Believing in Wrong Doctrine: Will I lose my salvation?

[JLB]

I normally do not reply to posts without Scriptural reference but for you, I'll make an exception:

Someone who never had saving faith is an unbeliever (literally in the Greek it means not-believer). ápistos (from 1 /A "not" and 4103 /pistós, "faithful,"

Someone who no longer has saving faith (but once did) would be called an ex-believer (a word that never appears in the whole enter Bible, literally it's not-biblical, unbiblical).

Here's Jesus' definition:

John 3:18 Disciples’ Literal New Testament (DLNT)

18 The one believing in Him is not judged. But the one not believing has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only-born Son of God. ​

​

See??? According to Jesus, someone not believing (an unbeliever, same word in the Greek) has not believed in the name of the only-born Son of God.

I know there are people out there that think there are some 'unbelievers' who have once believed in the name of the only-born Son of God and yet longer believe in the name. The problem is, that's an unbiblical idea, literally, according to Jesus. And it's an idea that directly conflicts with Jesus' teaching here in John 3:18. I believe Jesus on this subject.

Do you believe there are unbelievers who have believed in the name of the only-born Son of God?

Chessman, I asked you a question that pertains to the scripture we are discussing.


Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, 1 Timothy 4:1

Your whole post never addresses my question at all.

Here is my question again.


If a believer departs from the faith are they still saved by faith?

• It’s a yes or no answer.

What is the difference between someone who never had faith and someone who no longer has faith?

They both do not have faith. Faith is a noun; a tangible thing.


I’m not asking about “believing”, my question refers to a person who either has or does not have faith; the substance of the salvation they hope for.


JLB

 

[GodsGrace]

So true.


It’s not that we are asking anyone to “let go” of the scriptures that teach us and encourage us about God and His great mercy and grace toward us, to bring us into everlasting life His Son paid the price for us to obtain.


It’s that we ask to them to “take hold” of the other verses that admonish and warn us about departing from the faith; departing from Christ, without whom we will be lost.


We must learn to reconcile these scriptures together to establish and walk in the truth.


We must love the truth.

All truth. The Spirit leads us and guides us into all truth.

Not just the truth we like to hear.


Those who don’t learn to love the truth are in great danger of being deceived.

• with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
2 Timothy 2:9-12

JLB

Yes JLB,
These are verses that make me worry about some.
This worry is the only reason to speak to incorrect doctrine...not the desire to be "right".

It just seems so clear from scripture...

Hebrews 3:18 speaks against those that say that NOTHING can separate us from God --- it would seem that disobedience does...

Hebrews 3:18
And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who were disobedient?

 

[williamt]

Some believe in eternal security, or OSAS.
Some believe in conditional security or OSNAS.

Only one of said doctrines result in proclaiming soli deo gloria. The other points to themselves and promotes a works based salvation or performance based salvation. If one is pointing to themselves then that is self idolatry. Therefore, the alleged recipient of salvation is placing their faith in the wrong object, themselves, rather than Jesus Christ.

The very least that can be said about those works based salvation or performance based salvation (ist) are that they more closely align to Catholicism rather than Protestantism.

A lot of people are turned away by "doctrine". Ironically, they usually symptomatically display misplaced faith, perhaps because they reject monergism (Protestant) for synergism (Catholicism, JWs, Mormons etc)? Such people usually reject the great pivotal historical arguments in the church throughout 2000 years of church history. Some pivotal moments include Arius, Pelagius, and followers of Arminius.

Personally, I do not adhere to the doctrine of OSAS but rather Perseverance of the saints. Though they both communicate eternal security only one communicates accountability and responsibility of both the unbeliever and believer.

 

[chessman]

Chessman, I asked you a question that pertains to the scripture we are discussing.


Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, 1 Timothy 4:1

Actually, your question does NOT pertain to the Scripture we were discussing at all (which was confusing, so I didn't answer it).

But see Post #100 where I showed what Paul's Holy Spirit inspired phrase "depart from the faith" actually means in this context simply by reading the rest of his sentence. Literally, in the very sentence from which you snipped the phrase out off, Paul defines it's meaning clearly. So your question isn't about his phrase's meaning or anything else in that Scripture. Thus, I didn't mention it.

If a believer departs from the faith are they still saved by faith?

Please quote and underline where 1 Tim 4:1-7 says anything about being "still saved by faith" in the first place (your phrase not Paul's). Otherwise, your assumptive question is akin to; Have you stopped beating your wife yet? In reality your 1st question was (and still is) not about 1 Tim 4:1-3 at all.

Here's a couple of logical questions that is actually about that Scripture:

1. Has someone who forbids marriage "departed from the faith"? (I'm thinking certain priesthoods)

Or
2. Has someone who forbids abstaining from eating certain foods "departed from the faith"? (I'm thinking Islam)

Care to answer either??? My answer is yes to both.

Now those are non-assumptive questions pertaining to Paul's use of the phrase "departed from the faith" in this context. Yours, not so much.

What is the difference between someone who never had faith and someone who no longer has faith?

See post #120 where Jesus answers this question.

Faith (Strong's 4102) is simply the noun form of the same root word "believe" (4100) in its verb form. Here's the link again to the word where you can look at every single usage of the word Jesus uses in John 3:18 (either verb, noun, or adjective forms).

In John 3:18, He uses this word and makes a rather astonishing claim (that is to someone that claims an unbeliever is the same as an ex-believer).

The one not believing (an unbeliever in the present tense) "has not believed in the name of the only-born Son of God".

4100 pisteúō from 4102 /pístis, "faith".

 

[OzSpen]

Hi Oz,
Sorry for delay.

No. I don't consider incorrect doctrine to be the same as heresy. Heresy means believing something that is the opposite of accepted Christanity.

heresy
/ˈhɛrɪsi/
noun

1. belief or opinion contrary to orthodox religious (especially Christian) doctrine.
   "Huss was burned for heresy"
   sinonimiissension, dissent, dissidence, blasphemy, nonconformity, unorthodoxy, heterodoxy, apostasy, freethinking, schism, faction; Altro
   
   • opinion profoundly at odds with what is generally accepted.
     "the heresy of being uncommitted to the right political dogma"

So now we have to define the difference between incorrect doctrine and heresey.

doctrine
/ˈdɒktrɪn/
noun

1. a belief or set of beliefs held and taught by a Church, political party, or other group.
   "the doctrine of predestination"
   sinonimi:creed, credo, dogma, belief, set of beliefs, code of belief, conviction, teaching; Altro
   • US
     a stated principle of government policy, mainly in foreign or military affairs.
     "the Truman Doctrine"

The way I understand it is that an incorrect doctrine is taught by a Christian church based on how it understands particular scriptures.

A heresy is a belief that goes against ANY and ALL churches because it teaches what is not found anywhere in the bible...IOW, it discards the bible and comes up with its own understanding.

The gnostics would be a good example. I can't find anywhere in scripture that teaches that the body is separate from the soul...I do find that we are a complete human, comprising of body, soul and spirit.

In the case of OSAS, we do have some verses that seem to show that we are saved forever once we come to believe. Although I don't agree with this and the majority of churches don't either...it's understandable how this could be deduced from scripture.

The authors you posted are heretics and are not christians that believe in incorrect doctrine.

Thanks W for your clarification.

For me, I regard OSAS vs OSNAS and infant vs believers' baptism as different interpretations of Scripture. While I consider OSAS not to be the best biblical perspective, but perseverance of the saints is, I will not sever fellowship over this doctrine. The same with 2 views of baptism.

I strongly object to the transubstantiation teaching of the Lord's Supper, which means ...

The complete change of the substance of bread and wine into the substance of Christ's body and blood by a validly ordained priest during the consecration at Mass, so that only the accidents of bread and wine remain (source).​

I consider this to be false teaching - and so did Martin Luther - because the Scripture teaches:

• 'He has no need to do every day what those priests do, to offer sacrifices first for their own sins and then for the sins of the people, since he did this in offering himself once for all (Heb 7:27 NET).
• 1 Cor 11:23-26 (NET) and the emphasis on the Lord's Supper being a 'remembrance' of Jesus' death:

'23 For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night in which he was betrayed took bread, 24 and after he had given thanks he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way, he also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, every time you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For every time you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes'.​

Oz

​

 

[Walpole]

The logical question to the OP:

Who or what has the authority to declare what is right doctrine?

Asked another way, how does one know what is or is not the Christian faith?

 

[OzSpen]

The logical question to the OP:

Who or what has the authority to declare what is right doctrine?

Asked another way, how does one know what is or is not the Christian faith?

Wal,

How would you respond to this answer to your questions?

The Five Tests of False Doctrine - Tim Challies

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Right.
But those believing in OSAS will say we do not have to endure to the end! THIS is the problem....

wondering,

That's why I consider the language of OSAS to give a false impression of the biblical teaching.

OSAS, in my understanding, does not involve faith that endures to the end of life: 'But the one who endures to the end will be saved' (Matt 24:13 NLT).

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

First, the verb tense is used in a continuous sense.
(Enduring in the faith is absolutely mandatory!)

Senior,

To which verses are you referring?

Next, some Greek words have different meanings
within Christianity than in the secular world.

Please give us examples.

Finally, to reconcile with the rest of the NT ...
true saving belief includes faith, trust, obedience.
I.E. NT pisteou means different that secular pisteou!

The Greek noun for belief, faith, trust is pistis, in the nominative case.

As for pisteou, no such form exists in the Greek NT. I've checked my Analytical Greek Lexicon (rev), which parses all words, and no such form exists there.

I think you may be referring to the verb, pisteuw, which sometimes is transliterated as, pisteuo. The problem is that the last letter is omega and not omicron. When transliterated as 'o' in this verb, it gives the wrong Greek letter for the end of the verb.

Pisteuw means I believe, I have faith, or I trust. Commonly, it is, 'I believe'.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Right.
But those believing in OSAS will say we do not have to endure to the end! THIS is the problem....

That's why I consider OSAS is wrong teaching (interpretation) and Perseverance of the Saints is the biblical doctrine.

For a person who once believed/trusted in Jesus, now no longer is interested in Jesus, and is not serving Jesus, to be called a Christian who obtains eternal life at death, means a redefining of the language of 'I believe/trust/have faith'.

This side of heaven (and it's pretty close for me), I don't think evangelical Christians will resolve this controversy.

Oz

 

[JLB]

Only one of said doctrines result in proclaiming soli deo gloria. The other points to themselves and promotes a works based salvation or performance based salvation. If one is pointing to themselves then that is self idolatry. Therefore, the alleged recipient of salvation is placing their faith in the wrong object, themselves, rather than Jesus Christ.

The very least that can be said about those works based salvation or performance based salvation (ist) are that they more closely align to Catholicism rather than Protestantism.

A lot of people are turned away by "doctrine". Ironically, they usually symptomatically display misplaced faith, perhaps because they reject monergism (Protestant) for synergism (Catholicism, JWs, Mormons etc)? Such people usually reject the great pivotal historical arguments in the church throughout 2000 years of church history. Some pivotal moments include Arius, Pelagius, and followers of Arminius.

Personally, I do not adhere to the doctrine of OSAS but rather Perseverance of the saints. Though they both communicate eternal security only one communicates accountability and responsibility of both the unbeliever and believer.

Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. 2 John 9


The doctrine of Christ must be believed, obeyed and practiced, otherwise the one who does not, no longer has God.



JLB

 

[OzSpen]

Only one of said doctrines result in proclaiming soli deo gloria. The other points to themselves and promotes a works based salvation or performance based salvation. If one is pointing to themselves then that is self idolatry. Therefore, the alleged recipient of salvation is placing their faith in the wrong object, themselves, rather than Jesus Christ....


Personally, I do not adhere to the doctrine of OSAS but rather Perseverance of the saints. Though they both communicate eternal security only one communicates accountability and responsibility of both the unbeliever and believer.

william,

These two statements seem contradictory to me. You don't agree with OSNAS because it "promotes a works based salvation or performance based salvation ... [of] self idolatry".

Then you state that you don't use OSAS but prefer Perseverance of the Saints. Who perseveres? Individuals who believe!!

Why don't you also consider the effort for believers 'to persevere' to be 'works based salvation ... self idolatry"?

Sounds like an oxymoron to me.

Oz

 

[JLB]

Actually, your question does NOT pertain to the Scripture we were discussing at all (which was confusing, so I didn't answer it).

Thank you, Chessman for being honest enough to admit you didn’t answer my question.


If this question is too confusing for you to answer, maybe you should consider that arguing against what the scriptures so plainly say, may not be a good decision.


Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, 1 Timothy 4:1


According to your theology, if someone departs from the faith are they still saved?

• Yes, they are still saved even though they no longer have faith in Christ for salvation.

• No, they are not still saved.

JLB

 

[OzSpen]

good points - imo creating doctrines has replaced reading entire chapters and books of the bible for study

i didn't learn doctrines as a new christian - i read the bible cover to cover over and over - and i learned the heart of God that way

the heart of God makes more sense to me than any doctrine

TF,

I'm rather saddened by this emphasis because:

1. Doctrines come from reading the text of the Bible and obtaining the teaching from God. Doctrine = teaching. If you read 1 Cor 14 (NIV), what doctrines are found there? Reading the content of this chapter has caused heartache in many churches because of the doctrines in this one chapter. Every chapter of the Bible that I've read has teaching of doctrine. I'd be a fool not to acknowledge that.
2. So you didn't learn doctrines as a new Christian! You have to learn the doctrine of salvation by repentance and faith through Christ alone to even be saved. Were you baptised as a new Christian? From where did that doctrine come? What about growing in your faith? How did you know what God said in Scripture about sanctification and the gifts of the Spirit?
3. The heart of God is in Scripture. He provided it by theopneustos (breathed out). See 2 Tim 3:16 (MNT).

It seems to me that you separate the voice of God independently to you and the voice of God through Scripture. Am I correct or wrong in that assessment?

Oz

 

[chessman]

If this question is too confusing for you to answer,

Please quote and underline where I said your question is too confusing to answer. It’s not a confusing question, it’s an illogical/leading question. And furthermore, your question doesn’t pertain to the 1 Tim 4:1-3 Scripture.

I said your question is an assumptive question because it is. They are easy to spot, just like the question; Have you stopped beating your wife? is an easy to spot assumptive question. Which is why judges do not all them in a court of law.

According to your theology, if someone departs from the faith are they still saved?

Again, if you want to ask a question about what Paul meant by “depart from the faith”, why not just read and post the rest of his sentence??? You stop each time before he tells you what it means to depart from the faith and why. Then ask a logical question about his actual statement, not your own. (Or not)

Then quote and underline where he says anything about being saved in his sentence about depating from the faith. Otherwise, your question isn’t about 1 Tim 4:1-3 at all. It’s about your assumption.

 

[Truthfrees]

TF,

I'm rather saddened by this emphasis because:

1. Doctrines come from reading the text of the Bible and obtaining the teaching from God. Doctrine = teaching. If you read 1 Cor 14 (NIV), what doctrines are found there? Reading the content of this chapter has caused heartache in many churches because of the doctrines in this one chapter. Every chapter of the Bible that I've read has teaching of doctrine. I'd be a fool not to acknowledge that.
2. So you didn't learn doctrines as a new Christian! You have to learn the doctrine of salvation by repentance and faith through Christ alone to even be saved. Were you baptised as a new Christian? From where did that doctrine come? What about growing in your faith? How did you know what God said in Scripture about sanctification and the gifts of the Spirit?
3. The heart of God is in Scripture. He provided it by theopneustos (breathed out). See 2 Tim 3:16 (MNT).

It seems to me that you separate the voice of God independently to you and the voice of God through Scripture. Am I correct or wrong in that assessment?

Oz

nope - not at all - i'm not sure how i even remotely gave you that impression - i must have used all the wrong words that meant something different to you than what i meant

i'm not sure how to sort this out - i used my best words and somehow it looks almost opposite to you from what i meant

 

[GodsGrace]

Wondering,

If you truly believe that Christ died for your sins, was buried, and raised from the dead 3 days later, as per Paul's gospel of salvation in 1Cor 15:1-4, the Holy Spirit enters you and seals you and seals your salvation, as per Paul in Eph 1:13. Also from Paul is Eph 2:8-9, where it says that works can never provide salvation.
1Cor 15:1-4
1 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
Eph 1:13
In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
Eph 2:8-9
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Paul was chosen by Jesus Christ, on the Damascus Road, to be the ONLY preacher, teacher, and apostle to the Gentiles. Jesus Christ trained Paul through the many special revelations given to Paul, and no one else - search for the word "revelation" on Paul's epistles. Every word Paul said and wrote came from Christ. Paul's words are Christ's words. Paul's word is our Last Word,

Believe Paul always. Don't believe James on this question. James was written to Israel, Jam 1:1. Israel was required to do works - the works of the Law. You're not a Jew and Gentiles were NEVER required to keep Israel's law.

If you believe the wrong doctrine, excluding the doctrine concerning Christ, no problem. Probably 99% of Christendom and the members of any forum believe in false doctrine, but they are still saved. They have been taught by the Satan-led Denominational Church system the belief that most everything taught to or given to Israel, is also given to the Gentiles. In truth, the only books that contain truth TO us or ABOUT us Gentiles today, can be found ONLY in Paul's 7 books written after Acts - Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1&2 Timothy, Titus, and Philemon. Only in those books do you find that you can spend eternity in the Highest Heaven, where God lives, Eph 2:6,Eph 1:20. The other 59 books are TO and ABOUT Israel ONLY, except what is written about Christ. Those in the 59 Israel books had a Hope of the Earth or the New Jerusalem, which certainly isn't Heaven. It comes down from Heaven and attaches to the new Earth.

Hi Acts 28

First of all, welcome to the forum.

You make some interesting statements up above which, quite frankly, I don't understand.

Are you saying that Jesus taught something different than what Paul taught?

Are you saying the entire bible, both the O.T. and the N.T. are not for us gentiles? The Jews have one set of rules and we Christians have a different set of rules?

So does this mean there are TWO bodies of Christ?
So what does PAUL mean in the following verses?

Romans 12:5
5 so we, who are many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.

1 Corinthians 12:13
13For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.

 

[GodsGrace]

imo if we read scripture cover to cover over and over we would learn these concepts from the bible words wouldn't we? -

shouldn't these concepts come clear from reading and studying scripture? -

if not where did these concepts come from? - and why should we read something other than the bible to understand what God says about everything?

Hi TF,
I would have to say that biblical scholars/theologians ARE necessary.

Take the concepts of Justification and Sanctification. Paul uses the terms interchangeably...in some places it sounds like we've already been sanctified, and in some places it sounds like it's ongoing. It would have confused me TTYTT, unless someone who actually studied this wrote about it so others could teach about the difference and I could come to understand it.

Some biblical concepts are very easy to learn just from reading, and I find that others are not. Some will be much more intelligent than me and maybe come to know these concepts with no help --- but what about those of us who would NEVER understand?

It's good that explanations are available.

 

[williamt]

william,

These two statements seem contradictory to me. You don't agree with OSNAS because it "promotes a works based salvation or performance based salvation ... [of] self idolatry".

Then you state that you don't use OSAS but prefer Perseverance of the Saints. Who perseveres? Individuals who believe!!

Why don't you also consider the effort for believers 'to persevere' to be 'works based salvation ... self idolatry"?

Sounds like an oxymoron to me.

Oz

Of course believers will persevere in the faith to the last day. John 6:44 No man can come to me (T) unless the Father (U) draws them to me (I) then I will raise them up (L) on the last day (P).

"Why don't you also consider the effort for believers 'to persevere' to be 'works based salvation ... self idolatry"?"

No, there is a difference between being justified by works and Christian duty. In other words, to the believer the Law drives them to the Gospel that they are justified, then sends them to the Law again to show them their duty now that they are justified. One cannot lose the justification they're imputed (not infused). If one relies on their own works for salvation then that is works based salvation or performance based salvation.

The reason I do not consider it right to base perseverance on works is because of my understanding of faith (a fruit of regeneration). A lot of people look at faith and say I was saved by my "act" of faith rather than by the object of faith. God is the author and finisher of our salvation. He who began a good work will finish it. Faith in itself does not save but it is the object of faith (Jesus Christ) that saves us.

Salvation is strictly monergism.

Again, if any doctrine points to man it is wise to reject it. One of the fundamental Protestant Pillars is Soli Deo Gloria. If one cannot proclaim all Glory to God alone for their salvation then they are attributing salvation to another (idolatry) as such Catholicism attributes salvation to the believer, the saints before them, and Mary, as well as God. Therefore, they reject Soli Deo Gloria.

 

[GodsGrace]

Any doctrine that a person believes in that is contrary to the Word of God, is a doctrine that could cause Salvation issues.
Jesus Christ is the Word, if you believe something that is contrary to the Word, you believe something that is contrary to Jesus Christ.
The Apostle Paul plainly taught that what he teaches are commandments from Jesus Christ. Therefore if you believe something contrary to what Paul taught, then you believe contrary to the commandments of Jesus Christ.
To believe in Jesus is to believe in His Word.
If you believe something that is contrary to His Word, then how are you believing in Jesus?

I couldn't agree more!

But then why do we disagree on doctrine?
Doctrine just means a teaching...it could be the doctrine of a church or the doctrine of Jesus.

I find that Jesus taught that salvation can be lost.
I find that Paul also taught this, as did the other writers.

So how did eternal salvation come to be accepted?
Did Calvin know more than Jesus or Paul?
Herein lies the difficulty....we all believe we have the right doctrine...even though we disagree!

We have a poster here that believes Jesus taught differently than Paul.

And how could you believe ALL doctrine is equal? For instance, I've stated that believing in OSAS or eternal security, could be a cause of loss of salvation. How could having a misunderstanding of the Trinity be a cause for loss even though it's a tenet of Christianity?