Loss of salvation???

[Wansvic]

The so called "gospel of grace" is a perversion of the Gospel of the Kingdom that Jesus and His Apostles taught, aka the Doctrine of Christ.

Sure we are saved by grace thru faith, but it's faith that is the gift of God that enables one to access the grace of God to enter in to His Kingdom (the King's Domain)

The so called "gospel of grace" in modern times is the false gospel that teaches one is secure and saved as they continue in sin, aka the "security in sin" false gospel

Thanks for sharing the specifics of the term "gospel of grace." I sure would not have used that term had I known. My point was the message initially given at Pentecost was the direct result of God's grace. Man did nothing to deserve a means of salvation. Evenso, God provided a way for man to take hold of what Jesus died to provide for all humanity.

 

[Wansvic]

You seem to have no concept for grace, because Acts 2 clearly lays down the requirement for water baptism for remission of sins, which is not grace...not as Paul defined it in his epistles by inspiration directly from God.

MM

It was God's grace that provided a way for believers to take hold of what Jesus died to provide. Man certainly did nothing to deserve God's kindness.

 

[Wansvic]

Yes I do know what you are saying but you seem to think that by using the word "since" it means anything but simultaneous which is incorrect.

"The town flooded since the dam broke". It can be used as causation and in this case it would mean believing caused the receiving.

I explained why they were not filled with the Spirit, they had not received the Gospel properly. They knew only of John's baptism. Paul's question expected people to receive when they believed. Both words, when and since, are words indicating cause.

You say after believing. How long after? If people hear the Gospel preached correctly and they believe, what stops them receiving the promise? Some will say baptized in water but here they had to have hands laid on them as well. When does it end? How many hoops must be jumped through before the Father keeps His word? Or is it the lack of believing due to incomplete/incorrect teaching that people do not receive?




According to you baptism is with water, according to Christ it is with the Spirit. It is not either or, nor is it both, but only one baptism. The command is to immerse people into the fullness of who God is Matt.28:19 The outcome is to be immersed into Christ's death and resurrection by which we are saved and placed into a brand, never seen before, new life. Rom.6:3 Gal.3:27 2Cor.5:17 Water simply will not cut it as evidenced by those who do not receive the Spirit at water baptism hence, the promise of the Spirit. Acts 8:16

Acts 1:4-5
4 And being assembled together with them, He commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the Promise of the Father, “which,” He said, “you have heard from Me; 5 for John truly baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.”

Ephesians 4:5
one Lord, one faith, one baptism;

Everything you've stated does not change what Paul's question conveyed.

And not I, but scripture reveals baptism in the name of Jesus is water baptism. Conversion accounts include water baptism in the name of Jesus and receiving the Holy Ghost. And both experiences were still occuring years after the initial message was presented.

 

[James456]

Everything you've stated does not change what Paul's question conveyed.

And not I, but scripture reveals baptism in the name of Jesus is water baptism. Conversion accounts include water baptism in the name of Jesus and receiving the Holy Ghost. And both experiences were still occuring years after the initial message was presented.

Can I ask you. When Cornelius and his household received the Holy Spirit as the disciples did at Pentecost and spoke in tongues, were they in saved states at that time?

 

[Wansvic]

And not once did Jesus ever say baptize them with water. The Church has done a lot of things for a very long time but it doesn't make everything right, that's why the Church is still to be evaluated. Considering before the first century ended, five out of seven churches got things terribly wrong, I am not going to trust in Church practices but will rely on what the scriptures say.

Go into all the world and baptize people. (Matt. 28:19) People don't baptize people with the Holy Ghost; however, God does. And as Peter said, Can any forbid water that these should not be baptized? And he commanded they be baptized in the name of the Lord.

 

[Musicmaster]

I’ve never known if another person was truly saved as that is impossible to know. Have I known people who claimed to know they were saved and no longer believe Jesus is who He says he is? Yes.

my apologies if you thought I was putting words in your mouth. That is the reason I started with probably. That is usually the answer I would get. So as to speed up the conversation I threw it in adding probably as I could be wrong.

I’m not saying God would break but only that He could. I personally don’t believe He would either.

Well, put.

So, in the final analysis, I would never base a belief upon loss of salvation by any means until someone can show to me a real case by which they had verified all facets of that other person's particulars and how they proved beyond doubt those particulars to know that what they want to believe about scripture is true.

To date, scripture gives to us no reason to believe that we can lost our salvation, even if we fall into unbelief:

2 Timothy 2:13
If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.

As you can see in that verse, it's not about our faithfulness, its about His. It's all about Him, just like all of what Gentiles call the "Old Testament."

When someone asks if God will force someone into Heaven, that assumes many things, thus begging the question(s), one of which is how that questioner could possibly know that at point of death of that one they imagine was saved then fell into unbelief, that such a person would retain their unbelief, thus feeling as if they had been forced when finding themselves in Heaven. I could almost write a book on the questions that could be asked when someone comes up with some hypothetical that they never took the time to question all the in's and out's before asking. Few ever see the many traps they set for themselves before asking something so open-ended.

Additionally, we can look at this as well:

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 you see, if one builds his life with things that can and will burin the fired of testing before the Lord, he will still be saved, although his loss will still be a matter of some measure of suffering, just as this verse not only implies but addresses directly.

I appreciate your feedback on this.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

It was God's grace that provided a way for believers to take hold of what Jesus died to provide. Man certainly did nothing to deserve God's kindness.

And yet you parrot a gospel of works-based salvation. To say Peter didn't preach such a thing, please explain to us all how walking to a water hole or river, down into the water and back out again isn't a work of effort, and that doing so is the means by which YOUR sins were remitted. Can you do that? Please explain how that can ever match up with unmerited favor, which is the definition of grace. How is what you're saying not a dichotomy...a self-contradiction?

MM

 

[James456]

Everything you've stated does not change what Paul's question conveyed.

And not I, but scripture reveals baptism in the name of Jesus is water baptism. Conversion accounts include water baptism in the name of Jesus and receiving the Holy Ghost. And both experiences were still occuring years after the initial message was presented.

Could you answer this with a yes or no answer please, thanks

When Cornelius and his household received the Holy Spirit as the disciples did at Pentecost and spoke in tongues, were they in saved states at that time?

 

[Just_A__Follower]

Well, put.

So, in the final analysis, I would never base a belief upon loss of salvation by any means until someone can show to me a real case by which they had verified all facets of that other person's particulars and how they proved beyond doubt those particulars to know that what they want to believe about scripture is true.

To date, scripture gives to us no reason to believe that we can lost our salvation, even if we fall into unbelief:

2 Timothy 2:13
If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.

As you can see in that verse, it's not about our faithfulness, its about His. It's all about Him, just like all of what Gentiles call the "Old Testament."

When someone asks if God will force someone into Heaven, that assumes many things, thus begging the question(s), one of which is how that questioner could possibly know that at point of death of that one they imagine was saved then fell into unbelief, that such a person would retain their unbelief, thus feeling as if they had been forced when finding themselves in Heaven. I could almost write a book on the questions that could be asked when someone comes up with some hypothetical that they never took the time to question all the in's and out's before asking. Few ever see the many traps they set for themselves before asking something so open-ended.

Additionally, we can look at this as well:

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 you see, if one builds his life with things that can and will burin the fired of testing before the Lord, he will still be saved, although his loss will still be a matter of some measure of suffering, just as this verse not only implies but addresses directly.

I appreciate your feedback on this.

MM

So can we know we are saved into eternity or can we only know that we are saved at the present moment?

 

[sawdust]

Everything you've stated does not change what Paul's question conveyed.

And not I, but scripture reveals baptism in the name of Jesus is water baptism. Conversion accounts include water baptism in the name of Jesus and receiving the Holy Ghost. And both experiences were still occuring years after the initial message was presented.

You are welcome to rely on experience as being the foundation if that is your desire.

Go into all the world and baptize people. (Matt. 28:19) People don't baptize people with the Holy Ghost; however, God does. And as Peter said, Can any forbid water that these should not be baptized? And he commanded they be baptized in the name of the Lord.

No they don't, they immerse people into the fullness of who God is through teaching the word accurately and sufficiently and thereby making disciples.

As Peter also said "then I remembered the word of the Lord" Acts 11:16 that is, after he had been baptizing people in the usual method of water, he finally woke up to the new way of doing things.

Here we are 2,000 years later and it still doesn't get through to people. One can only be immersed in Christ by means of the Spirit.

One Baptism.

 

[Musicmaster]

So can we know we are saved into eternity or can we only know that we are saved at the present moment?

I can't speak for you personally because I don't know what gospel you believe. I believe Paul's Gospel of Grace, which is salvation to the uttermost. Nothing will divert me away from the only Gospel that shows to us salvation, which is grace through faith, and not of works...lest any man should boast.

So, do YOU believe in Paul's gospel stated in 1 Cor. 15:1-4, or are you a works-based follower of another gospel? I am Israeli, and I no longer believe in the adherence to the Law nor do I follow after the Messianic roots. The freedom we have in Christ and His righteousness He has imputed upon us, there's nothing any of us could possibly add to the sufficiency that's in the Blood of Christ shed for us.

Those out there who believe they must try to add to what was already done for us all, they are on their own. When they preach their gospel of works, they're accursed when preaching it to those who know Paul's gospel. This isn't about worshipping Paul any more than it is about worshipping Peter, James, et al. It's about believing through rightly dividing the word of truth...truth from truth.

Does that answer your question?

MM

 

[Just_A__Follower]

I can't speak for you personally because I don't know what gospel you believe. I believe Paul's Gospel of Grace, which is salvation to the uttermost. Nothing will divert me away from the only Gospel that shows to us salvation, which is grace through faith, and not of works...lest any man should boast.

So, do YOU believe in Paul's gospel stated in 1 Cor. 15:1-4, or are you a works-based follower of another gospel? I am Israeli, and I no longer believe in the adherence to the Law nor do I follow after the Messianic roots. The freedom we have in Christ and His righteousness He has imputed upon us, there's nothing any of us could possibly add to the sufficiency that's in the Blood of Christ shed for us.

Those out there who believe they must try to add to what was already done for us all, they are on their own. When they preach their gospel of works, they're accursed when preaching it to those who know Paul's gospel. This isn't about worshipping Paul any more than it is about worshipping Peter, James, et al. It's about believing through rightly dividing the word of truth...truth from truth.

Does that answer your question?

MM

I’m not really talking about adding anything. I believe the gospel and if I don’t wake in the morning I believe that I will be saved. What I don’t know is that if I die ten years from now where my heart will be then. Will I still have the same faith?

So either falling away is possible or it is impossible to know that we are sealed.

There is much about perseverance in scripture. Paul himself finished the race as he said. Jesus said the one that endures to the end will be saved. He also said to see that no one leads you astray.

 

[Genez]

Such an odd statement, especially since Jesus saw fit to use Peter to present the gospel message, that included water baptism in the name of Jesus I might add, to both Jews and Gentiles.

Peter wasn't clinging to old ways.

Water baptism was clinging to Peter's old ways.

Just look at what had been going on with Peter and the disciples prior to the cross!

Now Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard that he was gaining and baptizing more disciples ​

than John— although in fact it was not Jesus who baptized, but his disciples." John 4:1-2​

Spirit baptism was to replace water.
Peter took a while and needed to finally catch on to the new way.

 

[Genez]

So what would a baptism look like? Laying on of hands? Simply words spoken? And how does an individual spiritually baptized another? Even if they went through whatever motions you think are called for, isn't it the Spirit that does the spiritual work?

No ritual needed. It is something that takes place invisibly when we believed.

 

[Cameron143]

No ritual needed. It is something that takes place invisibly when we believed.

So why did Jesus commission the disciples to baptize if it happens upon belief?

 

[Genez]

So why did Jesus commission the disciples to baptize if it happens upon belief?

Jesus did not tell them to baptized in water in Jesus name.

Baptize held several meanings in that day... It also could mean to immerse someone into some person.
Like what the news media does today with certain people.

An example?

They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea." 1 Corinthians 10:2​

Outside of Israel, many nations had no idea who Jesus was.
They needed to become baptized into knowing Jesus.

Again... Jesus never told them to baptize in water.
Matter of fact, Jesus taught just the opposite!

On one occasion, while he was eating with them, he gave them this command: ​

“Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have ​

heard me speak about. For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be ​

baptized with the Holy Spirit.” Acts 1:4-5​

We can not ignore these realities as to cover for the embarrassment that the errors Christians over the years kept on passing down from one generation to the next. Just look at the Catholics. Accurate scriptural understanding does not matter to many of them.

 

[mailmandan]

Could you answer this with a yes or no answer please, thanks

When Cornelius and his household received the Holy Spirit as the disciples did at Pentecost and spoke in tongues, were they in saved states at that time?

Still no answer from Wansvic?

 

[Ouch]

Water baptism was clinging to Peter's old ways.

Just look at what had been going on with Peter and the disciples prior to the cross!

Now Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard that he was gaining and baptizing more disciples ​

than John— although in fact it was not Jesus who baptized, but his disciples." John 4:1-2​

Spirit baptism was to replace water.
Peter took a while and needed to finally catch on to the new way.

So spirit baptism replaced water baptism?

Water baptism is to remove our sins.

Spirit baptism is when the FATHER puts spirit of GOD inside of you, you will speak in tongues.

If spirit baptism replaced water baptism how do we get rid of our sins?

Is there veses that prove spirit baptism replaced water baptism?

Or are you saying that spirit baptism not only removes our sins but also fills us with the spirit?

Per the scripture you provied they were told to wait for the FATHER to give them the spirit.

So your saying that MEN HAVE THE ABILIY to go and put the spirit of GOD in people.

Why do you say it's in error and has been passed down when people are still being baptized in JESUS name and GOD is filling them with the Holy Ghost and they speak in tongues?

So we have people who refuse to be baptized in JESUS name and have never been filled with the Holy Ghost saying none of it is true, which goes against HIS rule book.

Then we people who have obeyed GODS rules and have been baptized in JESUS name and GOD filled them with the spirit, which lines up with HIS rule book.

Who is wrong?

 

[James456]

Still no answer from Wansvic?

View attachment 285625

If he refuses to respond and plainly answer the question, I will inevitably have to come to the conclusion he agrees with ouch but doesn't want to say so. Its a mystery to me, that people who lay so much emphasis on the Holy Spirit could actually believe He resides in the unsaved/the unsaved can receive the Holy Sprit as the disciples did at Pentecost and speak in tongues. That would have to be one of the greatest errors of belief in the Christian faith in my view.

 

[Ouch]

Still no answer from Wansvic?

View attachment 285625

LOL, I'm watching to see if Wansvic tells him the truth also to see if he gets put on ignore as well.

Really is strange who people really think that we can be reborn and never get rid of our sins!!

Why do you think that is so?

James 456 made these statments, "The unsaved CANNOT receive the Holy Spirit as the disciples did at Pentecost and speak in tongues."

And right in front of his face, Acts 10 GOD filled the unsaved with the Holy Ghost!!

He also said this, "Your inflexible rule book has left you in a very bad place indeed"

GODS RULES DO NOT CHANGE!!!

GOD knows our hearts and HE will do as HE please.

GOD knew Uzzah's heart, tried to do good, problem is GOD told NO ONE TO TOUCH THE ARK.

2 Samuel 6,
6 And when they came to Nachon's threshingfloor, Uzzah put forth his hand to the ark of God, and took hold of it; for the oxen shook it.

7 And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Uzzah; and God smote him there for his error; and there he died by the ark of God.

GOD knew the Gentiles heart and knew they were going to follow Peter to the water!

Will you?