Panin said:
You stretching and twisting the meaning here. Salvation is not even mentioned.
No, I am not stretching anything. I am putting 2 and 2 together. If you are interested in what the Bible
actually says, then give me a minute of your time and reflect on these comments...
First, let me define "salvation".
Being saved is that point where we begin a new walk in the Spirit - and CONTINUE in that walk. It also refers to a CURRENT condition. We repent of our sins and are forgiven. We take on the divine nature, as Peter says earlier. We are able to love and forgive others because we are MADE "God-like" (called "theosis" or "divinization" by the Church Fathers of ancient Christianity). All as a result of the Spirit working in me, I personally am able to love and forgive. Turning from sin and walking in Christ is being saved, and this is EXACTLY what 2 Peter tells us about the "wicked preachers" or anyone who followed them WERE.
The people of 2 Peter had escaped the pollutions of sin. How else can we do that, my friend? Can we work our way without the Spirit to escape sin?
They obeyed the commandments of God. Do you suggest that Peter thought there was ANOTHER principle that guided men to obey God's commandments???
Follow the ways of righteousness. You suggest that we can do that, as well, without being saved???
No, the word "salvation" is not used... No matter, we know what being saved is and Peter describes the conditions of salvation where we are forgiven of sins and begin to walk in the Lord...
Unless you suggest there is ANOTHER way that we can obey God WITHOUT being saved...
These "wicked" men were ONCE saved - that is beyond doubt.
So clearly, we CAN lose THAT salvation - since a person NOT walking in the Lord, NOT obeying the commandments, NOT following the ways of righteousness,
RETURNING to a life of sin (RETURN means they - at one time - were NOT in sin -
are no longer saved. Again, ANY OTHER way we can avoid sin, my friend???
Is this condition of "being saved" guaranteed? No, Peter describes some who are NO LONGER saved - since they have fallen into a condition WORSE than before...
Now,
HOW can a saved person be in a condition that is WORSE THAN BEFORE being saved - and STILL be saved??? It is not possible. A person's walk TODAY describes whether they are saved, not something said 20 years ago. That idea is a false gospel.
Thus, once you understand what Peter is saying here, that some people were once saved, freed from sin, walk in the Spirit - CAN TURN BACK to a pre-saved condition, one worse than before - you will see that you are incorrectly understanding the Scriptures taught by the Church.
Panin said:
Knowledge and knowing is not the same as receiving and accepting salvation. I dont need to think long and hard about this at all. And further more the only reason I did not post this scripture along with the others is becuase I knew it would be brought up to allude that it means one can loose their slavation. Well it don't.
No, knowledge alone is not enough - IF we define "knowledge" as "information", which is anachronistic. We are speaking of Sacred Scripture, not the 21st century...
That is not what "knowledge" means here, or in most portions of Scriptures that deal with the act of faith and the resulting fruit. It is clear that this knowledge (and "knowledge" here refers to what precedes Baptism - since "being enlightened" refers to a knowledge gained by an experiential meeting between Christ and the individual within the community). "Knowing something" refers to something much more sublime than our idea of book knowledge. It is knowing through experiencing someone in a relationship, as a man and wife "knowing" each other. Would you agree that "knowing" one's wife in Scriptures means something MORE than just knowing THINGS about her??? No, "knowing" in Scriptures is something much deeper than that.
And what does THIS "knowing" in 2 Peter lead to? Escaping sin, following the commandments, being righteous. This "knowing", a meeting of Jesus Christ, is what begins our being saved.
Again, they escaped sin. Please explain HOW we can escape sin and NOT be saved, please....
Panin said:
Your arguemnets are as old as the hills, there is nothing new in what you are saying.
AH, so innovation and re-invention is the sign of correct doctrine and beliefs???
If we invent something new, it must be correct, while Christians of the past 2000 years were crazy for believing something taught by the Apostles long ago???
I challenge you to find me something from the first 1000 years of Christianity that clearly points out that no one can lose their salvation, no matter what they do. An argument "older than the hills" has meaning because it has been tested and found correct by Christians of many different ages. IF it was ridiculous, it would have been dismissed long ago.
However, to appease busy American Christians who don't have time to pray and worship the Lord, busy with their "real life", the doctrine of OSAS appeals, since they can do their one-time faith declaration and "get on with their life". Clearly, such teachings avoid the clarion call to repent and CHANGE, turning aside from a life of sin and slavery. It is a "feel-good" teaching that gives false security to busy people who don't have that much time for ACTUALLY repenting and changing their lives and KEEPING them that way.
Returning to a life of sin is NOT a sign of being saved, since saved = saved from a life of sin, not a bus pass to heaven.
Panin said:
And at the end of the day, my friend, you can belive what ever you like. I don't believe what you believe and I dont twist the meanings of scripture either.
I know you don't believe what I do - which is why I am trying to point out your error. I am not saying you are twisting 2 Peter, but you ARE avoiding the meaning of it to protect your false doctrine. Answer me the questions in red, and tell me how ELSE they did these things, WITHOUT being saved???
These people were saved, with or without the use of the actual word, my brother.
Regards