Why I now believe that salvation can be lost.

[Rondonmon]

@Rondonmon you said: No one has salvation or condemnation until they die, that is why Jesus said say not who is saved nor condemned, that is God's alone, no one can know a man's heart.

You have that promise of Salvation, but you have to ENDURE until the end. What part of that do you not get, the point is anyone can turn away from God. That is why Jesus said only 5 of the 10 virgin brides will make the Marriage in Heaven. That ratio also matches the Matt. 24:36-51 ONE TAKEN and ONE LEFT. Only half the church will make the Rapture my sister. God sees the heart.

People better grasp this. Sell out for Jesus, if you cling to this world Jesus says you are not of God.

 

[Magenta]

You have that promise of Salvation, but you have to ENDURE until the end. What part of that do you not get, the point is anyone can turn away from God. That is why Jesus said only 5 of the 10 virgin brides will make the Marriage in Heaven. That ratio also matches the Matt. 24:36-51 ONE TAKEN and ONE LEFT. Only half the church will make the Rapture my sister. God sees the heart.

People better grasp this. Sell out for Jesus, if you cling to this world Jesus says you are not of God.

Why did you edit out my recommendation of reading John 3:18? Is because it says people are condemned already, which contradicts what you said? There is also another verse that John wrote specifically telling us that we can KNOW we are saved... that means right now ... not waiting to the end find out.

 

[Magenta]

1 John 5:13 John writes telling us we can know we have eternal life and that means we know we are saved ... we are also under no condemnation being in Christ ... fear has to do with punishment. Those who fear have not been perfected in love.

 

[Rondonmon]

Why did you edit out my recommendation of reading John 3:18? Is because it says people are condemned already, which contradicts what you said? There is also another verse that John wrote specifically telling us that we can KNOW we are saved... that means right now ... not waiting to the end find out.

I did not.........at least not on purpose, I came back to get the verse, I had John 3:16 pilled up, so I might have accidently OFFEED IT..........But my rebut is to your John 3:18 premise sister, which is why I stated, "You have the PROMISE of Salvation, but you still have to ENDURE.

How to 5 of the 10 virgins not make it to the Marriage Sister? THINK. Why did Jesus tell his own disciples you MUST ENDURE until the end. Yes, you can Salvation by the mouth, and its yours for the keeping, but you can then reject God if you so desire, that just common sense.

 

[Magenta]

1 John 2:19 makes plain why any leave.

 

[Musicmaster]

He didn't address it to the Jews; He addressed it to his spiritual brethren: the saved which are the spiritual Jews, but not because they were of the nation of Israel. Those with faith (see below), have been saved making them his spiritual brethren. Likewise, the twelve tribes represent spiritual Israel- the Israel of God- not the nation of Israel. They were "scattered abroad" because of their beliefs - they were spiritually persecuted as Christians. So, the book of James was addressed primarily to Christians.

[Jas 1:1 KJV]
1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.

[Act 8:4 KJV]
4 Therefore they that were scattered abroad went every where preaching the word.

[Act 11:19 KJV]
19 Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only.
[Act 11:21 KJV]
21 And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number believed, and turned unto the Lord.

[Jas 1:3 KJV]
3 Knowing [this], that the trying of your faith worketh patience.

[Jas 1:6 KJV]
6 But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.

Roger, looking back at your quote of verse one where he stated that it was addressed to the twelve tribes. Twelve tribes, I hope we can both agree, is Jews, not Gentiles. Spiritualizing the text to try and enlarge it to include those who could not possibly have been of the twelve tribes, that's very, very suspect, especially considering that he wrote his epistle before Paul had received revelation of the mystery and began to preach it on his first missionary journey.

James does not tie so easily into the language used in Acts to the extent that we cannot take thw words of James for what they say, so I'm therefore suspect of that tactic as well dare we become careless in drawing parallels that don't belong to each other in a comparative sense.

Additionally, James and the other apostles at that time were still preaching the Kingdom Gospel, which included works, faith, water baptism, repentance, and also observing that the Jews were still zealous for the Law. Paul's Gospel of Grace did not require works for justification, where the gospel preached by James did. I also don't buy the over-expansion of James' words by the tactic some have tried to employ in that Jesus completed the works for us. That would render the word of James silly at best, for he made no mention of Christ having fulfilled what he is instructing his Jewish audience to understand and practice.

If a Jehovah's Witness or Mormon tried to use similar tactics in support of their beliefs, you would call them out onto the carpet (or at least I would hope that you would call them out on that), so I hope you will appreciate my lack of so easily believing in these similar tactics whereby one injects concepts and meaning into a text that leaves no room for such in the way it is worded, such as a command, directive, instruction, etc.

MM

 

[rogerg]

Roger, looking back at your quote of verse one where he stated that it was addressed to the twelve tribes. Twelve tribes, I hope we can both agree, is Jews, not Gentiles. Spiritualizing the text to try and enlarge it to include those who could not possibly have been of the twelve tribes, that's very, very suspect, especially considering that he wrote his epistle before Paul had received revelation of the mystery and began to preach it on his first missionary journey.

NO, we definitely cannot agree on that. In order to demonstrate that they were not Jews (earthly Jews), is exactly the reason
I included the other verses. They, without question, show that the Jews of verse 1 are spiritual Jews.

 

[Musicmaster]

Because there is no such animal as the "Gospel of Law". Where is the good news in the a law that could only condemn us, since no one was ever able to keep it perfectly, save for Christ!? And there's nothing "in my personal system of theology" (so-called) that I cannot reconcile. I recognize that there is both Continuity and Discontinuity in scripture, but do you? Man has always been saved by grace through faith -- from the very beginning to the very end.

I really don't understand what your point in all this really is in relation to what I said. The instrument of Law was and is a good thing, but like you said, it could not and cannot save anyone. Yes. We all agree with that, so can we get past that? The Law, as a "schoolmaster" is a good thing in that regard, and in many others, such as us knowing what sin is by the Law, so please don't throw out the baby with the bathwater, as the proverbial saying goes. The good news (gospel) within the Law, and that characterizes the Law, is that it the means by which sin is identified and known.

If you're going nit-pic every statement and nuance, then we will get nowhere.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

NO, we definitely cannot agree on that. In order to demonstrate that they were not Jews (earthly Jews), is exactly the reason
I included the other verses. They, without question, show that the Jews of verse 1 are spiritual Jews.

Then we simply agree to disagree. Subjectively tying those other verses into that one verse written by James as to whom he was addressing...no. That's what's to messed up with Western Christianity, with Gentiles trying to force themselves into any and every nook and cranny they can slip by the awareness of others.

If those Jew were in Christ, then they would no longer be Jews, for in Christ there is no Jew nor Gentile. James would have addressed them as the "body of Christ" or the "churches scattered abroad" or some other distinguishing identifier, but he didn't.

Sorry, but spiritualizations almost always are found to serve only a subjective purpose in the arena of interpretations, and I'm simply not buying the forced meaning into the text that you're trying to perpetrate here.

Did you come up with that on your own, or were you taught that by your "pastor" or "Sunday school" teacher? This is very similar to a teaching that I heard from Joel Osteen Benny Hinn some years ago. Almost everything those guys teach I find to be suspect. I hope you're not following them.

MM

 

[Jimbone]

You have that promise of Salvation, but you have to ENDURE until the end. What part of that do you not get, the point is anyone can turn away from God. That is why Jesus said only 5 of the 10 virgin brides will make the Marriage in Heaven. That ratio also matches the Matt. 24:36-51 ONE TAKEN and ONE LEFT. Only half the church will make the Rapture my sister. God sees the heart.

People better grasp this. Sell out for Jesus, if you cling to this world Jesus says you are not of God.

Okay so you believe in a works based salvation that is earned by your behavior and not a gift from God. I 100% disagree and believe this is a false gospel. I feel bad you have the full weight of salvation on your shoulders and would suggest that you submit yourself to the TRUE God through Jesus and take on His light yolk. SO much better than this works righteousness you're teaching. If you say you can lose salvation you believe your own behavior is what ultimately saves you, not Gods grace. I couldn't disagree more and name this a false gospel that cannot save.

 

[rogerg]

Did you come up with that on your own, or were you taught that by your "pastor" or "Sunday school" teacher? This is very similar to a teaching that I heard from Joel Osteen Benny Hinn some years ago. Almost everything those guys teach I find to be suspect. I hope you're not following them.

I read the Bible - that is my sole spiritual authority

 

[Rufus]

Appreciate the answer. And Israel's disobedience was the reason the old covenant came to an end. But their measure of disobedience wasn't full until they killed Jesus. But God can't simply end the covenant upon Jesus' death. He must still render the sanctions upon Israel for her failure to live up to the stipulations of the covenant. And this is what the book of Revelation is concerned with. Christ indeed came again, this time in glory and judgment, visiting the wrath of God on disobedient Israel. By destroying the temple, God destroyed the place He made His presence known to Israel. In doing so, God severed His ties to corporate Israel and ended the covenant.

Now, you're conflating the official end of one dispensation with the judgment of the people with who were disobedient.

Yes, Christ did come in judgment against Israel in 70 A.D., but that is not be confused with the Parousia.

I still maintain that God did not have two very different, contradictory covenants overlapping in time and space, which is what you believe. And the writer to Hebrews also believed as I do since he wrote that the OC was indeed obsolete at the time of his writing. What was getting ready to disappear[ in the future] was the most outstanding symbol of that OC, which was the temple with its Levitical priesthood, its sacrifices -- everything outwardly connected to the Mosaic Law Covenant. You would have a very strong case if the writer of Hebrews spoke also of the obsolescence in the future tense, but he doesn't. Just because corporate Israel didn't believe the OC had been abrogated at the Cross doesn't mean that God didn't do that very thing upon his Son's death.

 

[Rufus]

Of course salvation can be "LOST" but not really, but yes REALLY. Sounds illogical right? Well, the point is Jesus told his disciples in Matt. 24:13 that they must endure until the end for a reason, ones salvation only comes at death. Is there blood applied or not.

Its like watching a pro football game and lets say Miami is ahead 17-0, everyone will say they are winning 17-0 right? But if they lose 27-17, then when they we ahead 17-0 at the half they were LOSING up 17-0 not winning !! No one has salvation or condemnation until they die, that is why Jesus said say not who is saved nor condemned, that is God's alone, no one can know a man's heart.

You can KNOW Jesus, receive Jesus, but then reject Jesus and accept the world and on judgment day Jesus will say, depart from me for I never knew you to those who cast out Demons in his name and preached in his name etc. etc.

Those once saved guys do not understand we are only saved once we pass over in Christ, we can reject Jesus at any moment in time, just like Judas did.

That's simply not true. There are numerous scriptures that teach that God keeps his saints in this age.

 

[Cameron143]

Now, you're conflating the official end of one dispensation with the judgment of the people with who were disobedient.

Yes, Christ did come in judgment against Israel in 70 A.D., but that is not be confused with the Parousia.

I still maintain that God did not have two very different, contradictory covenants overlapping in time and space, which is what you believe. And the writer to Hebrews also believed as I do since he wrote that the OC was indeed obsolete at the time of his writing. What was getting ready to disappear[ in the future] was the most outstanding symbol of that OC, which was the temple with its Levitical priesthood, its sacrifices -- everything outwardly connected to the Mosaic Law Covenant. You would have a very strong case if the writer of Hebrews spoke also of the obsolescence in the future tense, but he doesn't. Just because corporate Israel didn't believe the OC had been abrogated at the Cross doesn't mean that God didn't do that very thing upon his Son's death.

Ok. Where does God pour out His wrath on Israel before the destruction of the temple?

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

I trust God greatly.

Could have fooled me.

If you really truted God. you would give him the glory and not think he would fail.

If a person could lose salvation. God failed that person..

Disagreeing with you may equate to not trusting you, but it does not equate to not trusting God.

If you were just disagreeing with me I would agree 100 %

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

There is no commandment to persevere to the end. Comments about perseverance are descriptive, not prescriptive. In other words, those who are truly saved do persevere to the end.

Actually. No they do not. Because they would still be condemned where they stand

The command to persevere is for those living in the tribulation period. If you can endure til the end (when Christ returns) you will be saved (physically)

 

[Musicmaster]

Yes, Christ did come in judgment against Israel in 70 A.D., but that is not be confused with the Parousia.

Preterism! I knew there was something off about your take on it all, and now we see what it is.

MM

 

[Cameron143]

Actually. No they do not. Because they would still be condemned where they stand

The command to persevere is for those living in the tribulation period. If you can endure til the end (when Christ returns) you will be saved (physically)

Can you show me a command from scripture that thou shalt persevere?

 

[PaulThomson]

While I can appreciate this and I personally hate labels, for example I do believe once God saves us, we are SAVED, I do NOT believe OSAS as most here that argue against it as if we are saved and therefore free to sin as much as we want to now with no worry about condemnation. I despise that just as much and Paul answers this strait up when he says "so should I now sin so grace may abound, BY NO MEANS". So I can understand the argument against this "OSAS". However, no matter what teaching we can lose our salvation IS believing in a works based salvation. There's no way around it rationally or logically. If it's something that we can lose then, #1 we are not "saved" when we're born again, and #2 we can only earn salvation by obeying well enough. That strips away anything that can be called grace and drops the full weight of salvation on our shoulders. There's NO WAY AROUND THIS. None. So while I can agree with your comment here I can also say that regardless of the nice arrangement of words, if you believe salvation can be lost, then everything I said in the first comment holds true. It has to, there's no way around it.

Your assertion is a logical nonsequitur, actually. If you become saved by becoming in Christ through faith, and remain saved by abiding in Christ, by continuing to trust Jesus Christ as your Lord and Saviour, not because of works; then you could lose your salvation by ceasing to trust Jesus Christ as your Lord and Saviour, and you are not saving yourself by your own works but are continuing to be saved by maintaining ongoing faith in Jesus Christ. Faith is not a work. Works issue out of faith (ek pisteOs), but the faith those works issue from is not itself a work, any more than an apple that issues from an apple tree is not an apple tree.

If an apple tree develops a disease in its roots that produces a symptom of rottenness in the fruit, and the tree resists treatment that would heal it, the orchardist may destroy the tree because of the disease in the tree that is causing the rotten fruit. She is not destroying the tree because of the fruit, but because of the trees resistance to treatments for the disease that the fruit evidences.

Your assertion, "No matter what, teaching we can lose our salvation IS believing in a works based salvation. There's no way around it rationally or logically. If it's something that we can lose then, #1 we are not "saved" when we're born again, and #2 we can only earn salvation by obeying well enough," is logically fallacious. We receive salvation not by works but by putting our trust in Christ. Obeying well enough has nothing to do with becoming in Christ, remaining in Christ and being found in Christ on resurrection day.

Your assertion, "That strips away anything that can be called grace and drops the full weight of salvation on our shoulders. There's NO WAY AROUND THIS. None," may be a bold assertion stated with conviction, but it is not actually true.

 

[PaulThomson]

Could have fooled me.

If you really truted God. you would give him the glory and not think he would fail.

If a person could lose salvation. God failed that person..


If you were just disagreeing with me I would agree 100 %

God won't fail. He is omnipotent. No one can thwart anything He is determined must happen. We disagree on the number of things God has determined and will determine must happen.