No Eternal Security = No Salvation?

[eternally-gratefull]

You literally talk in circles!!

One would think after reading your posts that you have circular logic

Now your resorting to name calling.

Stop. Your hurting your own cause by attacking people with judgment instead of showing them how they are wrong.

Sadly your becoming like many before you who were broke down to where thats all they had.

 

[rlm68]

Now your resorting to name calling.

Stop. Your hurting your own cause by attacking people with judgment instead of showing them how they are wrong.

Sadly your becoming like many before you who were broke down to where thats all they had.

How am I judging by taking every post I read from certain posters and can see a full circle?

Clearly, it is a circular logic!!

You don't have to judge the OBVIOUS!!

 

[rlm68]

You mean like the 1 John scripture you keep saying can be interpreted different ways although John is quite specifit.

You not one to judge when you do that very thing my friend.

1 John is specific we must repent of our sins. This is clearly different than those who believe you can sin and ignore it due to the OSAS condition!!

 

[eternally-gratefull]

How am I judging by taking every post I read from certain posters and can see a full circle?

Clearly, it is a circular logic!!

You don't have to judge the OBVIOUS!!

Because the same can be said of you.

Did we not have this conversation yesterday?

You do not support your view and get people to see your way when you use circular reasoning (things that can also be said of you)

Your being the very thing you are attacking others for.

Are you here to discuss the word. Or just atytack people who do not believe as you do? Or just to cause division? Which is it?

 

[Chester]

Ok. But please don't go away mad. I actually fall pretty much in line with your statement that there are some eternal security people unsaved and some non osas that are saved. I just think the non osas saved don't realize yet that they ARE eternally secure.

Not sure why you thought I was mad . . . ? Actually I am thinking it is quite hilarious . . .
I love you, brother

 

[rlm68]

Because the same can be said of you.

Did we not have this conversation yesterday?

You do not support your view and get people to see your way when you use circular reasoning (things that can also be said of you)

Your being the very thing you are attacking others for.

Are you here to discuss the word. Or just atytack people who do not believe as you do? Or just to cause division? Which is it?

I am not here trying to gain support. I am not here trying to make you see my point of view. I am trying to make you explain your beliefs until I can see it for myself!!

WOW, you assume a lot!!

 

[CS1]

This is a sincere question to mostly those who already believe they are eternally secure (OSAS), and cannot lose their Salvation because Jesus is the One who gave it to them and keeps it secure.

I know there are umpteen OSAS threads, and that can certainly and most likely will be discussed here as EVERY thread eventually boils down to that.

But what I'm asking is are those that don't believe in eternal security saved? I honestly don't know, but would like to hear your thoughts on this issue. At one time I thought you COULD lose your Salvation. I knew who Jesus is (God in the flesh) and what He has done (die to pay for our sin and resurrected to life after 3 days) but also thought that I could lose that Salvation for "willing sin" or disobedience in not totally following Him.

Others here believe they could lose their Salvation for additional reasons. So my question is does thinking you can lose your Salvation equate to NOT being saved?

May God Bless you all!

It is an argument amongst those who profess to be saved already.

Let that sink in. It is not edifying, nor comforting, and NOT ONE GREAT move of God from an Evangelist from the Day of Pentecost when Peter preached; Paul, and other over the year. Not even John Calvin, John Wesley, Whitefield, Spurgeon, Moody, Finney, Billy Graham, and many others. This topic is one of pride and division masked as sincere biblical question. I am not saying that is your motive but that is the normal context to the topic.

 

[PennEd]

Not sure why you thought I was mad . . . ? Actually I am thinking it is quite hilarious . . .
I love you, brother

Just imagine.... 80079 trillion yrs from now looking back at this thread, and us BOTH laughing! Love you Too.

 

[PennEd]

It is an argument amongst those who profess to be saved already.

Let that sink in. It is not edifying, nor comforting, and NOT ONE GREAT move of God from an Evangelist from the Day of Pentecost when Peter preached; Paul, and other over the year. Not even John Calvin, John Wesley, Whitefield, Spurgeon, Moody, Finney, Billy Graham, and many others. This topic is one of pride and division masked as sincere biblical question. I am not saying that is your motive but that is the normal context to the topic.

Sorry you feel that way.

Let me be clear. I haven't "argued" with anybody. Since at one time I thought it possible to lose Salvation, but no longer do, I wanted to hear others thoughts on whether they believed simply holding the position that one could lose Salvation in reality meant they weren't saved.

And frankly, I could care less what the beliefs are of the dudes you listed. I care what those that ARE here think.

The idea of pride is almost laughable. I know without a shadow of a doubt that it is only because Of Jesus that I am saved. That you interpret that as pride is interesting.

At the end of the day, you have just as much right to bypass whatever thread you like, as you do to comment on one. If you don't like this one, you can just mosey on by. Can't really see how your remarks are edifying.

 

[CS1]

Sorry you feel that way.

Let me be clear. I haven't "argued" with anybody. Since at one time I thought it possible to lose Salvation, but no longer do, I wanted to hear others thoughts on whether they believed simply holding the position that one could lose Salvation in reality meant they weren't saved.

And frankly, I could care less what the beliefs are of the dudes you listed. I care what those that ARE here think.

The idea of pride is almost laughable. I know without a shadow of a doubt that it is only because Of Jesus that I am saved. That you interpret that as pride is interesting.

At the end of the day, you have just as much right to bypass whatever thread you like, as you do to comment on one. If you don't like this one, you can just mosey on by. Can't really see how your remarks are edifying.

FYI the term “argument” is known in apologetics i.e. formulate an argument. It is not suggesting one is quarreling however, the majority do that very thing when this topic comes up. As far as carrying about the dudes? they were men of God the word of God says to render honor were it is due. That being said, I don't care what you think about those in here are thinking. And clearly you can't read either. because you missed where I stated "I am not saying that is your motive but that is the normal context to the topic. " So you prove my point, thank you for confirming why this topic is one of divsion and pride.
and why it was banned before .

 

[BaptistBibleBeliever]

Eternal security should be a comforting doctrine for those of us who are 'scarcely saved' . . . if God, through Jesus Christ can't keep that which 'I have committed unto Him against that day', I honestly don't know what I can cling to. It all boils down to 'God said, I believe it (though it doesn't matter whether I believe it or not), that settles it for me!"

When I get to heaven I want all the glory to go to God who is able! Not me for something that I did.

Jesus paid it all,
All to Him I owe;
Sin had left a crimson stain,
He washed it white as snow. ​

 

[Lillywolf]

L...,

Then you are saying the Bible is false....take that one up with G-d. Be blessed in that trip.

No, you are saying the Bible is false. Right there in your reply to me. Don't try to put on me your own thoughts. And wishing me blessings on that trip of your imagining is lame.

 

[PennEd]

FYI the term “argument” is known in apologetics i.e. formulate an argument. It is not suggesting one is quarreling however, the majority do that very thing when this topic comes up. As far as carrying about the dudes? they were men of God the word of God says to render honor were it is due. That being said, I don't care what you think about those in here are thinking. And clearly you can't read either. because you missed where I stated "I am not saying that is your motive but that is the normal context to the topic. " So you prove my point, thank you for confirming why this topic is one of divsion and pride.
and why it was banned before .

Again, it seems to me that YOU are being divisive, not me.
Well gosh! I don't care what you think I think About a bunch of Guys you listed or on here, I think? LOL
I been here 5 1/2 yrs and the only topic I have seen banned was "Hypergrace". Fully a third of the BDF talks in one fashion or another about OSAS, so not sure when that ban happened.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

1 John is specific we must repent of our sins. This is clearly different than those who believe you can sin and ignore it due to the OSAS condition!!

1 john is specific.

If a person claims to have once been part of the churhc, but now denies christ

They were never saved.

Why is it you think one part is right. But not the other?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

1 John is specific we must repent of our sins. This is clearly different than those who believe you can sin and ignore it due to the OSAS condition!!

By the way,

1 John 1 :9 literally says if we confess, or state our sin. God will forget it..

It is not a get resaved verse, it is a get back in fellowship verse.. nice try but no cigar

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Again, it seems to me that YOU are being divisive, not me.
Well gosh! I don't care what you think I think About a bunch of Guys you listed or on here, I think? LOL
I been here 5 1/2 yrs and the only topic I have seen banned was "Hypergrace". Fully a third of the BDF talks in one fashion or another about OSAS, so not sure when that ban happened.

When was calvanism banned? (Since the term OSAS comes from Calvanism.)

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I am not here trying to gain support. I am not here trying to make you see my point of view. I am trying to make you explain your beliefs until I can see it for myself!!

WOW, you assume a lot!!

Then why are you attacking people?

Just because?

I got alot to learn? Lol. Dude many have come before you doing the very same thing your doing.. Maybe we are just sick of people who think they know what everyne believes, and get to the point they resort to name calling and childish attacks..

So are you going to continue with these tactics. Or do you want to discuss the word?

 

[CS1]

Again, it seems to me that YOU are being divisive, not me.
Well gosh! I don't care what you think I think About a bunch of Guys you listed or on here, I think? LOL
I been here 5 1/2 yrs and the only topic I have seen banned was "Hypergrace". Fully a third of the BDF talks in one fashion or another about OSAS, so not sure when that ban happened.

lol Ok if you say so it was you sir, who assumed a negative connotation from my first response which you responded about the "dudes". Nothing i said was directed to you until the last post and this one I will not post on you thread as you have asked me. And there has been OSAS thread that have been banned , closed, and removed. The reason were welknown too. But don't take my word for it just look at those who have already started aruging. Please go back and read my comments again and hopfully you will see None of it was directed at you Until now.

Thank you

 

[eternally-gratefull]

FYI the term “argument” is known in apologetics i.e. formulate an argument. It is not suggesting one is quarreling however, the majority do that very thing when this topic comes up. As far as carrying about the dudes? they were men of God the word of God says to render honor were it is due. That being said, I don't care what you think about those in here are thinking. And clearly you can't read either. because you missed where I stated "I am not saying that is your motive but that is the normal context to the topic. " So you prove my point, thank you for confirming why this topic is one of divsion and pride.
and why it was banned before .

He asked a question about those who believe in eternal security from what I understand. Thus no one who does not agree with it would or should have anything to offer. Correct?

He asked the people who believe in eternal security if we though those who do not are saved.

How can someone who thinks salvation can be lost possibly answer that question?

And since when was OSAS a banned topic??

 

[CS1]

He asked a question about those who believe in eternal security from what I understand. Thus no one who does not agree with it would or should have anything to offer. Correct?

He asked the people who believe in eternal security if we though those who do not are saved.

How can someone who thinks salvation can be lost possibly answer that question?

And since when was OSAS a banned topic??

never said it was, clearly you can't read either. my comment the very first one was not to the poster nor was it rude or insulting but yet again people like you assume much. I will post my first response and please tell me were i said it was a banned topic.

"It is an argument amongst those who profess to be saved already."

"Let that sink in. It is not edifying, nor comforting, and NOT ONE GREAT move of God from an Evangelist from the Day of Pentecost when Peter preached; Paul, and other over the year. Not even John Calvin, John Wesley, Whitefield, Spurgeon, Moody, Finney, Billy Graham, and many others. This topic is one of pride and division masked as sincere biblical question. I am not saying that is your motive but that is the normal context to the topic."

Now show me were:

1. I said anything about being banned
2. that it was directed to Penned as to have done what I have seen in the past
3. tell that there has not been one POST ALREADY that someone has asked another poster " why are you attacking people? , " "Now your resorting to name calling. ", "Sadly your becoming like many before you who were broke down to where thats all they had. "

after you get done from your soap box tell me who it was that said the bold comments?

Then please continue your self-righteous uplifting topic.