If you believe you can lose your salvation, you are not saved!(explanation)

[Drew]

The error in your argument here is treating eternal life as an object. It isn't and you're unable to show any evidence from Scripture to support your view.

No, again no.

The fact that eternal life is not an object is beside the point. A gift that is not an object can be cast aside [Personal remark. WIP]

A woman can offer irrevocable love to a man as an "irrevocable gift" and the man can reject that love.

 

[smaller]

If any person doesn't believe they are saved, only that they might be, then they might be, they might not be, according to their own measure.

What proof might you provide to Jesus when the time comes? Are any going to have a checklist of their personal "obedience" achievements in their pocket? What if you have Alzheimers and can't remember? Are you going to pull out the list of Trinity features? The proper rules of baptism? Recite back to our Lord what you did, personally, to gain entry? The methodology exercised properly only by you in any other matter?

Faith has only one measure.

Gal. 5:
6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.

I might expect in any line of reasonings with God in Christ, if asked what I thought of my fellow whoevers that didn't baptize as I saw proper, that they might be damned, I might expect to hear this from Jesus:

Matthew 7:2
For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

So, I might advise caution in this area. Less fire may be in order on that day.

You think your formula's of faith which supposedly justify you (which are nothing but LAWs with PENALTIES in most cases) and you condemn others. Look at what Jesus said, above.

It's how you judge OTHERs, that you will be judged. So, whatever it is you think of THEM, you will have to yourself.

In this LIGHT I can only plead for a super abundance of Grace and Mercy toward ALL believers regardless of what "they" think.

 

[FreeGrace]

Hi,

1) Yes, salvation is called a gift. Yet it is being ASSUMED by FreeGrace that the gift of salvation is offered by God UNconditionally and this gift is received by man UNconditionally when this is not the case at all.

This statement is totally FALSE. The gift of salvation is conditioned upon believing in Jesus Christ for it. Please don't misrepresent my views.

3) FreeGrace has yet to prove that God has made 'eternal security' a gift that cannot be revoked. God has not promised or 'gifted' eternal security to any individual unconditionally.

The proof is in what Paul about eternal life. First, he defined eternal life as a gift of God in Rom 6:23. Then, he said that God's gifts are irrevocable in Rom 11:29. What's left to prove?

4) Yes, as long as one maintains a present tense, ongoing, sustained belief he will be saved.

This is refuted by Paul's answer to the jailer who asked what he MUST DO to be saved. Paul's answer was to 'believe' and he used the aorist tense, which means completed action. Not ongoing, continuous action as being claimed.

But what happens if one quits believing? One believes by his own volition and therefore can quit believing by his own volition also and become lost.

The error here is equating loss of faith with loss of salvation, because of the error that God requires ongoing belief for ongoing salvation. But that isn't taught anywhere in the Bible.

Will FreeGrace argue one's salvation is still guaranteed even if one quits his present tense believing?

To believe in the aorist tense, completed action, PROVES that one will still be saved.

Most likely not but will probably offer the common excuse that if one quits believing he "never really believed at all" which is not a valid excuse logically nor biblically.

I agree. That is a bogus argument that has no basis for validity.

My point is FreeGrace is ASSUMING that God has made eternal security a gift.

A very stunning statement. You've changed wording. God says eternal LIFE is a gift that is irrevocable. Though every believer IS eternally secure, based on God's promise, those in the insecurity crowd certainly don't feel eternally secure. Therefore, to their own experience, they don't experience eternal security.

Yet God has made eternal life a gift and God offers that gift CONDITIONALLY through faith. Those men that conditionally maintain a present tense faith receive the promise of the gift of eternal life.

So, was Paul lying to the jailer in Acts 16:31 because he used the aorist tense, which is completed action.

Yet if I cast away my faith then I have forfeited the promise of the gift and God did NOT revoke the promise of the gift of eternal life from me for the offer of the gift still remains before me but I have to go back to meeting the condition of having faith in order to have the promise for the gift of salvation again.

There are several errors in this paragraph. First, Rom 11:29 is NOT about any promise of the gift, but of the gift itself.

Second, one actually possesses the gift of eternal life WHEN one believes. John 5:24

In other words, if I lose the promise of the gift of eternal life it is NOT because God revoked His promise of eternal life it is because I no longer meet the conditions God has placed upon His gift.

One cannot "lose the promise of the gift". That doesn't even make sense. It is the actual gift that the Bible speaks of.

Sure, God keeps all of His promises. That means that when one believes in Christ, God at that moment gives him the gift of eternal life. God doesn't give promises. He gives gifts. A very big difference, and one worth noting.

 

[FreeGrace]

But you can discard your physical birth. It's called suicide.

Huh? Please show me some evidence from Scripture that a born again saved person can commit spiritual suicide.

We are born, and living our physical life, which we can "discard" by suicide. We are born again, living our spiritual life, which we can discard by disbelief and disobedience.

Then there WILL BE some Scriptural evidence of this idea, if true. Please share.

 

[Drew]

I will make this as clear as possible: if eternal life were an object, then, yes, one could discard it. But eternal life is NOT an object, so eternal life CANNOT be discarded. Is that clear enough?.

I think you are now in a place where your argument is vulnerable:

The fact that something is not an object does not mean it cannot be discarded, and this is really quite clear:

1. People released from prison discard the gift of their freedom all the time by committing another offence;
2. Everyday throughout the world, hundreds of thousands of people discard the gift of love, as offered by another person;
3. Schizophrenics discard the gift of release from inner mental turmoil by refusing to take their medication.

And I could go on and on.

I have no idea where you get this idea that something has to be an object to be discarded. Clearly, salvation is not an object and it can be received as a gift, even though it is not an object. So if one can receive this non-object of salvation, why can't you discard it?

What is it about "object-hood" that makes it something you can receive, but something you cannot discard?

 

[FreeGrace]

Sometimes you have to stun people out of their comfort zone. Just as you clearly see, as do I, the thread that runs though scripture that shows the triune nature of God in scripture, I clearly see the thread that runs through it that shows OSAS does NOT exist, unlike you.

Yes, we do see things totally differently.

Where does it teach this?

I cited examples.

Jesus said NO MAN has EVER seen God. David noted that his son went to Paradise, which is where all believers go. Paradise is NOT heaven. Heaven is where God resides, NOT human souls.

[Edited combative] Jesus went to Paradise and preached to the spirits and then took them to heaven. And at the Rapture, when Jesus returns FROM HEAVEN, He will be accompanied by all the dead in Christ.

Jesus told the thief on the cross that he would be with him in paradise that day. I'm pretty sure Jesus knows the difference. Paul said He would RATHER be with Jesus, not that he would be when he died.

The only ones left in Hades are unbelievers, awaiting the Great While Throne and the chained angels, awaiting the lake of fire.

 

[FreeGrace]

The fact that eternal life is not an object is beside the point.

It is the WHOLE POINT. One which you've admitted has NO EVIDENCE from Scripture. Why would I argue for things "in general" when we have a very specific issue about a very specific gift?

A gift that is not an object can be cast aside - please stop denying this since it is obvious.

Well, obvious from WHAT EVIDENCE? Please provide some evidence for your claims. Otherwise, they are just assumptions and speculations.

A woman can offer irrevocable love to a man as an "irrevocable gift" and the man can reject that love.

Any woman in the human race is FALLEN, and sinful from the start. Therefore, her love is flawed, unlike the eternal life that God gives to those who believe in His Son.

So this example fails to parallel God's gift of eternal life, which is irrevocable and NOT discardable.

[Edited combative] A fallen human's gift of love is not the same as God's gift of love.

 

[FreeGrace]

What is it about "object-hood" that makes it something you can receive, but something you cannot discard?

What is it about eternal life NOT being an object that keeps getting missed.

I'm NOT arguing about objects that can be discarded. I'm speaking specifically about God's gift of eternal life, which includes being born again, justified, adopted as sons. There is NO EVIDENCE from Scripture that they can be discarded. Even the notion of that is beyond my understanding.

 

[Drew]

Any woman in the human race is FALLEN, and sinful from the start. Therefore, her love is flawed, unlike the eternal life that God gives to those who believe in His Son.

You are engaging in the same pattern of essentially evading the relevant question.

You claim that what makes salvation "non-discardable" is that it is not an object. Fine, so I provided you with three examples of things that are not objects that people discard all the time.

As you have done in the past, you find something in the analogies that are provided to you that you seem to think invalidates them. But the very point of an analogy is that it is, yes, an analogy and, as such, will of course differ in some respects from what it's being used in relation to.

But here, the analogies are valid: I have shown, I suggest, that all sorts of "non-objects" can be discarded - that is what is important in the analogy - the "discardability" of the non-object thing.

 

[WIP]

What is obvious is that typical of this topic, this discussion is getting too heated up to remain civil. I am closing the thread for a while until I can clean up some of the posts that have now strayed too far from the forum rules and guidelines.

I have removed or edited a number of posts. Please remember to keep the forum guidelines and rules when posting. One common thing I see are smug and combative comments toward each other. There is no reason to do this. We can present our arguments without them in a Christian way, that is, with love and respect.