Loss of salvation???

[studier]

That's because you place the onus upon the individual, and not God.

That's because you place the onus upon the individual, and not God. Jesus did what He saw the Father doing. He followed God's lead. We are sheep. We are to follow the Shepherd. If we are yoked to Him, when we feel the tug, we move. It's little different from the pillar of fire moving for the children of Israel, except we move by faith and not by sight. But this requires an intimacy with God, whereas following a pillar of fire does not.

I can see this from your point of view because you to strip any responsibility from the Christian, yet what I just posted for you in response to a phrase you mentioned is full of the responsibility of the Christian. So much so that Peter deemed it necessary to be constantly reminding Christians of doing their part.

Your seemingly strict use of descriptive re: commands fits your point of view of what I "place" yet I speak of a responsible cooperation with God apart from which we can do nothing and in line with which we can be productive.

Even the following you speak of is active and responsive. He doesn't follow for us. His easy yoke becomes more of a guide and not something to drag us around unwillingly.

 

[Cameron143]

I'm not approaching this in one statement of my belief but through a methodical approach looking at Scripture re: endurance to begin with. So, I'm not going to sideline endurance with a rabbit trail to hypothetical or theoretical conclusions which seems to be the practice on these threads. I will say that your first question is a good one and the other two have been answered hypothetically by thoughts such as the Christian can walk away. I asked a question related to this in looking at endurance in Rev14 - can a Christian not endure and turn to become an enemy of God who bows to the beast?

I'm not sure you've ever answered what is the professing Christian who never fits the description of descriptive commands? I'll also ask you if you think the commands can be both prescriptive and descriptive thereby placing a cooperative effort between the Christian and God.

The Christian walking away doesn't change the last 2 questions. If someone is in Christ Jesus and didn't place themselves there, how would they remove themselves from a spiritual estate. And how does the unfaithfulness of an individual have anything to do with the unfaithfulness of Jesus? His promise isn't conditional. He will never leave or forsake. It doesn't give a condition whereby He can rescind the promise. For Jesus to leave or forsake an individual would make Him a liar.

Someone who never meets the description or prescription are never saved, regardless of their profession.

 

[Cameron143]

I can see this from your point of view because you to strip any responsibility from the Christian, yet what I just posted for you in response to a phrase you mentioned is full of the responsibility of the Christian. So much so that Peter deemed it necessary to be constantly reminding Christians of doing their part.

Your seemingly strict use of descriptive re: commands fits your point of view of what I "place" yet I speak of a responsible cooperation with God apart from which we can do nothing and in line with which we can be productive.

Even the following you speak of is active and responsive. He doesn't follow for us. His easy yoke becomes more of a guide and not something to drag us around unwillingly.

I don't absolve the Christian of his responsibility. We all have to give an account for our actions. But I don't see our actions as salvific in any way. Rather, they are the response to living in an intimate relationship with God. It's a matter of motivation. You follow actions you believe will keep you saved. I follow a course of action laid out before me by God to deepen my relationship with Him. Your motivation is for your good. My motivation is for God's good...or glory. Your motivation is actually fear of the loss of salvation. My motivation is the love of God that is shed abroad in my heart.

 

[studier]

Because you seem to be suggesting doing His commands is necessary to being saved when, even during the time when the keeping of the Law was the way to work out one's salvation, it didn't save anyone.

If we have a command under grace to abide/remain/stay in union with Him so we can do productive things by His nourishing and sustaining us, is that the same as doing the 10C under the Law?

Have I not been saying all along we must rest in Him and be led of His Spirit? I don't know why you are asking such a question. What will you add to that? Do you think the Spirit will lead you to ignore the hungry or turn your back on those who grieve? Of course you don't! What ever you say or do will be a reflection of your faith, or lack of it, but anything done outside that realm will be of your own doing and worthless.

Those 600 plus commands are the word of God and yes they will take care of you because God never fails to keep His word. Do you not trust in His word?

You inferred that I don't understand how grace works and that I don't understand by whose power we are saved. You seemed to say that all we need to do is rest (trust) in Him. That's where I began questioning you. By your first statement above you seem to be relating obedience to His commands under Law to obedience to His commands under NC grace and suggesting a kind of legalistic salvation for obeying His NC commands under grace.

Then your statement that God's 600 NC commands will take care of us, means what? It seems quite an ambiguous statement.

Is there any obedience to them required of us? Is there any obedience in faith? Do you see God's NC commands as @Cameron143 does in that they are descriptive of a real Christian and not prescriptive for the Christian to cooperatively do under the grace and power of God?

 

[Jimbone]

Yes, what Jimbone's testimony teaches is that some folks must be knocked to their knees by fire and wind before they will trust in God,
whereas mine indicates that some folks are more easily persuaded to believe by the still, small voice (1Kings 19:11-12 :^).

.
Again, this is you making up my argument for me. This is why any real conversations that might be worth something to someone, are impossible with you. You make us the enemy from the jump, then mold your every argument around this. Including making up our arguments for us. The fact you think that me testifying of the transforming and REAL-LIFE reconciliation of my dead spirit with His Spirit is some kind of special "knocked to their knees by fire and wind before they will trust in God" kind of thing is a red flag and points to you still being spiritually dead.

Every single person who has been born-again in truth knows what I'm talking about when I say these things, but they are foolishness to those who are perishing. Make of that what you will, but you've got to stop lying about what we believe and misrepresenting us with arguments and points we've never made. The fact you mock these things I've testified of, added to your very man centered view on EVERY topic, along with the fact you need to fabricate my arguments in order to "score points" is just "clear as day" red flags to me lining the whole street. You honestly seem to kind of hate God but exult yourself the way you think of everything, and your God seems to be a passive watcher sitting back watching our wills be done. Again man, only someone ignorant of the true Spirit of God can think this way, not to mention the fact your biggest foes seem to be the people that teach "ALL glory to God". No red flags at all huh?

 

[studier]

Someone who never meets the description or prescription are never saved, regardless of their profession.

Got it. Never saved vs. can lose salvation. If not enduring, then never saved. Descriptive commands.

 

[Cameron143]

If we have a command under grace to abide/remain/stay in union with Him so we can do productive things by His nourishing and sustaining us, is that the same as doing the 10C under the Law?





You inferred that I don't understand how grace works and that I don't understand by whose power we are saved. You seemed to say that all we need to do is rest (trust) in Him. That's where I began questioning you. By your first statement above you seem to be relating obedience to His commands under Law to obedience to His commands under NC grace and suggesting a kind of legalistic salvation for obeying His NC commands under grace.

Then your statement that God's 600 NC commands will take care of us, means what? It seems quite an ambiguous statement.

Is there any obedience to them required of us? Is there any obedience in faith? Do you see God's NC commands as @Cameron143 does in that they are descriptive of a real Christian and not prescriptive for the Christian to cooperatively do under the grace and power of God?

You have mischaracterized my position. I believe Christians are responsible to obey commandments. The verses I said were descriptive were dealing with endurance. Those passages did not contain commands. They were simply statements of fact, relating that those who endure are saved.

 

[GWH]

If faith and obedience are parallel, then works becomes the addition to faith-obedience, not obedience-works to faith. Faith-obedience for initial salvation becomes faith-obedience-works post salvation



I suppose it's partly this quantitative vs. qualitative classifying that I'm not fond of. Faith can be weak and thus strong. Faith can increase. Are these expressions of quantity or quality or both? 2Cor10:15 definition for increase or grow or however it's translated in various editions: 1. to cause to become greater in extent, size, state, or quality, grow someth., cause to grow, increase (BDAG). How is or can spiritual growth not be a higher quality of life?

During this lifetime we grow/mature spiritually quantitatively,
but being translated to heaven per 1Cor.15:35-54 will definitely be a qualitative transformation.

 

[Gideon300]

Thanks for this response.

While not commenting on your use of "salvation of the soul" I have highlighted some things of importance IMO in what you've said. As you can see, I've found much of what've said important.

I have done the studies re: patience and abiding and endurance and I've found them all to be correlated and necessary and although enabled, not done for us.

I appreciate your taking the time to consider what I've said. I do not demand or even expect everyone to agree with me. I'm not infallible!

 

[GWH]

.
Again, this is you making up my argument for me. This is why any real conversations that might be worth something to someone, are impossible with you. You make us the enemy from the jump, then mold your every argument around this. Including making up our arguments for us. The fact you think that me testifying of the transforming and REAL-LIFE reconciliation of my dead spirit with His Spirit is some kind of special "knocked to their knees by fire and wind before they will trust in God" kind of thing is a red flag and points to you still being spiritually dead.

Every single person who has been born-again in truth knows what I'm talking about when I say these things, but they are foolishness to those who are perishing. Make of that what you will, but you've got to stop lying about what we believe and misrepresenting us with arguments and points we've never made. The fact you mock these things I've testified of, added to your very man centered view on EVERY topic, along with the fact you need to fabricate my arguments in order to "score points" is just "clear as day" red flags to me lining the whole street. You honestly seem to kind of hate God but exult yourself the way you think of everything, and your God seems to be a passive watcher sitting back watching our wills be done. Again man, only someone ignorant of the true Spirit of God can think this way, not to mention the fact your biggest foes seem to be the people that teach "ALL glory to God". No red flags at all huh?

The truth hurts, huh? Many of us who are born-again disagree with your doctrine, but this does not make us enemies.
I hope His Spirit will lead you to being loving rather than judgmental.
See you in heaven if we satisfy GRFS:

The normative way of stating the kerygma/GRFS in the NT is “Accept Christ Jesus as Lord” (as in 2CR 4:5 & CL 2:6). The main points of Christian orthodoxy implicit in this statement can be explained or elaborated as follows:

1. There is a/one all-loving and just Lord or God (DT 6:4, JN 3:16, 2THS 1:6), who is both able (2TM 1:12) and willing (1TM 2:3-4) to provide all morally accountable human beings salvation or heaven—a wonderful life full of love, joy and peace forever.
2. Human beings are selfish or sinful (RM 3:23, 2TM 3:2-4, CL 3:5), miserable (GL 5:19-21), and hopeless (EPH 2:12) or hell-bound at the judgment (MT 23:33 & 25:46) when they reject God’s salvation (JN 3:18, RM 2:5-11).
3. Jesus is God’s Messiah/Christ and incarnate Son, the way that God has chosen (JN 3:16, ACTS 16:30-31, PHP 2:9-11) of providing salvation by means of his atoning death on the cross for the payment of the penalty for the sins of humanity (RM 3:22-25 & 5:9-11), followed by his resurrection to reign in heaven (1CR 15:14-28).
4. Thus, every person who hears the NT Gospel needs to repent and accept God’s justification in Jesus as Christ/Messiah the Lord or Supreme Commander (LK 2:11, JN 14:6, ACTS 16:31), which means trying to obey His commandment to love one another (MT 22:37-40, JN 13:35, RM 13:9)—forever (MT 10:22, PS 113:2).
5. Then God’s Holy Spirit will establish a saving relationship with those who freely accept Him (RV 3:20) that will eventually achieve heaven when by means of persevering in learning Truth/God’s Word/sanctification everyone cooperates fully with His will (JN 14:6, 17&26, RM 8:6-17, GL 6:7-9, EPH 1:13-14, HB 10:36, 12:1, JM 1:2-4).

 

[Musicmaster]

In part based upon what we're discussing now re: endurance and maybe other things we could be heading into.

For example, I've posted what Rev14 says about endurance which in essence is enduring in bowing to God even unto death vs. bowing to the beast. If one does not endure in bowing to God and revolts and bows to the beast, does he simply lose rewards?

As I've said, based upon looking at endurance more completely in the Text, I see Jesus' statement re: endure to the end will be saved as being a principle extending beyond that eschatological context.

Revelation is precisely what I had pointed at in relation to those people at that time, for they will not be sealed by Holy Spirit unto salvation like we are today under the Gospel of Grace. The same goes for Jesus' statements in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21...that all had to do with the tribulation and the coming Kingdom in the Millennium. Many people juxtaposition those statements by trying to overlay them onto today.

So, where did Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles and the original minister of the Gospel of Grace, ever say to us that we had to endure in order to retain our salvation, earn it, or anything else other than enduring the sufferings in this life, especially from persecution?

MM

 

[studier]

I don't absolve the Christian of his responsibility. We all have to give an account for our actions.

OK. Agreed.

Rather, they are the response to living in an intimate relationship with God.

Responsive living and coupled with the above responsible living. OK.

It's a matter of motivation.

OK. I agree motivation or intent is important and quite possibly more important than many realize as we have a God who can see into our inner depths and will judge accordingly.

You follow actions you believe will keep you saved.

No, actually I don't. I was raised on can't lose. I still think it's correct in part. But I don't currently view it in the same way and as broadly as I was raised which leaves me sorting out loss and never saved. Never saved is very clear at minimum in John6. I currently place continued emphasis on man's will, so my heavy leaning includes loss based upon objective readings of some Scriptures. As I look at the entirety of the Gospel Text and several decades in the Faith, I'm comfortable I'm in Him and that any personal effort is in line with the goals He's set for us.

I follow a course of action laid out before me by God to deepen my relationship with Him.

Yes, you "follow" which IMO speaks of commands being prescriptive and descriptive. If you see a command or instruction in His Word that you objectively sense that you're not living up to, in reading you I doubt you'll ignore it and not be asking to become better in that regard, which is a prescriptive concept knowing how you become better. My view has always been to be responsive to His will, and responsible to be responsive, and apart from Him we can do nothing but remaining in union with Him we can be productive as He empowers and enables us to be.

Your motivation is actually fear of the loss of salvation.

No, again, and addressed in part above. But based in the above discussion of responsive and responsible I've never viewed salvation under grace as allowing for the sinful lifestyles I've seen being lived by professing Christians whose churches I know to teach a dumbed down version of faith and incorrect concept of works coupled with a security that results in grace and truth being abused.

NKJ Titus 1:16 They profess to know God, but in works they deny Him, being abominable, disobedient, and disqualified for every good work.​

​

This says they are disgusting, and I believe and agree with it/Him.​

Your motivation is for your good. My motivation is for God's good...or glory.

Wrong again.

I have little to no reason to disbelieve you.

My motivation is the love of God that is shed abroad in my heart.

And I'm not your judge.

 

[studier]

You have mischaracterized my position. I believe Christians are responsible to obey commandments. The verses I said were descriptive were dealing with endurance. Those passages did not contain commands. They were simply statements of fact, relating that those who endure are saved.

OK. Not my intention. It seems like we've wasted a lot of digital ink.

The commands for endurance like 1Tim6:11 that I posted are just as prescriptive as any other prescriptive command.

 

[NightTwister]

I can see this from your point of view because you to strip any responsibility from the Christian,...

God's Sovereignty and man's responsibility is not a dichotomy.

 

[studier]

During this lifetime we grow/mature spiritually quantitatively,

So, we have more quantity of spiritual maturity but no quality of spiritual maturity? Isn't this like saying we have more quantity of purity and thus greater value, but our quality is no different than it was when we had less purity / value?

 

[studier]

Revelation is precisely what I had pointed at in relation to those people at that time, for they will not be sealed by Holy Spirit unto salvation like we are today under the Gospel of Grace. The same goes for Jesus' statements in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21...that all had to do with the tribulation and the coming Kingdom in the Millennium. Many people juxtaposition those statements by trying to overlay them onto today.

So, where did Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles and the original minister of the Gospel of Grace, ever say to us that we had to endure in order to retain our salvation, earn it, or anything else other than enduring the sufferings in this life, especially from persecution?

MM

So far, I've just dealt with the Gospels and one part of Rev and a few side-tracks. As I've said, there are numerous statements about enduring and endurance in the NC Writings. There are also words closely associated with endurance and other words being translated as endurance that have a different nuance and are not the same original word under discussion.

Whether strictly eschatological or dispensational rather than also in principle, I'm not concluding at this time and not agreeing to.

 

[studier]

God's Sovereignty and man's responsibility is not a dichotomy.

As far as I understand your full meaning, I'd agree.

 

[Cameron143]

OK. Agreed.



Responsive living and coupled with the above responsible living. OK.



OK. I agree motivation or intent is important and quite possibly more important than many realize as we have a God who can see into our inner depths and will judge accordingly.



No, actually I don't. I was raised on can't lose. I still think it's correct in part. But I don't currently view it in the same way and as broadly as I was raised which leaves me sorting out loss and never saved. Never saved is very clear at minimum in John6. I currently place continued emphasis on man's will, so my heavy leaning includes loss based upon objective readings of some Scriptures. As I look at the entirety of the Gospel Text and several decades in the Faith, I'm comfortable I'm in Him and that any personal effort is in line with the goals He's set for us.



Yes, you "follow" which IMO speaks of commands being prescriptive and descriptive. If you see a command or instruction in His Word that you objectively sense that you're not living up to, in reading you I doubt you'll ignore it and not be asking to become better in that regard, which is a prescriptive concept knowing how you become better. My view has always been to be responsive to His will, and responsible to be responsive, and apart from Him we can do nothing but remaining in union with Him we can be productive as He empowers and enables us to be.



No, again, and addressed in part above. But based in the above discussion of responsive and responsible I've never viewed salvation under grace as allowing for the sinful lifestyles I've seen being lived by professing Christians whose churches I know to teach a dumbed down version of faith and incorrect concept of works coupled with a security that results in grace and truth being abused.

NKJ Titus 1:16 They profess to know God, but in works they deny Him, being abominable, disobedient, and disqualified for every good work.​

​

This says they are disgusting, and I believe and agree with it/Him.​

Wrong again.

I have little to no reason to disbelieve you.



And I'm not your judge.

As I can't see into your heart, my understanding of your motivation is based on your words. I gave my impressions of that. So I'll start saying...it seems to me. And it seems to me that you prefer to deal with God on the basis of your actions and not on the basis of what He has done and continues to do.

I don't see your responses as judgmental. I believe you are earnest in your pursuit of God and in your desire to help others do the same. I simply believe your emphasis is wrong. You seem to focus on obedience rather than relationship. While obedience is part of relationship, a real and vital relationship dwarves mere obedience.
When I wake up in the morning I don't think about a list of chores my wife wants me to get to. I simply want to spend time with her. The same goes with God. I awake with a desire to get into my Father's presence. Simply to be near to Him. So I do the things He has said will bring that about. This of course is obedience, but my goal isn't obedience but renewing my relationship; afresh entering into the presence of God.

 

[GWH]

So, we have more quantity of spiritual maturity but no quality of spiritual maturity? Isn't this like saying we have more quantity of purity and thus greater value, but our quality is no different than it was when we had less purity / value?

Calling it purity instead of maturity makes no difference, but don't you agree with the difference in 1CR 15?
I hope that I am more mature today than I was yesterday or fifty years-worth of days ago, but I sense no
qualitative transformation comparable to being raptured or resurrected.

 

[Musicmaster]

As far as I understand your full meaning, I'd agree.

Understood. My experience with the numerous works-based salvationists out there has been that they firmly believe they have to endure in order to retain their salvation, which shows the lack of thinking to its logical conclusion about salvational endurance.

That inevitably leads to works-based salvation that they cannot define by any means because scripture gives to us no distinct line over which one must allegedly cross in order to lose one's salvation. It simply isn't there. That also calls into serious question the efficacy of that seal upon us by Holy Spirit, for it makes that seal utterly subjective and therefore based upon our own strength to retain it.

In other words, if one must expend effort to hold on to salvation, then it's no longer a gift if it can be lost so easily. That, then, calls into question our being saved because it too would have to be based upon our efforts, thus calling into question the efficacy of the Blood of Christ shed for us.

MM