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

[dadof10]

God raised up Pharaoh into a position. He used Pharaoh to fulfill His plan. Does that mean that Pharaoh was a man of God, is he an OT saint? No
God chose Judas, just as He did the others, into a position and used Judas to fulfill His plan. Does that mean Judas was a man of God, a believer in the Messiah?
I believe that Jesus said he was not. According to John 6:64.
If you think I am reading that incorrectly please show me how.

Your argument is built on a false premise. Please show me where Scripture teaches that "disciple" was an office. Again, Acts shows that Apostle was, but not disciple.

Jesus did not choose them, the Father gave them to Him.

Luk 6:13 "And when it was day, he called his disciples, and chose from them twelve, whom he named apostles"

Because God chooses to raise someone up to a position, even an Apostle, does that mean they are saved?

I think it's a good indication, yes. It makes more sense to believe that Jesus picked saved people to be His apostles than not, doesn't it? It seems we should at least give Him the benefit of the doubt even if Scripture doesn't specifically tell us if Nathaniel was saved.

I think the problem is in using the term "called", and assuming 'called' means saved.

It depends who is doing the calling. If it is Jesus, I think He knows whom He's calling. If He is giving them a share in His kingdom, it makes sense to believe the person has at least accepted His message.

I don't care what man has written in a dictionary....what does scripture say.

Scripture doesn't define words (except "faith"). We have to go elsewhere for that.

I'm not saying that I am right but give me something from scripture about Judas. I have given three I think.

Ok, I'll try. If Jesus calls someone and they become His disciple, doesn't that assume faith? If a friend of yours told you he was called by Jesus and he became his disciple, would you even question his faith, or would it just be assumed?

 

[Deborah13]

Your argument is built on a false premise. Please show me where Scripture teaches that "disciple" was an office. Again, Acts shows that Apostle was, but not disciple.

I did not mean that it was an office, just that it is a position, like an elder/disciple has a position in the Body of Christ. Actually a disciple would be more like a student, one who follows someone's teaching.
What is your position in Christ, is it not as a disciple.

Luk 6:13 "And when it was day, he called his disciples, and chose from them twelve, whom he named apostles"

He had prayed all night long and then came down from the mountain, and chose (selected) them. Did He do that all on His own or had He asked the Father?

Joh 17:12 when I was with them in the world, I was keeping them in Thy name; those whom Thou hast given to me I did guard, and none of them was destroyed, except the son of the destruction, that the Writing may be fulfilled.

I think it's a good indication, yes. It makes more sense to believe that Jesus picked saved people to be His apostles than not, doesn't it? It seems we should at least give Him the benefit of the doubt even if Scripture doesn't specifically tell us if Nathaniel was saved.

Were any of them were saved when they were chosen? What did they believe. They were Jews, they believed there was a Messiah coming and that He would be a King over their nation and free them from the oppression of other nations. But they really didn't know the Jesus was the Messiah and that He was the Redeemer, at the point they were chosen.
I really don't know if they could be called saved. But it wasn't until later that they came to know who He was.
Mat 16:15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
Mat 16:16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
Mat 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

It depends who is doing the calling. If it is Jesus, I think He knows whom He's calling. If He is giving them a share in His kingdom, it makes sense to believe the person has at least accepted His message.

Which scripture are you referring to that says He was giving them a share in His Kingdom?

Scripture doesn't define words (except "faith"). We have to go elsewhere for that.

Ok, I'll try. If Jesus calls someone and they become His disciple, doesn't that assume faith? If a friend of yours told you he was called by Jesus and he became his disciple, would you even question his faith, or would it just be assumed?

What does the scripture tell us about Judas?
What does the scripture say about why he was selected?

I don't question people's salvation, it's not for me to do. I just try to understand what God is telling us in the scriptures.
Why do you think the scripture mentions Judas when it says Jesus knew which ones of the disciples didn't believe? John 6:64 Maybe it doesn't mean anything other than what Jesus knew.

 

[reba]

Saul was a murderer Paul an Apostle

Saul belonged to the group of snakes vipers... til God wacked him

 

[turnorburn]

The thief on the cross knew who Jesus was and we all know how he fared.. Jesus was extremely clear about the state of Judas no devil no son of perdition will ever see Gods kingdom..

tob

 

[Deborah13]

The thief on the cross knew who Jesus was and we all know how he fared.. Jesus was extremely clear about the state of Judas no devil no son of perdition will ever see Gods kingdom..

tob

But the question is, was Judas ever saved and then lost that salvation?

 

[DRS81]

29 How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know Him who said, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY." And again, "THE LORD WILL JUDGE HIS PEOPLE." (Hebrews 10:29-30 NASB)

This is speaking of apostates, not born again christians.

I guess if you keep repeating the same thing over and over, it will eventually whitewash those verses that teach the opposite.

Yeah we're done here.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Can't you see the requirement to stay in the means of the Spirit to be saved in the example of the Galatians? They are turning away from their faith in Christ to the law to be justified and making Christ of no affect for them in justification:

2 Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision (for justification--see context), Christ will be of no benefit to you.
4 You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.
5 For we through the Spirit, by faith, are waiting for the hope of righteousness.
(Galatians 5:2,4-5 NASB)

So, do you want to continue to say, "'if holding on' was a requirement to get into heaven, then none of us would make it there" in light of the fact that is the very thing Paul says we must do to secure the hope of righteousness faith provides us. You must hold fast to that which you received to be saved by what you received.

You said it right there.
It is through the Spirit, it is God's work, not ours.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Why not? Do you consider HAVING faith a "work"? If so, where is the word "works" used in relation to remaining faithful? It is only used to refer to works of the law, except in a couple of verses.

John 6:29; NIV
"The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent".
No more requirements beyond that.
It is the Spirit of God who keeps us straight beyond that, if indeed we have the Spirit within us. 1 John 4:13; NIV

 

[Jethro Bodine]

You said it right there.
It is through the Spirit, it is God's work, not ours.

Of course it is through the Spirit.
Of course that Spirit is what works in us.
You get the Spirit through believing. You keep the Spirit through believing.
It's interesting how getting the Spirit by believing is not a works gospel, but staying in the Spirit by that same believing is.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

John 6:29; NIV
"The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent".
No more requirements beyond that.

Not even the requirement to keep doing the work of believing?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

This is speaking of apostates, not born again christians

Correct. Apostates who used to be Christians.

How do we know? Because the text says they were sanctified by the blood of the Covenant.

29 How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know Him who said, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY." And again, "THE LORD WILL JUDGE HIS PEOPLE." (Hebrews 10:29-30 NASB)

 

[Jethro Bodine]

The saved Galatians were warned by Paul to not stop believing in Christ for justification or else lose the benefit of Christ in justification.

The saved Corinthians were warned by Paul to not stop believing that Christ was resurrected or else lose the benefit of the believing they had done, making it all in vain.

The saved Hebrew Church was warned by the author of their letter to not throw away their confidence in the sacrifice of Christ or else lose the benefit of the only sacrifice for sin that there is.

 

[chessman]

Simple. …That believing will be in vain and be of no effect for them if....

Yes it’s simple. And our debate’s conclusion is, as you say “plainly and clearly” and simply concluded.

1. Paul said “believed in vain” (past tense) yet even given this evidence you continue to say Paul really meant “that believing will be in vain if…” (future tense). I find that very, very significant evidence against the validity of your doctrine. And to use your word’s to me; “I would be ashamed to teach others” that Paul said “that believing will be in vain” when we both know that what he actually said was that they had already “believed in vain” right there in the very verse. The text is inspired and Holy (and by the way flows logically) as written by Paul back in the 1st Century. Your doctrine is changing what He said to meet a desire for what it needs to say for you to be able to use the phrase “hold fast” for your purposes. The simple and plain fact is, Paul said otherwise.

2. Jesus tells John to prophecy to the already lukewarm members (present tense), “I know your works…you are lukewarm” and because of this fact “I am (not might but am) about to vomit you out of my mouth!... in order that the shame of their nakedness might be revealed precisely because of His love and discipline and reproof toward these lukewarm church members. Yet you say the phrase is a warning about their potential (avoidable) “destiny in the lake of fire” and “not some kind of intermediate” disciplining prophecy. i.e. avoid the Lake of Fire by working hard to be become either hot/cold in the future and you can avoid Jesus’ prophecy of being “vomited out of God’s mouth”. I find that very, very significant evidence against the validity of your doctrine. And I find it very, very telling that even though you’ve been shown what this phrase truly means, you continue to use it for your purposes and to ‘support’ your doctrine. I would be ashamed to teach others that Jesus meant that God might vomit them out of God’s mouth (sending them to the Lake of Fire) when in fact Jesus told them He was about to do it (and did it) because of His loving disciplining toward them. All so that you can continue to use it for your purposes, not His.

Even given these two clear contradictions within your view of these passages, you are continuing to use them (the Rev 3 “vomit you out” and 1 Cor 15 “hold fast” phrases) as so called ‘proof ‘ of a non-OSAS doctrine. Evidently the “C Word” has been selectively banned as an insulting word, when it comes from the OSAS side of the debate, so I’ll just say that seems to me like you are assuming non-OSAS is true, contrary to the good evidence against it that’s been presented, then changing these passages’ verb tenses to meet that doctrine’s requirements. And ignoring the broader contexts within which they are written.

For whatever reason (I'm curious as to why) you obviously really, really like non-OSAS. I personally could take it or leave it. I really don’t care about anything but what the Scriptures actually say about it. And they say there were some unbelievers in Corinth that had a vain belief (past tense, not future maybe) and that the lukewarm church members in Laodicea were(not if in the future) vomited out of God’s mouth because He loved them and disciplined them into seeing their nakedness without Him as their loving Father simply must do. They clearly thought they didn’t need Him (as the text says they already had this beleif) and were “rich” even without Him and His refined gold and could go it alone. Naughty, naughty blind and naked children.

I’ve enjoyed studying these passages more alongside of your thoughts on them. However, and it’s made me more and more confident in the OSAS doctrine along the way and not your non-OSAS doctrine. Thanks for that.

You take care though and “indeed” continue to “hold fast” to the Gospel and stay inside “God’s loving mouth” so you don’t get vomited into the Lake of Fire (or should I say disciplined) for thinking you can hold on to God's hand versus Him holding yours. I’m confident you will, IF indeed it’s Jesus’ desire for you to do just that. He pretty much gets His will done, no matter the costs, on the issue of salvation. Last time I checked, He positions the ones He chooses on either His left or the right side of His throne no matter what the people say they’ve done toward their salvation “in His name”. It’s His name, His throne and His judgment. That's the OSAS position.

p.s. if you ever do run across an actual “plain and clear” example of a person that the Bible says lost their God given salvation, let me know. I’d be interested in it.

 

[Gregg]

Why a Christian cannot lose his salvation:

1. God the Father selected us to be in Christ, has redeemed and forgiven us through Christ, and sealed us in Christ with His Spirit (Eph 1:3-14); . . . but the serpent desires to blind the believer of God’s blessing, grace, and peace - ‘and the serpent was cunning’ (Gen 3:1).

2. God’s word; . . . but the adversary challenges the Truth and His message - ‘Is it true that God has said . . .?’ (Gen 3:1).

3. God has made us His children, the body of the Living One, the dwelling place of His Spirit; . . . but the tempter entices our focus away from the Creator and towards the creature - ‘the day you . . . and you shall be as God’ (Gen 3:5)].

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Yes it’s simple. And our debate’s conclusion is, as you say “plainly and clearly” and simply concluded.

1. Paul said “believed in vain” (past tense) yet even given this evidence you continue to say Paul really meant “that believing will be in vain if…” (future tense). I find that very, very significant evidence against the validity of your doctrine. And to use your word’s to me; “I would be ashamed to teach others” that Paul said “that believing will be in vain” when we both know that what he actually said was that they had already “believed in vain” right there in the very verse. The text is inspired and Holy (and by the way flows logically) as written by Paul back in the 1st Century. Your doctrine is changing what He said to meet a desire for what it needs to say for you to be able to use the phrase “hold fast” for your purposes. The simple and plain fact is, Paul said otherwise.

2. Jesus tells John to prophecy to the already lukewarm members (present tense), “I know your works…you are lukewarm” and because of this fact “I am (not might but am) about to vomit you out of my mouth!... in order that the shame of their nakedness might be revealed precisely because of His love and discipline and reproof toward these lukewarm church members. Yet you say the phrase is a warning about their potential (avoidable) “destiny in the lake of fire” and “not some kind of intermediate” disciplining prophecy. i.e. avoid the Lake of Fire by working hard to be become either hot/cold in the future and you can avoid Jesus’ prophecy of being “vomited out of God’s mouth”. I find that very, very significant evidence against the validity of your doctrine. And I find it very, very telling that even though you’ve been shown what this phrase truly means, you continue to use it for your purposes and to ‘support’ your doctrine. I would be ashamed to teach others that Jesus meant that God might vomit them out of God’s mouth (sending them to the Lake of Fire) when in fact Jesus told them He was about to do it (and did it) because of His loving disciplining toward them. All so that you can continue to use it for your purposes, not His.

Even given these two clear contradictions within your view of these passages, you are continuing to use them (the Rev 3 “vomit you out” and 1 Cor 15 “hold fast” phrases) as so called ‘proof ‘ of a non-OSAS doctrine. Evidently the “C Word” has been selectively banned as an insulting word, when it comes from the OSAS side of the debate, so I’ll just say that seems to me like you are assuming non-OSAS is true, contrary to the good evidence against it that’s been presented, then changing these passages’ verb tenses to meet that doctrine’s requirements. And ignoring the broader contexts within which they are written.

For whatever reason (I'm curious as to why) you obviously really, really like non-OSAS. I personally could take it or leave it. I really don’t care about anything but what the Scriptures actually say about it. And they say there were some unbelievers in Corinth that had a vain belief (past tense, not future maybe) and that the lukewarm church members in Laodicea were(not if in the future) vomited out of God’s mouth because He loved them and disciplined them into seeing their nakedness without Him as their loving Father simply must do. They clearly thought they didn’t need Him (as the text says they already had this beleif) and were “rich” even without Him and His refined gold and could go it alone. Naughty, naughty blind and naked children.

I’ve enjoyed studying these passages more alongside of your thoughts on them. However, and it’s made me more and more confident in the OSAS doctrine along the way and not your non-OSAS doctrine. Thanks for that.

You take care though and “indeed” continue to “hold fast” to the Gospel and stay inside “God’s loving mouth” so you don’t get vomited into the Lake of Fire (or should I say disciplined) for thinking you can hold on to God's hand versus Him holding yours. I’m confident you will, IF indeed it’s Jesus’ desire for you to do just that. He pretty much gets His will done, no matter the costs, on the issue of salvation. Last time I checked, He positions the ones He chooses on either His left or the right side of His throne no matter what the people say they’ve done toward their salvation “in His name”. It’s His name, His throne and His judgment. That's the OSAS position.

p.s. if you ever do run across an actual “plain and clear” example of a person that the Bible says lost their God given salvation, let me know. I’d be interested in it.

Before I dive into this (and your other lengthy post)...

What you're not seeing is the "unless you believed in vain" (1 Corinthians 15:2 NASB) has no bearing on what he just said: "...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" (1 Corinthians 15:1-2 NASB)

This is why I said you have completely failed to weave this simple, plain truth, that can stand all alone on it's own, into your elaborate explanation of why this passage does not mean that you can lose your salvation.

You're making this way too complicated. But I know that's what one must do to make what is plainly written not really mean what it so plainly says. The church, in general, is good at doing this. I've repented of doing that.

 

[gr8grace3]

Why a Christian cannot lose his salvation:

1. God the Father selected us to be in Christ, has redeemed and forgiven us through Christ, and sealed us in Christ with His Spirit (Eph 1:3-14); . . . but the serpent desires to blind the believer of God’s blessing, grace, and peace - ‘and the serpent was cunning’ (Gen 3:1).

2. God’s word; . . . but the adversary challenges the Truth and His message - ‘Is it true that God has said . . .?’ (Gen 3:1).

3. God has made us His children, the body of the Living One, the dwelling place of His Spirit; . . . but the tempter entices our focus away from the Creator and towards the creature - ‘the day you . . . and you shall be as God’ (Gen 3:5)].

Good point Gregg.
Has God really said?.............…38 For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand.


Clear and unmistakable statements. But contradicted if one believes that a believer can perish somehow.

 

[Deborah13]

Jethro Bodine

Just in case you missed this post.

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

Is the answer to this question in 1 Corinthians 15?

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Not even the requirement to keep doing the work of believing?

Absolutely not!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The work of believing is done through the Spirit.
It is not of ourselves.
If it were, than we would be saving ourselves.

 

[Gregg]

Good point Gregg.
Has God really said?.............…38 For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand.


Clear and unmistakable statements. But contradicted if one believes that a believer can perish somehow.

Yes gr8grace3!
Eternal life is just that, 'eternal.' And to 'never perish' means 'never' with no qualifications but to have entered into Christ. Salvation is God's work, and we are Christ's workmanship, and we have a Helper.

 

[chessman]

Before I dive into this (and your other lengthy post)...

What you're not seeing is the "unless you believed in vain" (1 Corinthians 15:2 NASB) has no bearing on what he just said: "...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" (1 Corinthians 15:1-2 NASB)

This is why I said you have completely failed to weave this simple, plain truth, that can stand all alone on it's own, into your elaborate explanation of why this passage does not mean that you can lose your salvation.

You're making this way too complicated. But I know that's what one must do to make what is plainly written not really mean what it so plainly says. The church, in general, is good at doing this. I've repented of doing that.

When you have a chance, can you explain the logic behind you telling me what I've NOT said and completely failed at explaining prior to you reading what I've said and explained?