Loss of salvation???

[Inquisitor]

A believer cannot undo his/her status of innocent once that person has accepted the payment of the debt in full.
The believer has no way of acquiring/taking back the the debt.

That is what it means to be "justified" it is a non-revocable status.

So this logic is completely flawed right out of the gate because belief/faith is the >>> "through' it is not the end result.

There is one act of belief in Christ Jesus and His work that brings the one irrevocable gift.

Our status of justified is not tethered to this "ongoing belief" but completely dependent on God and His promises.

Israel taught you that a covenant can be broken by one of the parties in the old covenant.

Israel broke the covenant and was severed from Jesus Christ.

The old covenant was a conditional covenant.

The N.T. delivers a new covenant based not on the law but on the divine sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

Yet, Paul reminds the Gentiles in Rome that the new covenant is also conditional.

Romans 11:21-22
For if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. Behold then the kindness and
severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness;
otherwise you also will be cut off.

Anyone can break the basic condition attached to the new covenant.

We know that our behavior is ultimately driven by what we believe.

 

[Genez]

It seems to me most if not all have such times. It's part of the process of having our faith tested and refined and establishing our abiding and endurance.

When you speak of giving up the fight and casualties of war you almost sound like the loss of salvation side, but...

Isn't Faith Alone in Christ Alone & OSAS or similar also a mantra belief type church?

Not loss of eternal salvation.

Merely the loss of their salvation of their souls for the faithful while living in time.

In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while, if need be, you have been grieved by various trials, ​

that the genuineness of your faith, being much more precious than gold that perishes, though it is tested ​

by fire, may be found to praise, honor, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ, whom having not seen you love. ​

​

Though now you do not see Him, yet believing, you rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory, receiving the goal of your faith—the salvation of your souls. 1 Peter 1:6-9​

... I wish you understood.

 

[Inquisitor]

That's a potentially big problem. I guess we'll see because it's obviously the next phase for many.

Interesting data and conclusion though.

If your interpretation is not derived from what a letter actually states, but an overview
of the N.T. Then one would be advised to check the literal reading first before signing up
to an interpretation of the N.T.

Here is an example of an interpretation applied to the scripture.

There is a church organization that has a specific interpretation of the N.T.

This church identifies Sunday attendance as a shadow of the mark of the beast.

If we are in the end times then Sunday church attendance is the mark of the beast.

Will a literal reading of the N.T. support that interpretation?

 

[Genez]

No offense intended but seems like an easy out that ends up really meaning nothing.

You were citing certain things without understanding their meaning.
It would have taken so long to straighten out.
Then the reason I was answering would be lost.

Now, if we were in a large classroom with people wanting to learn?
I would have then taken the needed time.
At least someone would have benefitted about the other things your diversions introduced.

........

 

[Genez]

The N.T. consists simply of letters sent to churches or an individual.

Many letters are an easy read and don't require any interpretation.

Take, for example, the letter identified as 3 John.

I have never seen a single interpretation of 3 John.

The problem with the N.T. is nearly always a failure of reading a letter in context.

A letter can state that Jesus was crucified and rose from the dead.

That is a simple statement that anyone can understand, even Chat GPT will recognize that.

It's another matter to believe that we receive forgiveness for our bad behavior by that sacrifice
on the cross. We receive a reconciliation to God through Jesus Christ.

Never confuse the contents of a simple letter written to a church (literal) and the spiritual
truth that a simple letter may contain.

OSAS is not what the N.T. teaches from a literal reading of the N.T.

OSAS is an interpretation applied to the text.

Thanks for explaining yourself....

 

[Inquisitor]

Not loss of eternal salvation.

Merely the loss of their salvation of their souls for the faithful while living in time.

In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while, if need be, you have been grieved by various trials, ​

that the genuineness of your faith, being much more precious than gold that perishes, though it is tested ​

by fire, may be found to praise, honor, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ, whom having not seen you love. ​

​

Though now you do not see Him, yet believing, you rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory, receiving the goal of your faith—the salvation of your souls. 1 Peter 1:6-9​

... I wish you understood.

Your interpretation is overriding the literal reading of the text.

Romans 11:21-22
For if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. Behold then the kindness and
severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness;
otherwise you also will be cut off.

That's an example of an interpretation that is at odds with what a letter states.

 

[Genez]

@Genez looks to be questioning the KJV.

You don't?

It reads like a script from Shakespeare.

 

[Inquisitor]

Thanks for explaining yourself....

Happy to explain anything you ask except if it relates to the book of Revelation.

 

[Genez]

Your interpretation is overriding the literal reading of the text.

Romans 11:21-22
For if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. Behold then the kindness and
severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness;
otherwise you also will be cut off.

That's an example of an interpretation that is at odds with what a letter states.

Cut off from what?

You are shallow in your understanding.
But your dogmatism runs deep.

Now....

Go find some simple mended souls you can bully from your pulpit.
Then you can feel important with the power they will grant you.

Emotionally pumped up self-esteem does not please God.

 

[Genez]

Happy to explain anything you ask except if it relates to the book of Revelation.

Go away! You can't take a hint!

... sad to witness to.

 

[Taylorj2]

Who said it was guarnteed? I testify that one who has been transformed by the POWER of God cannot turn from Him. Not by my power, but by His, I'm saying that anyone saved in truth by the real life Creator of everything through His Son Jesus, can not walk away from Him. Maybe you can, but I testify that my Gods power keeps me, by His power and for His glory. I don't know the weak God you're talking about that saves people to walk away from Him. My God is MUCH better than yours.

The scripture is very clear that salvation belongs to those who do not wander and persevere in the faith.

 

[studier]

If your interpretation is not derived from what a letter actually states, but an overview
of the N.T. Then one would be advised to check the literal reading first before signing up
to an interpretation of the N.T.

Here is an example of an interpretation applied to the scripture.

There is a church organization that has a specific interpretation of the N.T.

This church identifies Sunday attendance as a shadow of the mark of the beast.

If we are in the end times then Sunday church attendance is the mark of the beast.

Will a literal reading of the N.T. support that interpretation?

A little clarification would help. "your" highlighted above - generally speaking - or pointed at me?

Since AI is becoming the new "reverend" it's yet to be trusted and I for one have a concern about what's going to happen as it is relied upon. On the other hand, I find it an interesting tool and as it becomes more perfected, it's power may well assist us in unwinding some things in the Text that take a lot of capacity to work through.

With that said, I work at translation and begin literal unless something in the grammar suggests otherwise. Having said this, I found the reverend's compilation interesting and as much as I read through it, consistent with some of the thinking in support of loss of salvation. There were no real surprises in it.

 

[NightTwister]

Israel taught you that a covenant can be broken by one of the parties in the old covenant.

Israel broke the covenant and was severed from Jesus Christ.

The old covenant was a conditional covenant.

The N.T. delivers a new covenant based not on the law but on the divine sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

Yet, Paul reminds the Gentiles in Rome that the new covenant is also conditional.

Romans 11:21-22
For if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. Behold then the kindness and
severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness;
otherwise you also will be cut off.

Anyone can break the basic condition attached to the new covenant.

We know that our behavior is ultimately driven by what we believe.

The New Covenant cannot be broken, because it is between God the Father and Jesus Christ, who cannot fail.

 

[studier]

Not loss of eternal salvation.

Merely the loss of their salvation of their souls for the faithful while living in time.

In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while, if need be, you have been grieved by various trials, ​

that the genuineness of your faith, being much more precious than gold that perishes, though it is tested ​

by fire, may be found to praise, honor, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ, whom having not seen you love. ​

​

Though now you do not see Him, yet believing, you rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory, receiving the goal of your faith—the salvation of your souls. 1 Peter 1:6-9​

... I wish you understood.

Please clarify. You're saying 1Pet1:9 "receiving the goal of your faith- the salvation of your souls" is not resurrection into eternal life? So, a different salvation? So, two salvations?

 

[studier]

You were citing certain things without understanding their meaning.
It would have taken so long to straighten out.
Then the reason I was answering would be lost.

Now, if we were in a large classroom with people wanting to learn?
I would have then taken the needed time.
At least someone would have benefitted about the other things your diversions introduced.

........

In broad strokes, what was I not understanding? And what were my "diversions"?

Unless there is some confusion, it seemed to me you were saying the AI list of Scriptures in post #1543 were a "wall of conflictions". Correct?

 

[studier]

You don't?

It reads like a script from Shakespeare.

Not arbitrarily. IOW I'll look to see how it compares in content re: for example, words under discussion, before I automatically discount it if someone is using it in a discussion.

I don't normally use it, and I won't get into any KJV only discussions.

 

[PaulThomson]

Pointing at those who were commissioned to preach the Kingdom Gospel to Israel, which did indeed require water baptism for THEM, and apply that to us today who are under the Gospel of Grace, that does indeed create more problems for such a system of belief.

The dichotomy you are proposing is that coupling any work to unmerited favor, that's counterintuitive and antiscriptural. What part, may I ask, of unmerited favor do you not understand? 1 Corinthians 15: 1-4 makes no mention at all of water baptism as an element for salvation. Are you prepared, then, to accuse THE apostle to the Gentiles of the sin of ommission? After all, for Paul to have left out an element necessary for salvation, that would have been a horrid blunder that neither Peter nor any of the other apostles scolded him for having omitted...IF in fact that were an omission, which it was not.

So, what your post does is to attempt forcing into the Gospel of Grace an element for boasting..."Well, I was also baptized for my salvation, which added to the sufficiency of the Blood of Christ..."

So, are you now saying that Paul, OUR apostle, was wrong? Do you think he left out an allegedly vital part for salvation?

MM

"He that believes and is baptised shall be saved" does not mean "Only he that believes and is baptised shall be saved."

If I say, "The person who comes to my party AND eats the haggis is my friend" I am not saying that those who come to my party but refuse the haggis are not my friends. To claim it does is the fallacy of negative inference. I could be elevating the haggis eating friend to a level of greater friendship, because they are willing topartake of whatever I partake in. Jesus may have a greater appreciation of the person who gets baptised to fulfil all righteousness, as he did, than the one who refuses to do so for some prideful reason. But it does not mean he is not willing to save the unbaptised on the basis of their faith in Him.

 

[PaulThomson]

That was quite a setup!

@Genez looks to be questioning the KJV.

I also question the KJV. It is not perfect. But at least it's content is based on the received text, not a few abominably mutilated copies of emended text versions from the fifth century.

 

[Genez]

Please clarify. You're saying 1Pet1:9 "receiving the goal of your faith- the salvation of your souls" is not resurrection into eternal life? So, a different salvation? So, two salvations?

In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while, if need be, you have been grieved by various trials,
that the genuineness of your faith, being much more precious than gold that perishes, though it is tested
by fire, may be found to praise, honor, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ, whom having not seen you love.

Though now you do not see Him, yet believing, you rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory, receiving the goal of your faith—the salvation of your souls. 1 Peter 1:6-9

Peter said that the indicator of having received the salvation of one's soul is joy inexpressible.

The trials we all must face (ordained to happen by God) are difficulties that require having sound doctrine in our thinking to overcome them. That the trials are designed to test to see if what we chose to believe is real or false doctrine.

Those who prefer and desire false doctrine will always feel a void, even if they pretend to be having joy.

Now, this process for being tested is not something that takes place overnight. It can take years, depending on how much we have been given and what is being required of us by God.

Those who have been given much. Much will be required of them.

 

[PaulThomson]

Have fun.
I refuse to enter into your world of boredom.

Some seem to be of the vies that it is boring to read the Bible taking notice of the genre of literature we are reading. It's so much more interesting to them to free ourselves from such concerns and be able to interpret the Bible to say whatever we can twist it into saying by ignoring context and genre.