Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Eternal security or conditional security?

Please share the scripture that people who are cast into the fire, are saved, though they are burning in fire.
JLB
Because there are no such verses, we don't find eternal security there. But we do find eternal security in all the verses posted in the OP in points 1-5.

I have invited anyone who disagrees to deconstruct all those verses to show that they don't teach eternal security.
 
I answered this post already.

In Me, refers to being "in Christ".
The Bible teaches who does the placing "into Christ" in Eph 1:13 - 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.

Now, where is the verse that teaches that any human being is able to get "out of Him"? That is the question.

Eternal life and redemption are in Christ Jesus, for in Him is the Spirit of Life.

Those who are in Him, are joined to Him, and are joined to the eternal life that is in Him.
This is true. And those who have been given eternal life WILL NEVER PERISH.
John 3:16 - For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, so that whosoever believes in Him, WILL NOT PERISH, but have eternal life.
John 10:28 - I give them (believers, per v.9) eternal life, and they WILL NEVER PERISH; no one can snatch them out of My hand.
 
I'm not in disagreement with this. The believer has eternal life now, when he believes (to the extent one can have it in this life). Eternal life is as much a quality of life as it is a length of life. The point of contention is whether or not you can lose that eternal life before the resurrection.
Exactly!! Where is the verse that tell us plainly that eternal life can be lost?
 
I answered this post already.

In Me, refers to being "in Christ".

This is a reference to being saved.

23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. Romans 3:23-24

For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:23

There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. Romans 8:1


Eternal life and redemption are in Christ Jesus, for in Him is the Spirit of Life.

Those who are in Him, are joined to Him, and are joined to the eternal life that is in Him.

12 He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. 13 These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God. 1 John 5:12-13


JLB

You don't seem to be getting it...do you?
Yes, there are verses that equate "in Christ" with being saved....but the original verse you presented ...didn't. You are inserting a topic where it doesn't belong. I showed why here in a previous post.

Here's the post again:
Does it have to read that way?
The Berean Literal Bible says it this way:
Every branch not bearing fruit in Me, He takes it away; and every one bearing fruit, He prunes it that it may bear more fruit

The Internation Standard Version put it this way:
He cuts off every branch that does not produce fruit in me,

In other words, unless you are in Christ you are not producing fruit.

The Aramaic Bible in plain English say:
“Every branch on me not yielding fruit he takes away...

On me is not in me

Gills exposition of the entire bible puts it this way....

There are two sorts of branches in Christ the vine; the one sort are such who have only an historical faith in him, believe but for a time, and are removed; they are such who only profess to believe in him, as Simon Magus did; are in him by profession only; they submit to outward ordinances, become church members, and so are reckoned to be in Christ, being in a church state.

Understanding that, as the English Standard Version puts it:
Every branch in me that does not bear fruit he takes away,

Does "in me" refers to those saved?
 
I'm not in disagreement with this. The believer has eternal life now, when he believes (to the extent one can have it in this life). Eternal life is as much a quality of life as it is a length of life. The point of contention is whether or not you can lose that eternal life before the resurrection.


...because of a denial of Christ.
You must understand the entire argument if you're going to try to refute it.
The person who does not mature in Christ because they have fallen away from the faith in a denial of Christ will forfeit the salvation he had when he believed. The struggling saint tenaciously clinging to the forgiveness of God in Christ through the worst of times still has the salvation/eternal life given him when he first believed. To lose it the person has to deny Christ altogether. That is when his disobedient unfruitfulness (his sin) will condemn him beyond remedy:

29How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?" (Hebrews 10:29 NASB bold mine)

Peter denied Christ...three times. Did Peter lose his salvation?
 
Were you going to explain/address how the two points I earlier made about 1 Cor 15:1-2 err? Or answer what exactly it is you find vague about Rom 11:29?

why does Paul say their belief served NO purpose?

1 Corinthians 15:2 (LEB) by which you are also being saved, if you hold fast to the message I proclaimed to you, unless you believed to no purpose.

On your view, Paul should have said believed to a temporary purpose or fleeting purpose or conditional purpose or revocable purpose or "everything salvation is now" purpose (which is surely not no purpose). But he doesn't say that, he says no purpose or "vain". This is fact #1 that excludes your interpretation of this passage as being valid.
...
A person in Corinth that holds to a firm belief in a salvific need to continue sacrificing animals (anti-2) or anti-resurrection beliefs (anti-1) or a need to meet a fruit quota (anti-2), that person had a vain belief in Paul's gospel message to begin with. Which is why the past tense verb is used; "believed in vain". This is fact #2 about this passage which precludes your interpretation of it.

Romans 11:29 (NASB) For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.

What is vague within this verse?
What the gifts are?
What the calling of God is?
Or what irrevocable means?
I struck out one question because you said you don't include eternal life as one of the irrevocable gifts Paul meant in Rom 11:29 (even though Rom 6:23 plainly says it is a gift) because it's not in the same verse as Rom 11:29 being your rationale.

I suppose I should ask you then what are some of the irrevocable gifts of God that Paul had in mind then if it's not Eternal Life.
 
I struck out one question because you said you don't include eternal life as one of the irrevocable gifts Paul meant in Rom 11:29 (even though Rom 6:23 plainly says it is a gift) because it's not in the same verse as Rom 11:29 being your rationale.
I CAN'T include salvation in the gifts that are irrevocable in Romans 11:29 because that would make Paul a liar who said the Corinthians are saved "if you hold fast the word which I preached to you" (1 Corinthians 15:2 NASB). That's a condition to be saved that OSAS swears does not exist in the Bible and which instantly rules out any suggestion that Paul was talking about salvation in Romans 11:29 NASB. And besides, Paul doesn't explicitly spell out the gifts that are irrevocable that there is any chance whatsoever that 1 Corinthians 15:1-2 somehow contradicts Romans 11:29 NASB. So an argument for that can't be made.

And I understand perfectly why the church can't see what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15:1-2 NASB. They have been trained to automatically say to themselves that salvation can not be lost when they come across those many passages of scripture that say it can be. Been there, done that. It wasn't until I got challenged about how we Christians tend to do that with doctrine that I then started listening, instead of squelching the little voice inside that tried to tell me the verse I was reading doesn't agree with the presupposed doctrine taught to the church at large.

I honestly believe the present day church needs another reformation on the order of what the church needed in the 14th and 15th centuries. History teaches us that it is no so unreasonable to see that the church as a whole has been overcome by false doctrine. It happened to the church when the the damnable works gospel took her into apostasy. What's happening now is the opposite extreme--the church is being overrun by hyper-grace doctrines. History shows us we should not be so surprised to see that it is possible for the leadership of the church to lead the church into wholesale heresy. This isn't the first time it has happened.
 
Peter denied Christ...three times. Did Peter lose his salvation?
I personally don't believe God imposes the sentence for denying Christ on a legalistic basis. When God knows that a person has sinned the sin unto death and isn't coming back, that is when God does not take them back and seals their fate in their denial of Christ. God's judgment is always mitigated by circumstances....circumstances that he alone understands perfectly, not us. So I always leave the Hebrews 6:4 & Hebrews 10:26-31 card to be played at his discretion, not mine.
 
The Bible teaches who does the placing "into Christ" in Eph 1:13 - 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.

Now, where is the verse that teaches that any human being is able to get "out of Him"? That is the question.

I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He takes away;
John 15:1-2

12 Beware, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God; 13 but exhort one another daily, while it is called “Today,” lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. 14 For we have become partakers of Christ if we hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast to the end, Hebrews 3:12-14


JLB
 
I suppose I should ask you then what are some of the irrevocable gifts of God that Paul had in mind then if it's not Eternal Life.
We know from the context of this discourse about Israel what the gifts and calling of Israel are that are irrevocable:

"3For I could wish that I myself were accursed, separated from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh, 4who are Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption as sons, and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the Law and the temple service and the promises, 5whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen." (Romans 9:3-5 NASB)
 
There are two sorts of branches in Christ the vine; the one sort are such who have only an historical faith in him, believe but for a time, and are removed;

Believe for a time, is what Jesus said in Luke 8:13

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

This group, in the face of persecution, fell away from Him.

Do you understand what is being said here.

These stopped believing because they were persecuted, that's what Jesus is teaching.

Jesus foretells of the persecution that was going come from unbelieving Jews who were attempting to turn Jewish converts to Christ, back to the ["antichrist"] religion of Judaism. The same folks who murdered Him, would continue to try and stop the spread of the Gospel.

This is what the writer of the book of Hebrews is warning these "Jewish" Christians about.

12 Beware, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God; 13 but exhort one another daily, while it is called “Today,” lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. 14 For we have become partakers of Christ if we hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast to the end, Hebrews 3:12-14


Fall away in Luke 8:13 and depart in Hebrews 3:12 are the same Greek word.


Strong's G868 - aphistēmi - Depart - Fall Away



  1. to make stand off, cause to withdraw, to remove
    1. to excite to revolt
  2. to stand off, to stand aloof
    1. to go away, to depart from anyone
    2. to desert, withdraw from one
    3. to fall away, become faithless
    4. to shun, flee from
    5. to cease to vex one
    6. to withdraw one's self from, to fall away
    7. to keep one's self from, absent one's self from
Believe = Saved
Believe for a while = Saved for a while


If you are faced with persecution from Islamic Extremist's, and you renounce Jesus as Lord, and convert to Islam, by confessing Allah as Lord, then you are no longer a believer in Jesus Christ.




JLB
 
We know from the context of this discourse about Israel what the gifts and calling of Israel are that are irrevocable:
(Romans 9:3-5 NASB)

We know that Romans was written after 1 Cor and to a different church. How could that passage be a part of the context that Paul wrote to the Corinthians about when he said the gifts and callings of God are irrevocable?
 
I CAN'T include salvation in the gifts that are irrevocable in Romans 11:29 because that would make Paul a liar who said the Corinthians are saved "if you hold fast the word which I preached to you" (1 Corinthians 15:2 NASB).
Or your interpretation of what Paul meant in 1 Cor 15:1-2 is wrong. Then you could inculde salvation as an irrevocable gift, right?
 
Or your interpretation of what Paul meant in 1 Cor 15:1-2 is wrong. Then you could inculde salvation as an irrevocable gift, right?
Of course, if my interpretation of 1 Corinthians 15:1-2, and all the many other non-OSAS passages, is wrong then Paul could be talking about the gift of salvation in Romans 11:29 NASB, though it still isn't in the context of that particular discourse about Israel. But it would be quite a mountain to climb to make so many passages of scripture not mean what they so plainly say. I simply refuse to do that.

I'm very honest about the scriptures now. I would have to lie to myself to dismiss so many passages in the Bible that speak plainly of losing salvation as the result of slipping into unbelief. Many in the church seem willing to do that. I'm not. I remember as a young lad in the Lord being afraid of the truth that I knew certain scriptures taught, and being so willing to latch onto any convenient explanation of why they didn't really mean what they said. But I've grown in the Lord since then and I'm not afraid anymore to face the truth.
 
We know that Romans was written after 1 Cor and to a different church. How could that passage be a part of the context that Paul wrote to the Corinthians about when he said the gifts and callings of God are irrevocable?
Really, just cut to the chase. Show me how this does not contradict the doctrine that salvation is a gift that once you have it you can never lose it:

"1Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, 2by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain." (1 Corinthians 15:1-2 NASB)

I've addressed all the pretensions set up against it to make it not 'really' mean what it so plainly says.
 
Because there are no such verses, we don't find eternal security there. But we do find eternal security in all the verses posted in the OP in points 1-5.

I have invited anyone who disagrees to deconstruct all those verses to show that they don't teach eternal security.

You have found those who disagree, and have stated the scriptures that plainly say why.

Romans 6:23 plainly states:

For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

This verse is from your point, which I am discussing one at a time.

Christians are plainly warned that the wages of sin is death.

When asked to discuss the context, you have refused, stating that all the points must all be addressed all at the same time.

Those who are in Christ Jesus, because he was given as a gift, have eternal life.

Relationship with Jesus Christ is by definition eternal life.

And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. John 17:3

Those who have the Son, have both the Father and the Son.

Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father either; he who acknowledges the Son has the Father also. 1 John 2:23

He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God. 1 John 5:12-13

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


Those who are in Christ have eternal life. Those who have departed from in in unbelief, do not have the eternal life that is in Him.


JLB
 
I'm very honest about the scriptures now.
Me too. You do realize that I honestly see zero conflict between 1 Cor 15:1-2 and salvation being one of God's irrevocable gifts don't you?

You never answered; Why do you think Paul said they believed to no purpose (vain), if they had received the gift of salvation and "everything that salvation is now"? Wouldn't that be of some purpose, even if it were temporary?
 
Back
Top