The old law was the law of the flesh, God's law is the law of the spirit. Where hes says against such there is no law, he was talking about the old law, which could not and no longer condemn us.
Loss of salvation.
- Thread starter BillG
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I don't see disown as the correct understanding of the word deny Ralph. It is to reject the gospel message and never receiving the new birth.
Nor can you use the Old Testament to explain the relationship with our Father through the action of the new birth because this was never given until the resurrection of Jesus and Holy Spirit given to men.
The new covenant is a "will" of inheritance through the death of Jesus. We inherit the same Spirit which rose up Jesus from death. Within and upon. OT was only upon.
The old covenant was an agreement of works. You do this...I do that.
It would be a good for everyone to examine their beliefs to discern whether they believe
- Christians are saved because they have been born again as eternal spiritual beings who cannot be lost no matter what they do in life
- Christians are saved because they remain in Christ through a living faith that does the will of GOD
Just because you set up a false premise of choosing either or, does not mean you can force people to choose one of the boxes YOU have prepared for them. This is a type of bullying.
I believe elements of both 1 AND 2!
Last edited:
Using the term bullying like you did is a technique straight out of the political left's playbook that is used to try to shut down opposing viewpoints.
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
Or three
christians are those who have truly repented, and come to true saving faith, and have been adopted as sons and daughters of a living father, and given eternal life, perfected forever and are in the process of being sanctified, their life of faith is based on gods promises not how well they perform (performance or works based theology)
you have a dangerous infatuation with Gnosticism, it keeps you from seeing the real picture. #2 is a works based theology which is not from God,
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
Yet sometmes it is true. Instead of trying to attack, why do you. Ot try to understand why he said it.
You gave two views as if there was no other view, that could be classified as bullying and saying those are the only two views, and wveryone who has a different view does not inow what they are talking about.
R
Ralph-
Guest
How to break the old covenant and lose out on the inheritance: Don't do everything commanded in the law to bring you near to God in Covenant relationship.
How to break the New Covenant and lose out on the inheritance: Stop trusting in Christ who brings you near to God in Covenant relationship.
R
Ralph-
Guest
This is a discussion board. All you have to do is share your thoughts about the matter being discussed.
R
Ralph-
Guest
It's not bullying, lol.
He shared his viewpoint and didn't demand that everyone submit to it. There were no threats attached to it.
R
Ralph-
Guest
Thank you, but this doesn't address the subject of this thread.
Actually, it's the church that has a dangerous infatuation with Gnosticism. We see it in the church's careless disregard for holiness and them thinking that doesn't matter in any way shape or form to their eternal fate, not knowing that how they act shows whether or not they are really saved.
I'll just refer you to the last remaining vestiges of the traditional once saved always saved argument: 'The person who is not living for God is not saved'. Have you switched and now that is a works gospel?
Last edited by a moderator:
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
than you for as usual not being able to counter my view so you have to try to dodge the point by deflecting.
1.do you even know what gnostics believed?
2.they do? What churches? You need to get out more, most the people you attack have no problem with holiness, it is just you making up something hey believe which is not true
I will refere you to the word of God, which says we are saved by grace throuh faith, not works.
I will refure you to scripture, whcih says faith works, it does not sit idle. But it also has to grow, and many churches still had to be fed milk because it could not yet handle meat, so lack of growth does not prove one is not saved.
You want to continue to earn salvation, you will continue to be said to preach a works based gospel.
R
Ralph-
Guest
1 Corinthians 3:8-15 is about people who do the work of raising up and disciplining other believers, and who are successful at it. They will have a reward. Those who aren't successful at it will not have any reward (obviously) but will still be saved. That's what he is talking about there in 1 Corinthians 3:8-15. He's not talking about personal growth in holiness.Well then, what about this?
Gal. 5:18-26 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law. Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts. If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another.
If he were talking about personal growth according to the fruit of the Spirit, the person who had none of that work would not be saved 'as by fire'. His lack of work will show him to not be a believer at all and he will NOT be saved as by fire. Unbelievers are signified by their lack of righteous living. The unrighteous are not going to pass through the coming fire of Judgment. They are going to be consumed in it as an unbeliever. So we know the absence of work in this passage can NOT be the work of personal holiness in a person.
Last edited by a moderator:
R
Ralph-
Guest
You, like so many in the church these days, are going to have to decide which 'once saved always saved' doctrine you're going to go with. For now we have to suffer through these complicated, contradictory doctrines of 'once saved always saved' that mix the two competing versions of that doctrine together like oil and water.
This is your private interpretation of 1 Corinthians 3.
These verses are referring to the Judgment Seat of Christ where the believer's work/labor will be judged not one's eternal salvation. Some will receive rewards and some will suffer loss of rewards. Those that suffer loss of rewards are still saved.
2 Corinthians 5
9 Wherefore we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him.10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.
Why do we labor? We labor that our works will be accepted at the JSOC.
Where you are missing the point is this: You say I would still "know in my heart that Jesus is Christ, that heaven is heaven, and that hell is hell, and that every singe letter in the bible is inspired". You are right - that is something I can never get away from though I might deny I know it. But that is not saving faith.
I repeat - Saving faith is not to "know in my heart that Jesus is Christ, that heaven is heaven, and that hell is hell, and that every single letter in the Bible is inspired." The devils believe that and tremble. There are unbelievers in the world that believe (know) that and ignore it. That will not save you!
Biblical saving faith is to believe and act upon that belief and to grab hold of Christ with a sense of desperation, knowing that without Him I will die, and be doomed to hell forever. Saving faith leans upon Christ, depends upon him, and then has a relationship with Him.
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
Dude, there are many different teaching out there in both camps, and what you have to do is stop judging people and put them under a doctrinal name, and start trying to understand what they believe, until you do that, you will continue to offnd people and come off as self righteous thinking you know them when it is obvious you do not know them at all,
i do not follow a doctrine, i never even heard of osas until a out a decade ago, so why would you try to put me under their camp, or hypergrace or any other camp?
I have faith in God, that he who begun a good work in me will continue his work in me until the day of christ, as he promised. You want to call that OSAS, thats fine, you want to call it hypergrace. So be it, just call it for what it is, true saving faith in God, and total reliance on him.
HA!! LOL!! I seriously almost spit my coffee as I read this! To put LEFT and me in the same sentence is beyond a joke!
You were gone from here for a couple of yrs. Not sure why, but I remember the vitriol you had toward those that believed in Grace and eternal security back then.
For a while, upon your return, it seemed the Lord had softened your heart, as your demeanor, and correspondence was much improved. I was glad to see that. Hoping you don't revert.
News Flash!! I shared my viewpoint as well! I know it may not have as much credence since you disagree, but I think I'm entitled to give it.