The reason you cant lose your salvation is?.....

[chessman]

There is no Scripture that says "...and Judas had a true, saving faith, not a said faith." I suspect (though I really don't know) you wouldn't accept it if Scripture did actually say this.
.

Then allow me to speak for what a would accept. I would accept any (and all) Scripture (properly understood) as the final Authority and Arbitrator of the Truth with respect to Judas' salvation (or lack thereof) or on any other salvation topic. How about you?

Again, I submit that no matter the evidence presented in the case of Judas, you would not accept it.

You just submitted error.

The verses in favor of Peter's salvation are BEYOND glaring, yet you SEEM unsure.

No, I'm 100% sure of Peter's salvation.

What I'm unsure of is any Verse(s) that back up your claim that Judas is a glaring example of someone that lost his salvation. This after asking you to post them several times.

 

[dadof10]

Then allow me to speak for what a would accept. I would accept any (and all) Scripture (properly understood) as the final Authority and Arbitrator of the Truth with respect to Judas' salvation (or lack thereof) or on any other salvation topic. How about you?

Ok. Let's find out. We'll start here.

"Chessman was called by Christ to be His disciple, therefore he is saved"

"Billy-Bob was called by Christ to be His disciple, therefore he is saved."

Judas was called by Christ to be His disciple, therefore he is ______."

Please fill in the blank.

No, I'm 100% sure of Peter's salvation.

But you wouldn't call the evidence "glaring"? I'm not sure why you would say:
"...but I'm unaware of one that "glares" at us whether he was or was not saved pre-Easter. Or any of the rest of the twelve, for that matter."

 

[Jethro Bodine]

This scripture is not talking about born again christians. These are prophecies of the destruction of Christ's persecutors.

Psalm 69:27 Charge them with crime upon crime; do not let them share in your salvation.

I'm not going to pretend to fully understand how this Book of Life works, although I have a fairly palatable idea about how it does. But the point is, you're making it sound like there is no hint whatsoever that someone can be in the Book of Life and then not be in the Book of Life. Hardly true. Or is this another one of those things that God talks about in the Bible concerning the Judgment of his people but which OSAS says actually has no basis in fact or reality whatsoever and is an empty and meaningless threat that we can gloss over?

Matthew 18:23-35 has nothing to do with whether you can lose your salvation. It's a parable about mercy and forgiveness.

Forgiveness IS salvation. How can this not be a parable about salvation?

It starts out by saying that what follows can be compared to how the kingdom is (Matthew 18:23 NASB). And in what follows he tells how a person really is forgiven (not 'really' forgiven as OSAS insists about fallen people) because he begged for it (Matthew 18:32 NASB), and how this person showed contempt for the forgiveness he himself had received from the King for the insurmountable debt he could not pay back (Matthew 18:25-27 NASB) by not forgiving a fellow servant of the King for the few bucks owed him (Matthew 18:28 NASB). And as a result the unmerciful servant's debt was reinstated by the King (Matthew 18:34 NASB). It did not remain paid as OSAS swears it will. And the servant of the King (yeah, that's right, a servant of the king, not somebody outside of the kingdom) was turned over to an everlasting punishment--everlasting because the King said he can't get out until HE himself pays all of the debt that was reinstated (Matthew 18:34-35 NASB). Remember, it's a debt he has no way of repaying. That makes his punishment eternal and never-ending. Jesus wraps the story up by saying this is how the Father in Heaven will treat each of us if we do what this servant did (Matthew 18:35 NASB).

Poor slob. If he'd only appreciated the gracious gift of forgiveness he himself had received. He must have fell into the crowd that taught that the forgiveness he had received had no strings attached whatsoever, that he could even show contempt for it and since it was a free gift it could not be taken back, little knowing that, actually, what came with the free gift of forgiveness was the obligation to honor it by giving that same gift to his fellow servants. What was free about the gift was he didn't have to jump through any hoops to get it. Free didn't mean he had no obligations whatsoever to fulfill in connection with keeping that gift.

If I may ask, are you a born again christian. Have you accepted Jesus Christ as your Lord and savior Jethro.

Yes, I did the 'work' of believing, and by God's help continue to do that 'work' to this day. I am born again.

 

[dadof10]

It's not your job to attain the promise. The promise is a gift from God, once you have received it God is not taking the gift back. That's why it's called a gift. If you give a gift to your girlfriend on her birthday do you take it back? It's the same thing with God. God gives you his holy spirit as a gift and does not take it back.

God may not take it back, but like the gift from the girlfriend, I can give it back, or reject it, right? Because it's offered doesn't mean it must be accepted and kept forever.

 

[dadof10]

Did somebody say Judas was a believer at one time, what did Jesus say about Judas in..

John 6:70 Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?

tob

Can a person be chosen by Christ to be a disciple, yet not be saved?

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Can a person be chosen by Christ to be a disciple, yet not be saved?

John 13:18;
"If you know these things, you are blessed if you do them. I do not speak of all of you. I know the ones I have chosen; but it is that the Scripture may be fulfilled, 'He who eats my bread has lifted up his heel against Me.'
Judas was chosen to fulfill prophecy.

 

[chessman]

But you wouldn't call the evidence "glaring"?

no. Not until you post verses that glare Judas' salvation state.

I'm not sure why you would say:
"...but I'm unaware of one that "glares" at us whether he was or was not saved pre-Easter. Or any of the rest of the twelve, for that matter."

because I am unaware of a verse that tells us whether Judas was saved or not pre-Easter. I could be persuaded either way given good Biblical evidence. I'm also unaware of any that tell us He became unsaved, but would be willing to evaluate any on their merits.

 

[dadof10]

John 13:18;
"If you know these things, you are blessed if you do them. I do not speak of all of you. I know the ones I have chosen; but it is that the Scripture may be fulfilled, 'He who eats my bread has lifted up his heel against Me.'
Judas was chosen to fulfill prophecy.

That doesn't speak to the subject because being a disciple and fulfilling prophesy aren't mutually exclusive. Was he chosen by Christ to be a disciple? Aren't those chosen for discipleship saved?

 

[turnorburn]

God can do whatever he pleases in the case of Judas Jesus said he was a devil and was chosen to do the devils work..

tob

 

[chessman]

Maybe I'm just plain dense and missed it, but, chessman, you still did not explain what 'if you hold fast to the message' means in regard to this being an OSAS passage.

You’re not dense. But yes, you did miss it (or ignored it). I’ve already explained what the “if you hold fast to the message” means in regard to this being an OSAS passage here:

http://christianforums.net/Fellowship/index.php?threads/the-meaning-of-justified.48100/page-12#post-815293"

But I'll do it again below:

More recently you said that you “think like a computer” here:
(http://christianforums.net/Fellowship/index.php?threads/the-law-of-god-ot-applicable-today.54003/reply&quote=954764 )

I beg to differ. And if you’ll objectively read through this you just might learn something.

I have a master’s degree in Engineer and Computer Science and have designed and built advanced computers for a living since 1989. It’s very plain that you do not “think like a computer”.

First, computers don’t think. Computer programmers and computer specification writers do ALL the thinking. Computers execute lines of code/instructions, one line after another, over and over again all day long, every day. That is if their coding has the proper syntax and is written error free and the program doesn’t crash in the process or their hardware breaks.

Computers always execute the programmer’s instruction precisely as written the same way every time. Which means that most of the time it’s the programmer that is responsible for ‘Blue Screens of Death’, not the computer. Though the computer often gets blamed for it. Luckily, the computers don’t really care, and get all mad at us for the false accusations made against them.

However, that does mean that it’s up to the programmer to write the software code correctly, in accordance with the intended specifications of the customer, to actually produce the intended results accurately.

Paul here in 1 Cor 15 has clearly issued a set of logical instructions (specifications) that can indeed be properly (or improperly) simulated/programmed in accordance with those specifications. Here’s how you would program Paul’s specifications properly into computer code:

First the initial condition of man (prior to being saved that is):

1:18 For the message about the cross (see verse 15:1-2) is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.​

Notice also how Paul initially and consistently gives the credit for salvation to God (not man). But the point is, the initial condition of man is that without adequately accepting the ‘message about the cross’, the Gospel Paul re-presents in 1 Cor 15:1-4 (i.e. the power of God) , man is perishing (unsaved). …. the weakness of God is stronger than human strength. … We are not stronger than he is, are we? Implied answer is no. He picks this theme back up in 1 Cor 15:1-4, (whole chapter really).

[Which it would be an interesting and informative exercise to program Matt 7:22-24 and these verses into an equivalent computer code of Jesus’ specifications there, but I digress.]

Unbelievers (including some entering the church at Corinth (see v 7:15, 10:27,14:22-24) need “the power of God”, “the message about the cross”, “the Gospel, 15:1” to be saved. I mean, that’s just plain from what Paul specifies here and many, many other passages.

Then we get to the passage being analyzed (thoretically objectively analyzed):

1 Cor 15:1-2 (NASB)
15 Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you (in person verbally), which also you received(see it written in verse 1:18), in which also you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain.​

There are certain key and significant logical words/phrases here that Paul is using that are also used in computer languages. For example “I make known to you” is analogous to a declaration statement in computer code. “If” is analogous to an IF conditional test in computer code with “you hold fast the word” being the test within an IF (test), THEN (do something) ELSE (do something else or nothing) section of code. “unless” is analogous to an ELSE test result path within an IF, THEN, ELSE computer module of code, etc. So then we can quite literally transfer Paul’s statement in 1 Cor 15:1-2 into an analogous section of computer code. But it simply must be done by properly thinking it through (not just any old way we please). Here’s how you’d do it:
Generic computer program code:

Declarations:
[used to tell the computer and others reading your code the definitions of your constants, variables and initial conditions thereof]

IF (test) THEN

Executable Statement(s)​

ELSE

Executable Statement(s)​

ENDIF

Logical flow of 1 Cor in accordance with Paul’s salvation specifications translated into a generic computer language (could be ADA, BASIC, C++, FORTRAN and many other computer languages that I ‘speak’)

Declarations:
G = The Gospel [defined in Verses 3-4 , made known to them v 15:1]
P= Person [the YOU, reader of his letter]
US = a Person’s initial state (v 1:18) is UnSaved and then potentially a possible state after becoming saved, but we’ll see if that’s true or not in accordance with what 1 Cor 15:1-2 say]
S = a Person’s state once they become Saved

Initial conditions:
P = US [i.e. All persons need to be saved, v 1:18]

IF (You hold fast to G) THEN

P = S [you become saved by holding fast to G, see v15:57]​

ELSE (unless) [you believed to no purpose, had a vain belief and remain in your sins (see v17), nothing happens]

ENDIF

So then as you execute through this code, P either = S or P remains US depending on the result of the test in verse 57. Did you “hold fast” to the powerful Gospel or not? That’s the test.

Your idea (on the other hand) of what this passage means (but that Paul didn’t actually specify) would look like the following computer code:

P=US

DO WHILE (you are holding fast to G)

P=S​

ELSE

P=US​

END DO

Which is not a proper computer syntax. Not to mention illogical. There is no such thing as a DO, WHILE, ELSE loop. It would not compile or execute. You are mixing up a DO WHILE loop with an IF, THEN, ELSE statement. They are not the same thing.

For example, the reason I say it’s illogical is that those that die in their sleep (while they are not ‘holding fast to G’ for example) or for that matter anybody scared stiff at the approaching train wreck at their last breath, become unsaved the minute they stop holding fast to G (nanoseconds literally in computer execution time) and always exit the program in the P=US state. Luckily, that’s NOT what Paul specified here.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I have a master’s degree in Engineer and Computer Science and have designed and built advanced computers for a living since 1989.

I figured you did, but was amazed that you failed to recognize the 'if-else-else' statement (or whatever it was, I don't remember exactly) in a scriptural passage we were discussing. I didn't bother to correct you. Nobody but you and I would be able to follow the discussion.

But anyway, you've written way too much to take the time to read through carefully and thoughtfully and test. That's why I didn't read the post you linked to the first time.


You're making this way too difficult. But I do know from my own experience that's what one has to do to make a passage of scripture not mean what it so plainly says. I've repented of doing that. I don't defend popular doctrines just because the majority has bought into it and somehow the church as a whole is supposed to defend it as part of their Christian duty. When what is believed by the whole is wrong, I won't defend it anymore out of a sense of misguided loyalty.

This is simple:

"1 Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. " (1 Corinthians 15:1-2 NASB)

They will be saved if they hold fast the word that was originally preached to them. Simple enough. No interpretation needed there. You have to hold fast the word that was preached to be saved by that word. You don't need a Master's degree in anything to understand that.

But then he adds 'unless you believed in vain'. OSAS says this means they didn't really believe when they heard the message, but rather had a vain (useless) believing that didn't save them, even though Paul plainly tells them they did receive the gospel (vs. 1), are now standing in it (vs. 1), and believed it (vs. 11). So we have to ask ourselves, "what does Paul mean about this belief, which they surely do have (he said so), potentially being in vain?" We learn that from what he explains next.

He goes on to explain to them that if Christ has not been raised from the dead, that is a gospel that can not save. Perhaps someone will argue that it doesn't matter what they believe about the resurrection of Christ, just that they are saved by the gospel of Christ. But the resurrection of Christ IS the gospel that saves. To change that to a gospel that does not have that element of his resurrection in it is to have a vain belief that can not save, not a belief that can save but just needs tweaking in regard to whether it's really true that Christ rose from the dead, or not. It is an essential belief of the gospel that one must have, and retain, in order to be saved through faith in that gospel:

"9...that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;" (Romans 10:9 NASB)

He's saying to the Corinthians, "you stand....unless you have believed in vain by removing the essential element of 'believing in your heart that God raised Jesus from the dead'".

A gospel message that does not retain this essential truth can not save you, and will even make your previous believing that did include it vain and useless and now unable to save.

 

[DRS81]

God may not take it back, but like the gift from the girlfriend, I can give it back, or reject it, right? Because it's offered doesn't mean it must be accepted and kept forever.

You have the choice to accept his gift or not,
but once you've accepted the gift of salvation you cannot return it back to God.
I was using the girlfriend example as just an example.
A gift from your boyfriend and a gift from God are not the same.

 

[follower]

...... Aren't those chosen for discipleship saved?

no.
look (read several places in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) how many disciples of Jesus, in the New Testament Gospels, left Him, (in the Gospels), because it was too hard to follow Him. how much more so today !
then(follow up) read how many the apostles of Jesus wrote about in Corinthians, Galatians, etc et al, now only left from being His disciple, but apparently vigorously and actively opposed those apostles and teachers preaching and teaching the truth.

 

[Deborah13]

But that assumes OSAS, that's my point. It could just as easily be that Judas did believe, was "saved," and turned away.

Joh 6:64 but there are certain of you who do not believe;' for Jesus had known from the beginning who they are who are not believing, and who is he who will deliver him up,

He did not believe and because he didn't he delivered up Jesus.

So what I see, is that Jesus said, Judas didn't believe and then he says Judas was lost.
If you see something different please explain.

 

[Deborah13]

Ok. Let's find out. We'll start here.

"Chessman was called by Christ to be His disciple, therefore he is saved"

"Billy-Bob was called by Christ to be His disciple, therefore he is saved."

Judas was called by Christ to be His disciple, therefore he is ______."

Please fill in the blank.

By this type of thinking Pharaoh was a man of God?

Judas was called into a Position. Judas was a thief from the beginning and what position was he given. He was the treasurer, he held the bag. If he hadn't had that position maybe he would not have hung around at all.
God can use anyone to fulfill a position to bring about His plan. Just as He did Pharaoh.
Seems to me, we are talking about major positions in His plan of redemption.

You use the word disciple as though there is some power in that word. It is a position just like an elder or a pastor. That does not mean that all those called elders, disciple, etc. are saved, does it? If I were asked to join a church as a member and I did, would not mean that I believe what they believe?
Judas was a member of a group called the disciples but that doesn't mean he was a believer.

 

[Deborah13]

I figured you did, but was amazed that you failed to recognize the 'if-else-else' statement (or whatever it was, I don't remember exactly) in a scriptural passage we were discussing. I didn't bother to correct you. Nobody but you and I would be able to follow the discussion.

But anyway, you've written way too much to take the time to read through carefully and thoughtfully and test. That's why I didn't read the post you linked to the first time.


You're making this way too difficult. But I do know from my own experience that's what one has to do to make a passage of scripture not mean what it so plainly says. I've repented of doing that. I don't defend popular doctrines just because the majority has bought into it and somehow the church as a whole is supposed to defend it as part of their Christian duty. When what is believed by the whole is wrong, I won't defend it anymore out of a sense of misguided loyalty.

This is simple:

"1 Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. " (1 Corinthians 15:1-2 NASB)

They will be saved if they hold fast the word that was originally preached to them. Simple enough. No interpretation needed there. You have to hold fast the word that was preached to be saved by that word. You don't need a Master's degree in anything to understand that.

But then he adds 'unless you believed in vain'. OSAS says this means they didn't really believe when they heard the message, but rather had a vain (useless) believing that didn't save them, even though Paul plainly tells them they did receive the gospel (vs. 1), are now standing in it (vs. 1), and believed it (vs. 11). So we have to ask ourselves, "what does Paul mean about this belief, which they surely do have (he said so), potentially being in vain?" We learn that from what he explains next.

He goes on to explain to them that if Christ has not been raised from the dead, that is a gospel that can not save. Perhaps someone will argue that it doesn't matter what they believe about the resurrection of Christ, just that they are saved by the gospel of Christ. But the resurrection of Christ IS the gospel that saves. To change that to a gospel that does not have that element of his resurrection in it is to have a vain belief that can not save, not a belief that can save but just needs tweaking in regard to whether it's really true that Christ rose from the dead, or not. It is an essential belief of the gospel that one must have, and retain, in order to be saved through faith in that gospel:

"9...that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;" (Romans 10:9 NASB)

He's saying to the Corinthians, "you stand....unless you have believed in vain by removing the essential element of 'believing in your heart that God raised Jesus from the dead'".

A gospel message that does not retain this essential truth can not save you, and will even make your previous believing that did include it vain and useless and now unable to save.

This is how I understand this.....
We need to keep reading.....
1Co 15:16 for if dead persons do not rise, neither hath Christ risen,
1Co 15:17 and if Christ hath not risen, vain is your faith, ye are yet in your sins;

So what is Paul saying. He is saying that if they don't believe that Jesus was raised from the dead, they are Not saved and never were. A vain faith is not complete, it can't save.

So when he says, 'unless' your faith was a 'vain' faith and it cannot saved you.
He says the words that he first preached to them is the gospel that saves them and they believed that that was true. But now he hears that some did not believe in the resurrection and if they don't believe that part of the gospel they are not saved.

 

[Obadiah]

no.
look (read several places in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) how many disciples of Jesus, in the New Testament Gospels, left Him, (in the Gospels), because it was too hard to follow Him.

Please cite the chapter and verse from the gospels that show that the disciples (other than Judas, obviously) did this.

then(follow up) read how many the apostles of Jesus wrote about in Corinthians, Galatians, etc et al, now only left from being His disciple, but apparently vigorously and actively opposed those apostles and teachers preaching and teaching the truth.

Please cite the chapter and verse in Corinthians (either one) and Galatians where apostles or disciples did this.

 

[chessman]

This is simple:

"1 Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. " (1 Corinthians 15:1-2 NASB)

Yes, it's simple.

Here's a simple couple of questions:

1. You believe what Paul wrote is truth, right? I'll assume you'd answer yes so as to simplify this post.

2. Why do you think he said "believed in vain" using the very precise past tense verb form of the Greek word for belief then calling it (their belief) vain?

Your non-OSAS doctrine says that Paul should have used a future tense of the verb for belief. That's just not the case.

 

[dadof10]

no. Not until you post verses that glare Judas' salvation state.

This was concerning PETER'S salvation state, not Judas'. You said there was not "glaring" evidence for the salvation of any of "the twelve". My point is, there is overwhelming evidence that Peter was saved, yet you don't think so. I have already said that aren't any verses that speak to "Judas' salvation state". Is this all you'll accept?

because I am unaware of a verse that tells us whether Judas was saved or not pre-Easter. I could be persuaded either way given good Biblical evidence. I'm also unaware of any that tell us He became unsaved, but would be willing to evaluate any on their merits.

I think that the fact that Judas was called by Christ to be a disciple is glaring proof that he was saved. Is it possible for Christ to call a person to discipleship, for that person to accept, yet not be saved?

 

[dadof10]

no.
look (read several places in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) how many disciples of Jesus, in the New Testament Gospels, left Him, (in the Gospels), because it was too hard to follow Him. how much more so today !
then(follow up) read how many the apostles of Jesus wrote about in Corinthians, Galatians, etc et al, now only left from being His disciple, but apparently vigorously and actively opposed those apostles and teachers preaching and teaching the truth.

You are assuming OSAS I'm your post. You are assuming that a saved person can't "fall away", so anyone mentioned who "left him" or "opposed him" are assumed to be never saved in the first place.