Jesus Died For You To Be Saved

[Runningman]

You miss the point of the last several posts.

Especially refering to judas and his wordly remorse.

When the Lord saved you and you repented, dis you want to go out and kill yourself?

That burden of sin was lifted and paid for, no guilt (remorse) would have remained after conversion.

I don't see any promise of salvation in that verse.
Salvation is dependent on enduring until the end.

If the belief fades, or was never true to begin with, there will be no salvation.

Exactly. Judas lost his salvation.

 

[electedbyHim]

Exactly. Judas lost his salvation.

The Bible does not teach a person can lose their salvation.

 

[Runningman]

The Bible does not teach a person can lose their salvation.

That would be nice, but unfortunately that is not true. There's a lot in the Bible about losing salvation... here's a short list.

Galatians 5:1-5 teaches Christians can fall from grace.

Romans 11:18-22 teaches Christians can be cut off.

Revelation 22:19 teaches a Christian can have their name removed from the book of life.

 

[electedbyHim]

That would be nice, but unfortunately that is not true. There's a lot in the Bible about losing salvation... here's a short list.

Galatians 5:1-5 teaches Christians can fall from grace.

Romans 11:18-22 teaches Christians can be cut off.

Revelation 22:19 teaches a Christian can have their name removed from the book of life.

You forgot the passages in Hebrews.

All easily refutable.

Must be a huge burden on oneself to maintain their own salvation. No wonder people think they can loose their salvation. if it were left up to me, I would never be saved.

Next you will tell me you chose to be saved.

Please start a thread and we can discuss what the Bible teaches on the perseverance of the saints.

 

[Hopeful 2]

Yes, it is.

No, it isn't.

His observations are that those who continually walk in willful, habitual, unrepentant sin cannot say they have fellowship with God.

Doesn't that describe every single person who says they cannot cease from sinning ?
If you never actually quit committing sin, you are a habitual sinner !

A believer's sin doesn't remove his right standing with God,

You have been taught a lie.
That ill belief means God sanctions sin.
It is a pathetic POV.

No, his point is the very opposite of what you're saying. Those who walk with God cannot say they are without sin, or they are not actually walking with God.

Ask yourself, Is there sin in God ?
NO ?, then there can't be any sinners in God either.

No, it doesn't stand to reason. You can't just claim it does; you need to provide serious proof or a sound argument as to how that can be the case.

Ask yourself, Is there sin in God ?
NO ?, then there can't be any sinners in God either.

That believers "never sin again" is an abominable heresy; that is never taught in Scripture. In fact, the Bible makes it abundantly clear that believers continue to struggle with sin, which is precisely what John writes about in 1 John 1:8-2:1; 5:16. It also makes most of the NT commands absolutely meaningless.

It is written..."Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin;" (1 Peter 4:1)
If Peter is a heretic, the anti-God's righteousness doctrine you were taught would be correct.

Sanctification is both a position and a process. That is, we are set apart when we are justified, but we grow in holiness until our death or Christ returns. The irony is, it is your position that makes John say a person is saved, then not saved, then saved again, et

We had better be growing in grace and knowledge until we die.
But going back and forth, from light to darkness, again and again, is just retention of that which has been destroyed...the old man !
It is the sign of a false faith.

1Jn 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. (ESV)

There is a man who can say he has no sin !

Again, John literally states, "If we keep on confessing our sins." If, as you state, people confesses once, are saved, and never sin again, then John is speaking nonsense. The only way to make sense of that according to your position, is that we confess, are saved, sin and become unsaved, confess, become saved again, etc. But that also contradicts your position. So, once again, John would be speaking nonsense.

You are adding "keeps" to scripture.
I would be ashamed to to that.

According to the biblical position, a person repents and is justified by faith in Christ, and so is saved from the penalty of sin (death), but still needs to be saved from the power of sin. This is why a true believer still struggles with sin and needs to continually repent, seeking God's forgiveness and cleansing. That is how a believer grows in holiness. We are commanded to be holy and commanded to avoid all manner of vices and sins, which is all meaningless if we are perfectly holy already.

Your version of the word "saved", is a mirage.
It incorporates continued disobedience to God as part of its plan.

If someone continues to live in willful, habitual, unrepentant sin, then yes, but every believer from the very beginning has continued to struggle with sin. True believers are saved from the penalty of sin; they have gone from death to life.

That is a false conclusion.
It could only occur without a real repentance from sin.
It could only occur without rebirth from God's seed.

Your proof-texting is all out of context and not doing your position any favors. is as solid as rock.

My scriptural support is as solid as rock.
Your unbiblical conclusions are built on sand.
They were designed by someone to defend sinning.

 

[Hopeful 2]

The Bible does not teach a person can lose their salvation.

What do you suppose this means?..."But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul." (Heb 10:39)
Seems some "draw back".

 

[KV-44-v1]

But it is true

I can easily say it is false, and my assertion will have the same weight. See?
Assertions aren't great evidence.

 

[KV-44-v1]

What do you suppose this means?..."But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul." (Heb 10:39)
Seems some "draw back".

Yup. Can't "draw back" if you were "never saved" in the 1st place.

 

[KV-44-v1]

1Jn 1:8 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
1Jn 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
1Jn 1:10 If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. (ESV)

These verses seem to be talking about if someone says "theyve never sinned before".
I don't see anything indicating people saying "never sinning again from repentance, onward"
Context matters.

And, see that "cleanse us from ALL unrighteousness"? Hopeful 2 Take notes. ;)

 

[KV-44-v1]

totally achievable by man.

Wouldn't it be only because of God? man couldnt do it alone, they NEEED God.

but addressing only those who are walking in darkness.

What Scriptures in-context make you think it's adressing darkness-people only?

It’s blasphemous to sin, as you do, and say that it isn’t sin. That’s why John says it makes God a liar.

What sins was Hopeful calling "Not a sin"?

continually confess our sins,

That's a sad cycle. Belief, fall, belief fall. "Hopeful" 's name makes sense now.
One can't serve two masters.
Do you believe that you, along with every Born Again Christian,

enduring until the end.

??
Works salvation? Is the human enduring on his own will, or is God gifting him endurance?
are serving 2 masters?

 

[KV-44-v1]

A believer's sin doesn't remove his right standing with God

Does God "auto forgive" the believer if they accidentally sin?

This is why John states that believers are to be continually confessing their sins.

Why didn't the translators catch your "keep on"?? How many translations have that vs how many do not?

or they are not actually walking with God.

So by your logic, Hopeful must not be walking with God???

That believers "never sin again" is an abominable heresy;

That's a very heavy charge. What Scripture demonstrates this? What EXTRA-Biblical evidence has proven this? What fruits do you think "True Believers Never sinning AGAIN" belief has bore?

Why do you hate the belief that Christians can 'quit sinning from repentance onward' so much?

Hopeful 2 is not teaching that the "sinning no more Christian" never sinned ONCE in their life. He's saying that believers can sin "NO MORE".

that is never taught in Scripture.

I doubt your heavy charge is taught there.

In fact, the Bible makes it abundantly clear that believers continue to struggle with sin,

Struggling with committing it, or struggling with temptation and the effects of sin in general?
And if the believer struggles with sin, but doesn't actually do any sin, he hasn't sinned. Struggling with it doesn't necessitate caving to doing it.

So, given this, it does not seem much of an arg against Hopeful's "believers can sin no more" teaching.

It also makes most of the NT commands absolutely meaningless.

Why?
If Hopeful's teaching is correct, Born Again Believers will always follow them.

It's more likely the "sin-stuck believers" theory does that.

 

[Runningman]

What do you suppose this means?..."But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul." (Heb 10:39)
Seems some "draw back".

Pinging you if I or someone else opens a thread on Calvin's "perseverance of the saints" as electedbyhim suggested,

 

[brightfame52]

I can easily say it is false, and my assertion will have the same weight. See?
Assertions aren't great evidence.

You can but its true nonetheless. Disagreeing with truth is no new thing.

 

[Runningman]

Nothing is said about giving Judas eternal life there you read that into it

We have proof Judas was a disciple. We have proof Jesus spoke to the disciples and told them they will have eternal life. Therefore, there is evidence Jesus spoke to Judas and told him he will have eternal life.

You are not actually interacting with the evidence or proofs, but you keep repeating the same thing. It's a bit like an argument from silence which is a logical fallacy, i.e., a particular fact is not explicitly mentioned therefore it's false, which is considered bad reasoning. The absence of the mention of a specific person does not falsify that eternal life applies to a specific person.

This is why we actually discuss things, examine the Scripture, look at the preponderance of evidence, to come to a sound and reasonable conclusion.

So what you're saying comes off as "you're wrong no matter what you say."

What you can do next is provide evidence that Jesus was not speaking to Judas, if you can.

 

[brightfame52]

We have proof Judas was a disciple. We have proof Jesus spoke to the disciples and told them they will have eternal life. Therefore, there is evidence Jesus spoke to Judas and told him he will have eternal life.

You are not actually interacting with the evidence or proofs, but you keep repeating the same thing. It's a bit like an argument from silence which is a logical fallacy, i.e., a particular fact is not explicitly mentioned therefore it's false, which is considered bad reasoning. The absence of the mention of a specific person does not falsify that eternal life applies to a specific person.

This is why we actually discuss things, examine the Scripture, look at the preponderance of evidence, to come to a sound and reasonable conclusion.

So what you're saying comes off as "you're wrong no matter what you say."

What you can do next is provide evidence that Jesus was not speaking to Judas, if you can.

Nothing is said about giving Judas eternal life there you read that into it

 

[electedbyHim]

We have proof Judas was a disciple. We have proof Jesus spoke to the disciples and told them they will have eternal life. Therefore, there is evidence Jesus spoke to Judas and told him he will have eternal life.

You are not actually interacting with the evidence or proofs, but you keep repeating the same thing. It's a bit like an argument from silence which is a logical fallacy, i.e., a particular fact is not explicitly mentioned therefore it's false, which is considered bad reasoning. The absence of the mention of a specific person does not falsify that eternal life applies to a specific person.

This is why we actually discuss things, examine the Scripture, look at the preponderance of evidence, to come to a sound and reasonable conclusion.

So what you're saying comes off as "you're wrong no matter what you say."

What you can do next is provide evidence that Jesus was not speaking to Judas, if you can.

It has been shown to you Biblically that Judas was not saved.

You believe he was, but have shown no Biblical evidence.

Everything you have posted has been proven false Biblically.

There is no nee for me to keep this conversation going with you on this false teaching.

This is not glorify God our Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[Runningman]

Nothing is said about giving Judas eternal life there you read that into it

How's this? Jesus gives eternal life to those who the Father gave to him. Judas, the son of destruction, was given to Jesus, but was lost. So he lost his eternal life. What's your workaround for this? And don't say "Nothing is said about giving Judas eternal life there you read that into it" this time because he's mentioned.

John 6
37All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

John 10
28And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. 29My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.

John 17
2For You granted Him authority over all people,a so that He may give eternal life to all those You have given Him.
12While I was with them, I protected and preserved them by Your name, the name You gave Me. Not one of them has been lost, except the son of destruction, so that the Scripture would be fulfilled.

 

[Runningman]

It has been shown to you Biblically that Judas was not saved.

You believe he was, but have shown no Biblical evidence.

Everything you have posted has been proven false Biblically.

There is no nee for me to keep this conversation going with you on this false teaching.

This is not glorify God our Lord Jesus Christ.

According to Scripture Judas was saved, but lost his eternal life. So I would have to say that you are the one doing what you falsely accuse me of. If I open a thread on debunking Calvin's TULIP I'll be sure to ping you.

 

[KV-44-v1]

You can but its true nonetheless. Disagreeing with truth is no new thing.

Standalone assertions are still poor arguments. Calling weak, one-sentence assertions "truth" does not make it true.

Ask yourself, "Why am I terrible at persuading others".

None of your arguments stood up. :/


"God is real" is a true standalone statement, but just saying is not effective for a convincer, even on the easiest-to-convert athiest.

 

[KV-44-v1]

Nothing is said about giving Judas eternal life there you read that into it

Parroting yourself 100 times does not make it true.