1 Peter 1:23 is about eternal security

[JLB]

That notion has been thoroughly refuted from Eph 1:13,14 and 4:30, all of which prove that the sealing WITH the Holy Spirit means He can't and won't be removed from that person.
Eph 1:13-14
And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession — to the praise of his glory. NIV

The Holy Spirit is given to those who believe.

Those who believe for a while, then no longer believe, are not guaranteed anything by the fires of hell, since they have returned to unbelieving.


JLB

 

[FreeGrace]

I assume you mean to say, "Those that believe are eternally one with Christ."
I agree. They are eternally one with Christ as long as they continue to believe.

I am patiently waiting for someone to provide a verse that says that one must continue to believe in order to continue to be saved. With ANY wording that clearly states the point.

No one is worthy of eternal life.
Eternal life is a gift offered to sinners who will repent and believe.
It's a GIFT.

Eternal life is more than a gift. It is an irrevocable gifts. I know that because God's Word says the gifts of God are irrevocable.

 

[FreeGrace]

Good question.
Those previous sins are forgiven and God does not go back on His word.
But everything after apostasy remains for the apostate.

I am patiently waiting for someone to provide any verse that teaches this clearly.

Someone who is apostate is someone who has disconnected from God and, therefore, no longer has eternal life in Christ Jesus which is the only place that a person can find eternal life. (IN Christ Jesus)

But Eph 1:13,14 and 4:30 teach that WHEN one believes, they ARE SEALED with the Holy Spirit, FOR the day of redemption.

Now, for your view to be credible, there must be at least one verse that very plainly teaches that God will break this seal by removing the Holy Spirit from anyone who ceases to believe. I am patiently waiting.

]Rom 3:21-26
But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

Fall from grace; back at square one.

Excuse me, but I didn't read anything about being back at "square one" for anyone who falls from grace in the passage quoted.

 

[FreeGrace]

If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned. John 15:6

Jesus taught us that there will be those who are in Him, however they do not remain in Him.
JLB

Please explain how this verse cannot be referring to loss of fellowship rather than loss of relationship.

 

[WIP]

Correct, but you repeatedly refuse to acknowledge that the opposing side has any evidence, so you are not even engaging them in what you define as debate. There is a difference between pointing out why you believe someone is wrong and refusing to acknowledge that they've shown anything at all. I've watched too many hours to count of world class apologists debate at the highest level. I've never see one of them dismiss anything, let alone everything, their opponent presented as opinion. That's a cop out.

Of course I'd expect you to argue for what you interpret scripture to say. You can take my friendly given advice or not. I'm just telling you that this tactic of yours tends to weaken your otherwise strong defense.

Although this was a response to one particular person, in my opinion, this assessment applies to everyone in this debate and not just the person to whom the response was directed.

The result of what we see is not a good edifying Christian debate but rather just an argument with each side disclaiming the other in an attempt not to learn and grow but to score points, puff themselves up, and tear the other down.

 

[FreeGrace]

Correct, but you repeatedly refuse to acknowledge that the opposing side has any evidence, so you are not even engaging them in what you define as debate.

If the other side did have actual evidence for their position, then the Bible is clearly internally contradicted. There simply cannot be evidence for two diametrically opposed views. What has happened is that one side has taken certain verses (evidence) either out of context, or simply misunderstood. That is what I oppose, and I provide explanation for why their verses are not evidence for loss of salvation.

However, the opposite has not been shown. The other side does not explain why or how my verses aren't evidence. Instead, they just repeat their view or indicate that my view is wrong.

There is a difference between pointing out why you believe someone is wrong and refusing to acknowledge that they've shown anything at all.

I've not only acknowledged what they quote, but I've addressed what they quote, to show how and why their own verses don't support their claims. What I also acknowledge is that what they have provided does not rise to evidence, and why it doesn't.

I've watched too many hours to count of world class apologists debate at the highest level. I've never see one of them dismiss anything, let alone everything, their opponent presented as opinion. That's a cop out.

I agree!! I have not dismissed their so-called evidence. I've addressed it repeatedly and shown why and how it isn't evidence at all.

But they have not addressed my verses at all.

Of course I'd expect you to argue for what you interpret scripture to say. You can take my friendly given advice or not. I'm just telling you that this tactic of yours tends to weaken your otherwise strong defense.

As I said earlier, a debate involves presenting your evidence, and challenging the evidence of the other side. That is what I do.

 

[FreeGrace]

The Holy Spirit is given to those who believe.

Those who believe for a while, then no longer believe, are not guaranteed anything by the fires of hell, since they have returned to unbelieving.
JLB

Then please provide verses that teach that the Holy Spirit is taken away or removed from apostates. That is the only way your view can have any credence.

 

[JLB]

Then please provide verses that teach that the Holy Spirit is taken away or removed from apostates. That is the only way your view can have any credence.

13 But the ones on the rock are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, who believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away. Luke 8:13

Those who believe for a while, then return to unbelieving, no longer meet the biblical requirements of having the Holy Spirit.

And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession — to the praise of his glory.

8 But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.” Revelation 21:8


Those who believe for a while, the no longer believe, are no longer believers.



JLB

 

[JLB]

I agree!! I have not dismissed their so-called evidence. I've addressed it repeatedly and shown why and how it isn't evidence at all.

But they have not addressed my verses at all.

Your "so called" evidence have repeatedly been refuted, by the truth of God's word.

28 Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. 29 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. 30 For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, Romans 11:28-30

1. The context of this verse refers to unbelieving Jews who have rejected Jesus as Messiah.
2. Unbelieving Jews who have rejected Jesus as Messiah, do not have eternal life.
3. Eternal life is not mentioned in these verse's.


Case Closed.



JLB

 

[JLB]

Please explain how this verse cannot be referring to loss of fellowship rather than loss of relationship.

Is a branch that is connected to a vine, a fixed relationship, or a temporary "fellowship"?

A. A fixed relationship.
B. A temporary fellowship.


JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

When one obtains salvation, are they "kept" by their own faith or by God's powerful faith?

Neither.
Read the passage:

"5who are protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time." (1 Peter 1:5 NASB)

The believer is kept by the power of God.
But that power is applied through faith.
It is incumbent on the believer to continue to trust in the blood in order to continue to have the power of God applied through their faith in the blood. The author of Hebrews speaks of this continuing ministry of the blood here:

"25Therefore He is able also to save forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them." (Hebrews 7:25 NASB bold mine)

The 'forever' of salvation is based on the fact that Christ is always interceding on behalf of the believer (not the unbeliever) in the heavens. It's not a one time sacrifice that allows you to go back to unbelief and you're still justified by that sacrifice. It's only 'one time' in that Christ does not need to be re-sacrificed to gain the ongoing justification that his ongoing ministry in heaven secures for the believer in their ongoing faith.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Since a saved person's sin is covered(paid for) by the blood of Christ, what happens to that covered(paid for) sin when they become an unbeliever again? Are those sins then re-imputed (put to their account) and when they die they will be judged for those "once covered by the blood" sins?

Matthew 18:21-35 teaches us how in the kingdom of God sin guilt can and will be reinstated for person who shows contempt for the free gift. Does God reinstate specific guilt for specific past sin? I don't know. But I lean more toward the point being the one who shows contempt for the free gift of forgiveness (by returning to their sin in unbelief) will simply become guilty of sin, with no justification available for that renewed sin, all over again.

It really doesn't matter if the sin guilt is for past sin previously forgiven, or if their sin guilt is for the sin they are committing in their renewed faithless, unbelieving lives. They are condemned either way. And that's the point. They are saddled all over again with the burden of sin guilt because God revoked the free unmerited gift of grace in the forgiveness of sin. And he revoked it because of a contemptuous unbelief regarding that gift. A contempt that was evident in the way the poor slob in the parable who lost that gift acted towards others. Proof once again of how actions will be used to measure the presence of justifying faith. Actions don't justify (make a person righteous). They simply reveal if you have been made righteous by your faith in the life changing blood of Christ via the Holy Spirit.

 

[chessman]

The result of what we see is not a good edifying Christian debate but rather just an argument with each side disclaiming the other in an attempt not to learn and grow but to score points, puff themselves up, and tear the other down.

I think Jethro Bodine makes a good point. That is, Paul does have the call for Israel (all Israel, all His people) to repent and not reject Christ (Messiah) in mind within Romans 11 (including 11:29). The issue is, however, he also has the full number of Gentiles in mind as well. That same irrevocable call applies to all of His people (Jews and Gentiles), not just to Jews. And it applies individually AND collectively. You just cannot get to a group without individuals. And it is not just the call that's irrevocable but the gifts of God (clearly including Eternal Life among those gifts) as well as the call.

Romans 11:2, 7, 25-26, 29-32 (LEB) God has not rejected his people, whom he foreknew! Or do you not know, ... they did not stumble so that they fell, did they? May it never be! But by their trespass, salvation has come to the Gentiles. ... 25 For I do not want you to be ignorant, brothers, of this mystery, so that you will not be wise in your own sight, that a partial hardening has happened to Israel, until the full number of the Gentiles has come in, and so all Israel will be saved, just as it is written, ... 29 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. 30 For just as you formerly were disobedient to God, but now have been shown mercy because of the disobedience of these, 31 so also these have now been disobedient for your mercy, in order that they also may now be shown mercy. 32 For God confined them all in disobedience, in order that he could have mercy on them all.​

Just as you (gentile believer) were formerly disobedient (like them), God has not and will not (never) reject His people.

 

[chessman]

I asked:

When one obtains salvation, are they "kept" by their own faith or by God's powerful faith?

You answered:

Neither.

So if you think Peter isn't talking about their own faith or God's powerful faith, who's faith is it?

But then you say:

It is incumbent on the believer to continue to trust in the blood in order to continue to have the power of God applied through their faith in the blood

So it does seem that you think it's their own faith that Peter is talking about. Not sure why you answered "neither", if you do think it was "their faith" Peter means in 1 Peter 1:5.

Frankly, you are a little flip-floppy on your answer to a perfectly reasonable question (and others like whether Paul meant gifts in Romans 11:29 to mean gifts to Jews exclusively or to Jews and Gentiles).

BTW:

Read the passage:

I've read it. Many times, in fact. Even studied it.

But without a straight-forward and consistent and defensable answer to my question(s), never-mind.

BTW:

How powerful is God's faith on your view?

You didn't answer.

 

[FreeGrace]

13 But the ones on the rock are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, who believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away. Luke 8:13

Yes, they only believed for a while. Jesus said so. And they fell away from their faith because of temptation.

Those who believe for a while, then return to unbelieving, no longer meet the biblical requirements of having the Holy Spirit.

Where did Jesus say this? Or anywhere else in the Bible? For credibility, one should provide Scripture that supports one's claims.

8 But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.” Revelation 21:8

Those who believe for a while, the no longer believe, are no longer believers.JLB

OK, now show anywhere in the Bible where believers who become apostates are called or referred to as "unbelievers". Only then will there be any credibility to your position.

Those who fall from the faith are called apostates. Not unbelievers.

 

[FreeGrace]

Your "so called" evidence have repeatedly been refuted, by the truth of God's word.

These are biblical FACTS that I have presented:
1. the gifts of God are irrevocable.
2. eternal life is a gift of God.

In order to refute my claim that eternal life is not irrevocable, one must show that either #1 or #2 is false.

 

[FreeGrace]

I said this:
"Please explain how this verse cannot be referring to loss of fellowship rather than loss of relationship."

Is a branch that is connected to a vine, a fixed relationship, or a temporary "fellowship"?

A question does not equate to an answer to a question.

A. A fixed relationship.
B. A temporary fellowship.
JLB

In the metaphor, which is related to farming, the point is about being useful or not useful. When a branch doesn't produce, it is no longer useful to the farmer. That was Jesus' point. John 15 is about fruit production, NOT about trying to stay saved by works, which seems to be your claim, but without evidence to support that claim.

Therefore, B is the answer. Fellowship is not automatic, guaranteed, or permanent. Unlike relationship between God the Father and His children. It seems your position will not accept this reality. But it is true, nonetheless.

The Jews in Jesus' day were very religious and thought, because they were God's chosen people, they were in service to God. In fact, they persecuted both Jesus and His followers for precisely this reason.

So, to be told that unless one was abiding in Him they would be 'cut off' was a real shock to a Jew.

btw, I've already shown how the phrase 'cut off' was used in the OT; physical death or physical separation from the Jewish community. In no other place is "cut off" used to indicate loss of salvation.

 

[Mike]

If the other side did have actual evidence for their position, then the Bible is clearly internally contradicted. There simply cannot be evidence for two diametrically opposed views.

This is patently false. Take crime scenes for example. There can be evidence pointing in various directions, even though one thing happened in one way. J. Warner Wallace was a homicide detective in LA, and he turned his investigative techniques toward Christianity with an apologetics ministry called Cold Case Christianity. His books and weekly podcasts are great.

There is always evidence of various things. Some are valid, and some are not, but they are all collected and considered evidence. For you to declare that no evidence has been presented at all appears disingenuous. Show how their evidence is wrong, but don't say they have no evidence at all.

As WIP said, this is good advice for everyone.

 

[dirtfarmer]

Matthew 18:21-35 teaches us how in the kingdom of God sin guilt can and will be reinstated for person who shows contempt for the free gift. Does God reinstate specific guilt for specific past sin? I don't know. But I lean more toward the point being the one who shows contempt for the free gift of forgiveness (by returning to their sin in unbelief) will simply become guilty of sin, with no justification available for that renewed sin, all over again.

It really doesn't matter if the sin guilt is for past sin previously forgiven, or if their sin guilt is for the sin they are committing in their renewed faithless, unbelieving lives. They are condemned either way. And that's the point. They are saddled all over again with the burden of sin guilt because God revoked the free unmerited gift of grace in the forgiveness of sin. And he revoked it because of a contemptuous unbelief regarding that gift. A contempt that was evident in the way the poor slob in the parable who lost that gift acted towards others. Proof once again of how actions will be used to measure the presence of justifying faith. Actions don't justify (make a person righteous). They simply reveal if you have been made righteous by your faith in the life changing blood of Christ via the Holy Spirit.

hello Jethro Bodine, dirtfarmer here

From reading your reply, am I to believe that on the cross, Christ did not pay for the sin of all mankind? Where in scripture do you find that a person can be "saddled all over again with the burden of sin and that God revoked it because of unbelief"? Is not the unbeliever crucified with Christ and therefore their life is in Christ? Who was it that resurrected Christ? Who is it that has the power of resurrection? man or God. Please quote scripture that states: "God revoked the free unmerited gift of grace".

Grace as I understand is God giving the believer that which he doesn't deserve. Does any one deserve grace? When we receive grace then Romans 8:1 is working: "There is therefore no condemnation to them that which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." According to the second verse, which states: For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death." The law of the Spirit of life is walking after the Spirit and our spirit has been separated from the "soul", the fleshly part, and has received the witness from the Spirit that we are the children of God.

There those that say: "Well, if you can't lose your salvation, then you can live any way you want and still be saved". That is a false statement because "the seed of God" is in the believer and when a believer commits sins fellowship with God is broken and the believer is alone with no one to fellowship with. You may have never experienced aloneness, but I have and as soon as I realize that fellowship is broken, I confess (say the same as God) my sin and God restores fellowship. During the time of broken fellowship my sonship is never in question, it is eternal.

 

[LovethroughDove]

I am patiently waiting for someone to provide a verse that says that one must continue to believe in order to continue to be saved. With ANY wording that clearly states the point.

1 John 2:19 They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.

They left the faith. Meaning, those who stopped with the faith were deceiving themselves that they were even in the faith. You will not stop believing if you've been given the Spirit. It's a moot point.