Saved by Grace Through Faith, Not by Works

[FreeGrace]

Abundant life is not for our benefit, it is a benefit to those around us.

There is no Scriptural basis for these remarks.

Consider Peter's words about the subject:
For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. 2 Peter 1:11

There is such a thing as entrance into the kingdom, and a abundant entrance into the kingdom.

Which is what Jesus was talking about in John 10:10 about "having life and having more abundantly".

We are most certainly born with Eternal life. It is called the new birth, being born from above, being "born again".

I clearly was referring to physical birth.

 

[Nathan]

I said this:
"No believer has any power to get rid of the gift of eternal life. It isn't some object that can be lost through a hole in one's pocket, or by misplacing it by some absent minded believer. That's the problem with OSNAS. The gift is treated as an object. Which is silly. It is God's life itself, given to the one who has believed."

The way those of OSNAS explain things, it sure seems they think of eternal life as something we can "get rid of", or lose.


The gift of eternal life is GIVEN when one believes, according to Jesus in John 5:24. So, one either HAS it or doesn't HAVE it. So how can one who HAS eternal life end up in the lake of fire?


Yet, your position IS loss of salvation. So your comments are in conflict with each other.

My position is not lose of salvation. If you read my posts you would see that it is abandoning, leaving, salvation. When I lose my wallet I don't know where it's at. When I leave my wallet at home, I know exactly where it's at.

 

[chessman]

I thought you looked into the meanings of words? Did you miss that the word "bought" is the same thing as redeem?

No it's not the same word, in English nor in Greek. Peter said they were bought, not redeemed. For a reason.

Who does a person serve? Their master or another?

Each serves 'their master'. Only Christians serve The Master. Peter said they denied The Master.

Peter states that "the Master" bought(redeemed) them

No, he said the Master bought them (not redeemed them).

2 Peter 2:1 But there were also false prophets among the people, as there will be false teachers among you also, who will bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, thus bringing on themselves swift destruction. ​

I thought you looked into the meanings of words? Did you miss that the word "bought" is the same thing as redeem?

No it's not the same word.

Here, and I quote from Thayer:
"In salvation-contexts, 59(agorázō) is not redeeming ("buying back")"

http://biblehub.com/greek/59.htm

Bought - agorázō, ag-or-ad'-zo; from G58;

That's a cognate of G59. And in all 11 uses means: market 6, marketplace 4, street 1

Where things are bought and sold, BTW.

Those teachers Peter speaks of most certainly had been redeemed past tense. That's why Peter could use the term "Master" to describe who they were denying.

The whole world has been "bought", as previously posted. Yet Christianity doesn't teach universalism.

 

[Nathan]

There is no Scriptural basis for these remarks.

Consider Peter's words about the subject:
For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. 2 Peter 1:11

There is such a thing as entrance into the kingdom, and a abundant entrance into the kingdom.

Which is what Jesus was talking about in John 10:10 about "having life and having more abundantly".


I clearly was referring to physical birth.

The basis is the fact that we are saved to serve Christ, not just to get something from God and be on our way. We were saved for good works, not for ourselves, but others.

Simple fact is, our focus was on ourselves and what we got before Christ, and afterwards it's about others. It's what we see called "fruit".

However, you say that abundant life is not about others so I will show you some passages.

Proverbs 10:21 (ESV) 21 The lips of the righteous feed many, but fools die for lack of sense.

Proverbs 15:4 (ESV)
4 A wholesome tongue is a tree of life: but perverseness therein is a breach in the spirit.

John 21
15 When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord; you know that I love you." He said to him, "Feed my lambs."
16 He said to him a second time, "Simon, son of John, do you love me?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord; you know that I love you." He said to him, "Tend my sheep."
17 He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of John, do you love me?" Peter was grieved because he said to him the third time, "Do you love me?" and he said to him, "Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you." Jesus said to him, "Feed my sheep.

Mattthew 25
14 "For it will be like a man going on a journey, who called his servants and entrusted to them his property.
15 To one he gave five talents, to another two, to another one, to each according to his ability. Then he went away.
16 He who had received the five talents went at once and traded with them, and he made five talents more.
17 So also he who had the two talents made two talents more.
18 But he who had received the one talent went and dug in the ground and hid his master's money.
19 Now after a long time the master of those servants came and settled accounts with them.
20 And he who had received the five talents came forward, bringing five talents more, saying, 'Master, you delivered to me five talents; here I have made five talents more.'
21 His master said to him, 'Well done, good and faithful servant. You have been faithful over a little; I will set you over much. Enter into the joy of your master.'
22 And he also who had the two talents came forward, saying, 'Master, you delivered to me two talents; here I have made two talents more.'
23 His master said to him, 'Well done, good and faithful servant. You have been faithful over a little; I will set you over much. Enter into the joy of your master.'
24 He also who had received the one talent came forward, saying, 'Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow, and gathering where you scattered no seed,
25 so I was afraid, and I went and hid your talent in the ground. Here you have what is yours.'
26 But his master answered him, 'You wicked and slothful servant! You knew that I reap where I have not sown and gather where I scattered no seed?
27 Then you ought to have invested my money with the bankers, and at my coming I should have received what was my own with interest.
28 So take the talent from him and give it to him who has the ten talents.
29 For to everyone who has will more be given, and he will have an abundance. But from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away.
30 And cast the worthless servant into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.'

 

[Nathan]

As I noted, a question does not answer a question. You've not done that yet.


No, he wasn't saying that at all, or he'd be contradicting himself. Because Paul described eternal life as a gift of God in Rom 6:23 and then wrote that God's gifts are irrevocable in 11:29. So he couldn't have meant what you're claiming.


Impossible. Or Paul totally contradicted himself, and all that Jesus said about eternal life.

I did answer the question, your choosing to not accept it. That's your choice.

You want to pull verses from their context and fit them to your thinking. Romans 11:29 does not have to do with eternal life. You have not proven it does.

Paul is clear that the Spirit is what we receive, and that He is the Eternal life in us. That is why those who have the Spirit have life, and those who don't do not have life.

Your rejecting the plain words that Paul used. I can't help you try to make them say something they don't. Sorry.

 

[Nathan]

Then just explain what Eph 1:13 and 14 mean.


No, Paul said so. In Eph 1:13,14.


If that were so, then Paul WOULD HAVE contradicted himself because of Eph 1:13,14.


We are in agreement. It's your view that is not in sync with Paul.


I used the very words supplied by your definition of "sever", just as you did.


Nor did Paul ever use the word Trinity, but he sure believes in the Trinity.


They're your words.


I didn't insert anything. I just explained what it means to be "idle" from Christ.


Any time a believer sins, they HAVE forsaken their Savior, who died for their sins.

However, please provide any verse that says in plain language that one can lose salvation for any reason.


I sure do. The question is: do you?

Actually they are the words used in the Bible. Your not rejecting my words, your rejecting the words the Bible uses. Sorry.

Ephesians 1 is very clear;

13 In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit,
14 who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.

The Spirit is who we are given. He is the eternal life in us that is Gods seal of His approval, because we believed the Gospel.

He is the guarantee of our inheritance, which is eternal life with God, until we acquire that - which is when we enter eternity.

Ephesians only proves the opposite of your point, which is we have not acquired possestion of our inheritance yet.

Here is a hint for you; think "inheritance" - "birthright".

 

[Nathan]

No it's not the same word, in English nor in Greek. Peter said they were bought, not redeemed. For a reason.


Each serves 'their master'. Only Christians serve The Master. Peter said they denied The Master.


No, he said the Master bought them (not redeemed them).

2 Peter 2:1 But there were also false prophets among the people, as there will be false teachers among you also, who will bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, thus bringing on themselves swift destruction. ​

No it's not the same word.

Here, and I quote from Thayer:
"In salvation-contexts, 59(agorázō) is not redeeming ("buying back")"

http://biblehub.com/greek/59.htm



That's a cognate of G59. And in all 11 uses means: market 6, marketplace 4, street 1

Where things are bought and sold, BTW.


The whole world has been "bought", as previously posted. Yet Christianity doesn't teach universalism.

It is the same word. I showed proof of it. A Master does not buy something that He does not also redeem. The word clearly means redeemed also.

Think about it. Would Christ go into the "marketplace"(world), buy the souls of man, and then leave them?

Do you go to the store and buy something without taking possession of it?

I think your trying to muddy the fact that Peter clearly states they denied the Master who bought them. Good thing it's recorded in the Bible for everyone to see it's true.

Does the Bible say that Christ has bought unbelievers? Or does the Bible say that when a person comes to Christ then the payment is made to their account?

Maybe your confusing propitiation with actual purchasing?

If someone has a debt and I make a propitiation for them, the money to pay their debt is available. However, if they don't use that availability then I did not pay for their debt. They would still owe the debt.

If they did use the money to pay for their debt, then I did purchase it. However, if they then racked up more debt, and denied the propitiation I made available, I am then again in the position of not paying for their debt. At that point, their previous debt was paid for, but their current one is still owed.

In the end, if they simply abide in my propitiation I made available, as they incur debt, it is continually paid for. Only when they leave, on their own free will, do they deny it.

Jude 1:21 (ESV)
keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ that leads to eternal life.

 

[Nathan]

No it's not the same word, in English nor in Greek. Peter said they were bought, not redeemed. For a reason.


Each serves 'their master'. Only Christians serve The Master. Peter said they denied The Master.


No, he said the Master bought them (not redeemed them).

2 Peter 2:1 But there were also false prophets among the people, as there will be false teachers among you also, who will bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, thus bringing on themselves swift destruction. ​

No it's not the same word.

Here, and I quote from Thayer:
"In salvation-contexts, 59(agorázō) is not redeeming ("buying back")"

http://biblehub.com/greek/59.htm



That's a cognate of G59. And in all 11 uses means: market 6, marketplace 4, street 1

Where things are bought and sold, BTW.


The whole world has been "bought", as previously posted. Yet Christianity doesn't teach universalism.

Your link states that the word means to transfer ownership correct? Where one thing becomes another's belonging.

If they belong to the Master, because He bought them, then they belong to Christ and God. They no longer belong to themselves or satan.

It would be impossible to belong to both correct?

Romans 8:9 (ESV)
You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him.

If those who do not belong to Christ do not have the Spirit, then those who do belong to Christ do have the Spirit, right?

So those who Peter talks about did have the Spirit in them. The same Spirit that seals. The same Spirit that is eternal life.

Obviously they denied this after having it.

 

[chessman]

You want to pull verses from their context and fit them to your thinking.

Here's the context of what Paul was telling Timothy:

1 Timothy 6:10-14, 17-19 For the love of money is a root of all evil, by which some, because they desire it, have gone astray from the faith and have pierced themselves with many pains. But you, O man of God, flee from these things, and pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patient endurance, gentleness. Fight the good fight of the faith; take hold of the eternal life to which you were called, and confessed the good confession in the presence of many witnesses. I command you, in the sight of God who gives life to all things and Christ Jesus who testified the good confession before Pontius Pilate, that you observe the commandment without fault, irreproachable until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, Command those who are rich in this present age not to be proud and not to put their hope in the uncertainty of riches, but in God, who provides us all things richly for enjoyment, to do good, to be rich in good works, to be generous, sharing freely, storing up for themselves a good foundation for the future, in order that they may take hold of what is truly life. ​

If a man who has eternal life (has the Spirit, loves the Lord) yet does not observe 100% the command to not put hope in money without fault, he 'lets go' of his eternal life in your opinion?

 

[chessman]

Your link states that the word means to transfer ownership correct?

The link I posted (Thayer's same open source as yours) said "In salvation-contexts, 59(agorázō) is not redeeming ("buying back")"

Can it be any plainly stated??? No.

 

[Nathan]

Here's the context of what Paul was telling Timothy:

1 Timothy 6:10-14, 17-19 For the love of money is a root of all evil, by which some, because they desire it, have gone astray from the faith and have pierced themselves with many pains. But you, O man of God, flee from these things, and pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patient endurance, gentleness. Fight the good fight of the faith; take hold of the eternal life to which you were called, and confessed the good confession in the presence of many witnesses. I command you, in the sight of God who gives life to all things and Christ Jesus who testified the good confession before Pontius Pilate, that you observe the commandment without fault, irreproachable until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, Command those who are rich in this present age not to be proud and not to put their hope in the uncertainty of riches, but in God, who provides us all things richly for enjoyment, to do good, to be rich in good works, to be generous, sharing freely, storing up for themselves a good foundation for the future, in order that they may take hold of what is truly life. ​

If a man who has eternal life (has the Spirit, loves the Lord) yet does not observe 100% the command to not put hope in money without fault, he 'lets go' of his eternal life in your opinion?

Actually, the only way to 'let go' of eternal life, is to deny it. There is no balance beam, where one thing has to outweigh another.

If I am holding onto something with my hand, I cannot grab something else without letting go of what I already have ahold of.

When Christ first saves us we have to let go of our sin, and our self righteousness, in order to take hold of His perfection and righteousness.

If we then let go of His perfection and righteousness, for our own desires or self righteousness, we can no longer have a hold of His.

We can only have one or the other. Not both. Paul is telling Timothy not to let go of Christ, but hold all the more tighter.

1 Corinthians 15:1 (ESV) 1 Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand,

1 Corinthians 15:2 (ESV) 2 and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you--unless you believed in vain.

Hebrews 3:6 (ESV)
but Christ is faithful over God's house as a son. And we are his house if indeed we hold fast our confidence and our boasting in our hope.

Revelation 3:11 (ESV)
I am coming soon. Hold fast what you have, so that no one may seize your crown.

 

[Nathan]

The link I posted (Thayer's same open source as yours) said "In salvation-contexts, 59(agorázō) is not redeeming ("buying back")"

Can it be any plainly stated??? No.

"Redeemed" is a derivative of #59. It simply condenses the meaning of "buy" or "redeem".

#59 still clearly means to redeem, as in transfer ownership from one to another. This is according to your link you posted.

*edit - here is the full copy/paste from your link.

In salvation-contexts, 59(agorázō) is not redeeming ("buying back"), but rather focuses on how the believer now belongs to the Lord as His unique possession (J. Thayer). Indeed, Christ purchases all the privileges and responsibilities that go with belonging to Him (being in Christ).

 

[MarkT]

I don't think you're getting the concept. The gift itself is irrevocable. Meaning, those who have been given that gift, which is eternal life (Rom 6:23), cannot lose it. The Bible doesn't have to state it the way you seem to want it. 11:29 says that God's gifts are irrevocable. And etrenal life is one of those gifts.


Please explain why that can't refer to one's life on earth before they die? Clearly, God punishes His children for disobedience. Heb 12


v.4 doesn't say "to restore salvation" as it seems many suppose it means.

That's what you say, but Paul said they tasted the heavenly gift and they became partakers of the Holy Spirit and they tasted the goodness of the word of God. Then he compares them to land which has drunk the rain, if it bears thistles and thorns, it is worthless and near to being cursed; its end is to be burned.

God will grant eternal life to those who love him. So we believe. God gives his children good gifts. But what does Paul say about those who fall into unbelief?

How do you account for
Matthew 24:22
And if those days had not been shortened, no human being would be saved; but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened.

Jesus said, 'no human being would be saved.' That includes everyone, every believer and unbeliever. Everyone is in danger of losing their salvation.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I am convinced in the simple veracity of Jn 3:16; and so to me it is a standard that is unmovable and unshakable. Should anything contradict it, then I reject it because two truths can not contradict one another.

And this is the problem with OSAS that I encounter all the time. Most people are dogmatically hardened in their OSAS beliefs and are not willing to thoughtfully and honestly and openly examine the passages that oppose OSAS.

If you really do believe that the gift of eternal life is irrevocable, then WHY do you believe that one can lose eternal life? That makes no sense.

Why? Because I define the gifts and calling of God being irrevocable the way Paul defines it: Israel's calling and gifting has not been revoked despite their rejection of Messiah. Paul getting called and gifted after they rejected Jesus is proof of that. But OSAS ignores the context in which Paul says the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable and claims it means a person can believe, then not believe, and they still have eternal life.

This doesn't make any sense to me. Where does Paul "assign it it's own agenda"? What what does that even mean?

You misread my post. OSAS is the one that assigns it's own agenda to Romans 11:29 NASB. It completely ignores the context and says it means people who once believed still have eternal life even if they later reject Messiah. Even you know there is no context in Romans 11 to validate that interpretation of Romans 11:29 NASB. You just decided that's what it means.

 

[FreeGrace]

My position is not lose of salvation. If you read my posts you would see that it is abandoning, leaving, salvation.

But there is no appreciable difference. In either case, salvation is lost.

When I lose my wallet I don't know where it's at. When I leave my wallet at home, I know exactly where it's at.

This analogy has nothing to do with our salvation.

There are no verses that warn us of "giving away" our salvation. Or abandoning or leaving our salvation.

What OSNAS keeps forgetting is that those having believed (aorist tense) ARE sealed IN HIM with the Holy Spirit.

That means we can't leave salvation. We are sealed in Him.

What verse warns us of being unsealed? None.

So your premise is incorrect.

 

[FreeGrace]

The basis is the fact that we are saved to serve Christ, not just to get something from God and be on our way. We were saved for good works, not for ourselves, but others.

I don't disgree.

Simple fact is, our focus was on ourselves and what we got before Christ, and afterwards it's about others. It's what we see called "fruit".

OK.

However, you say that abundant life is not about others so I will show you some passages.

Correction. Jesus said it. I only repeated it.

John 10:10 - The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.

So, who are the "they"? v.9 tells us; those who "entered through Him", or believers. And why did Jesus come? "that they may have life".

So, the "they" are believers and Jesus came so that THEY "may have life" and "have it to the full".

If this isn't about the "they", please explain how that works. The verse is clear enough.

 

[FreeGrace]

I did answer the question, your choosing to not accept it. That's your choice.

I will repeat; a question does not answer a question.

You want to pull verses from their context and fit them to your thinking.

This is a very familiar claim. But wholly without any merit. No one has shown how any of my verses have been "pulled out of context".

That's just a very convenient way of trying to avoid what the verses are saying in plain language.

Romans 11:29 does not have to do with eternal life. You have not proven it does.

Let's consider what context really means. It means anything previously stated that is related to what follows. If that's not true, then prove it from something other than opinion.

Now, when Paul wrote 11:29, he mentioned "the gifts of God". However, in that SAME LETTER, previous to 11:29, he specifically described 3 of God's gifts, which I've listed numerous times. I'm sure you'll remember what they are and where they're found.

So when Paul wrote 11:29, everyone in the church at Rome would have known exactly what Paul was referring to by what Paul wrote specifically before 11:29. So, at the very least, the 3 specific gifts of God that Paul described are THE CONTEXT for 11:29.

Not some vague un-named so-called gifts to Israel. I find it astounding that those who insist on separating Rom 6:23 from Rom 11:29 cannot find ANY evidence of Paul referring to ANY gifts to Israel ANYwhere in ch 9-11. Yet, Paul specifically mentioned 3 of God's gifts leading up to ch 11.

Paul is clear that the Spirit is what we receive, and that He is the Eternal life in us.

I don't doubt this, but where is Paul so "clear" in Romans?

That is why those who have the Spirit have life, and those who don't do not have life.

Which is why NO ONE can remove themselves from salvation or eternal life. Because Eph 1:13,14 states that having believed (aorist tense), the believer is sealed IN HIM with the Holy Spirit for the day of redemption.

Therefore, all the ones who do not have the Spirit NEVER had the Spirit. And, all the ones who have been sealed with the Spirit ALWAYS have the Spirit. And will always be IN HIM.

Your rejecting the plain words that Paul used.

This is false. Please show me where Paul mentioned any so-called "gift to Israel" in ch 9-11 which form the "context" for 11:29.

But you're not going to find any. So please don't lecture me on "plain words" of Paul.

I've SHOWN the plain words of Paul about what God's gifts are:
1. spiritual gifts, Rom 1:11
2. justification, Rom 3:24, 5;15,16,17
3. eternal life, Rom 6:23

 

[FreeGrace]

I said this:
"Then just explain what Eph 1:13 and 14 mean.

No, Paul said so. In Eph 1:13,14.

If that were so, then Paul WOULD HAVE contradicted himself because of Eph 1:13,14.

We are in agreement. It's your view that is not in sync with Paul.

I used the very words supplied by your definition of "sever", just as you did."

Actually they are the words used in the Bible. Your not rejecting my words, your rejecting the words the Bible uses.

I asked for an explanation of what Eph 1:13 and 14 mean. And you have dodged again. I will take that as not having one then. Fine.

But that only weakens your position and tremendously so.

Ephesians 1 is very clear;

13 In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit,
14 who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.

The Spirit is who we are given. He is the eternal life in us that is Gods seal of His approval, because we believed the Gospel.

There is nothing about "approval" here. There IS mention of a GUARANTEE, though. What do you suppose this guarantee actually is?

He is the guarantee of our inheritance, which is eternal life with God, until we acquire that - which is when we enter eternity.

Sounds rather like waffling. Either our inheritance IS guaranteed, or not. There is NOTHING here about "until we acquire that", whatever "that" may be.

Ephesians only proves the opposite of your point, which is we have not acquired possestion of our inheritance yet.

No, it GUARANTEES the day of redemption. I suggest reading the verses with a lot more care.

And it isn't "acquired possession" that Paul speaks of, but the FACT that the one sealed with the Holy Spirit IS God's possession:
13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit,
14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.

It shows that you've not read the verses correctly when claiming that our inheritance is the "acquired possession". It is the sealed believer who is God's possession. And what is guaranteed is "our inheritance".

Thses verses are plain language. There is no excuse for misreading them.

 

[FreeGrace]

Actually, the only way to 'let go' of eternal life, is to deny it.

Then please provide any verse that actually speaks of "denying it (eternal life)". Or how one can "let go" of eternal life".

OSNAS makes many claims, but none that are supported by Scripture.

 

[FreeGrace]

I said this:
"I don't think you're getting the concept. The gift itself is irrevocable. Meaning, those who have been given that gift, which is eternal life (Rom 6:23), cannot lose it. The Bible doesn't have to state it the way you seem to want it. 11:29 says that God's gifts are irrevocable. And etrenal life is one of those gifts."

That's what you say

Is this a suggestion that Rom 6:23 and 11:29 are saying something DIFFERENT than what I have said? Please clarify.

but Paul said they tasted the heavenly gift and they became partakers of the Holy Spirit and they tasted the goodness of the word of God. Then he compares them to land which has drunk the rain, if it bears thistles and thorns, it is worthless and near to being cursed; its end is to be burned.

First, scholars are quite divided on who wrote Hebrews. It certainly wasn't Paul's style of writing. Second, there is nothing in Heb 6 that says that those believers who "fell away" lost their salvation. It does say they "can't be brought back to repentance". That's state of mind, not a state of being saved or lost.

God will grant eternal life to those who love him. So we believe.

Please provide any verse that says God grants eternal life to those who love Him.

otoh, here is a verse about the basis for God giving eternal life to humans:
John 3:15, 16, 5:24, 6;40, 47, 11:25,26.

God gives his children good gifts. But what does Paul say about those who fall into unbelief?

They will be disciplined by the Lord, which will be painful, according to Heb 12.

How do you account for
Matthew 24:22
And if those days had not been shortened, no human being would be saved; but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened.

Jesus said, 'no human being would be saved.' That includes everyone, every believer and unbeliever. Everyone is in danger of losing their salvation.

First, I understand the context, which is the Tribulation. And the verse didn't say that "no human being would be saved". It does say that "if those day had not been shortened", then no human being would be saved.

So, what is there to "account for"? I don't follow your point.