Why I now believe that salvation can be lost.

[Everlasting-Grace]

Yes, James spoke of a different emphasis because he was teaching others under the Kingdom Gospel, not the Gospel of Grace that was given only to Paul by the Lord Jesus Christ. In other words, they both spoke the truth in different times to different people. James wrote only to the Jews because Judaism was the only means through which Gentiles could obtain salvation. Paul's Gospel changed all that, this ushering in the Gospel of Grace for both Jews and Gentiles.

MM

No

He was scolding a licentious Gospel.

Paul was scolding a legalistic gospel.

They both taught the same gospel. They agreed with each other

 

[Rufus]

It's indeed a blessing today that we do not have to do works to produce fruits...although it is advisable that we do so, but that requirement is not laid upon us as it was for those of the Kingdom Gospel:

Matthre 3:9-10
9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to [our] father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

The mystery revealed to Paul only by Christ, said this to us today who are under grace:

1 Corinthians 3:15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

So, yes, the Kingdom dispensation for how the Lord dealt with the people of that time, were required to be fruitful. The Gospel of Grace, on the other hand, has no such requirements laid upon it, for it would not be grace if works were required.

So, yes, they could lose their salvation if they produced no fruit for justification. They will be cast into the fire who did not produce fruit.

Please keep in mind that I said it's best that we too produce fruit for reward and to keep from losing inheritance, those will still be saved, "...so as by fire." I absolutely advise against that, because being in Heaven without reward or inheritance, the shame of that will be great.

MM

You really don't understand God's great salvation at all, do you?

How can one in Christ lose his inheritance? And when a saint dies and he goes to heaven, how is heaven not part of that glorious inheritance? If a saint could lose his inheritance, then what does he gain? How could life eternal not be part of his inheritance, as well? And if neither of these are parts of his inheritance, then what exactly are the saint's inheritance after we die?

 

[rogerg]

Mark 16:16-18
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

So, if the same Gospel is what they were under at that time as is now in effect for us, even though they knew nothing yet of the mystery yet to be revealed to Paul long after James wrote his epistle, then why aren't those who believe that nonsense DOING the things promised under THAT dispensation?

The slick, slight-of-hand dodges are usually along the line of the necessity for those things no longer necessary with the coming of the scriptures, yadda, yadda, yadda, never minding, of course, that publication of the scriptures didn't happen until many centuries later, long after the cessation of those miracles.

The streams of excuses are plentiful. Some will even say that the baptism spoken at that time was that of Holy Spirit, even though the Greek Jesus used had to do with IMMERSION, not FILLING, and no mention of fire either. The fire came once, and only once, alighting upon the disciples as they awaited the coming of Holy Spirit AFTER Christ had been crucified. Thayer's Greek Lexicon defines this in verse 16 asthis: "a. The word is used absolutely, to administer the rite of ablution, to baptize."

So, sit and watch the attempts at squirming out from under this if there be any brave soul willing to try and tackle this in a manner that is not humorously filled with holes, and just downright foolishly a demonstration for eisegetical interpretations. I would venture to say that none of them, once bitten by a venomous snake, or who drinks arsenic, lead or any other poisonous thing, that they would croak like all others who did the same, and they certainly don't go into hospitals to empty them out as an act of obedience to the Christ they claim to obey.

MM

Easy - all of those things do occur today:
1) True baptism is a spiritual event, not one of water. God is the one who spiritually baptizes an individual
upon salvation. A person cannot spiritually baptize themselves. Water baptism serves as a symbolic act that physically
represents and commemorates what has already happened spiritually - as it is with all Christian physical ceremonial acts: the true are from and by the Holy Spirit. Water baptism holds no spiritual efficacy on its own; it is effect, not cause.
You don't get to make up the rules, scripture alone does:
[Mar 1:8 KJV] 8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.
2) Sharing God's gospel with the elect unsaved—those who will become saved through Christ - is that which casts
out devils. Those who are thus saved then speak with new tongues from a new heart and with a renewed mind, about the
true gospel. Even now, all of the saved do so eventually. The unsaved are indwelt with devils that blind them from
perceiving the true gospel until and unless becoming saved.
Everyone saved will eventually do so even if they don't always realize when they are doing it.
3) Those who are saved partake only in the spiritual water of the true gospel. Should they become exposed to a different
gospel, God, through the Holy Spirit, will cause them to reject it and guide them back to the truth. They will recognize its
meaning and origin for what it is, and they will not desire to associate with it. The same with venomous snakes - should
anyone be exposed to the venom of a false gospel, the Holy Spirit will make evident to them the error, folly and sin, of that
gospel and they will therefore refuse to accept it.

 

[Musicmaster]

No

He was scolding a licentious Gospel.

Paul was scolding a legalistic gospel.

They both taught the same gospel. They agreed with each other

Really? Then why is it that you cannot withstand the bite of a venomous snake, or drinking poisonous drink, and healing the sick by simply laying on hands? That is part of the Kingdom Gospel, so if that is the same as today, then why can't you do that? After all, John said that they who believe shall do those things. Do you not believe?

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

Easy - all of those things do occur today:
1) True baptism is a spiritual event, not one of water. God is the one who spiritually baptizes an individual
upon salvation. A person cannot spiritually baptize themselves. Water baptism serves as a symbolic act that physically
represents and commemorates what has already happened spiritually - as it is with all Christian physical ceremonial acts: the true are from and by the Holy Spirit. Water baptism holds no spiritual efficacy on its own; it is effect, not cause.
You don't get to make up the rules, scripture alone does:
[Mar 1:8 KJV] 8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.
2) Sharing God's gospel with the elect unsaved—those who will become saved through Christ - is that which casts
out devils. Those who are thus saved then speak with new tongues from a new heart and with a renewed mind, about the
true gospel. Even now, all of the saved do so eventually. The unsaved are indwelt with devils that blind them from
perceiving the true gospel until and unless becoming saved.
Everyone saved will eventually do so even if they don't always realize when they are doing it.
3) Those who are saved partake only in the spiritual water of the true gospel. Should they become exposed to a different
gospel, God, through the Holy Spirit, will cause them to reject it and guide them back to the truth. They will recognize its
meaning and origin for what it is, and they will not desire to associate with it. The same with venomous snakes - should
anyone be exposed to the venom of a false gospel, the Holy Spirit will make evident to them the error, folly and sin, of that
gospel and they will therefore refuse to accept it.

But you don't lay hands on the sick and they be healed. If you're under the Kingdom Gospel, and you can't do those precise things stated by John, then according to his words, you don't have faith. When then? Beating around the bush through spiritualizations will not change the fact that the measure for faith is clearly stated, and you think you're under that, so you do not have faith, according to John's words, not mine.

MM

 

[rogerg]

But you don't lay hands on the sick and they be healed. If you're under the Kingdom Gospel, and you can't do those precise things stated by John, then according to his words, you don't have faith. When then? Beating around the bush through spiritualizations will not change the fact that the measure for faith is clearly stated, and you think you're under that, so you do not have faith, according to John's words, not mine.

MM

Jesus spoke in parables and used figurative language, not to be taken literally. The concepts He shared were meant for symbolic interpretation. Taking them literally would render them irreconcilable and beyond human achievement.
BTW there is only one gospel of God, not multiple.

 

[PaulThomson]

God selects individuals for salvation based solely on His divine will and good pleasure to do so, choosing those He desires, independent of any actions they have taken or will take.

And you claim he chose you but rejected others according to his divine will and good pleasure. that makes you special to God above others, giving you a reason to boast. So stop accrediting others with boating merely because they could find reasons for doing so, if they wated to. people in glass houses....

 

[Musicmaster]

Jesus spoke in parables and used figurative language, not to be taken literally. The concepts He shared were meant for symbolic interpretation. Taking them literally would render them irreconcilable and beyond human achievement.
BTW there is only one gospel of God, not multiple.

Yep. The spiritualization dodge is always a favorite to try and make scripture say what one wants it to say when faced with difficulty. That also helps to keep one from grappling with the discontinuities in one's beliefs that otherwise would force them to rethink their beliefs.

Nothing new here!

MM

 

[PaulThomson]

But you don't lay hands on the sick and they be healed. If you're under the Kingdom Gospel, and you can't do those precise things stated by John, then according to his words, you don't have faith. When then? Beating around the bush through spiritualizations will not change the fact that the measure for faith is clearly stated, and you think you're under that, so you do not have faith, according to John's words, not mine.

MM

You have no understanding of the spiritual laws by which divine healing and miracles work, because you don't believe they still work. The Bible gives many reasons why people struggle to receive or fail to receive God"s gifts made available through Christ and offered by grace. Can you name some?

 

[rogerg]

And you claim he chose you but rejected others according to his divine will and good pleasure. that makes you special to God above others, giving you a reason to boast. So stop accrediting others with boating merely because they could find reasons for doing so, if they wated to. people in glass houses....

Nope - that means God made me, and all of the others He saves special only through Christ. It ain't boasting
to say you received something that you did not deserve and have it because of someone else's work.
Instead, this is called an underserved gift, not a boast. For us to boast in ourselves, that boast would have to be in
our works: instead, our boast is in Christ.

 

[PaulThomson]

You don't pay attention very well. All non-Reformed who esteem their God-given "free" will above the Giver of all his good and perfect gifts in grace, implicitly elevate themselves above God. Such say, "God would never trample on my free will. Nor would he violate my God-given right to determine my own eternal destiny", yada, yada, yada.

Synergism is not in scripture, which is why the Reformers came up with a suitable theological antonym. Salvation is not a business or contractual agreement between God and all sinners. Salvation is not a quid pro quo arrangement. If this were true, then scripture could not state that there is only one Savior in this universe by which men must be saved. Scripture knows nothing about multiple saviors, which sinners would be when they think they can partner up with God to save themselves.

Mark 16:20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them (sunergeO), and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.

 

[rogerg]

Yep. The spiritualization dodge is always a favorite to try and make scripture say what one wants it to say when faced with difficulty. That also helps to keep one from grappling with the discontinuities in one's beliefs that otherwise would force them to rethink their beliefs.

Nothing new here!

MM

Maybe you just don't understand that Jesus spoke in parables.
If you don't accept it was written in that way, and instead just take it only at face value,
you never will be able to comprehend the true gospel. You will be in violation of the
directions the Bible gives for itself as to how it is to be interpreted.

[1Co 2:13 KJV] 13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

[2Pe 1:20 KJV] 20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

 

[PaulThomson]

Nope - that means God made me, and all of the others He saves special only through Christ. It ain't boasting
to say you received something that you did not deserve and have it because of someone else's work.
Instead, this is called an underserved gift, not a boast. For us to boast in ourselves, that boast would have to be in
our works: instead, our boast is in Christ.

Mada yada yada...

 

[rogerg]

Mada yada yada...

I'll give that reply a 40. It's easy to dance to but I don't like the words (American Bandstand era 1950s)

 

[Musicmaster]

You have no understanding of the spiritual laws by which divine healing and miracles work, because you don't believe they still work. The Bible gives many reasons why people struggle to receive or fail to receive God"s gifts made available through Christ and offered by grace. Can you name some?

Yep. More spiritualization that was not the prime operator when those people physically laid hands on others and healed them.

Spiritualization is also a useful and effective battering ram against those who are stupid. Trying to make others out to be ignorant by trying to paint them with colors in trying to betray them as allegedly having no understanding of scripture, that's an old Armenian trick I've seen in operation for decades.

That only works against those who don't know better, so nice try.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

Maybe you just don't understand that Jesus spoke in parables.
If you don't accept it was written in that way, and instead just take it only at face value,
you never will be able to comprehend the true gospel. You will be in violation of the
directions the Bible gives for itself as to how it is to be interpreted.

[1Co 2:13 KJV] 13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

[2Pe 1:20 KJV] 20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

You seem to be applying private interpretation against the clear language of what's written.

MM

 

[rogerg]

You seem to be applying private interpretation against the clear language of what's written.

MM

It may seem that way to you because you haven't established a reference yet to the symbols and parables of the Bible.
And I'm not going to go through them for you to decipher and define each. If you really want understanding, do some digging and cross-referencing- it's all there.
BTW what may seem to be "clear language" on the surface, after a more in-depth analysis may not seem so, with it actually ending-up
with a very different meaning/intension than what initially seemed so obvious.

[Luk 8:10 KJV] 10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.

 

[PaulThomson]

Yep. More spiritualization that was not the prime operator when those people physically laid hands on others and healed them.

Spiritualization is also a useful and effective battering ram against those who are stupid. Trying to make others out to be ignorant by trying to paint them with colors in trying to betray them as allegedly having no understanding of scripture, that's an old Armenian trick I've seen in operation for decades.

That only works against those who don't know better, so nice try.

MM

So, you can't give even three biblical hinderances to a sick person receiving healing or other gifts from God? But you're an expert on spiritual gifts? Yeah, right.

 

[Musicmaster]

So, you can't give even three biblical hinderances to a sick person receiving healing or other gifts from God? But you're an expert on spiritual gifts? Yeah, right.

That's ok. Hop and skip about to try and avoid the darts of guilt for hyper-spiritualizing the scriptures into saying what you want them to say. You're doing a famous job of it. Keep it up.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

It may seem that way to you because you haven't established a reference yet to the symbols and parables of the Bible.
And I'm not going to go through them for you to decipher and define each. If you really want understanding, do some digging and cross-referencing- it's all there.
BTW what may seem to be "clear language" on the surface, after a more in-depth analysis may not seem so, with it actually ending-up
with a very different meaning/intension than what initially seemed so obvious.

[Luk 8:10 KJV] 10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.

Yeah, yeah. We've all heard that stuff before. Shucking and jiving around only shows that you have no substance to your beliefs other than to point at the esoteric, as if we're all of the caliber of ignorant pagans to whom the hidden things were masked.

Go for it. You too are doing famously...old school, but famously.

MM