Giving up

[JM]

Recovering, still phobic, Fundamentalist

unred, I find it difficult to dialogue with you as you’re still phobic and have already admitted your responses are made on “auto pilot.†You keep repeating yourself, arguing against those who have abused you, not the arguments presented. You’ve drawn lines in the sand, dug your trench and you’re unwilling to even consider what I posted, as you admitted by responded in “auto pilot.†No matter what evidence presented you’re unable to make the examination of it from an unemotional, unbiased point of view. The doctrines of Grace never abused you, people did, which doesn't make these Biblical doctrines false.

I’ll have a good look at what you wrote, but chances are, I’ll end up cutting and pasting what I’ve already wroe in response to your “auto pilot†responses.

~JM~

 

[cyberjosh]

The idea of OSAS is not accurate, by the way, and doesn’t express what I believe, once again, you build a straw man. I doubt you’ve even looked into “preservation of the saints†and what Calvinists actually believe on this subject…have you? Once saved always saved is NOT the same thing as the “P†from the TULIP. By being hasty and looking down your nose at Calvinistic theology you were too quick to assume these beliefs are one and the same, they’re not.

JM this reminds me, I have a really good quote I would like to give you from Charles Spurgeon about his doctrine on this and how they exceeded the basic beliefs of his Calvinistic brethren while completely beleiving in them. I'll have to do so later tonight when I get home from work because I have it printed out on a peice of paper.

Perseverance of the Saints does not mean "once saved always saved". This corruption of the doctrine has been popular in recent years, but has never been a true representation of the doctrine. "Once saved always saved" is more keenly given the name "Perseverance of the sinner" instead of "the saint". For it teaches that man can be saved by Christ and then sin habitually, do whatever he wants, and then still "persevere to the end". Perseverance of the saints does not teach this. Perseverance of the saints teaches that once God has renewed the heart of a sinner through the application of the redemption wrought by Christ upon the cross, he will continue to be saved and show forth the fruits of that salvation. The sinner perseveres because of Christ, but he continually shows himself as one who has been changed by Christ. God has saved the individual and will sanctify him until the end when he is ultimately glorified, and in heaven. It does not mean man has a license to sin. Those who think they have a license to sin are not changed and saved by grace.

JM since you seek to clarify your definition of OSAS let me notify you that what you just said is exactly how I view OSAS. Perhaps I use the term differently than other people but what you just said is all bundled up in my view of OSAS, because those who still habitually sin (as a lifestyle - as I said in my long post) are not and have not been changed or saved by grace. That's why those whe are truely saved (in contrast) sanctify themselves and show fruits of salvation. "Ye shall know them by their fruits." But this is just a small simplification and summary of what I have already said. If you wish to see my entire view please read my long (but not as long as yours! :wink post on the first page.

 

[unred typo]

unred, I find it difficult to dialogue with you as you’re still phobic and have already admitted your responses are made on “auto pilot.†You keep repeating yourself, arguing against those who have abused you, not the arguments presented. You’ve drawn lines in the sand, dug your trench and you’re unwilling to even consider what I posted, as you admitted by responded in “auto pilot.†No matter what evidence presented you’re unable to make the examination of it from an unemotional, unbiased point of view. The doctrines of Grace never abused you, people did, which doesn't make these Biblical doctrines false.
I’ll have a good look at what you wrote, but chances are, I’ll end up cutting and pasting what I’ve already wrote in response to your “auto pilot†responses.

What’s new? I see you are going to deal with my responses the same way you always have, which is why I could answer your claims as I always have, because I‘ve said them just about every way I know how and you consistently give me back rote that I could find on any number of sites. You’re the one with perfect Re-Cal. Have you ever once tried to explain your doctrines in real terms applied to real actual life situations? Have you ever yet explained how a God of love who promises to show no partiality, with the power to do anything at all, can choose out only a few to be saved, when it is within his power to save everyone? Please answer in your own words, and not a conglomeration of disjointed verses.

I have no complaint with grace as described in the Bible. The grace displayed by the creator of all creation, coming as a man and dying for their offenses needs no further acts of mercy to be labeled as a gift of grace. If he should deem it necessary that we all stand on our head until we bleed out our eyes in order to be worthy to receive such an amazing gift, it would still be a gift of completely unmerited grace. Instead, he asks that we love one another, and forgive as we were forgiven. The father is imploring his children to stop fighting, share and actually act like his children.

Your evidence is lacking in scriptural support. When have you ever made a real proof positive point that held up under scrutiny? Your theories are constructions made up of bits of verses chopped out of the Bible and whenever they are set back into their context, the whole concept disintegrates. No where, I repeat, n-o w-h-e-r-e, do you find the doctrine you expound presented in scripture as an eternal salvation by a workless faith and belief in a gospel that is stripped down to only the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ where works of faith are not required for the salvation of the soul, unless it is an occasional verse that you lift out of context and ignore other parts of the very same book. Even the word ‘gospel’ itself has been changed. Jesus preached the gospel of the kingdom. When did he ever tell the masses that they had to believe in the death, burial and resurrection of their messiah for the forgiveness of sins? What did he tell the disciples to preach? Hint: Matthew 28:20

:roll: < note: my emotional, phobic expression

 

[unred typo]

JM since you seek to clarify your definition of OSAS let me notify you that what you just said is exactly how I view OSAS. Perhaps I use the term differently than other people but what you just said is all bundled up in my view of OSAS, because those who still habitually sin (as a lifestyle - as I said in my long post) are not and have not been changed or saved by grace. That's why those whe are truely saved (in contrast) sanctify themselves and show fruits of salvation. "Ye shall know them by their fruits." But this is just a small simplification and summary of what I have already said. If you wish to see my entire view please read my long (but not as long as yours! :wink post on the first page.

I was just about to attempt a point by point reply for your post, Josh, but since you feel exactly like JM, go ahead and take my post to him as your very own. It won’t even hardly be used. JM isn’t going to make a dent in it because he’s already ignored it before. I doubt if he plans to scratch the surface. With all his glossing over, my post to him will be shinier than gold tried in the fire.

If you want to save a few thousand words, just go to the post I wrote to him above and answer it. I’m sure he won’t mind. This isn’t a one on one debate, after all.

Since you have summed up your belief in "Ye shall know them by their fruits," can you tell me if there is no fruit to examine, is there any salvation? And what specifically are the ‘fruits’ that prove one is saved and how are they displayed in the person‘s life? Are you talking about Bible study, church attendance, gathering in worship or does one have to actually perform good deeds in love and mercy? If a person has a change of heart, but not a change of lifestyle, are they saved or not?

:-?

 

[cyberjosh]

I was just about to attempt a point by point reply for your post, Josh, but since you feel exactly like JM, go ahead and take my post to him as your very own. It won’t even hardly be used. JM isn’t going to make a dent in it because he’s already ignored it before. I doubt if he plans to scratch the surface. With all his glossing over, my post to him will be shinier than gold tried in the fire.

If you want to save a few thousand words, just go to the post I wrote to him above and answer it. I’m sure he won’t mind. This isn’t a one on one debate, after all.

Since you have summed up your belief in "Ye shall know them by their fruits," can you tell me if there is no fruit to examine, is there any salvation? And what specifically are the ‘fruits’ that prove one is saved and how are they displayed in the person‘s life? Are you talking about Bible study, church attendance, gathering in worship or does one have to actually perform good deeds in love and mercy? If a person has a change of heart, but not a change of lifestyle, are they saved or not?

Wait a minute. I didn't say I agree with the entirety of JM's arguement. Just that what he described was how I viewed the definition of OSAS.

And I said that it was but a summary, and a meager one at that. I don't want to lose you, so I will refrain from commenting on anything further until you are done looking over that discussion I posted. I'll be patient I understand that you want to pray over it and I respect that. Don't let this last post taint your views on reading my arguement on that discussion for what it says. I meant to just point out something to JM who seemed to want to discredit OSAS by his definition - of which mine is a little different than how he presented it (but you'll never see how I view it until you read that long discussion). My arguement as presented to him is a little different than that discussion that I posted for you to look over. Plus that discussion post had lots of Scriptural references. I'm not going to let you cheat on this one. :wink: Please, I await your reply to that post. Even if you don't answer till tommorow or the day after. However long you need... but please read all of it.

I was just about to attempt a point by point reply for your post

No, no, please do! Take your time if you need it. I eagerly await your reply.


God Bless,

~Josh

 

[JM]

Josh, I'm not sure I understand how you're defining OSAS. You quoted Spurgeon who called OSAS the "Perseverance of the sinner" which you deny, but still want to call what you believe OSAS even when the quote from Spurgeon refers to this doctrine as "Perseverance of the saint."

Just so we're clear...

You believe in the "perseverance of the saints" as defined by Calvinism and Spurgeon, etc. but deny OSASed idea that a person can be born again and live a life of sin...right?

:smt017

Once I get an idea of what we're talking about, our terms defined, I'll respond [when time permits] to your post.

~JM~
PS: Maybe I could get Coles Notes on your post, you know, the questions that you'd like me to answer about this topic.

 

[cyberjosh]

I'll respond, but I don't want to break unread's concentration on my other discussion (which I really want to get around to discussing) by side tracking the issue. I'll PM my answer to you for now.

~Josh

 

[unred typo]

Josh, I have read your entire post several times and prayed it through. I hope you will forgive the lack of a blow by blow rebuttal. The spirit is willing but the flesh is stuck in the Christmas rut. I plan to reread it in the future. We’re not so far apart but I don’t know if either of us can make that leap to the same side of the divide.

I think I can safely say that I agree with most of your posting and it’s use of scripture, except at a very critical point, which I doubt anyone on this board totally agrees with me. (If there is one, please make yourself known because I’m getting shell shock in this fox hole alone.) The gift is the blood, nothing more, nothing less and it is all that we need to cover our sin. It is not me who has added to the gift of his blood, but those who add that ‘God has provided all aspects of our salvation and we are left with nothing to do but accept this free gift.’ No! We are told to add to our repentance acts of love and kindness to one another. We are told to work out our own salvation. We are told to follow righteousness and to put on Christ.

When you say that a person is ‘saved’ and then add to that prerequisite that his good works are only an ‘evidence of the work done by God in their hearts,’ you have missed the point. What you’re actually saying is that unless a person is saved, they are not saved. What an obvious ridiculous redundancy. Sorry, slipping into my evil, phobic neurosis, but I can’t stress it enough. Nothing personal. I probably have said the same inane comment myself. I may slop into it again. But it’s not right. Lord, help me not to say it in the future. The works must be done in obedience, and without obedience, we are going to be punished. Even to hell if we don’t repent.

(How much of hell is a fabrication to keep the faithful fearful and dependently loyal to the church, I don’t know but the more I know of church history, the more suspicious I am of their writings being embellished with boogey man warnings, but that‘s another thread.)

By removing the works to the other side of the equation, you have made God ultimately responsible for every unsaved man’s lack of salvation. Tell me it isn’t so. :o I want to believe you know better.

The reason that I am leaning toward OSAS is because there are verses that say that the Lord is able to keep you and also that it is he that works in us. Now the current issue is: "Is this true for all believers or just those who endure through faith who allow God to keep them?" If the latter then I guess you could call the Bible's view semi-OSAS because if that is true it would be possible for people to be always saved once they are saved while for others not.

The Lord keeps what we have committed of our hearts and lives to obedience and repentance, toward our reward reserved in heaven, if we get there in one piece. He is not unfaithful to forget your labor of love. Of your two choices, I would say, both, but at the same time I would say that any may change their minds and that takes your whole concept of OSAS entirely out of the picture. He works in our lives to bring us to repentance and good works but he’s not going to do them for us. He can keep Satan from tempting you beyond your ability to withstand, and strengthen you with verses, encouraging hymns, dreams, even a word fitly spoken by a stranger, or a message in a bottle for that matter, but the choice to follow him is yours to make.

:smt102

 

[cyberjosh]

Ah, thank you for finally replying! Gracias, Danke Shon, Takk.

Josh, I have read your entire post several times and prayed it through. I hope you will forgive the lack of a blow by blow rebuttal. The spirit is willing but the flesh is stuck in the Christmas rut. I plan to reread it in the future. We’re not so far apart but I don’t know if either of us can make that leap to the same side of the divide.

I think I can safely say that I agree with most of your posting and it’s use of scripture, except at a very critical point, which I doubt anyone on this board totally agrees with me. (If there is one, please make yourself known because I’m getting shell shock in this fox hole alone.) The gift is the blood, nothing more, nothing less and it is all that we need to cover our sin. It is not me who has added to the gift of his blood, but those who add that ‘God has provided all aspects of our salvation and we are left with nothing to do but accept this free gift.’ No! We are told to add to our repentance acts of love and kindness to one another. We are told to work out our own salvation. We are told to follow righteousness and to put on Christ.

Of course. And even if our nature has been changed by Christ's atoning blood we can screw up big time and try to live selfishly while our whole live we repent and repent and repent, actually wanting to turn from certain sinful things in our life (because we were indeed saved) but still fall into our own strongholds. But the evidence of salvation is there. But for such people I gave the Scripture in first Corinthians chapter 3 as a warning that they will have their works burned, yet be saved, but as through fire. This is not a pretty sight and no Christian cake-walk view of life. No it isn't a one time enjoy the ride deal because belief is a state of mind and a state of faith of walking toward Jesus though we struggle with sin in order to please him and cleanse our selves. Even Jesus said that among the saved some would recieve 30, some 60, some 100 fold for their fruits, thus one Christian can bear more fruit in their life than another. I'm just saying that when Christ gives you a truely changed nature and puts his Spirit in you you can no longer ignore your sin and God will convict you of it, and you are going to want to turn away from it. To what degree you accomplish to turn away from sin and do righteousness is up to you but I believe that all among the saved will demonstrate some amount of fruit if they are saved, while those who live in sin as a life-style and (most often) are fickle about their "religion" and claim to be saved are decieving themselves and are not really saved. In other words I believe the title "Carnal Christian" is a contradiction and not doctrinally sound.

The Lord keeps what we have committed of our hearts and lives to obedience and repentance, toward our reward reserved in heaven, if we get there in one piece. He is not unfaithful to forget your labor of love. Of your two choices, I would say, both, but at the same time I would say that any may change their minds and that takes your whole concept of OSAS entirely out of the picture. He works in our lives to bring us to repentance and good works but he’s not going to do them for us. He can keep Satan from tempting you beyond your ability to withstand, and strengthen you with verses, encouraging hymns, dreams, even a word fitly spoken by a stranger, or a message in a bottle for that matter, but the choice to follow him is yours to make.

The only thing I say concerning this is that those truely saved are changed by God's grace but by what degree is up to them, but I do not doubt their salvation and that they have indeed been changed. I just try to call out those who falsely claim to have salvation and then fall away. And remember that's what false prophets do also.

------------------------
P.S. Also recall what I said in that discussion:

What I'm saying is that you're not going to want to do those things any longer, and if you do (and I'm thinking most of these will have to be out of weakness or ignorance) then you will be grieved, yes, but none-the-less condemn the sin because of your new nature.

You're right in pointing out that I can't tell you for sure the condition of their heart but I'll be darned if a true Christian can be a practicing murderer, because one of the evidences of salvation according to the Bible is love for the brethren and love for our enemies.

You will have some reaction and wanting to change from your sin if you are truely saved (even it is just grief for the time being - Godly sorrow that brings about repentance). Otherwise you would be hard pressed to show that you were saved because one cannot habitually live a life of sin and then claim to love God and be in the light. John calls such a person as that a liar.

 

[TanNinety]

(If there is one, please make yourself known because I’m getting shell shock in this fox hole alone.)

You had to throw that in there didn't you? :x

I've read through all of the posts as lengthy as they were. I've got only one question. When is a person saved? I am not asking about the process of how. I am not asking about is it by faith, works or faith and works. All I am asking is WHEN. Is it during one's life time or on the judgment day? And provide any scripture that suggests the answer.

For example if you say:
Acts 2:21 And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

I will say they "shall be" saved so it is still a future event and that the verse doesn't read "is saved".

Again if you say Acts 2:47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

I will say, God's will is for not any to perish. But we all agree that there are many who do. So just because God added the people to church doesn't mean all of them are saved but "such as should be saved". Which is still a future event.

So I am seeking scripture that shows where the bible says this person is saved and where is that person standing at the point of time. This is where the heart of the matter lies in my opinion.

 

[cyberjosh]

TanNintey,

Look at the post I made to Unread on the first page. I gave him a link to my dicussion with JayT about this in the "Christians are on Probation" thread. Maybe you could read that. I'm not sure if that is what you are looking for but we did mention that you are saved immediately but that it isn't completed as a process until we go to be with God (most of that on the last page of that thread). Read there for more details.

Edit:
Tan, just for clarification do you believe that when John talks about being in the light and having fellowship with God that it refers to being saved (1 John 1:7), and that knowing him (which is eternal life), loving him, and being "in Him" are equivalent to salvation, or atleast the effects/evidences of being saved (1 John 2:4-6)? I say yes. But I'd like to hear your thoughts.


God Bless,

~Josh

 

[TanNinety]

you are saved immediately but is completed as a process until we go to be with God.

That is exactly what I was asking proof for cyber, that we are saved immediately. I have looked at the threads you have linked to and read the posts (well only yours) and I kind of gathered the scripture that you used.

Revelation 19:7; 1 Corinthians 15:1-2; 2 Corinthians 7:1; 1 Corinthians 3:15; Philippians 2:12-13; 2 Cor 6:1; 1 John 1:8
…
the Church will have made herself ready by purifying themselves
…
what happens is that these people which say the prayer, yet utilize no power in their life show strong evidence of never having come to saving faith in Christ

I’ve tried to gather a picture of “saved†from your posts and even though you say that one is immediately saved, I see that you lean more towards “are going to be savedâ€Â, well that is evident from the scripture you provided. But you draw a different conclusion of ‘already saved’. So, can you provide any scripture that says someone “is saved†and does not suggest a process?

“saved immediately but that it isn't completed as a process until we go to be with God†to me makes as much sense as “My exam has been graded and I got an A+, but I am still writing the answers.â€Â

I agree with your below quote.

cybershark: God can keep those who are his from stumbling and how those who claim to be saved but bear bad fruit are liars, and how the Bible says that those who endure to the end will be saved

I don’t think saved “at the end†is same as saved “immediatelyâ€Â. These views kind of contradict.

Tan, just for clarification do you believe that when John talks about being in the light and having fellowship with God that it refers to being saved (1 John 1:7)

Good question. We definitely need to nail down what “saved†means. This will help remove some confusion.

Before I answer this I will ask you a question which will surely help me answer your question. Do you believe being a branch in the vine of Christ is being saved? John 15:5 I am the vine, ye [are] the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
Now if one is “saved†simply by being a branch and this being saved brings forth the fruit then I must say what happens when the branches that bear not the good fruit are being cut off and are burnt? Surely one cannot be the grafted into the vine of Christ without being “saved†right? And yet this grafting does not seal the deal.

So to answer your question I think being in the light and having fellowship with God points to “eventually being savedâ€Â.

, and that knowing him (which is eternal life), loving him, and being "in Him" are equivalent to salvation, or atleast the effects/evidences of being saved (1 John 2:4-6)? I say yes.

Yup, evidence of being saved and not are.

I believe we are saved on the judgment day or on the day we die because we can't save ourselves any more once we are dead. Until then we are being saved. I haven’t found any biblical text that suggests otherwise. But I might have looked at it with biased eyes. So if anyone could provide some scripture that proves we are already immediately saved. Until then I will have to put evidence of fruits before saved and not saved before evidence of fruits. Hope it made sense. Though I feel I need to clarify more.

People might refer to Paul being saved before evidence of fruits on the road to Damascus. I beg to differ. There is no text that suggests that and on that day that his salvation was sealed.

To say someone is already saved and then suggest its a process is similar to calling a kid already an adult and that they are just in the process of growing up. It will not make sense. Saved is when we are already in the kingdom of God, having walked into the Salvation provided by Yeshua, until then we are in the process of being and walking on the narrow path. This walk determines what gate will open to us on the judgment day, it will either be the narrow gate to the Kingdom of God or the broad gate that lead to destruction.

 

[unred typo]

To say someone is already saved and then suggest its a process is similar to calling a kid already an adult and that they are just in the process of growing up. It will not make sense. Saved is when we are already in the kingdom of God, having walked into the Salvation provided by Yeshua, until then we are in the process of being and walking on the narrow path. This walk determines what gate will open to us on the judgment day, it will either be the narrow gate to the Kingdom of God or the broad gate that lead to destruction.

I like this. I would add that the term ‘saved’ could be implemented in the situation of a person, who once was blindly headed in the wrong direction, walking on the broad road to hell, who is turned around now and begins his walk on the straight and narrow. The effect of this decision is that the person is saved from sure destruction, and as long as they don’t leave this righteous path, or turn away from the destination, they continue to walk nearer to the goal before them.

I really find the term, ‘saved’, to be misleading. To me it has a ring of finality similar to the expression, ‘dead in trespasses and sins.’ A person who is in such a way ‘dead’ is certainly not unable to commit any more sin, but it suggests that they are headed in the direction of death and hell, just as a death row inmate headed for the chair is a ‘dead man walking’.

Conversely, given a pardon, this same man would be ‘saved’ but only from his present state of sure death. If he returns to a life of crime and commits another offence punishable by death, his former pardon will not apply to his new crimes. “There remained no more sacrifice for sins.†He will need another pardon from this new sentence of death, and be worse off than before, since he has already shown himself untrustworthy. Not knowing how far the grace of the ‘governor’ of our souls will stretch, we must take sinning after knowing the joy of being pardoned to be a very serious matter.

:o

Edit note: I purposefully said, ‘knowing the joy of being pardoned,’ and not just ‘being pardoned’ because I believe we all were pardoned at the cross, and only those who realize this fact can truly know the freedom to walk out of our prison cells and begin a new victorious life in Christ. Who is going to use this freedom to do more sin worthy of death?

 

[cyberjosh]

I’ve tried to gather a picture of “saved†from your posts and even though you say that one is immediately saved, I see that you lean more towards “are going to be savedâ€Â, well that is evident from the scripture you provided. But you draw a different conclusion of ‘already saved’. So, can you provide any scripture that says someone “is saved†and does not suggest a process?
...
...
I agree with your below quote.

cybershark: God can keep those who are his from stumbling and how those who claim to be saved but bear bad fruit are liars, and how the Bible says that those who endure to the end will be saved

I don’t think saved “at the end†is same as saved “immediatelyâ€Â. These views kind of contradict.

I completely understand what you are asking and why, so let me try to explain. First off no they don't contradict, and remember that many things that seem to contradict in the Bible can infact be reconciled by Paradox of how God works, like God's mercy and wrath, God keeping us and us having to stay on the path ourselves. These can work in tandem. Look at the following verses:

Salvation is a Past Event:
"for in hope we were saved" (Rom 8:24)
"by grace you have been saved through faith" (Eph 2:5,8)
"he saved us, called us, according to his grace" (2 Tim 1:9)

Salvation is a Present Process:
"work out your salvation with fear and trembling" (Phil 2:12)
"as you attain the goal of your faith, salvation" (1 Peter 1:9)

Salvation is a Future Process:
"he who endures to the end will be saved" (Mt 10:22)
"we shall be saved through the grace of Jesus" (Acts 15:11)
"salvation is nearer now than first believed" (Rom 13:11)

How these fit together is because to atleast some degree we can be sure of our future full salvation right now, because God had put his seal of the Holy Spirit in us and can cause us to persevere. This is why Paul could speak of his assurance that he would be saved in the future, he knew he would make it to that point, and also why he spoke of working out the salvation we already have and that he and other believers had been given salvation by grace in the past.



P.S. I got to go to work, I'll answer the rest of this post later...

~Josh

 

[cyberjosh]

Unread, did my last reply to you answer any of your questions?

 

[francisdesales]

I like this. I would add that the term ‘saved’ could be implemented in the situation of a person, who once was blindly headed in the wrong direction, walking on the broad road to hell, who is turned around now and begins his walk on the straight and narrow. The effect of this decision is that the person is saved from sure destruction, and as long as they don’t leave this righteous path, or turn away from the destination, they continue to walk nearer to the goal before them.

I really find the term, ‘saved’, to be misleading. To me it has a ring of finality similar to the expression, ‘dead in trespasses and sins.’ A person who is in such a way ‘dead’ is certainly not unable to commit any more sin, but it suggests that they are headed in the direction of death and hell, just as a death row inmate headed for the chair is a ‘dead man walking’.

Excellent observation - by Tan and yourself. Unfortunately, the word "salvation" has multiple meanings and is the cause of much confusion, as you have properly pointed out. "being saved" means being healed - of sin. But our human experience finds that even after this event, we continue to sin - and often require being "saved" or "healed" again by turning to the Lord and asking pardon. "Being saved" can also refer to our current walk - AND can also refer to what will become of us, as Tan points out. Thus, the term "salvation" and its derivatives can be confusing. Thus, we should be careful of our definitions, reminding ourselves that "being saved" in the Scriptures doesn't always mean the same thing everywhere. That is why context is so important.

Regards

 

[cyberjosh]

Excellent observation - by Tan and yourself. Unfortunately, the word "salvation" has multiple meanings and is the cause of much confusion, as you have properly pointed out. "being saved" means being healed - of sin. But our human experience finds that even after this event, we continue to sin - and often require being "saved" or "healed" again by turning to the Lord and asking pardon. "Being saved" can also refer to our current walk - AND can also refer to what will become of us, as Tan points out. Thus, the term "salvation" and its derivatives can be confusing. Thus, we should be careful of our definitions, reminding ourselves that "being saved" in the Scriptures doesn't always mean the same thing everywhere. That is why context is so important.

I have never seen another context for salvation other than the idea that we have been saved from the world and the corruption of sin to be reconciled unto God. Also the doctrines that Paul and the other NT writers build their salvation doctrines on are often quotes of the OT works of God towards Israel as "types" and shadows of things to come (which became realities under the New Covenant), and the largest by far is that God delivering Israel out of Egypt was typical of salvation. Paul makes this analogy very closely in Corinthians by paralleling it closely to the works and promises of God in Exodus and a recuring theme of coming out from exile.

"16And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God. As God has said:


“ I will dwell in them
And walk among them.
I will be their God,
And they shall be My people.â€Â

17 Therefore

“ Come out from among them
And be separate, says the Lord.
Do not touch what is unclean,
And I will receive you.
18 “ I will be a Father to you,
And you shall be My sons and daughters,
Says the LORD Almighty.â€Â
(2 Corinthians 6:16-18)

"Therefore, having these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God." (2 Corinthians 7:1)

God in Exodus called the Israelites out of Egypt so that they would worship Him in the desert. God's entire purpose for calling them out of Egypt was to call them to Himself, reconcilliation. "You yourselves have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles' wings, and brought you to Myself." (Exodus 19:4) But before they could come near God at Mt. Sinai they had to consecrate (make holy - "be seperate/set apart") themselves for three days and they were commanded to wash their garments from all the filthiness on it, analogous to what Paul said, and probably the image Paul drew from, about cleansing ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit. But salvation can only mean one thing, escaping the corruption of the world and being reconciled unto God.

 

[francisdesales]

I have never seen another context for salvation other than the idea that we have been saved from the world and curruption of sin to be reconciled unto God. Also the doctrines that Paul and the other NT writers build their salvation doctrines on often quote the OT works of God towards Israel as "types" and shadows of things to come (which became realities under the New Covenant) and the largest by far is that God devlivering Israel out of Egypt was typical of salvation. Paul makes this analogy very closely in Corinthians by paralleling it closely to the works and promises of God in Exodus a recuring theme of coming out from exile.

Yes, but being saved in such a manner today doesn't mean we will be saved for heaven tommorrow. Thus:

Salvation is a Future Process:
"he who endures to the end will be saved" (Mt 10:22)
"we shall be saved through the grace of Jesus" (Acts 15:11)
"salvation is nearer now than first believed" (Rom 13:11)

Now, if salvation is ONLY that one time healing from sin, what do these verses refer to? How or why would a Christian (to whom these verses are addressed to) need to be "saved" again - unless salvation refers to our final state as well as our past state, depending on the context.

I leave you with two verses:

"He that hath the Son hath life; [and] he that hath not the Son of God hath not life." 1 John 5:12

And will we remain in this state all the time once we are first healed?

"Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: [and] not that he should return from his ways, and live? But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, [and] doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked [man] doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die." Eze 18:24-25

The Bible clearly tells us we must persevere until the end. Being saved today does not guarantee we will be saved for heaven tommorrow. Thus, it is important to understand the context when the word "save" is being discussed.

God in Exodus called the Israelites out of Egypt so that they would worship Him in the desert. God's entire purpose for calling them out of Egypt was to call them to Himself, reconcilliation.

And as 1 Cor 10:1-12 relates, they all weren't saved for the Promised Land, were they. For Christians, the Promised Land is a shadow for the REAL Promised Land, the New Jerusalem - heaven. Verse 12 is telling for those who think they have been saved and now can relax.

But salvation can only mean one thing, escaping the corruption of the world and being reconciled unto God.

This reconciliation is not permanently and irrevocably given until the day we die.

Regards

 

[cyberjosh]

Yes, but being saved in such a manner today doesn't mean we will be saved for heaven tommorrow. Thus:

Salvation is a Future Process:
"he who endures to the end will be saved" (Mt 10:22)
"we shall be saved through the grace of Jesus" (Acts 15:11)
"salvation is nearer now than first believed" (Rom 13:11)

Now, if salvation is ONLY that one time healing from sin, what do these verses refer to? How or why would a Christian (to whom these verses are addressed to) need to be "saved" again - unless salvation refers to our final state as well as our past state, depending on the context.

Let me state as comprehensively as possible that I am not 100% sure that you can't loose your salvation. It may indeed be possible, as some verses seem to imply. However, this pitiful view of Christians having no security or rod of protection (even through discipline) from God to keep them on the path is incorrect because to an extent (and I would argue a great extent - though not limitless) God will keep you on the path when you struggle (Hebrews 12:4-11). And God is able to keep you, and though possibly not true for every one people such as Paul were assured of their salvation, as I am confident that I have salvation and that it will be realized in full once I die. I see as a basic principle in the Scriptures (especially 1 John ) that those who are saved will walk in the light and will desire to sanctrify themselves. I know there are exceptions, but there is no escaping that those who have been regenerated (saved) are given a new nature and the Holy Spirit as a seal and that nature does manifest itself outwardly to some degree. Those who are God's cleanse themselves. And I see seemingly contradictory principles which must be mistakenly contradictory about God working in us and through us yet us doing the work, they must work in tandem somehow and both assume salvation & sanctification, so how do we explain this away lightly? And if it is possible to lose your salvation much grace must be rejected and even the Holy Spirit must be rejected. The thing is though that those who would seemingly apostacise seem never to have had a change in them, thus why they are running, that would evidence them ever having been given a new heart. But assuming it is possible to apostacise, if you are really His, God will discipline you much before you get to that point though, regardless of what happens when you get there. But there are those like Paul who can be assured of their salvation and who walk in it.

P.S. But now I'm on the defensive of this aspect of it. You will have to read previously about how I believe that those truely saved will bear fruit and sanctify themselves, thus no such thing as a fruitless Christian life (no free ride and relaxation), thus I emphasise demonstrating fruits by our faith, because faith without fruits is not real faith.

 

[unred typo]

Unread, did my last reply to you answer any of your questions?

Hmmmn… let me see. I asked, “Since you have summed up your belief in "Ye shall know them by their fruits," can you tell me if there is no fruit to examine, is there any salvation? And what specifically are the ‘fruits’ that prove one is saved and how are they displayed in the person‘s life? Are you talking about Bible study, church attendance, gathering in worship or does one have to actually perform good deeds in love and mercy? If a person has a change of heart, but not a change of lifestyle, are they saved or not?â€Â

Those are not even what I would like to ask but I wrote in the context of ‘saved’ which I find obscures the actual state of things. At any rate, I don’t think you got this one: “Are you talking about Bible study, church attendance, gathering in worship or does one have to actually perform good deeds in love and mercy?†Your summary was:

The only thing I say concerning this is that those truely saved are changed by God's grace but by what degree is up to them, but I do not doubt their salvation and that they have indeed been changed. I just try to call out those who falsely claim to have salvation and then fall away. And remember that's what false prophets do also.

There you have said it plain as the nose on your face, but then, you can’t see your own nose, can you. The OSAS SOS, Josh; “Those who are truly saved will be saved, or they truly weren’t saved at all.†This isn’t really dealing with the verses that plainly say that those who sin willfully after having received the Spirit and begun the whole rebirth process, are lost. I believe that a person who has the earnest of the Spirit, had better be prepared to go the distance, count the cost, and not turn back from following. With every fall, it is harder to make the effort to begin again, isn’t it? OSAS is wrong, and messing up your otherwise pretty straight theology, from my point of view. BTW, I can’t really see your nose from my vantage point here either, but going by your mixed message, it might be out of joint by my blunt observations and for that I am sorry.

Where are the churches who teach us that we can be overcomers? Where are the preachers who yell the consequences of sin and put the fear of God in our hearts to help us stay on the straight and narrow? Where are the brothers in Christ who exhort us to love, good works and holiness without which no man will see the Lord? (I mean besides you, Tan, Fran, Jay, and a few others in forums like this :wink: ) Whine, wail, moan.

OK, now that I have finished this, I see you and Joe have been writing without the express written permission from the thread meister. :wink: How am I ever going to keep this thread of mine under my control if you‘re going to write to each other here? Heh heh. Wow. Power corrupts. Write that down.
:-D