The problem of the statement of “never saved to begin with”

Yes..they also like to use it along with the word, saved…”truly saved”…typical OSAS language

Just repeating!!!

Not the power and ultimately the presence?

or what?

What happens when we do not trust God in areas of our life?

I know what happens in my life.

I also know what does not happen. He never leaves nor forsakes me. But he corrects (chastens) me

The difference is who you think is in charge. You're talking about sanctification as if it's us trying to wrestle our own flesh into obedience to God.

Romans 5:20-21 clearly states that God's grace reigns through righteousness.

NKJ Galatians 3:1 O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you that you should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed among you as crucified? 2 This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? 3 Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh? (Gal. 3:1-3 NKJ)

This is certainly one of the theories normally put forth.

Man plays some role in his salvation. His participation is not purely passive.

1. If man plays no role in his salvation, then we are faced with only two possibilities:

a. Either all men are saved, because God would have no man perish. (2 Peter 3:9)

b. Or some are predestined for salvation and others are not, and there is nothing either group can do about it. That option would make God a respecter of persons, which he is not. (Acts 10:34)


2. So where does that leave us? It must be true that man plays some role in his salvation.

a. What then must he do? We are not the first to ever ask that question. Those who heard the very first gospel sermon in Acts 2 asked that very question, and they were told to repent and be baptized.

If we do not have somewhat of a hand in our salvation, then who does? God alone? If it is God alone, then is anyone going to be cast into hell? If they are, then who chose hell for them?

Is that what happened of the forgiven servant in Matthew 18:21-35?
Was the servant being chastened?

Scripture clearly teaches that it is possible for a believer to commit the unforgivable sin of blasphemy, but I won't bother reposting those right now. Instead, I want to consider the issue regarding rewards in heaven, which is rather problematic because heaven is eternal bliss. Does loss of reward make one unhappy in heaven?

I prefer to think that degrees of reward in heaven are comparable to the differences in enjoyment of music or art, for example, where someone ignorant of the subject has less appreciation for it than someone more experienced. Similarly, a person who has suffered for Christ greatly on earth will have greater joy in heaven than someone who had it relatively easy--like me. But we all will be happy and will not commit sins such as envy, because in heaven the greatest will be those who serve.

It is not changing the language, it is instead considering the semantic range of the word and how it is being used in the text.
The scripture is using the words they were commonly used in every day life at the time.
They do not have a separate special meaning within scripture.

Do yo see any distinction between the temporal salvation (an ongoing event) and the eternal salvation (a one time event) in scripture?

Warnings and encouragement to walk in the Spirit, not one is about being unjustified.

Actually, this is mind-boggling. The semantic range? Salvation means salvation. It's really just that simple. Then comes context.

How many times have you read me say in this thread things like, were saved - being saved - will be saved? This is the language of the Text re: the word "save" when reviewed in all of its tenses.

The specific words in the Word are there for a reason.

The problem here is that some of you think you need to change the inspired Text to protect your theological constructs you were raised under, as was I, then I studied the Word of God.

Do you believe Salvation is a process or a onetime event or a future event or some combination of the three or all of the three or?

Again, IMO "works salvation" is a mess of opinions, emotions, theological constructs of men, poor exegesis, and in fairness to all, an obviously tough topic to discuss and to deal with in the Text. Look at all of the considerations being brought up here from (and some not from) Scripture; lose vs. can't lose; walk away vs. can't walk away; believed vs. never believed; truly believed vs. believed; the extent of the meaning and topic of sealing, rewards, wages, etc., etc., etc.

My decision long ago was to reject the constructs and the traditions - all of them - and rest in my belief of who Jesus is and the fact that He is YHWH"s Christ, YHWH's King, the only absolute ruler to whom all knees shall bow (including mine willingly in Christ in Spirit) etc., etc., and just sit and study His Word as it's written, and let Him work in me to provide His capacity to will and work what He commands. I, like all of us, am a work in progress within the Process of His Salvation Plan with all of its benchmarks and goals until salvation future when we will be like Him because we'll see Him as He is (which is some very interesting language in itself).

I think I have a pretty decent understanding of the Salvation Process as it's written. I studied and taught for some years every instance of the word "save" in all of its parsing in our Text. I know why I don't change the language of Phil2:12 and why I have zero problems with being commanded to accomplish my SALVATION with fear and trembling...

I also know and studied before we could find others on the internet who have done likewise every form of language in the NC that is imperatival - a command. Without pulling up that work, as I recall, there are just below 600 commands to Christians just in the Epistles. IMO each and every one of them is important as is every word in the Word properly and accurately understood. This is just some of the reason I attempt to pull fellow believers into actually working in Scripture. More often than not the process is to set the Scripture aside or deal with it casually while letting the made-up constructs and accusations fly.

As I said, what a mess.

The child doesn't become more saved, but the quality and enjoyment of his salvation has been enhanced.

I'll focus here and not comment on the other parts for the moment. This is where your analogy goes off track. In the language of Scripture - being saved - is progressive just as is growth from infancy to maturity and then beyond maturity.

When salvation is taught in its past, present and future tenses by some teachers, the progressive and continuous present - being saved - is taught by some as being saved from the power of sin. Your verses from Peter convey this. As we grow in Christ in Spirit, we sin less and less - we're being saved from the power of sin.

God's children under the hand of a perfect, loving Father, must be and are disciplined as they are growing. This discipline is lessened as growth takes place. Within such analogy is the Biblical concept of being progressively saved from the power of sin. We're given the instruction - the command - tested in it - disciplined as necessary until His command is our will and work and sin/deviation/
disobedience to whatever degree is no longer a part of us. Train a child in the way he should go....

So, yes, Biblically speaking, a child does become more saved, and I can then work with the last part of your sentence.

For works to contribute to the onset or initial salvation would render Ephesians 2:8-9 false.

Likewise, having no works attending new life would suggest no life exists.

This seems to be your agreeing to the 'never believed' position. It has merit per John6 but I agree there needs to be continued discussion and reasoning re: the position re: apostasy.

And if you are suggesting that works are necessary to maintain salvation, this is incorrect.

Some obviously disagree with you and I'm open to discussion re: apostasy.

While they will certainly attend one who is saved, they are not the source of life with him. Only Christ supplies this life. And it is His faithfulness to the Father and to us who are His that secures for us eternal life.

I don't think the discussion is about the Source of Life. I think both sides know the Source and I think accusations that another side doesn't is simply weak discussion - fallacious argumentation.

could the servant pay for his sin debt? Could the servent save himself?

Why do you refuse to admit you can not save yourself. why do you insist on being like the pharisees?

Likely agree but I'll again go back to John6:27 and to other topics like Faith correlated to obedience, how and when grace was applied pursuant to Rom8 and 11, works of law, etc., in order to clarify what are and what are not works that create debt.



Answers interlineated.

PS. I am still waiting. what works do I have to do? Why are you so afraid to answer?