Believing in Wrong Doctrine: Will I lose my salvation?

[williamt]

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

Of course it has to be. But this is not your own doing.

Look, I don't care what you believe. All I am stating is that pure Protestant theology is strictly monergistic and not synergistic.

 

[Truthfrees]

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.

good point - thanks for explaining

i suppose all teachers have a foundational set of doctrines they teach from

and i guess if i think about it i do have foundational doctrines that shape how i pray - speak - interact with God and man

ok - so i now think i see what you and OzSpen are saying - i have been thinking i focus on practices - but really my practices came out of doctrines - and because i sorted out which doctrines i most agree with i can now focus on only practices -

thanks to you both for helping me understand

 

[Senior]

To which verses are you referring?

I'm told ...
-- Believe in John 15-16 is in the continuous sense.
-- Some Greek words can have up to 40 different meanings, depending on the context.

Dr. Lester Sumrall researched the NT "pisteou" with regard to the rest of the NT, and concluded it must mean:
belief, faith, trust, obedience.

It really is so ridiculous that people just cannot
seem to understand what the NT is saying!

E.G. Many verses say that believers must endure in their faith
until the end of their lives to receive eternal life.

 

[GodsGrace]

Perhaps if one believes in man's doctrine vs God's.

I believe man's doctrine should be the same as Jesus' doctrine.
Sometimes it's easy to tell the difference....most times it's the same.

1 John 1 and 2 about sinning is the same as man's doctrine.
1 Corinthians 3:11-15 is taken to mean purgatory by a church...but if one reads the verses, it's so clear that it's not speaking of a "place".

If we just simply take what the bible says without reading too much into it, we'd have God's doctrine be man's doctrine.

I can't think of one that would be different...can you?

 

[williamt]

E.G. Many verses say that believers must endure in their faith
until the end of their lives to receive eternal life.

Of course they do. But do you really think enduring to the end is based on your works? Lemme rephrase and emphasize, can you attribute and take credit for anything in or throughout the entire process of salvation?

I'm going to post what I had on another board. Please excuse the time I didn't take to personalize it for you since these types of arguments are very repetitive:

In Ephesians 2:8-9 I suggested the "this or that" refers back to the entire salvation process. None of these are works on part of the recipient. Please take time to consider Ephesians 1, and honestly assess what you yourself have done in any of this:

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing gin the heavenly places, 4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love 5 he predestined us2 for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. 7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, 8 which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight 9 making known3 to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ 10 as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.

11 In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will, 12 so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory. 13 In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, 15 to the praise of his glory.

Consider Ezekiel 36:25-27 which is regeneration, rebirth, born from above that Jesus alluded to from John 3 and Ephesians 2:5 (timing) addresses and consider what you yourself have done and what God does:

I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. 26 And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules.

Anything else or argument thereof attempts to puff the recipient up in pride (works righteousness or performance based salvation). In my mind this is nothing more than self-idolatry.

Monergism (Greek mono meaning "one" and erg meaning "work") is a term for the belief that the Holy Spirit is the only agent who effects regeneration of Christians. This view, held by Reformed and Calvinistic groups, sees salvation as the work of God alone, from first to last. He has chosen in eternity past whom He will save out of lost humanity (often referred to as the elect), and in His timing He will bring the elect to faith through the work of the Spirit for the sake of the Son, and save them forever to the praise of His glorious grace (Romans 8:29f). This is opposed to the synergistic view as held by Arminianism and its theological predecessor Semi-Pelagianism where salvation is seen as a cooperative effort between God and man.

Quoting John Hendryx, "Monergism simply means that it is God who gives ears to hear and eyes to see. It is God alone who gives illumination and understanding of His word that we might believe; It is God who raises us from the dead, who circumcises the heart; unplugs our ears; It is God alone who can give us a new sense that we may, at last, have the moral capacity to behold His beauty and unsurpassed excellency."

Soli Deo Gloria?

 

[williamt]

1 Corinthians 3:11-15 is taken to mean purgatory by a church...but if one reads the verses, it's so clear that it's not speaking of a "place".

A lot of people read 1 Corinthians 3:11-15 and do not read the entire context, " 15 If anyone's work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire. "

This is really what it comes down to. Each theological camp applies different methods and principles for interpretation. Some isolate and disregard context. Others don't. And still some address any theological question systematically.

 

[GodsGrace]

Myself and others have deduced what the problem is ...
the single word "believe" doesn't even come close
to including all of what is required for eternal life.

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

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

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!

Agreed, 100% !

 

[GodsGrace]

If people lost their salvation by believing the wrong doctrine, no one who ever believed a denominational preacher would be saved.

The O.P. doesn't state that one could lose their salvation by believing a wrong doctrine....it states that if might be possible to CAUSE someone to lose their salvation by teaching a wrong doctrine.
(at least, that's what it was meant to state).

 

[williamt]

The O.P. doesn't state that one could lose their salvation by believing a wrong doctrine....it states that if might be possible to CAUSE someone to lose their salvation by teaching a wrong doctrine.
(at least, that's what it was meant to state).

Soli Deo Gloria?

 

[GodsGrace]

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

Perseverance of the saints is correct...but some don't even understand what that means. Even Calvin stated that it's not easy to persevere till the end and that work, that much hated word, is necessary to persevere.

Your second paragraph is right on. If even those that no longer believe are still saved...then salvation loses all meaning....the word "believe" loses all meaning.

 

[GodsGrace]

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.

Hi WT, Welcome to the forum.

God gets all the glory no matter what.
It's impossible for man to take glory away from God.
How little do we think God is that we could take glory away from Him?

How would you explain perseverance of the saints?
Persevere means to endure. Exactly WHAT needs to endure?

Works based salvation: There's no such thing. I don't know one Christian who believes he is saved by his works.

Works maintained salvation: This is what perseverance is all about! We must persevere till the end...YOU tell me in what we are to persevere...

Being aligned to Catholicism isn't the end of the world.
They must have some doctrine right!
Do you know any church that teaches we could have a sinful life and still be saved? That's pretty much what Catholicism teaches, and Protestantism.

You equate monergism with protestantism. I don't see this...but I wont' get into this right now...unless you want to.

 

[GodsGrace]

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

​

Oz,
I feel like you're speaking to two different ideas.
1. Transubstantiation
I can't speak to this. It seems to me that the ECF believed in it. Then sometimes I feel Jesus was speaking metaphorically. I'm just too torn on this. I used to believe in it --- then not --- now I'm not sure. I'm talking about 40 year's worth of thinking and reading. I wish I could be as sure as you. Didn't Luther believe in the real presence, if I remember?

2. Sacrifice
The sacrifice is not offered every day. This is a misunderstanding of the Mass. I've studied it on my own...and I must say the CCC is not the clearest book on this! Anyway, I've asked THREE priests that I know and they tell me they are NOT offering the sacrifice again but are remembering it as if we were standing of the feet of Jesus.
They agree that Jesus offered Himself only ONE TIME.

BTW, I agree with you that I don't let any difference in doctrine separate me from other Christians. If a person loves Jesus that's enough for me. The rest just becomes talk because we like God's Word and like to discuss it and learn new things.

 

[JLB]

Please quote and underline where I said your question is too confusing to answer.

Here ya go

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

Here is the scripture. -

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

• some will depart from the faith,

Here is my question that comes directly from the scripture.


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

 

[williamt]

Hi WT, Welcome to the forum.

God gets all the glory no matter what.
It's impossible for man to take glory away from God.
How little do we think God is that we could take glory away from Him?

How would you explain perseverance of the saints?
Persevere means to endure. Exactly WHAT needs to endure?

Works based salvation: There's no such thing. I don't know one Christian who believes he is saved by his works.

Works maintained salvation: This is what perseverance is all about! We must persevere till the end...YOU tell me in what we are to persevere...

Being aligned to Catholicism isn't the end of the world.
They must have some doctrine right!
Do you know any church that teaches we could have a sinful life and still be saved? That's pretty much what Catholicism teaches, and Protestantism.

You equate monergism with protestantism. I don't see this...but I wont' get into this right now...unless you want to.

I'm comfortable to let your post stand as is. As an outsider reading in I'd think orthodox theology is meaningless. That's what I glean from your response.

Thanks for the welcome!

 

[GodsGrace]

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?

Hi Walpole, Welcome to the forum.

Very important questions!

I would say that the original church should have the authority to decide what is the correct doctrine.


But then it becomes a complicated discussion...

 

[JLB]

Look, I don't care what you believe. All I am stating is that pure Protestant theology is strictly monergistic and not synergistic.

Sorry brother,


I don’t know what “pure Protestant theology” teaches or means.


We either obey what the Lord Jesus taught or we don’t.


JLB

 

[williamt]

Sorry brother,


I don’t know what “pure Protestant theology” teaches or means.


We either obey what the Lord Jesus taught or we don’t.


JLB

No problem. I'm comfortable with letting your post stand as is.

 

[ezra]

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.

you have to study the scriptures out we are no longer sinners but a new creation in Christ

 

[GodsGrace]

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).



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.

You have an incorrect idea of Catholicism.
It does NOT attribute salvation to the believer.
That church believes in Ephesians 2:8 just like we do.
Also Galatians 2:16
We are saved BY grace, THROUGH faith.
This is salvation...this is justification.
God does this,,,it is solely an act of God.

AFTER salvation, we are required to obey God.
To obey God means to follow His commandments...
we've come to call this works. Any good act we do is a good deed or a good work.

The N.T. tells us we are to obey God and do good deeds.

Colossians 3:23
John 14:23-24

 

[GodsGrace]

good point - thanks for explaining

i suppose all teachers have a foundational set of doctrines they teach from

and i guess if i think about it i do have foundational doctrines that shape how i pray - speak - interact with God and man

ok - so i now think i see what you and OzSpen are saying - i have been thinking i focus on practices - but really my practices came out of doctrines - and because i sorted out which doctrines i most agree with i can now focus on only practices -

thanks to you both for helping me understand

Yes, I agree with you.
What we believe will be what we live.

If we believe we are to obey God, we'll do our best to do this. If we believe we don't have to obey God, we'll probably sin more and sadden our Lord,,,or even come to a point when salvation is in jeopardy.

For instance, the beatitudes in Mathew 5 tell us how Jesus would like us to be. We may not ever become this...but at least we'll make an effort. I do believe it's the effort that will count; I don't believe we will ever be perfect in this life.