One result of being in union with Christ

[FreeGrace]

I believe the OSAS or "Preservation of the Saints" is demonic in origin.

Just an amazing statement in light of what Jesus promised about those to whom He gives eternal life:
John 10:28 - I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand.

We know to whom He "gives eternal life": those who believe in Him, per John 3:16. And note the conditions for the promise that "they shall never perish". Nothing. Those who have believed, HAVE eternal life, per John 5:24. And those who have been given eternal life, on the basis of faith in Christ, simply WILL NEVER PERISH.

It encourages believers to neglect the good works for which we have been created "to walk in them." (Eph 2:10)

Wrong. It encourages no such thing, IF the believer has been properly taught about God's promise of eternal reward for faithful living and promise of painful discipline for unfaithful living. I STILL wonder why this seems to be ignored by those who espouse loss of salvation.

It discourages preaching about holiness and submission to God's will provides room for preaching of self-centered prosperity gospels.

Wrong again. I've NEVER ever espoused anything about the false doctrine of the evil prosperity gospels.

By their fruits you shall know them.

I wonder if there is any understanding of who isbeing referenced by 'their fruits'. Hint: it isn't believers. Another hint: Matt 7:15.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Just an amazing statement in light of what Jesus promised about those to whom He gives eternal life:
John 10:28 - I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand.

We know to whom He "gives eternal life": those who believe in Him

Correct....'those who believe in Him'.
That's the non-OSAS argument.
Once again an OSASer who doesn't even realize non-OSAS is right in his own OSAS argument.
Quite amusing, I must say.

 

[FreeGrace]

I said this:
"I said this:
"The only question is this: regardless of how he lived in his younger years, did he EVER put is trust in Jesus Christ, as the Son of God, for his salvation? If he did, he WAS saved and IS in eternity now. Because of God's grace. Simple as that."

the wages of sin are not death?

I don't understand how anyone would come to such a question from what I posted. But, to answer your question; of course the wages of sin is death. And we've ALREADY suffered spiritual death from sin. Rom 5:
12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned.

It seems to me that the view of loss of salvation includes the idea that any sin will cause spiritual death. But that doesn't make sense because we've all died spiritually, according to Rom 5:12.

Where does the Bible teach that man can die spiritually over and over? Or even just twice? Never.

The point is that those who believe have been born again spiritually and HAVE eternal life, which means they WILL NEVER PERISH.

Why is it that the loss of salvation folk just don't seem to understand that very simple point?

universalism?

What about it? Other than it's a very false doctrine and totally unbiblical.

However, the question was regarding my comment:
"Second question: for how many sins did Christ die for?
If He died for ALL sins, then the lifestyle has NO BEARING on getting into heaven.
The Bible says He died for all sins. So lifestyle CANNOT be an issue for getting into heaven."

My question wasn't answered. Apparently you have no answer. Which explains a lot.

They are addressed you simply refuse to listen or attempt to understand..

Please answer my questions. It seems most of my questions have been ignored (refused to listen to).

It will provide credence to your views IF answers can be provided to legitimate questions. When questions are not answered, that shows an inability to answer.

And truth ALWAYS has an answer. Jesus never skirted any questions.

 

[FreeGrace]

I said this:
"This post, which is #177, doesn't show any response from you, but when I click the "reply" button, there is a response."

on this i do not a clue

I can't speak for anyone else's computer, but on mine, post #177 only shows my quote, and no response from you, though that post is from you. It was as if you captured my quote but didn't have any response.

But when I clicked on "reply", your response showed up.

 

[FreeGrace]

Biblical eternal security does not abuse God's grace.

Well, finally. Great that you've come along. Eternal security certainly IS biblical.

Everyone who continues to believes is secure in Christ. No if's, and's, or but's about it.

Except the use of the aorist tense refutes your claim. No if's, and's, or but's about it.

It is HYPER grace that abuses God's grace.

There is no such thing. God's greater is simply GREATER than all our sin. It's worse than a shame that there are believers who don't believe that.

 

[FreeGrace]

And it's interesting that he is the only one who can't see that's true.

Those who think that my views are not held by anyone else are seriously deluded.

 

[FreeGrace]

I said this:
"Lifestyle ABSOLUTELY is an issue in whether God will spank His children during this life, and whether they will be rewarded in the next life.

I continue to wonder WHY the conditional security crowd never addresses these points."

Rewards are not in contention here.
Never have been.

Of course they have been in contention. When verses about eternal rewards, or loss of them, are claimed to be about loss of salvation, that makes them in contention.

 

[FreeGrace]

I said this:
"The only question is this: regardless of how he lived in his younger years, did he EVER put is trust in Jesus Christ, as the Son of God, for his salvation? If he did, he WAS saved and IS in eternity now. Because of God's grace. Simple as that.

Ah!
So based on that, Adolf Hitler is in heaven right now with all the saints who have passed from this vale of tears including all those he murdered.

I have no idea about Hilter's life. But if he ever believed, then, according to the very words of Jesus, he WILL NEVER PERISH. John 3:16, 10:28

However, I've heard from a number of Bible teachers who viewed him as demon possessed, given his extreme obsession to exterminate the Jews. That sounds reasonable to me. Therefore, he never believed, because there is no evidence that believers, who are indwelt by the Holy Spirit, can be demon possessed. Influenced, yes. but indwelt by a demon; no. Or, hell, no.

 

[reba]

FreeGrace about 177 I went back a couple times looking then it clicked ... i did the quote thing and clicked post reply too quickly so i edited to include

The way this reads to me you have made my point, and that of others .

maybe you got caught it the process

 

[FreeGrace]

I said this:
"The conditional security view is that God's grace is LIMITED and exhaustible. The Bible teaches that God's grace is greater than all our sins and is limitless."

Then, please, explain the damnation of those who say God's grace is a license to sin:

"4For certain persons have crept in unnoticed, those who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation, ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ." (Jude 1:4 NASB)

Read the passage very carefully and deliberately. Grace is NOT a license to sin, but you are insisting it is.
That makes YOU one of those being spoken about above. You turn the grace of our God into licentiousness.

your claims are patently FALSE. I've NEVER insisted on that nonsense.

Grace means that our salvation has nothing to do with us, and everything to do with what God did for us. Do you understand that?

My perception of your view is that salvation is maintained by our own efforts. Which is a works based salvation. Which I reject.

Grace gives us a license to SERVE. No unbeliever really serves God, nor will be rewarded for anything they do in His name.

Just consider the crowd in Matt 7:21-23 and the basis for their appeal to get into the kingdom. All about works, and they even did them "in His Name". Big deal. Jesus told them to get away from Him.

 

[FreeGrace]

Wait.....didn't John say murderers don't have eternal life in them (1 John 3:15 NASB)? I guess John was wrong again.

Proper understanding has no problem with the verse.

But, why not believe what Jesus said about those who have been given eternal life: that they will never perish? John 10:28. And He added NO conditions for never perishing.

IOW, being given eternal life means they WILL NEVER PERISH.

Yet, your view is that for certain reasons, some who have been given eternal life may lose it. Which goes directly against what Jesus promised.

So, why believe a misunderstanding of what John said, and NOT believe the clear promise from Jesus?

 

[FreeGrace]

'Free grace' is another term for the doctrine.
Be careful. They talk out both sides of their mouth.

Either back up this extremely inappropriate FALSE CLAIM, or apologize for it.

It will be proven ONLY by giving concrete examples of how I've "talked out of both sides of my mouth".

No response will REVEAL the total falseness of your claim.

 

[FreeGrace]

Grace is free. It comes with no strings attached. It's not earned in any way. Otherwise it's not grace. But when one considers the whole council of God, it's clear that one cannot simply claim salvation and that's that.

Correct. And this conversation has never been about what one claims. Rather, it's been about what one has believed.

 

[chessman]

It is damable to lead believers in Christ into thinking that their subsequent unbelief, and it's resultant willful sin, will not separate them from Christ.

It's un-Biblical (not Biblical) to lead people into thinking that unbelief (as used in the Scriptures) is first believing in Christ then no longer believing in Christ. That would be apostasy, not unbelief. Not to mention hypocritical to think unbelief results in sin when even believers sin. Even your post above uses "ex-believers", yet without any passage that uses this, the correct term, "ex-believer".

If you 'got' the argument you'd know that non-OSAS says it is those who DON'T believe that are separated from the love of God

If you got Paul's logic you'd get the fact that those that are saved are those that did not believe (past tense) in vain.

If Paul would have said anything like being "first saved" (to use your words) by believing in what he preached, then no longer being saved by becoming an ex-believer, you'd have a point.


As it stands, however, you have Paul writing back to Corinth saying you are saved unless you believed in vain. Which has OSAS doctrine in it, but you just don't get it.

 

[FreeGrace]

Okay, good. Glad you said this (I was going to post something about this before but headed out the door instead).

See, the foundational error of 'free grace' doctrine is the thinking that, well, since salvation is secured by nothing at all

EDITED No one has EVER said that salvation is "secured by nothing at all".EDITED

Salvation is secured by the death of Christ on the cross for our sins. Nothing less than that. And given by grace through faith in Christ.

then there's nothing that can take it away from you.

We did nothing to deserve or earn it. And we can do nothing to lose it. That's what GRACE means.

Problem being, salvation is not secured by nothing. It is secured by faith.

OK, please read what I just wrote.

 

[FreeGrace]

Correct....'those who believe in Him'.

And...missing the point again. Eternal life is given WHEN one believes, according to Jesus in John 5:24. It is to those who have been given eternal life that they will never perish, unlike your claims to the contrary.

 

[Jim Parker]

It is damable to lead believers in Christ into thinking that their subsequent unbelief, and it's resultant willful sin, will not separate them from Christ. That is my view. Get it right.

People who cause believers to stumble that way will themselves be destroyed (1 Corinthians 3:17, Matthew 18:6 NASB, 2 Peter 2:2 NASB).

If telling people they can walk away from God in unbelief and go back to their old lives, and they do that, is not destroying them, what is, chessman, what is????

Hyper-grace reminds me of the false prophets that assured the people of Judah over and over that God would not destroy them even though Judah was backslidden and God had made it clear through his real prophets that He would indeed destroy them.

Eggs Ackley

 

[chessman]

It is damable to lead believers in Christ into thinking that their subsequent unbelief, and it's resultant willful sin, will not separate them from Christ. That is my view. Get it right.

I did get it (your view) right.

Your view is that genuine believers are able to be separated from the love of Christ.

Yet this site's SoF which derives from Paul's doctrine is that genuine believers are sealed by the Holy Spirit and thus unable to be separated from the love of Christ.

 

[Jim Parker]

I have no idea about Hilter's life.

He was a devout Christian as a young boy having a child's faith.
When his brother died, he became angry with God and you know the rest of the story.
If your "gospel" teaches that such a man has eternal life then you are preaching a gospel that has no connection to the one in the Bible.
1Co 6:9-10 (NKJV) Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.

Apparently, you do not know.

Rev 21:8 (NKJV) But the cowardly, unbelieving,[fn] abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.

As the poster child of mass murders, your alleged Saint Adolf Hitler will have a place in the lake of fire, the second death, and will not inherit the Kingdom as you profess.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

My perception of your view is that salvation is maintained by our own efforts. Which is a works based salvation. Which I reject.

(See, Papa Zoom. This is what I was talking about. He considers 'believing' to be equivalent to the work that can not justify. It is upon this horrible error of understanding that hyper-grace doctrine is based.)

All you have to do is show a single verse of scripture that equates trusting/ believing with the works that can not justify and you will have made your point. But instead, the scriptures teach that faith and works of the law are diametrically opposed in their ability to solicit a declaration of righteousness. But for some reason, in the church, 'faith' got moved over to the side of the works of the law that can not justify and, if you do that (think you have to continue to believe), you are guilty of trying to earn your own salvation. Yet there is no scriptural foundation whatsoever for believing that. In fact, the exact opposite is what the scriptures teach (Romans 4:5 NASB). Faith is indeed the very thing that justifies. Faith has never been what constitutes a works salvation.