January 2007, 12:09 AM

For the sake of arguement, lets say you can lose it. Now how would one lose it?
If you have salvation, you cannot lose it.

IisJustMe

22nd January 2007, 12:52 AM

For the sake of arguement, lets say you can lose it. Now how would one lose it? ... but this is a silly question. It is only for argument's sake to be asked, because it is impossible. Interesting thing about those who claim it is possible ... they never suspect they have or could "lose" it, but it is something that "could happen" to some poor unfortunate dolt who doesn't know he's playing with fire. Why speculate on the speculations of those who don't understand what salvation is, or by Whom it is accomplished?

DeaconDean

22nd January 2007, 05:23 AM

I personally have a hard time believing in OSAS. Probably just the demons though. Ive asked a couple of people about it, still have a hard time with it though.:sigh:

Look at Scripture. Don't take my word for it, or anyone else's, whether it is for or against OSAS. Here's a pointer, although I may have already posted this in one of your thread.

http://www.leaumont.com/theology/Eternal_Security.pdf

I grew up in a strong Pentecostal church teaching OSNAS. I sat down, did my own study, and am now utterly convinced. The Word pointed me to a change in belief, despite my strong previous conviction that one could lose their salvation.

Here is something I wrote:

Once Saved, Always Saved
But is it Biblical?

Not very many doctrines receive as much debate as this one does. Many adhere to it, others do not. There are a few others that will provoke debates even among long time Christians. The Rapture, Millennialism (pre, post, and a) just to mane a few. As for me, I believe in the doctrine of Once Saved, Always Saved. I was taught this from an early age in church. And for many years I just accepted it as true. You know, what you learn at an early age tends to stick with you through life.

I started seminary school and a whole new world opened up to me. I’ve got a thirst for knowledge that seems to be unquenchable. I began to research, to investigate, to seek enlightenment, regarding church doctrines and what we come to accept and believe. I have read some of the early church doctrines and early versions of Systematic Theology. I wanted to why we believe what we believe. I have studied such authors as: John Gill’s “Body of Practical Divinity,” The Complete Works of Jonathan Edwards, “Theology Proper” by Charles Hodge, “Institutes of Christian Religion” by John Calvin, “Abstract of Systematic Theology” by James Petigru Boyce, “Manual of Theology” by John L. Dagg, “Introduction to Christian Doctrine” by Millard Erickson, The Complete works of Arthur W. Pink. And just to balance things out, I’ve even read Charles Finney's 1851 Lectures on Systematic Theology (http://www.whatsaiththescripture.com/Voice/Systematic.Theology.1.html), and the Theology of Karl Barth (http://www.theology21.org/christianbook/karl_barth.htm), along with The Works of James Arminius (http://www.godrules.net/library/arminius/arminius.htm).

You see, I felt a need to see how theology has developed from the earliest days, up to the present time. I have even studied a lot of Augustine’s writings. While I do not agree with all of Augustine’s writings, I have been able to pick bits and pieces of useful information from him, he does have his good points. I have studied some of the Confessions of Faith, and in my humble opinion, The Westminster Confession of Faith of 1647 to 1649 and The Baptist Faith and Message of 1963 are the best ones. But that’s neither here nor there. Before I get into this subject, I wanted to see how this idea developed. So I went and did research and some serious studying on the subject, I wanted to make sure that what I propose is right and biblical. I studied a lot of scripture while doing this, and decided on one single passage which I believe supports my position.

Before we dive in, I feel you should know at least some other views on this subject and their position:

Classic Arminianism
One must persevere in faith to be saved.
True believers can lose their faith.
Those dying without faith in Christ are condemned.
The believer who loses his faith is damned.

Antinomianism
One need not persevere in faith to be saved.
True believers can lose their faith.
Those who lose their faith are saved because they once believed.
The believer who loses his faith is saved.

Classic Calvinism
One must persevere in faith to be saved.
True believers cannot lose their faith, since it is God’s gift.
Those dying without faith in Christ are condemned.
Those who lose their faith never had it to begin with.
God will preserve true believers and they will be saved.

Now lets look at the above table for just a minute. Arminians are right when they say the Bible teaches that only those who persevere will be saved, and they’re right in accusing Antinomians of easy-believism and cheap grace. Antinomians (they wouldn’t use the term) are right in telling committed believers that they are secure in Christ and “once saved, always saved.” But where both of these views are wrong, is in assuming that a true believer can lose his faith and fall away from Christ. Faith is “a gift of God—not by works, lest any man boast.” Paul was confident that, since Christ had begun a good work in believers, He would continue that work until completion (Phil. 1). John said that those who fell away were never really true Christians, since true believers don't leave the faith (1 John 2:19).

Scripture teaches that believers must persevere until the end, but also that believers will persevere until the end by God's grace. Christians might temporarily yield to Satan's temptations, even to excess, but like Peter when he denied Christ three times, God will still restore and preserve the faith of the Christian, a faith which God gave in the first place! Peter went on to be chief among the apostles! It is my opinion that the classical Calvinist model takes into account all of the biblical data.

Continued...

DeaconDean

22nd January 2007, 05:25 AM

One argument against this used by the Arminians is: “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.” Eze. 18:24.

John Gill gives this answer:
“Such a sense of the words is contrary to the scope and design of the whole chapter, which not at all concerns the perseverance or apostasy of saints, and neither their salvation nor damnation; but the sole view of it is to vindicate the justice of God, from a charge of punishing the Jews, not for their own sins, but the sins of their fathers, and of injustice and inequality in his providential dealings with them, and has nothing to do with the spiritual and eternal affairs of men.”[1] (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=30986582#_ftn1)

The whole context wholly and solely regards the house of Israel, and the land of Israel, and the conduct of the people of Israel in it. In applying that to the saints in particular, which relates to the Jewish church and nation only, as distinguishable from all other people, and so stands self-condemned. Millions of instances of this kind will never enervate the doctrine of the saints perseverance; let it be proved if it can, that any one that has been made righteous by the obedience of Christ, and has been truly and inwardly sanctified by the Spirit and grace of God, ever so fell away, as everlastingly to perish; let this be proved and we have done: As for a man’s own righteousness and outward acts of holiness, we allow a man may turn from them and he lost, but not from the righteousness of Christ, which is everlasting, nor from an inward principle of grace and holiness, which ever abides.

Another argument is: "one who is endued with the faith that purifies the heart, that produces a good conscience, may nevertheless so fall from God, as to perish everlastingly." In proof of which is produced, 1 Timothy 1:19, 20, holding faith and a good conscience, which some having put away, concerning faith have made shipwreck, of whom is Hymeneus and Alexander. It does not appear that these men ever had their hearts purified by faith; this should be first proved, before they are produced as instances of the apostasy of real saints; the contrary appears in their characters; they were ungodly men, and were never otherwise for any thing that is said of them; and after their profession of religion, they increased and proceeded to more ungodliness; they were vain-babblers, opposers of the doctrines of the gospel, and blasphemers of it, and were never upon the foundation that stands sure, or were known by the Lord as his, (see 1 Tim 1:20 and 2 Tim. 2:16, 19; 4:14, 15).[2] (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=30986582#_ftn2)

Arthur W. Pink says: “This terrible sin is not committed by a mere professor, for he has nothing to fall away from, save an empty name.”[3] (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=30986582#_ftn3)

Nor is it clear from the text, that they ever had a good conscience, but rather that they never had one; putting it away does not necessarily suppose they had it, but rather that they had it not, they rejecting it with dislike; as the Jews who never had the gospel are said to put it away; when they contradicted, blasphemed and rejected it, the apostle says, ye put it from you, apwqeisqe, the same word that is here used; ye rejected it, cast it from you, and would not receive it, so here; had these persons ever had a good conscience, it would rather have been said, which some having put out of them; but they never had it; when it was proposed to them, as the Christian religion proposes that a man should exercise a good conscience, they disliked it, and put it away, and would not attend to it, and chose rather to drop the faith they professed, as being contrary to their evil consciences and practices; besides, persons may have a good conscience in some sense, and as it is shews itself by an external behavior among men, which does not arise from an heart purified by faith; the apostle had such an one before he had faith in Christ, Acts23:1. though it does not seem as if these men had ever such an one.

The faith they made shipwreck of, is not the grace of faith, which it does not appear they ever had, but the doctrine of faith, the Gospel; peri thV pistewV , concerning the faith, is a phrase that is never used but of the doctrine of faith, see Acts. 24:24; 1 Timothy 6:21; 2 Timothy 3:8. This is the faith they made shipwreck of, denied and destroyed, or contradicted and blasphemed, as it is explained in the next verse; and the particular doctrine of faith they made shipwreck of. Men may profess the doctrine of faith and fall from it; but this is no instance of a man’s having true faith which purifies the heart, and falling from God so as to perish.

Another objection is: “For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.” (Heb. 6:4-6)

John Gill says:
“There is nothing in the characters of these persons which shew them to be true believers;there is nothing said of their believing in Christ, or that necessarily implies it; there is nothing said that is peculiar to true believers; they are not said to be regenerated by the Spirit of God, called by the grace of God, or sanctified, or justified, or adopted, or heirs of God, and meet for the inheritance, or sealed by the Holy Ghost, or any thing of that kind.”[4] (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=30986582#_ftn4)

The following section is taken from Arthur W. Pink’s Exposition of Hebrews:

“Apostasy from Christ was a step more easy and natural to a Jewish than to a Gentile believer, because the way was always open and inviting them, as men, to return to those associations which once carried with them the outward sanctification of Jehovah’s name, and which only the power of grace had enabled them to renounce. When heavenly realities became inoperative in their souls, the visible image was before them still, and here was the danger of their giving it the homage of their souls. If there were not an habitual exercise of their spiritual senses, the power of discernment could not remain: they would call evil good, and good evil. The ignorance which springs from spiritual neglect begins its own punishment of apathetic dullness on the once clear mind, and robs the spirit of its power to detect the wily methods of the Devil. It is in the presence of God alone that the Christian can exert his spiritual energies with effect. Abiding in Christ, maintains us in that presence. A more unhappy error cannot befall a believer than to separate, in the habit of his mind, acquired knowledge from the living Christ. Faith dies at once when separated from its object. Knowledge indeed is precious, but the knowledge of God is a progressive thing (Col. 1:10), whose end is not obtained this side of the glory (1 Cor. 8:2).”[5] (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=30986582#_ftn5)

A clear and growing faith, in heavenly things was needed to preserve Jewish Christians from relapse. To return to Judaism was to give up Christ, who had left their house ‘desolate’ (Matthew 23:38). It should be pointed out, however, that it is just as easy, and the attraction is just as real, for a Gentile Christian to return to that world out of which the Lord has called him, as it was for a Jewish Christian to go back again to Judaism. In verse 4, “For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened" the apostle continues the digression which he began at Hebrews 5:11. The parenthesis has two divisions: the first, Hebrews 5:11-14 is reprehensible; the second, Hebrews 6:1-20 is hortatory. In chapter 6 he exhorts the Hebrews unto two duties: to progress in the Christian course (verses 1-11); to persevere therein (verses 12-20). The first exhortation is proposed in verses 1,2 and qualified in verse 3. The motive to obedience is drawn from the danger of apostasy (verses 4-6). The opening "For" of verse 4 intimates the close connection of our present passage with that which immediately precedes. It draws a conclusion from what the apostle had been saying in Hebrews 5:11-14. It amplifies the "if" in verse 3. It points a most solemn warning against their continuance in their present sloth.

Three things claim our careful attention in coming closer to our passage: the persons here spoken of, the sin they commit, the doom pronounced upon them. In considering the persons spoken of it is of first importance to note that the apostle does not say, "us who were once enlightened", nor even "you", instead, he says "those". In sharp contrast from them, he says to the Hebrews, "Beloved, we are persuaded better things of you".

It is scarcely accurate to designate as "mere professors" those described in verses 4,5. They were a class who had enjoyed great privileges, beyond any such as now accompany the preaching of the Gospel. Those here portrayed are said to have had five advantages, which is in contrast from the six things enumerated in verses 1, 2, which things belong to man in the flesh, under Judaism. Five is the number of grace, and the blessings here mentioned pertain to the Christian dispensation. Yet were they not true Christians. This is evident from what is not said. Observe, they were not spoken of as God’s elect, as those for whom Christ died, as those who were born of the Spirit. They are not said to be justified, forgiven, accepted in the Beloved. Nor is anything said of their faith, love, or obedience. Yet these are the very things which distinguish a real child of God. First, they had been "enlightened". The Sun of righteousness had shone with healing in His wings, and, as Matthew 4:16 says, "The people which sat in darkness saw great light, and to them which sat in the region and shadow of death light is sprung up". Unlike the heathen, whom Christ, in the days of His flesh, visited not, those who came under the sound of His voice were wondrously and gloriously illumined.

Continued...

[1] (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=30986582#_ftnref1) Final Perseverance, Asserted and Vindicated, John Gill

[2] (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=30986582#_ftnref2) Ibid

[3] (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=30986582#_ftnref3) Arthur W. Pink, An Exposition of Hebrews, Chapter 24: Apostasy

[4] (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=30986582#_ftnref4) Final Perseverance, Asserted and Vindicated, John Gill

[5] (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=30986582#_ftnref5) Arthur W. Pink, An Exposition of Hebrews, Chapter 24: Apostasy

DeaconDean

22nd January 2007, 05:27 AM

The Hebrews had accepted the gospel of the once crucified and now glorified Redeemer, who sent down from heaven the Spirit, a sign of His exaltation, and a pledge of the future inheritance. Having thus entered into the sphere of new covenant manifestation, any one who willfully abandoned it could only relapse into that phase of Judaism which crucified the Lord Jesus. There was no other alternative for them, but either to go on to the full knowledge of the heavenly priesthood of Christ, and to the believer’s acceptance and worship through the Mediator in the sanctuary above, or fall back into the attitude, not of the godly Israelites before Pentecost, such as John the Baptist and those who waited for the promised redemption, nor even into the condition of those for whom the Savior prayed, ‘for they know not what they do’; but into a state of willful conscious enmity against Christ, and the sin of rejecting Him, and putting Him to an open shame" (Adolph Sophir)

Now I don’t believe that a true believer can fall into apostasy either. The stress is on “true believers.” And the people spoken of in Hebrews 6:4-6 were not true believers.

First, the Greek word for "enlightened" here signifies "to give light or knowledge by teaching". It is so rendered by the Septuagint in Judges 13:8, 2 Kings 12:2, 17:27. The apostle Paul uses it for "to make manifest", or "bring to light" in 1 Corinthians 4:5, 2 Timothy 1:10. Satan blinds the minds of those who believe not, lest "the light of the gospel should shine unto them" (2 Cor. 4:4), that is, give the knowledge of it. Thus, "enlightened" here means to be instructed in the doctrine of the gospel, so as to have a clear apprehension of it. In the parallel passage in Hebrews 10:26 the same people are said to have "received the knowledge of the truth", cf. also 2 Peter 2:20, 21. It is, however, only a natural knowledge of spiritual things, such as is acquired by outward hearing or reading; just as one may be enlightened by taking up the special study of one of the sciences. It falls far short of that spiritual enlightenment which transforms (2 Cor. 3:18). An illustration of a unregenerate person being "enlightened", as here, is found in the case of Balaam; Numbers 24:4.

Second, they had "tasted" of the heavenly gift. To "taste" is to have a personal experience of, in contrast from mere report. "Tasting does not include eating, much less digesting and turning into nourishment what is so tasted; for its nature being only thereby discerned it may be refused, yea, though we like its relish and savor, on some other consideration. The persons here described, then, are those who have to a certain degree understood and relished the revelation of mercy; like the stony-ground hearers they have received the Word with a transcient joy" (John Owen). The "tasting" is in contrast from the "eating" of John 6:50-56. Those here in view had had an acquaintance with the Gospel, as to gain such a measure of its blessedness as to greatly aggravate their sin and doom. An illustration of this is found in Matthew 13:20, 21.

Third, they were "made partakers of the Holy Spirit". First, it should be pointed out that the Greek word for "partakers" here is a different one from that used in Colossians 1:12 and 2 Peter 1:4, where real Christians are in view. The word here simply means "companions", referring to what is external rather than internal. These apostates had never been "born of the Spirit" (John 3:6), still less were their bodies His "temples" (1 Cor. 6:19). Nor do we believe this verse teaches that the Holy Spirit had, at any time, wrought within them, otherwise Philippians 1:6 would be contravened. It means that they had shared in the benefit of His supernatural operations and manifestations: "The place was shaken" (Acts 4:31) illustrates.

Fourth, "And have tasted the good Word of God". "I understand by this expression the promise of God respecting the Messiah, the sum and substance of all. It deserves notice that this promise is by way of eminence termed by Jeremiah ‘that good word’ (Jer. 33:14). To ‘taste’, then, this ‘good Word of God’, is to experience that God has been faithful to His promise. They could not say with Jeremiah, "Thy words were found and I did eat them" (Jer. 15:16). "It is as though he said, I speak not of those who have received nourishment; but of such as have so far tasted it, as that they ought to have desired it as ‘sincere milk’ and grown thereby" (Dr. John Owen). A solemn example of one who merely "tasted" the good Word of God is found in Mark 6:20: "for Herod feared John, knowing that he was a just man and an holy, and observed him; and when he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly".

Fifth, "And the powers of the world to come," or "age to come." The reference here is to the new dispensation which was to be ushered in by Israel’s Messiah according to Old Testament predictions. It corresponds with "these last days" of Hebrews 1:2, and is in contrast from the "time past" or Mosaic economy. These "powers" of the new Age are mentioned in Hebrews 2:4, to our comments on which we would refer the reader. Of these mighty "powers" these apostates had "tasted",or had an experience of. They had been personal witnesses of the miracles of Christ, and also of the wonders that followed His ascension, when such glorious manifestations of the Spirit were given. Thus they were "without excuse". Convincing and conclusive evidence had been set before them, but there had been no answering faith in their hearts. A solemn example of this is found in John 11:47, 48. The class here described are such as had had their minds enlightened, their consciences stirred, their affections moved to a considerable degree, and yet who were never brought from death unto life. Nor is it backsliding Christians who are in view. It is not simply "fall into sin", this or that sin. The greatest "sin" which a regenerated man can possibly commit is the personal denial of Christ: Peter was guilty of this, yet was he "renewed again unto repentance". It is the total renunciation of all the distinguishing truths and principles of Christianity, and this not secretly, but openly, which constitutes apostasy.
By ‘falling away’, we are plainly to understand what is commonly called apostasy. This does not consist in an occasional falling into actual sin, however gross and aggravated; nor in the renunciation of some of the principles of Christianity, even though those should be of considerable importance; but in an open, total, determined renunciation of all the constituent principles of Christianity, and a return to a false religion, such as that of unbelieving Jews or heathens, or to open infidelity and open godlessness" (Dr. J. Brown).

"If they shall fall away". "This is scarcely a fair translation. It has been said that the apostle did not here assert that such persons did or do ‘fall away’; but that if they did—a supposition which, however, could never be realized—then the consequence would be they could not be ‘renewed again unto repentance’. The words literally rendered are, ‘And have fallen away’, or, ‘yet have fallen’.

Taking the passage as a whole, it needs to be remembered that all who had professed to receive the Gospel were not born of God: the parable of the Sower shows that. Intelligence might be informed, conscience searched, natural affections stirred, and yet there be "no root" in them. All is not gold that glitters. There has always been a "mixt multitude" (Ex. 12:38) who accompany the people of God. Moreover, there is in the real Christian the old heart, which is "deceitful above all things and desperately wicked", and therefore is he in constant need of faithful warning. Such, God has given in every dispensation: Genesis 2:17; Leviticus 26:15, 16; Matthew 3:8; Romans 11:21; 1 Corinthians 10:12.

Finally, let it be said that while Scripture speaks plainly and positively of the perseverance of the saints, yet it is a perseverance of saints, not unregenerate professors. Divine preservation is not only in a safe state, but also in a holy course of disposition and conduct. We are "kept by the power of God through faith". We are kept by the Spirit working in us a spirit of entire dependency, renouncing our own wisdom and strength. The only place from which we cannot fall is one down in the dust. It is there the Lord brings His own people, weaning them from all confidence in the flesh, and giving them to experience that it is when they are weak they are strong. Such, and such only, are saved and safe forever.

Now to the passage in question.

John 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
John 10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
John 10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.

Pelagius held a man-centered concept of salvation in which grace was unnecessary and man's heart was not affected by Adam's fall into sin. Augustine set forth the biblical teaching that Adam's sin was imputed to the race, that man did not have the moral ability to respond to Christ apart from the grace of God and, therefore, God was the initiator of salvation. Coupled with the idea that salvation was of the Lord was also the implication that God would carry out his plan and purpose in the life of each recipient of divine grace. Shortly after the time of Augustine, the Church moved away from his position and embraced a semi-pelagian concept in which man possessed an autonomous will that had the moral power to choose the gospel in and of itself. This laid the foundation for many of the Roman Catholic concepts of man contributing to his salvation through earning merit before God. Semi-Pelagianism focused on the power of man to choose the good; to make right moral decisions, and ultimately be able to choose Christ. This position denies the fact that Scripture teaches that man is dead in sin (Eph. 2:1-3; Col. 2:13); that no one is righteous, understands, or seeks for God (Rom. 3:9-12); that man is hostile to the law of God and is incapable of submitting to it (Rom. 8:7); that no one can come to Christ unless the Father draws him (John 6:44, 63-65); and that regeneration must precede faith (Eph. 2:1-5; John 3:1-10; John 1:12,13; 1 John 5:1). Semi-Pelagianism, in giving great power to man, also gives man the power to receive and reject salvation repeatedly. A person's salvation ultimately lies in the whims of that person's will. This is the background to the debate of whether or not a Christian can lose his salvation. The Augustinian position and later the position of the Reformers in the sixteenth century was that if a person is truly regenerate, God will protect and sustain that person so that he will persevere unto the end and be saved.
Many people who approach the Christian life in an antinomian (lawless) way and excuse their sin by saying, "It doesn't matter what I do, because I can't lose my salvation." That is a distortion, not only of grace, but also of the concept of salvation itself. Many of the arguments I have heard against the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints stem from understanding the doctrine in this way. Paul goes to great lengths in Romans 6 to demonstrate that if a person is truly in Christ, he cannot sin in order that grace might abound. Union with Christ presupposes a new heart that desires to obey God.

Continued...

DeaconDean

22nd January 2007, 05:30 AM

"For I am confident of this very thing, that he who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus." (Phil.1:6) In John 6:37-40, Jesus states that all who the Father gives to him will come to him and the ones who come will not be cast out. Verses 39 and 40 say, "And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that he has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him, may have eternal life; and I myself will raise him up on the last day." Jesus promises eternal life to those who believe and he immediately connects the giving of eternal life to the resurrection; those who come to him will be raised up on the last day (see also: John 5:24; 6:44). Just as Philippians 1:6 says that God will perfect the work which he began to the day of Christ Jesus, so also Jesus ties coming to him and receiving eternal life with the idea of a future resurrection. Receiving eternal life is concomitant with being raised on the last day. The two ideas cannot be separated. Eternal life is not eternal if it can be lost in the morning and regained in the evening only to be lost again at some future date; it is not eternal if it lasts only five days or five years. When Jesus promises eternal life and connects the receiving of eternal life with a future resurrection, he is teaching that the true believer is eternally saved.

This same idea is reiterated in John 10:27-29: "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me; and I give eternal life to them, and they shall never perish; and no one shall snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand." Again, Jesus states that he gives his sheep eternal life and emphasizes this by the statement that no one is able to snatch them out of either his or his Father's hand. Concerning this passage, some contend that although others cannot snatch a man out of God's hand, the man himself is free to do so. However, the verse states that no one can do this. That is a universal negative which certainly includes the man himself. The passage does not qualify the "no one" by saying that the regenerate man himself may make himself unregenerate and translate himself from the kingdom of God back into the kingdom and family of the devil. Another attempt to discount this passage argues that Satan can snatch a man out of the hand of God. This passage blatantly contends that the Father is greater than all and no one can snatch them out of his hand. That certainly includes the devil and man. This passage also demonstrates that the perseverance of the saints is actually a preservation by their Savior; their coming (being drawn by the Father) and their perseverance are grounded on God and not man (see: John 6:53,63-65).

If you believe in the sovereignty of God, that He is omnipotent, all powerful, then how can you disagree with the above passage? If man can take himself out of the Father’s hand, then in effect, that makes man more powerful than God! And this is not so. God sits on high, and rules all facets of my life, my world and is the only God.

The predominant teaching of Scripture is that the believer is eternally saved. The rejection of this position means that assurance of salvation is impossible. The most anyone could say is that at a present moment in their life they are in a state of grace, but they could not express assurance toward ultimate salvation; they could not say that they knew they were going to heaven because the possibility of falling from that state of grace sometime in their life exists. Those who hold that the true Christian can lose his salvation find themselves in disharmony with a preponderance of Scriptural evidence.

That's just how I see it.

God Bless

Till all are one.

stelow

22nd January 2007, 10:45 AM

Since true believers have no reason either to add to Scripture or remove anything from it, they will not do either. But, the warning is for all persons and for all times, so it is put there in that harsh manner.Matthan

Are you kidding I see christians changing the Word from time to time trying to make it fit there own belief system.

... but this is a silly question. It is only for argument's sake to be asked, because it is impossible. Interesting thing about those who claim it is possible ... they never suspect they have or could "lose" it, but it is something that "could happen" to some poor unfortunate dolt who doesn't know he's playing with fire. Why speculate on the speculations of those who don't understand what salvation is, or by Whom it is accomplished?

I do not think it is a silly question because it could help someone get a hold of it and say yes it can or no it can not happen. There could be some christians who might feel it has happened to them and that's why they ask.

TwinCrier

22nd January 2007, 10:52 AM

Since our salvation comes through us bu faith in Christ, one would have to lose that faith, have a change in their beliefs regarding Christ's sacrifice. I don't believe a Christian can accidentally lose their salvation.

Matthan

22nd January 2007, 11:58 AM

Are you kidding I see christians changing the Word from time to time trying to make it fit there own belief system.

You must learn to read more carefully. I stated that true believers would not change the Word by either adding to it or taking away from it. You may see "christians" changing the Word, but you will never see any TRUE Christian doing such a thing.

Always remember, many are called.....

Matthan

Matthan

22nd January 2007, 11:59 AM

Seeker of the Truth

22nd January 2007, 12:36 PM

So much human wisdom....

Matthan
He's saying that one cannot receive eternal life and then lose it, gain it, lose it, etc.

warriorforJesus

23rd January 2007, 12:16 AM

20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
21 But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die. 22 All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live. 23 Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live? 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.

daveleau

23rd January 2007, 12:22 AM

Outstanding, Dean. Thanks for sharing. I cannot in good conscience, despite my background as a staunch OSNAS-ist take the whole of Scripture into account and still be a OSNAS-ist. That's why I altered my belief, into what I believe wholeheartedly is the stance Scripture outlines definitively. If one can lose their salvation, then there are major passages of Scripture that contradict, and I fully believe the Scriptures are perfect and without contradiction.

stelow

23rd January 2007, 09:58 AM

DeaconDean

24th January 2007, 02:37 AM

I see the term “true believer” as something that is elusive to only certain group of people which think there dogma as being the way that is more correct than others who could believe also that might not agree with there dogma.

Let me clarify "true believers." True believers can be seem clearly in the teaching of Jesus in the parable of the sower:

"And he spake many things unto them in parables, saying, Behold, a sower went forth to sow; And when he sowed, some seeds fell by the way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up: Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth: and forthwith they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth: And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away. And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprung up, and choked them: But other fell into good ground, and brought forth fruit, some an hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear." -Mt. 13:3-9

Notice the different types of people to whom Jesus is refering to in this parable.

1: And when he sowed, some seeds fell by the way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up:

These are the people who come into the church, make a confession, and as soon as they leave the church, their so-called friends, take them back into the world. And they are not seem in the church again. Was their confession a "true" heart-felt confession? Perhaps, but Jesus also said:

"Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." -Mt. 7:20

2: Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth: and forthwith they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth: And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away.

Then you will see people come into the church, make a confession, and endure for a short time, but because they have no real root in Jesus or His word, they too, soon depart back into the world, and are not seen in the church again. Was their confession a "true" heart-felt confession? Perhaps, but Jesus also said:

"Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." -Mt. 7:20

3: And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprung up, and choked them:

Then again you will see some people come into church, make a confession, endure for a short time, but when they begin to be persecuted for their faith and beliefs, they fall away, leave the church never to be seen again, and go back into the world. Was their confession a "true" heart-felt confession? Perhaps, but Jesus also said:

"Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." -Mt. 7:20

4:But other fell into good ground, and brought forth fruit, some an hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Here we come to the "true believers." There will be some come to the church, lead by the Spirit, convicted of/by the Spirit, who make a genuine, heart-felt, confession of their sinfulness, and their need for the Savior. They will grow in the word and the Lord. And they will bring an increase. These are the "true believers" who never depart, and whom "no man can pluck them out of the Fathers hand." Do you know why you can say for sure they are "true believers?"

"Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." -Mt. 7:20

If these so called Christians do not manifest and real, noticable, change in life, and an increase in knowledge of the Lord and His word, there are no "fruits" manifest in their life.

"Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." -Mt. 7:20

The first three so-called "Christians" had no fruits, but the last, the "true believers" they had fruits. They were seen to:

"Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:" -Mt. 3:8

"Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." -Mt. 7:20

God Bless

Till all are one.

mlqurgw

24th January 2007, 04:11 AM

Though I haven't read the whole thread I did want to respond to the OP. If we can lose our salvation then that would mean that Christ isn't God who is faithful. It would also mean that He failed in accomplishing that which He agreed to do as the surety of a better covenant and must bear the shame for His failure. It would mean that the death and blood of Christ was of no value at all and that He really didn't put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. It would mean that the prophet lied when he said that He shall see of the travail of His soul and shall be satisfied. It would make Christ a liar and the Gospel a farce. It would make man his own savior instead of God. It would mean that God in Christ isn't worthy of trust. I will leave it to you to look up the passages I referenced. Suffice to say that if a man can lose salvation once he has it then there is no Gospel and no salvation.

DeaconDean

24th January 2007, 04:40 AM

Seeker of the Truth

24th January 2007, 11:11 AM

Well, let me say this:

If one is to "lose" their salvation, did he really have it?

In his own mind he may think he has salvation, but in reality he never had it.

Now, then there's the case of my old pastor. He seemed like he was a Christian, but then he committed adultery, lied to the church, kept committing adultery (by this point he has already been given the "boot") and to this day he has spent some time in prison and beat his wife.

Well, can I honestly believe that this man is "saved"?

I answer, no. You may ask why, but I don't believe that this man was ever a follower of Christ and now, especially, isn't a follower of Christ.

BereanTodd

24th January 2007, 11:25 AM

Do we believe what the Scriptures say or do we not?

Philipians 1:6For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus.

We did not begin the work of salvation and we will not finish the work of salvation. It was accomplished on the cross of Christ. Yeshua did not put a down payment on our sins, where we have to maintain now the interest or else risk hell. He paid it all.

What does Ephesians 2 tell us?

Ephesians 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.

Just as salvation does not begin based on works (so that no man may boast) it is also not kept by works. If it were kept by our works, then we would have reason to boast over those who were at one time saved and then fell away (though in truth no such creature ever existed). But we do not have that right because salvation is of God, and all of it is of God, and as we saw above, He who began that work is faithful to complete it.

Ephesians 2:10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.

There is where our works come in. They are the result of our faith, they come out of our life. But what does Paul say in Romans? If we are faithless, He remains faithful! How far can we run from God? There are rewards to lose in heaven, and some will experience loss at that judment seat we will all stand before (1 Cor speaks of this).

But salvation? If we have truly placed our whole trust and faith in Christ, and accepted Him as Lord and Savior then there is now nothing that can separate us from His grace.

Romans 8:37 But in all these things we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us. 38 For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Seeker of the Truth

24th January 2007, 12:21 PM

None of those verses are hitting at what we're discussing.

They may offer some inspiration, but none of them speak of permanent salvation.

stelow

24th January 2007, 04:21 PM

Let me clarify "true believers." True believers can be seem clearly in the teaching of Jesus in the parable of the sower:

"And he spake many things unto them in parables, saying, Behold, a sower went forth to sow; And when he sowed, some seeds fell by the way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up: Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth: and forthwith they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth: And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away. And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprung up, and choked them: But other fell into good ground, and brought forth fruit, some an hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear." -Mt. 13:3-9

Notice the different types of people to whom Jesus is refering to in this parable.

1: And when he sowed, some seeds fell by the way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up:

These are the people who come into the church, make a confession, and as soon as they leave the church, their so-called friends, take them back into the world. And they are not seem in the church again. Was their confession a "true" heart-felt confession? Perhaps, but Jesus also said:

"Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." -Mt. 7:20

2: Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth: and forthwith they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth: And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away.

Then you will see people come into the church, make a confession, and endure for a short time, but because they have no real root in Jesus or His word, they too, soon depart back into the world, and are not seen in the church again. Was their confession a "true" heart-felt confession? Perhaps, but Jesus also said:

"Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." -Mt. 7:20

3: And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprung up, and choked them:

Then again you will see some people come into church, make a confession, endure for a short time, but when they begin to be persecuted for their faith and beliefs, they fall away, leave the church never to be seen again, and go back into the world. Was their confession a "true" heart-felt confession? Perhaps, but Jesus also said:

"Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." -Mt. 7:20

4:But other fell into good ground, and brought forth fruit, some an hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Here we come to the "true believers." There will be some come to the church, lead by the Spirit, convicted of/by the Spirit, who make a genuine, heart-felt, confession of their sinfulness, and their need for the Savior. They will grow in the word and the Lord. And they will bring an increase. These are the "true believers" who never depart, and whom "no man can pluck them out of the Fathers hand." Do you know why you can say for sure they are "true believers?"

"Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." -Mt. 7:20

If these so called Christians do not manifest and real, noticable, change in life, and an increase in knowledge of the Lord and His word, there are no "fruits" manifest in their life.

"Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." -Mt. 7:20

The first three so-called "Christians" had no fruits, but the last, the "true believers" they had fruits. They were seen to:

"Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:" -Mt. 3:8

"Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." -Mt. 7:20

God Bless

Till all are one.

I don't buy it and still say: I see the term “true believer” as something that is elusive to only certain group of people which think there dogma as being the way that is more correct than others who could believe also that might not agree with there dogma.

The Calvinist says they are the true believers. The Pentescostal says they are the true believers and so on with each religions own dogma.

BigChrisfilm

25th January 2007, 05:29 AM

the one thing about that that im iffy on is where it mentions we are still saved even if we become lawless.
Tenken, we are all lawless, and no one can keep the law. Breaking the law in general is not going to lose your salvation. (BTW, I am back, lol)

icedtea

25th January 2007, 05:33 AM

Where were you?

BigChrisfilm

25th January 2007, 05:39 AM

Where were you?
I took a little two week vacation.

icedtea

25th January 2007, 05:44 AM

I took one a little while ago. Did you see the discarded plastic cups I left there? ;)

IisJustMe

25th January 2007, 08:57 AM

Either we trust Christ for our salvation, and Him alone, or we trust in ourselves to cling to that which we had nothing to do with acquiring in the first place. Don't know about you, but my best thinking and my best effort led me to the conclusion that I had no power, no ability, no goodness within me aside from Christ. So I trusted in Him. Now, I am still in same boat. Nothing I do will "keep me saved" any more than anything I do will return me to a state of condemnation.

"For by grace you have been saved, through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is a gift of God, not as the result of works, so that no one should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God created beforehand so that we would walk in them." (Ephesians 2:8-10)

I stand on the Word of God, which tells me that I am His, and He will never leave me nor forsake me. And the nonsense that's going through some people's minds as they read this ("Yeah, but you can leave Him.") is so much garbage. He has promised never to leave me, meaning He goes with me even if I do stray from His path. I may sin in my salvation, perhaps even willingly and rebelliously, but God never ever says that will cost me my salvation. My physical life, yes, as he will remove me for my poor witness as Paul turned over the young fornicator in Corinth (I Corinthians 5:2) for destruction of his flesh "so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus."

So don't try to convince me I can lose a relationship I had nothing to do with starting, based on the unconditional love of my Creator. It can't happen. And I note with interest that I have never talked with anyone who thought they had "lost" their salvation. It is always something that "could happen" but never to them.

BereanTodd

25th January 2007, 09:21 AM

Those who believe that you can lose your salvation have one big problem. For instance, John Wesley went his whole life without any assurance. It is really very sad if you read his personal writtings. One year he would write that now he knew that he was really, really saved, and a couple of years later he would write that before he had been sorely mistaken and he had never been saved or he had lost his salvation and back and forth he went his entire life.

But here is the thing I wanted to get to. First off let us consider how much sin it is that causes us to lose our salvation. Whether great or small get that point in your mind. Now read these verses:

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, 6 and 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.
IF it is possible to lose your salvation - then it is never possible to regain it and come back to Christ. Almost none of the "you can lose your salvation" crowd are willing to accept that fact or are comfortable with it. But if salvation can be lost then the one who lost it can NEVER come back to Christ.

Seeker of the Truth

25th January 2007, 10:22 AM

Let me ask you this:

How do you know that you're really saved? Have you entered Christ's kingdom?

No you haven't.

What I am saying is that it depends on what perspective you're looking at it from.

eldermike

25th January 2007, 10:35 AM

I find that folks that struggle with this sometimes do not understand Original sin. The other thing I find is Doctrine of God issues. These folks are driven by passages of scripture apart from context of doctrine.
Something like this:
Understanding God’s Nature –leads to correct Doctrine of God – leads to correct understanding of Scripture = Correct Doctrine of Christianity. IOW, scripture is understood through the engine of doctrine, derived from scripture and understanding the Nature of God.

Eternal security is not something we have for our good, it's actually the only way salvation could be.

edb19

25th January 2007, 03:19 PM

PrincetonGuy

25th January 2007, 05:02 PM

Look at Scripture. Don't take my word for it, or anyone else's, whether it is for or against OSAS.

On the surface this may appear to be sound advice—but the logic behind it is VERY seriously flawed. The New Testament was originally written in Greek, a language vastly different from the English language, especially regarding the nature of action expressed by verbs. English speaking people view actions largely in reference to their position in time. First century Greek speaking people viewed actions in reference to their beginning, duration, completion, or repetition with little or no reference to time. In order to verbally express action as they viewed it, they used six tenses—present, imperfect, aorist, future, perfect, and past-perfect—none of which have really close counterparts in English—and when these six tenses were inadequate to express the action as they viewed it—which was VERY common—they used participles, very much more than we do in English, and very differently than we do in English.

All of the Early Greek Church Fathers clearly understood that the Greek New Testament expressly teaches conditional security, and as long as the Greek language was the language of the Church, the New Testament did not at all allow for the possibility of a doctrine of eternal security to be conceived based upon its message. Very early on, the Greek New Testament documents were translated into Latin, Coptic, Syriac, and Ethiopic in order to give diverse cultures access to it, and the churches preaching and teaching in these languages continued to preach the doctrine of conditional security. The Latin Church gained dominance in the form of the Roman Catholic Church and, of course, it continued to preach the doctrine of conditional security and it does so down to the present day as do the Eastern Churches and most Protestant churches.

Very early in the Protestant Reformation, it was suggested that God is absolutely sovereign and that no one can resist His will and that, therefore, whomsoever God had predestined to be saved would be saved throughout eternity and therefore could not possibly lose their salvation. For one reason or another, this suggestion caught on and a large number of the Reformers began to teach it even though it was diametrically in opposition to the teaching of the Greek New Testament and the teaching of the Church in both the East and the West for 1,500 years. Every several years we find a new doctrine or two being introduced into the church and catching on to some extent, but this idea of eternal security was really unique because very few doctrines are so explicitly and incontrovertible taught in the Greek New Testament that they were universally understood and accepted by the entire body of Christians for 1,500 years as was the doctrine of conditional security.

Almost every imaginable Christian doctrine was opposed by at least one theologian during the first 1,500 years of the Church and therefore we find nearly every Christian doctrine being vigorously defended by the Early Church, but we find no opposition at all to the teaching of conditional security and we find no one defending it against any other view. And, of course, for those who know the Greek New Testament, this is exactly what one would expect to find because the Greek New Testament more clearly teaches the doctrine of conditional security than it does almost any other Christian doctrine.

The situation is comparable to a two thousand-year-old box that has been carefully guarded from the beginning to make certain that nothing would be added to it. For 1,500 years, tens of thousands of people very thoroughly searched the contents of that box and all that they found inside was 1,000 white marbles. The chances of someone coming along after than 1,500 years and discovering that one of the 1,000 marbles in that box was not white but black is almost infinitely small. The chances of someone coming along today and discovering that all 1,000 marbles are black rather than white, and were black rather than white from the very beginning, is almost infinitely smaller still.

“God is absolutely sovereign and no man can resist His will, therefore the doctrine of conditional security has to be wrong no matter what the Bible says!” Obviously such a claim as that would never fly, so proponents of the absolute sovereignty of God began searching for anomalies in the Greek text where the “rules” of Greek grammar are broken in the hopes of justifying their position. Over the years, the basic principle that if you want to believe something badly enough, you will eventually find a justification (in your own mind) for believing it allowed many people to believe as true precisely the opposite of what the Bible teaches.

There is literally more evidence, both biblical and scientific, for the ideas that the earth is flat and that the sun revolves around the earth than there is for the idea that the Bible teaches the doctrine of OSAS.

And consider this: If the entire body of Christians, for 1,500 years, was wrong about what the Bible teaches regarding salvation, and if since then, down to the present day, the very large majority of denominations, Christian affiliations, pastors, and laymen have been wrong about what the Bible teaches regarding salvation, there is no logical or rational reason to believe that ANY Christian doctrine believed and taught today is true because, in all likelihood, if we wait long enough, each one of them, like the doctrine of conditional security, will eventually be proven false as the Church matures in her thinking.

And consider this: If the entire body of Christians, for 1,500 years, was wrong about what the Bible teaches regarding salvation, and if since then, down to the present day, the very large majority of denominations, Christian affiliations, pastors, and laymen have been wrong about what the Bible teaches regarding salvation, the Bible was so poorly written that even the doctrine of salvation could not be understood by anyone for 1,500 years, and has since then been misunderstood down to the present day by the very large majority of denominations, Christian affiliations, pastors, and laymen. And if that is true, to believe that this very poorly written book is a divinely inspired book is contrary to reason.

There is one point here that I confess I do not understand. How is it possible that a man or a woman who cannot read Greek and who has, therefore, never read the New Testament through in Greek, how is it possible for such a man or a woman to believe that they understand what New Testament teaches about salvation when Polycarp, a native-born Greek speaker who was a personal acquaintance of the Apostle John, if OSAS is true, could not understand it; when Clement of Rome, a native-born Greek speaker who was a contemporary of all of the Apostles, if OSAS is true, could not understand it, and when none of the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers whom it pleased God to use to formulate the doctrine of the Trinity and to establish the New Testament Canon, if OSAS is true, could not understand it. How is such arrogance even possible? The answer to that question is infinitely beyond my comprehension! Where is the virtue of humility? Where is the belief that the Bible is the divinely inspired word of God, the very God who is more than able to inspire a work that even simple men and women could and did understand from the very beginning when they humbled themselves before God and prayed, “Teach me Thy word, O Lord!”

For the past 2,000 years, the Lord our God has blessed His people with scholars of the New Testament, and I do not believe that He blessed us with them that their council should be ignored.

Proverbs 11:14 Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counsellers there is safety. (KJV)

And when their council is unanimous for the first 1,500 years and remains to this day the council of the large majority of Bible scholars, theologians, teachers and pastors that council should be accepted as true, and if in one’s own mind it does not appear to be true, one needs to examine one’s self to learn what is wrong with one’s perception.

PrincetonGuy

25th January 2007, 06:06 PM

Absolutely, it means something. It's a tough question. The question is whether one who is saved is capable of this act. It does not say that one who is saved can do this. If one assumes that a Christian can commit this act, then one must balance this against the rest of scripture, which overwhelmingly states that one cannot lose their salvation. One verse does not a theology of salvation make...especially when there are so many that talk of God's irreversible salvation. From early on (2nd/3rd century), this passage was interpreted to talk of false prophets. While that is not incontrovertible evidence, it is great supporting evidence when the rest of the Word of God is taken into account.

In Him,
Dave

Rev. 22:19. and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book. (NASB, 1995)

Rev. 22:19. καὶ ἐάντιςἀφέλῃ ἀπὸ τῶνλόγωντοῦ βιβλίουτῆςπροφητείαςταύτης, ἀφελεῖ ὁ Θεὸςτὸ μέροςαὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τοῦ ξύλουτῆςζωῆςκαὶ ἐκτῆςπόλεωςτῆςἁγίας, τῶνγεγραμμένωνἐντῷ βιβλίῳ τούτῳ.

We do not find in any of the extant writings of the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers a quote from Rev. 22:19 and we find only one allusion to it. Irenaeus wrote in Book V, Chapter 30, paragraph 1, of his Against Heresies, “there shall be no light punishment [inflicted] upon him who either adds or subtracts anything from the Scripture, under that such a person must necessarily fall.” Irenaeus did NOT interpret this verse as speaking of non-Christian false prophets.

Indeed, this verse says that if (ἐάν with φέλη in the subjunctive mood and ἀφελεῖ in the indicative mood and therefore, from the point of view of the author, a real possibility) anyone (saved or not) takes away “from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.”

Even if this was the only verse in the New Testament that warned of the real and present danger of apostasy, in the Greek text of this verse the warning is expressly clear and stern and must be read as such. But, of course, this is only one of a multitude of verses that warn of the real and present danger of apostasy resulting in the eternal damnation of the Christian who apostatizes from the Christian faith. And your statement that the rest of scripture “overwhelmingly states that one cannot lose their salvation” is absolutely false. Indeed, there is NOT ONE verse in the entirety of the Greek New Testament that states such a thing, implies such a thing, or even so much as vaguely hints at such a thing. Such a concept was entirely foreign to the writers of the New Testament, the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers, and the whole of the Church for 1,500 years! It is a doctrine of men that stands in direct opposition to the teaching of the New Testament.

eldermike

25th January 2007, 06:13 PM

Baptists once agreed on this issue. Eternal security is a corner stone of our roots.

The great Princeton theologian, Dr. B. B. Warfield, describes Calvinism as follows:
Calvinism is evangelism in its pure and only stable expression, and when we say evangelism we say sin and salvation. It means utter dependence on God for salvation. It implies therefore, need of salvation and a profound sense of this need, along with an equally profound sense of helplessness in the presence of this need, and utter dependence on God for its satisfaction. Its type is found in the publican who smote his breast and cried, "God be merciful to me a sinner!" No question there of saving himself, or helping God to save him, or of opening the way to God to save him. No question of anything but "I am a sinner, and all my hope is in God, my Saviour!" This is Calvinism, not just something like Calvinism, or an approach to Calvinism, but Calvinism in its vital manifestation. Wherever this attitude of heart is found and is given expression in direct and unambiguous terms, there is Calvinism. Where this attitude of mind and heart is fallen away from it however small a measure, there Calvinism has become impossible. The Calvinist, in a word, is the man who sees God. He has caught sight of the ineffable Vision, and he will not let it fade for a moment from his eyes--God in nature, God in history, God in grace. Everywhere he sees God in His mighty stepping, everywhere he feels the working of His mighty arm, the throbbing of His mighty heart...Calvinism is just Christianity. The super-naturalism for which Calvinism stands is the very breath of the nostrils of Christianity; without it Christianity cannot exist...Calvinism thus emerges to our sight as nothing more or less than the hope of the world.
John A. Broadus, one of the great and respected Southern Baptist fathers, described the Calvinism of his fellow-founder of Southern Seminary, Dr. James P. Boyce, as nothing less than the technical name for "that exalted system of Pauline truth."

Charles Haddon Spurgeon, that great soul-winner, once said, We only use the term "Calvinism" for shortness. That doctrine which is called "Calvinism" did not spring from Calvin; we believe that it sprang from the great founder of all truth. Perhaps Calvin himself derived it mainly from the writings of Augustine. Augustine obtained his views, without doubt, through the Holy Spirit of God, from diligent study of the writings of Paul, and Paul received them from the Holy Ghost and from Jesus Christ, the great founder of the Christian Church. We use the term then, not because we impute an extraordinary importance to Calvin's having taught these doctrines. We would be just as willing to call them by any other name, if we could find one which would be better understood, and which on the whole would be as consistent with the fact. Spurgeon went on to say,
The old truths that Calvin preached, that Augustine preached, is the truth that I preach today, or else I would be false to my conscience and my God. I cannot shape truth; I know of no such thing as paring off the rough edges of a doctrine. John Knox's gospel is my gospel. And that gospel which thundered through Scotland must thunder through England again.

PrincetonGuy

25th January 2007, 06:33 PM

But the Bible says,

Heb. 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,
6. and 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.
7. For ground that drinks the rain which often falls on it and brings forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is also tilled, receives a blessing from God;
8. but if it yields thorns and thistles, it is worthless and close to being cursed, and it ends up being burned.
9. But, beloved, we are convinced of better things concerning you, and things that accompany salvation, though we are speaking in this way. (NASB, 1995)

Up until the 16th century this passage was universally interpreted as teaching that a Christian could lose his salvation, and the large majority of Bible scholars today still hold to that position. Indeed, this passage of Scripture gives us the most detailed description of what it means to be saved that we find anywhere in the Bible, and the end of these saved persons who subsequently fall away from the Christian faith is eternal damnation in the fires of hell. However, the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews wrote his Epistle using the terminology and phraseology of the very early Church. Therefore, in order to accurately interpret the Epistle to the Hebrews it is essential to have a solid background in the writings of the very early Church and the terminology and phraseology that they used.

The phrase in verse 4, “those who have once been enlightened,” is a reference to water baptism. Indeed, Justin Martyr (died in 165 A.D.) wrote that the term “enlightenment” was used as a synonym for water baptism of converts to Christianity and he uses the term “the enlightened one” for a person who has been baptized. And the ancient Peshita Syriac translation of the Greek New Testament renders the phrase in verse 4, “who have gone down into baptism.”

The phrase in verse 4, “have tasted of the heavenly gift,” was variously interpreted during the first 1500 years, but it was ALWAYS interpreted as describing a born-again Christian. Some, for example, saw it to be a reference to the Eucharist; others saw it to be a reference to the teaching of Christ in John 6:31-58. Still others saw it to be a reference to the forgiveness of sins; others saw it to be a reference to the blessings conferred upon the Christian believer.

The phrase in verse 4, “and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit,” is an obvious reference to receiving the Holy Spirit, something that, in the New Testament, happens EXCLUSIVELY to those who have been saved.

The phrase in verse 5, “and have tasted the good word of God,” is a clear reference to the Christian’s experience of hearing the word of God preached and taught and the consequential experience of it in his life as a believer.

The phrase in verse 5, “and the powers of the age to come,” is a reference to the miracles that were performed by the Apostles and other Christians as a foreshadowing of the kingdom to come, and to the other blessings that Christians experience now in part but shall experience in their fullness in the future kingdom.

The phrase in verse 6, “and then have fallen away,” can be properly interpreted only to be speaking of falling from grace and the Christian faith, something that can NOT happen until AFTER a person is saved.

The phrases in verse 6, “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,” tell us of the absolutely horrendous consequence of a Christian falling from grace, making the death of Christ on the cross for his sins to be of no effect. This passage expressly speaks of a person who has heard the Gospel, believed it, was saved and baptized, repented of his sins, and enjoyed the blessing of being a born-again Christian—but who subsequently chose to reject Christ and return to his sins. And the fate of such a person could not possibly be any worse—it is “impossible to renew them again to repentance.” Most obviously it is not impossible to renew an unsaved person to repentance if they have repented but not been born again and then fall back into sin. But the born-again Christian who, of his own free will, chooses to reject the Christ who redeemed him, this man or woman is beyond redemption and damned to the fires of hell for eternity.

Verses 7 & 8 are an analogy used to support the author’s statements. Just as the ground which once brought forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is also tilled received a blessing from God, and the ground that yields thorns and thistles is worthless and ends up being burned, so the Christian which once brought forth good fruit unto God but who now brings forth bad fruit ends up being burned in the fires of hell.

In verse 9 we find words of encouragement for those who have been so very severely warned of the possibility of losing their salvation, “we are convinced of better things concerning you, and things that accompany salvation.” These words would be absolutely meaningless if the loss of one’s salvation was not a very real possibility.

We know from early Church documents that candidates for water baptism were not carelessly selected and this passage therefore presupposes both a genuine faith and a genuine conversion. And, of course, it is impossible to apostatize from a faith that one never had, and all of the phrases used in this passage describing these individuals are applicable exclusively to those who have been saved by grace through faith and who lived as Christians before they fell away.

26. For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins,
27. but a terrifying expectation of judgment and THE FURY OF A FIRE WHICH WILL CONSUME THE ADVERSARIES.
28. Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on {the testimony of} two or three witnesses.
29. How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?
30. For we know Him who said, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY." And again, "THE LORD WILL JUDGE HIS PEOPLE."
31. It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God. (NASB, 1995)

Tenken07

25th January 2007, 11:26 PM

I found an article on the internet about OSNAS. it mentions that we must perservere to receive eternal life

http://www.christianissues.biz/perseverance.html

IisJustMe

26th January 2007, 01:02 AM

I found an article on the internet about OSNAS. it mentions that we must perservere to receive eternal life

http://www.christianissues.biz/perseverance.htmlIt fails to differentiate between mere words and true confession. It also misquotes Romans 8:13. Your web site says the verse reads thusly: "For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die;" That's not what it says.

"[F]or if you are (emphasis mine) living according to the flesh, you must die;"

That's a subtle but significant difference. It makes the distinction between occasional and unintentional sin versus an actively sinful lifestyle The former is common to all men, believer or unbeliever. The latter is not possible for the one who has truly confessed his depravity and sinfulness and acknowledges his need for a Savior. The actively sinful person has only paid lip service to his sinful nature, and has not made a confession of faith acceptable to God. He has, in fact, mocked God, knowingly or not. The difference is, the true confession comes from an inner knowledge that there is no hope apart from Christ. The lip service comes from nothing more than emotion or a deliberate lie. He who has the true inner knowledge will not renege on it, or he makes a liar of not only himself, but God, neither of which will be acceptable to one who has come to such a conclusion.

Salvation brings about life change. Confession without life change is intellectual or emotional in nature, not in the spirit where it needs to be to be effective. This is where those who reject eternal security are confused. They believe words are sufficient, that any confession is a good confession. Not true. Only that true, heartfelt confession is acceptable to God and therefore rewarded with saving grace.

PrincetonGuy

26th January 2007, 04:53 AM

The author of the article linked to does not understand Rom. 8:12-14 and what he says about conditional sentences in Greek is incorrect. It is true that the New Testament teaches the doctrine of conditional security, but the construction of Rom. 8:12-15 does not clearly teach the doctrine. A much more suitable passage for refuting the doctrine of OSAS is found in John 15:1-10:

1. "I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser.
2. "Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit, He takes away; and every {branch} that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit.
3. "You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you.
4. "Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me.
5. "I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing.
6. "If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned.
7. "If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you.
8. "My Father is glorified by this, that you bear much fruit, and so prove to be My disciples.
9. "Just as the Father has loved Me, I have also loved you; abide in My love.
10. "If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love; just as I have kept My Father's commandments and abide in His love. (NASB, 1995)

There are the four kinds of conditional sentence found in the Greek New Testament:

1. The supposition of a fact. Example: For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised; (1 Cor. 15:16). In this kind of conditional sentence we find the conditional Greek particle εἰ used with the verb in the indicative mood in the protasis (the “if” clause), and either the indicative mood or the imperative mood (or the subjunctive mood in the case of a prohibition) in the apodosis (the “then” clause).

2. The supposition of a possibility. Example: If anyone is willing to do His will, he will know of the teaching, whether it is of God or whether I speak from Myself. (John 7:17). In this kind of conditional sentence we find the conditional Greek particle ἐὰν ̓ used with the verb in the subjunctive mood in the protasis, and either the indicative mood or the imperative mood (or the aorist subjunctive with οὐ μὴ) in the apodosis.

3. The supposition of an uncertainty. Example: who ought to have been present before you and to make accusation, if they should have anything against me. (Acts 24:19).
In this kind of conditional sentence we find the conditional Greek particle εἰ used with the verb in the optative mood. There are no examples in the New Testament where this kind of conditional sentence is used having both the protasis and the apodosis.

4 The supposition of something contrary to fact. Example: If God were your Father, you would love Me. (John 8:42). In this kind of conditional sentence we find the conditional Greek particle εἰ used with the verb in the protasis and the Greek particle ἂν̓ used with the verb in the apodosis with the indicative mood used in both the protasis and the apodosis.

With this information in mind, let’s look at the conditional sentences that we find in John 15:1-10:

John 15:4. “Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me.”Although it is not apparent from this English translation, this verse does include a conditional clause and we find the conditional Greek particle ἐὰν ̓ used with the verb in the subjunctive mood in the protasis. (Compare Young’s Literal Translation of the Bible, “remain in me, and I in you, as the branch is not able to bear fruit of itself, if it may not remain in the vine, so neither ye, if ye may not remain in me.”)

John 15:6. “If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned.” Here we find the conditional Greek particle ἐὰν ̓ used with the verb in the subjunctive mood in the protasis and in the indicative mood in the apodosis.

John 15:7. “If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you.” Here again we find the conditional Greek particle ἐὰν̓ used with the verb in the subjunctive mood in the protasis and in the indicative mood in the apodosis.

John 15:10. “If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love; just as I have kept My Father's commandments and abide in His love.” Here again we find the conditional Greek particle ἐὰν ̓ used with the verb in the subjunctive mood in the protasis and in the indicative mood in the apodosis.

The word “abide” in verse 4 is in the subjunctive mood; Jesus is telling his disciples that unless they remain in him, they cannot bear fruit.
The word “abide” in verse 5 is in the imperative mood; Jesus is commanding His disciples to abide in him.
The word “abide” in verse 6 is in the subjunctive mood; Jesus is telling his disciples that if anyone does not remain in him, they are cast into the fire and are burned. It is very interesting that the verbs translated “thrown” and “dries up” are in the Greek aorist tense, a tense indicating past action completed at a point in time, as though anyone who fails to remain in Christ is viewed by God as already having been dried up and thrown out like a dried up branch to be cast into the fire where they are burned. This is a very stern warning in vivid language to those individuals who are in Christ that the consequence of failing to obey His command to remain in Him is to be dried up and burned like a dried up branch of a vine.
The word “abide” in verse 7 is in the subjunctive mood in both of its occurrences in this verse; Jesus is telling his disciple that if they (the you is plural) abide in Him and His words abide in them, they are to ask (imperative mood and hence a command) for whatever they wish and it will be done for them.

Therefore, in these verses the word “if” means “if,” not “since,” and that the promises found in these verses, both the good and the bad, are conditional upon the disciples, individually, continuing to abide (remaining) in Christ, and His words continuing to abide (remaining) in them. How do we continue to abide in Christ? Jesus answered that question for us, “If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love; just as I have kept My Father's commandments and abide in His love.” And earlier in John’s gospel, 8:31, we find a conditional sentence with exactly the same construction that we found in 15:6, 7 & 10, the conditional Greek particle ἐὰν ̓ used with the verb in the subjunctive mood in the protasis and the indicative mood in the apodosis.

John 8:31. So Jesus was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, “If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine.”

The study of the moods of the verbs in the Greek New Testament sheds a great deal of light upon the concepts that the New Testament authors were expressing. John 15:16 is especially illuminating when the mood of each verb is taken into consideration:

John 15:16. “You did not choose (indicative) Me but I chose (indicative) you, and appointed (indicative) you that you would go (subjunctive) and bear (subjunctive) fruit, and that your fruit would remain (subjunctive), so that whatever you ask (subjunctive) of the Father in My name He may (subjunctive) give (subjunctive) to you.”

God has chosen us and appointed us, but what we do with that choice and the appointments is up to us.

You are correct that salvation does bring about life change. The Apostle Paul stated this fact very clearly in 2 Cor. 5:17, Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new. (NKJV). However, according to Jesus as quoted by John in John 15:1-10, that life change lasts only so long as the born-again believer remains in Him (Christ), and His words remain in them. And as we saw earlier in this thread (post #45), Heb. 6:4-9 describes in detail true, born-again believers who fall from grace and find themselves in a state where it is “impossible to renew them again to repentance” and whose end it is to be cast into the flames of hell for eternity.

PETE_

26th January 2007, 09:26 AM

Hebrews 6:5-8

Naturally the words “fall away” cannot refer to the loss of eternal life which, as the Gospel of John makes perfectly clear, is the inalienable possession of those who trust Christ for it. But the writer evidently has in mind defection from the faith, that is, apostasy, withdrawal from their Christian profession (cf. (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=31141656#_ftn1) Heb. 3:6, 14; 10:23-25, 35-39). The assertion that such a failure is not possible for a regenerate person is a theological proposition which is not supported by the New Testament. Paul knew the dangers of false doctrine to a Christian’s faith and spoke of a certain Hymenaeus and Philetus who said “that the resurrection has already taken place, and they destroy the faith of some” (2 Tim. 2:17-18). The author of Hebrews was a solid realist who took assaults against the faith of his readers with great seriousness. And he warned that those who succumb, that is, “fall away,” after all of the great spiritual privileges they had experienced, could not be brought back to repentance.
The reason is expressed in the words because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting Him to public disgrace. The words “to their loss” might be better rendered “with respect to themselves.” Those who renounce their Christian faith are, with respect to their own conduct and attitude, taking a step that amounts to a fresh public rejection of Christ. When they first trusted Him, they thereby acknowledged that His crucifixion had been unjust and the result of man’s sinful rejection of the Savior. But by renouncing this opinion, they reaffirmed the view of Jesus’ enemies that He deserved to die on a cross. In this sense, “they [were] crucifying the Son of God all over again.” Since the original Crucifixion was especially the work of the Jewish nation, if the readers were Jews being lured back into some form of their ancestral religion, the writer’s words made a particular point. Their apostasy would be like stepping back over the line again and once more expressing solidarity with their compatriots who wanted Jesus put on the cross. That this was most serious was precisely the writer’s point. Such persons could not be won back to the state of repentance which marked their original conversion to Christianity. In affirming this, the author’s words suggested a deep hardening of their hearts against all efforts to win them back, not to Christian conversion, but to Christian commitment.
6:7-8. An illustration from nature now drives home the writer’s point. Whenever rain-soaked ground is properly productive, it receives the blessing of God. Here the writer compared the spiritual privileges he had just enumerated (vv. (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=31141656#_ftn2) 4-5) to a heavenly rain descending on the life of a Christian. Their effect should be a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed—a reference perhaps to the way other Christians benefit from the lives of fruitful believers (cf. v. (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=31141656#_ftn3) 10). Such productivity brings divine blessings on fruitful believers’ lives.
But suppose the land that has received this “rain” is unproductive? Though the NIV (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=31141656#_ftn4) introduces the word land for a second time in verse 8, the original text seems to relate the statement directly to the “land” mentioned in verse 7. A clearer rendering would be: “But when (or, if) it produces thorns and thistles. . . .” The point is that when a plot of ground that has been rained on is productive, God blesses it. But if it only produces thorns and thistles, it is worthless (adokimos, “disapproved”; cf. 1 Cor. 9:27) and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned. The metaphor recalls God’s original curse on the ground (Gen. 3:17-19) and suggests that an unproductive Christian life ultimately (“in the end”) falls under the severe condemnation of God and is subject to His blazing wrath and judgment (cf. Heb. 10:27).
Naturally the reference to “burned” has caused many to think of hell, but there is nothing in the text to suggest this. God’s anger against His failing people in the Old Testament is often likened to the burning of fire (cf., e.g. (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=31141656#_ftn5), Isa. 9:18-19; 10:17). Even this writer could say, with intense metaphorical effect, “Our God is a consuming fire” (Heb. 12:29). In fact, to think of hell here is to betray inattention to the imagery employed by the author. The burning of a field to destroy the rank growth it had produced was a practice known in ancient times. Its aim was not the destruction of the field itself (which, of course, the fire could not effect), but the destruction of the unwanted produce of the field. Thereafter the field might be serviceable for cultivation.
By choosing this kind of metaphor, the author showed that he did not totally despair of those who took the backward step he was warning against. To be sure, at least prior to severe divine judgment, all efforts to recall such people to Christian faith are futile (6:4-6), but it cannot be said that the impossibility applies in an absolute sense to God Himself. What the author probably meant is that nothing can deter apostates from the fiery retribution toward which they are headed, but once their “land” has been burned it is another matter. Paul believed that those who “have shipwrecked their faith” could profit by the retributive experiences to which they were exposed as a result (1 Tim. 1:19-20). But of course the writer of Hebrews was reticent about the issue of subsequent restoration. That some might not respond to the chastisement was perhaps in mind, but he was mainly concerned about warning against the course of action which leads to such calamitous divine judgment. Nevertheless his deft choice of this agricultural image serves to disclose that the “burning” is both temporary and essentially hopeful.
[/URL]

[URL="http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=31141656#_ftnref6"] (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=31141656#_ftn6)Walvoord, J. F., Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary.

eldermike

26th January 2007, 11:17 AM

Man turns to God - nothing changes - the branch has no power.
God moves and the branch lives.
Back up from the
syllabication mud bog, the bondage of being tossed from wave to wave by verbs, and look at who it is you are talking about, it's God.

Let go, let God.

There is nothing left fro me to add here.
But once again, historical baptists once had this right.

Tenken07

26th January 2007, 02:43 PM

It fails to differentiate between mere words and true confession. It also misquotes Romans 8:13. Your web site says the verse reads thusly: "For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die;" That's not what it says.

"[F]or if you are (emphasis mine) living according to the flesh, you must die;"

That's a subtle but significant difference. It makes the distinction between occasional and unintentional sin versus an actively sinful lifestyle The former is common to all men, believer or unbeliever. The latter is not possible for the one who has truly confessed his depravity and sinfulness and acknowledges his need for a Savior. The actively sinful person has only paid lip service to his sinful nature, and has not made a confession of faith acceptable to God. He has, in fact, mocked God, knowingly or not. The difference is, the true confession comes from an inner knowledge that there is no hope apart from Christ. The lip service comes from nothing more than emotion or a deliberate lie. He who has the true inner knowledge will not renege on it, or he makes a liar of not only himself, but God, neither of which will be acceptable to one who has come to such a conclusion.

Actually, both my bibles say For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die

PrincetonGuy

26th January 2007, 05:10 PM

Naturally the words “fall away” cannot refer to the loss of eternal life which, as the Gospel of John makes perfectly clear, is the inalienable possession of those who trust Christ for it.

This is Bible “study” at it absolute worst. It begins with a very broad false premise based upon false information and deduces from the false premise a very wrong interpretation of Hebrews. Furthermore, this Bible “study” confuses trusting in Christ for eternal life (which The Gospel According to John does teach) with a point in time belief in Christ that may or may not last and therefore offers no guarantee of eternal life.

We saw in post #48 of this thread that The Gospel According to John explicitly teaches conditional security rather than OSAS.

But the writer evidently has in mind defection from the faith, that is, apostasy, withdrawal from their Christian profession (cf. (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=31141656#_ftn1) Heb. 3:6, 14; 10:23-25, 35-39). The assertion that such a failure is not possible for a regenerate person is a theological proposition which is not supported by the New Testament. Paul knew the dangers of false doctrine to a Christian’s faith and spoke of a certain Hymenaeus and Philetus who said “that the resurrection has already taken place, and they destroy the faith of some” (2 Tim. 2:17-18). The author of Hebrews was a solid realist who took assaults against the faith of his readers with great seriousness. And he warned that those who succumb, that is, “fall away,” after all of the great spiritual privileges they had experienced, could not be brought back to repentance.
The reason is expressed in the words because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting Him to public disgrace. The words “to their loss” might be better rendered “with respect to themselves.” Those who renounce their Christian faith are, with respect to their own conduct and attitude, taking a step that amounts to a fresh public rejection of Christ. When they first trusted Him, they thereby acknowledged that His crucifixion had been unjust and the result of man’s sinful rejection of the Savior. But by renouncing this opinion, they reaffirmed the view of Jesus’ enemies that He deserved to die on a cross. In this sense, “they [were] crucifying the Son of God all over again.” Since the original Crucifixion was especially the work of the Jewish nation, if the readers were Jews being lured back into some form of their ancestral religion, the writer’s words made a particular point. Their apostasy would be like stepping back over the line again and once more expressing solidarity with their compatriots who wanted Jesus put on the cross. That this was most serious was precisely the writer’s point. Such persons could not be won back to the state of repentance which marked their original conversion to Christianity.

This, however, is true—much to the displeasure of VERY MANY Baptists.

In affirming this, the author’s words suggested a deep hardening of their hearts against all efforts to win them back, not to Christian conversion, but to Christian commitment.

This passage does NOT speak of winning them back to Christian “commitment,” but to the Christian faith from which they have fallen away,

Hebrews 6:6 and 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.

6:7-8. An illustration from nature now drives home the writer’s point. Whenever rain-soaked ground is properly productive, it receives the blessing of God. Here the writer compared the spiritual privileges he had just enumerated (vv. (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=31141656#_ftn2) 4-5) to a heavenly rain descending on the life of a Christian. Their effect should be a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed—a reference perhaps to the way other Christians benefit from the lives of fruitful believers (cf. v. (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=31141656#_ftn3) 10). Such productivity brings divine blessings on fruitful believers’ lives.
But suppose the land that has received this “rain” is unproductive? Though the NIV (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=31141656#_ftn4) introduces the word land for a second time in verse 8, the original text seems to relate the statement directly to the “land” mentioned in verse 7. A clearer rendering would be: “But when (or, if) it produces thorns and thistles. . . .” The point is that when a plot of ground that has been rained on is productive, God blesses it. But if it only produces thorns and thistles, it is worthless (adokimos, “disapproved”; cf. 1 Cor. 9:27) and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned. The metaphor recalls God’s original curse on the ground (Gen. 3:17-19) and suggests that an unproductive Christian life ultimately (“in the end”) falls under the severe condemnation of God and is subject to His blazing wrath and judgment (cf. Heb. 10:27).

Naturally the reference to “burned” has caused many to think of hell, but there is nothing in the text to suggest this. God’s anger against His failing people in the Old Testament is often likened to the burning of fire (cf., e.g. (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=31141656#_ftn5), Isa. 9:18-19; 10:17). Even this writer could say, with intense metaphorical effect, “Our God is a consuming fire” (Heb. 12:29). In fact, to think of hell here is to betray inattention to the imagery employed by the author. The burning of a field to destroy the rank growth it had produced was a practice known in ancient times. Its aim was not the destruction of the field itself (which, of course, the fire could not effect), but the destruction of the unwanted produce of the field. Thereafter the field might be serviceable for cultivation.
By choosing this kind of metaphor, the author showed that he did not totally despair of those who took the backward step he was warning against. To be sure, at least prior to severe divine judgment, all efforts to recall such people to Christian faith are futile (6:4-6), but it cannot be said that the impossibility applies in an absolute sense to God Himself. What the author probably meant is that nothing can deter apostates from the fiery retribution toward which they are headed, but once their “land” has been burned it is another matter. Paul believed that those who “have shipwrecked their faith” could profit by the retributive experiences to which they were exposed as a result (1 Tim. 1:19-20). But of course the writer of Hebrews was reticent about the issue of subsequent restoration. That some might not respond to the chastisement was perhaps in mind, but he was mainly concerned about warning against the course of action which leads to such calamitous divine judgment. Nevertheless his deft choice of this agricultural image serves to disclose that the “burning” is both temporary and essentially hopeful.

If you will read this carefully, you will see that the author not only contradicts the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, but he also contradict