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

[Jethro Bodine]

You been into the medicine jug? None of the words you highlighted are “threat” or “warning”.

What is it about not meeting the condition of 'if' to be saved that isn't a warning about what you have to do to be saved?

"...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)

Explain.

Are you through responding to my post?

No, I was not done responding to it. But perhaps it will be unnecessary to do that after this post. I've been trying to get you to get right to the point your doctrine seems to evade. Maybe I will succeed in this post.

I want to make sure I don’t accuse you falsely or anything of failing once again to answer the question about what your view is of the role of the Holy Spirit’s seal and guarantee within this topic of salvation. So I’ll just request your answer once again.

I could go back and re-post what I've said about it in this thread, or just tell you that the seal and guarantee of the Holy Spirit is conditioned on continued believing. When and while you are sealed in him, you're sealed in him. You can stake your life on it. To add the connotation that 'sealed' means irreversible is just that...adding that meaning to it.

Last time I checked the guaranteed seal of my wife's Tupperware is very much reversible, but when it's sealed I gotta admit, it's a guaranteed seal. Seal, and what is guaranteed by a seal in no way means irreversible because, the argument goes, that's what seal and guarantee mean 'with no means or variable conditions to reverse it'. Because it does not. We know it does not. But suddenly when talking about the Holy Spirit and OSAS it does mean that.

I did. (twice) Your response was that “it’s too long to read”:

Did you forget? I told you I did go back and read it. And I did not see an answer to my question.

Initial conditions:
P = US [i.e. All persons are UnSaved, v 1:18]
IF (You hold fast to G) THEN
P = S [you become Saved by holding fast to G, see v15:1-2]
ELSE (unless) [you HAD vain belief and remain in your sins (see v17]
ENDIF

Besides you simply restating your argument as the answer to your argument (that circular reasoning thing), the problem with this is Paul plainly says they really did believe:

"11 Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed." (1 Corinthians 15:11 NASB)

The Corinthians did not believe in vain as you are saying they believed in vain (that they never really believed to begin with). The verse above shows us "unless you believed in vain" doesn't mean they categorically didn't 'really' believe. We don't need to write psuedocode to examine something Paul says in plain words is already true--that they did in fact believe. So we know 'unless you believed in vain' means something else.


What I've been trying to get you to explain is how salvation being determined by whether you continue to believe or not (as the text plainly states), is true or not true (true for non-OSAS, not true for (OSAS) depending on if you really did believe the gospel at first, or not. This is what you have not explained. Do you understand what I'm asking? Show me that you even understand what I'm asking. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that the reason you have not answered the question is because you simply didn't grasp it. That's okay, that happens. But now, let's just get you to understand the question, then you answer it.

How is the truth of "if you hold fast the word which I preached to you" affected by if a person believes, doesn't believe, used to believe, or never 'really' believed? I contend that "if you hold fast the word which I preached to you..." (1 Corinthians 15:2 NASB) stands on it's own as a truth about salvation. It's truth is not determined by if you believe, never believed, or used to believe, but don't now. You can keep this simple for all of us if you would just address this directly.

 

[DRS81]

I still have not had anyone explain to me how God does my believing for me. How does that work?

Because he loved you Jethro before you even knew he existed. Simply put, you can't get saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Because he loved you Jethro before you even knew he existed. Simply put, you can't get saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved, saved then unsaved, then saved again then unsaved.

Now, what you need to do is take some time out to actually understand the argument you're resisting.

 

[DRS81]

Now, what you need to do is take some time out to actually understand the argument you're resisting.

Ok, so you can agree that one cannot be saved then unsaved?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Ok, so you can agree that one cannot be saved then unsaved?

Once God disowns you (because you disowned him first) it's over. If a person believes and is saved, but then tramples on the forgiveness they have received, they can not be brought back to repentance. That's the argument.

 

[Gregg]

Once God disowns you (because you disowned him first) it's over. If a person believes and is saved, but then tramples on the forgiveness they have received, they can not be brought back to repentance. That's the argument.

Jethro,

Isn't that how we all started out in life, having already disowned God and separate from Him. For lack of faith in God we were already dead. But that is what He saved us from - from not knowing Him, not believing Him.

"For if while being enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by His life (Rom 5:10).

". . . so also through the obedience of the One the many shall be constituted righteous" (Rom 5:19).

We are redeemed by and atoned to God, reconciled to Him, covered with Christ's blood, clothed in His righteousness . . . and we are set into the body of Christ; from whom death passed over. Death has passed over us who have been placed in Christ; in the Living One, and we live because of Him.

"Faithful is the Word: for if we died with Him, we also shall live with Him" (2Tim 2:11).

 

[Gregg]

To the non-OSAS,

God could have given us life in the way you see it, but in His timeless council He determined to give us eternal life; and that by His grace through faith.

"But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even we being dead in sins, He made us alive together with Christ (by grace you are being saved), and raised us up together and seated us together in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus," (Eph 2:4-6).

We have passed out of death into life because Jesus died and lived again; and we are in Him, in His body.

". . . and we are in the true One, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and the life everlasting" (1Jn 5:20).

 

[chessman]

What is it about not meeting the condition of 'if' to be saved that isn't a warning about what you have to do to be saved?

The fact that Paul doesn't call it a warning in this verse or chapter was my first clue. Oh, and the fact that he'd already told them what it took to be saved. Verse 1-2 is the conditional test as to the effect/ results from what it takes to be saved. Could be vain results, could be saved results. But results they are, not warnings about the future if they stop believing fast enough in the future.

to get right to the point your doctrine seems to evade.

the seal and guarantee of the Holy Spirit

Last time I checked the guaranteed seal of my wife's Tupperware is very much reversible,

last time I checked the Bible and it's Holy Spirit, comparing God's Seal and Guarantee to you wife's seal is arrogant and prideful and lukewarm toward God's power. You know, The Seal! That 3rd person of the Trinity thingy living inside every saved believer is NOT tupperware.

By the way, you got any idea why advertisers like to say they give a 100% money back, satisfaction guarantee? You believe them? Do they even think about how circular that is. Guaranteeing satisfaction to a bunch of unsatisfied people, now that's a trick. Only God could give a "satisfaction" guarantee.

Oh, and the Seal Paul meant was not the same thingy as a sealing type lid on tupperware. It was a stamp of authority from The King, was his point. The big one in the sky, not Rubbermaid.

You just made the word "seal" into rubber, something Paul did NOT mean, "plainly and clearly". Like turning an IF, THEN,ELSE statement into a DO WHILE loop. They are just as different as a wax stamp of Govt authority is to a tupperware lid.

Paul plainly says they really did believe:

unless they believed in vain

You know, the ... Part of Paul's complete IF, THEN, ELSE logic.

The Corinthians did not believe in vain as you are saying they believed in vain

I didn't say it. Paul did. In the ... part of the verse and in many other verses in the letter. Clearly there were some unbelievers there in their
Church.

 

[chessman]

"But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even we being dead in sins, He made us alive together with Christ (by grace you are being saved), and raised us up together and seated us together in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus," (Eph 2:4-6).

So you mean to tell me that God, that one that has done that already is so rich, so merciful and has such great love for us that His's already made us alive in Christ? Now? And already seated us in Heaven to prove it. Is that what your saying?

Wow! That's one more God your talkin about there. I feel like worshiping Him! I feel His love when I do.

I'm wondering though. If we B already seated in Heaven, yet He's left us here also, He must have something for us to be doing while we're still here, right?

I'm wondering. You think He'd like for us to be telling others just how great His Mercy and His Love is, capable of seating us in Heaven with Christ even as we live on Earth? Or do you think He'd like us to be telling others just how corrupt and corruptible His bride is? Just how some (always other people, of course) have unseated themselves from His Love?

You know, the brides seated next to Him in Heaven, how they can stand up and walk out on Him. Any guess?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

We have passed out of death into life because Jesus died and lived again; and we are in Him, in His body.

". . . and we are in the true One, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and the life everlasting" (1Jn 5:20).

Certainly true.

Now factor this additional counsel of God into these other truths you've shared.

"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: NASB)

 

[Jethro Bodine]

You know, the brides seated next to Him in Heaven, how they can stand up and walk out on Him. Any guess?

Believers are not literally seated in heaven. The spirit of the believer is not in heaven. Believers are represented vicariously through Christ who is seated on the right hand of the Father in heaven.

34 Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us." (Romans 8:34 NASB)


That is the hope we await. That one day we will actually be there ourselves. For now we wait by faith for that which we hope for. Faith is how we secure that promise. Lose your faith in Christ between now and then and you lose the promise of that which faith lays hold of.

"24 For in hope we have been saved, but hope that is seen is not hope; for who hopes for what he already sees? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, with perseverance we wait eagerly for it." (Romans 8:24-25 NASB)

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Oh, and the Seal Paul meant was not the same thingy as a sealing type lid on tupperware. It was a stamp of authority from The King, was his point.

It's not that the seal of a king is unbreakable, but rather that if you broke it you would be subject to the wrath of the king for breaking it. It's a legal matter, not the matter of an indestructible seal.

You just made the word "seal" into rubber, something Paul did NOT mean, "plainly and clearly". Like turning an IF, THEN,ELSE statement into a DO WHILE loop.

But I've already shown you right from the passage that Paul says they really did believe from the beginning, which directly contradicts your claim that "unless you believed in vain" means 'if you really didn't believe'.

So we know that "unless you believed in vain" is referring to the real believing they did in the gospel that was at first preached to them. That's why it's impossible for you to interpret "unless you believed in vain" as meaning whether or not they believed at first. Paul plainly says they did.

"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.
11 Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed."
14 and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain.
17 and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins.
19 If we have hoped in Christ (which he has shown us they did) in this life only, we are of all men most to be pitied.
(1 Corinthians 15:1-2,11.14,17,19 NASB parenthesis mine)

It's easy to see the passage was written to believers, not fake believers who never 'really' believed to begin with. The passage plainly says more than once that they really did believe, and it is these believers that he is addressing in the passage, not people who never believed from the beginning. And from there we see that he is warning them that to change the gospel that saved them into a different gospel about an un-risen Christ will make the salvation they did receive in the beginning null and void.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Okay, now that we know "unless you believed in vain*" doesn't mean 'if you really did believe at first', what your doctrine has to explain now is how "if you hold fast the word which I preached to you*" can not really mean what it plainly says--that you must hold fast to that which you first heard and were saved by in order to continue to be saved. You can do that by explaining how "if you hold fast the word which I preached to you*" is changed by if a person believes, doesn't believe, or used to believe, or never 'really' believed to begin with.

It's obvious that it doesn't change, and that it is a truth that stands on it's own. And that the variable that changes is whether or not you will continue in that which saved you, and if you don't continue in that which saved you the result will be you being turned away on the Day of Judgment.

"(I)f you hold fast the word which I preached to you" stands on it's own as a truth about salvation. It's truth is not determined by if you believe, never believed, or used to believe but don't now. As I say, you can keep this simple for all of us if you would just address this statement directly in the context of what we now know is the truth about it--that it is not a statement of the outcome of faith, but rather the condition for an enduring faith in order to be saved in the end.

*1 Corinthians 15:2 NASB

 

[dadof10]

How about maintaining it? I even agree one must maintain their free-will choice. I recognize, however, we have a Helper to do that very thing.

And what happens if we use our free will to refuse to "maintain" our "choice"? I recognize the Holy Spirit "helps" us too, but can we, in your opinion, reject that help? If not, there's not much free in the will.

 

[dadof10]

No, no, I was going through your steps one by one. You said Judas was called by Jesus to be a disciple. I don't remember any scripture that tells us when Jesus and Judas first met or how. Some of the others it does. So I was asking you if you knew a scripture that contained that information.



I glad you brought that up, there's several interesting things to look at here. Who are these disciples, they are Jews. First He tells them that the manna was not the true bread from heaven, He was. Then He goes on about eating flesh and drinking blood. Think about how that sounded to a Jew. Yike, talk about conflict with their Jewish faith. Would their Jewish Messiah say such a thing. But it was because they didn't understand Him. Then we have v64, that He knew some didn't believe and He tells them...
Joh 6:65 and he said, `Because of this I have said to you--No one is able to come unto me, if it may not have been given him from my Father.'
So He just tells them that they aren't His if the HIS Father has not revealed the truth to them.

Joh 6:70 Jesus answered them, `Did not I choose you--the twelve? and of you--one is a devil.
Maybe this is also when He first knows the Judas will betray Him?



Thanks for correcting me on that, I didn't remember it.



I don't know, the scripture doesn't really say anything about him. But we know that there were others, including some of the important Jewish guys who had seen what He was doing and had followed Him around enough that they too were doing things in His name, like that man. Remember when that one devil attacked the Jew? And I think from the Rev. scripture we can see that God allows it even when one is not saved. So there is a different between salvation faith and faith in the power that comes in His name.



Agree with this somewhat but think how advantageous it is in the GOP or Tea Party. Last time a Mormon just missed being elected so you know many Christians and/or conservatives voted for him. My, I'm not sure all ministry leaders are saved and I don't spend time thinking about it.

Deborah, my main Scriptural proof that Judas was a believer is that Scripture refers to him as a "disciple". I mentioned in a previous post that belief comes before discipleship, so is inherent within it. If Judas referred to HIMSELF as a disciple, I wouldn't feel as though the evidence was so overwhelming. But Jesus refers to him as a disciple through Scripture, then makes him an apostle. Nowhere does Scripture say he was a "false" disciple or he only thought he was a disciple. Nowhere does it say he was the only non-believing disciple. It seems logical to me to assume he was a believer before he was given apostleship until I get evidence to the contrary.

 

[Deborah13]

Okay, now that we know "unless you believed in vain*" doesn't mean 'if you really did believe at first', what your doctrine has to explain now is how "if you hold fast the word which I preached to you*" can not really mean what it plainly says--that you must hold fast to that which you first heard and were saved by in order to continue to be saved. You can do that by explaining how "if you hold fast the word which I preached to you*" is changed by if a person believes, doesn't believe, or used to believe, or never 'really' believed to begin with.

It's obvious that it doesn't change, and that it is a truth that stands on it's own. And that the variable that changes is whether or not you will continue in that which saved you, and if you don't continue in that which saved you the result will be you being turned away on the Day of Judgment.

"(I)f you hold fast the word which I preached to you" stands on it's own as a truth about salvation. It's truth is not determined by if you believe, never believed, or used to believe but don't now. As I say, you can keep this simple for all of us if you would just address this statement directly in the context of what we now know is the truth about it--that it is not a statement of the outcome of faith, but rather the condition for an enduring faith in order to be saved in the end.

*1 Corinthians 15:2 NASB

imo
The verses you have quoted here is not about losing salvation. Paul's argument throughout the whole is to defend the gospel which he and the others preached.
He is saying that this other gospel that you are hearing now is not the gospel that you heard from us.
That other gospel that you are hearing cannot save you and this is why....
Back in v 2, when he says 'hold fast' he is saying 'remember' this is what we preached, it is the gospel that is saving you, unless you didn't believe it.
So when they tell you the bodily resurrection is not true, stand fast in what you heard from us, knowing that the bodily resurrection is true.

 

[Deborah13]

Deborah, my main Scriptural proof that Judas was a believer is that Scripture refers to him as a "disciple". I mentioned in a previous post that belief comes before discipleship, so is inherent within it. If Judas referred to HIMSELF as a disciple, I wouldn't feel as though the evidence was so overwhelming. But Jesus refers to him as a disciple through Scripture, then makes him an apostle. Nowhere does Scripture say he was a "false" disciple or he only thought he was a disciple. Nowhere does it say he was the only non-believing disciple. It seems logical to me to assume he was a believer before he was given apostleship until I get evidence to the contrary.

I understand what you are saying and I can see why. You don't believe that he would have been given the title of apostle unless he was saved.
But to say that if one is called a disciple means the they are a believer that I cannot understand.
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,
Joh 6:65 and he said, `Because of this I have said to you--No one is able to come unto me, if it may not have been given him from my Father.'
Joh 6:66 From this time many of his disciples went away backward, and were no more walking with him,

imo. He knew some of those who were following Him (disciples) didn't believe. He says to them, that the Father had to give them to Him or they couldn't come (believe) in Him. If they couldn't receive that teaching then they weren't given by the Father, the Father hadn't given them the revelation to understand. Just like when Peter was given the revelation of who Christ really was. It came from the Father.
In another scripture, if I remember correctly, He says that the reason some are following Him is because of the miracles He performed, not because they believed He was the Messiah, the Redeemer.

 

[dadof10]

I understand what you are saying and I can see why. You don't believe that he would have been given the title of apostle unless he was saved.

Ok, so onto the other half of the equation. Do you think he died saved, and his betrayal of Jesus was a sin which he repented for like Peter did, or did he die a "devil"?

 

[Deborah13]

Ok, so onto the other half of the equation. Do you think he died saved, and his betrayal of Jesus was a sin which he repented for like Peter did, or did he die a "devil"?

I really don't know. There is this scripture to consider too....
Mat 27:1 And morning having come, all the chief priests and the elders of the people took counsel against Jesus, so as to put him to death;
Mat 27:2 and having bound him, they did lead away, and delivered him up to Pontius Pilate, the governor.
Mat 27:3 Then Judas--he who delivered him up--having seen that he (Jesus) was condemned, having repented (changed his mind), brought back the thirty silverlings to the chief priests, and to the elders, saying,
Mat 27:4 `I did sin, having delivered up innocent blood;' and they said, `What--to us? thou shalt see!' (words in para. are mine)

I think this is saying that Judas now realized that Jesus was to die as a transgressor and he knew that Jesus was not a transgressor and therefore innocent and didn't deserve to die. Because they wouldn't take the silver back, releasing him from his part in it, he hangs himself out of guilt.
But did he believe at that point that Jesus was the Messiah, Redeemer, spoken of in the Writings of the Prophets as Peter did?
I cannot in good conscience state the ultimate decision of God.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Joh 6:66 From this time many of his disciples went away backward, and were no more walking with him,

imo. He knew some of those who were following Him (disciples) didn't believe. He says to them, that the Father had to give them to Him or they couldn't come (believe) in Him. If they couldn't receive that teaching then they weren't given by the Father, the Father hadn't given them the revelation to understand. Just like when Peter was given the revelation of who Christ really was. It came from the Father.
In another scripture, if I remember correctly, He says that the reason some are following Him is because of the miracles He performed, not because they believed He was the Messiah, the Redeemer.

But he openly invited them to believe for that very reason--because he was doing miracles. What you're seeing happen here is the disciples seeing that the price of discipleship is too high, not that they weren't really disciples to begin with.

On the basis of the scriptures I see that the problem is not that people don't have the faith to save to begin with (of course, that may be true sometimes), but rather the faith they have can't endure to the end. IOW, among those who start out following Christ, it's not about whether or not they have faith. It's about whether or not their faith can, and will endure to the end. We see this in the case of the 2nd type of soil:

"13"Those on the rocky soil are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no firm root; they believe for a while, and in time of temptation fall away." (Luke 8:13 NASB)

"20 "The one on whom seed was sown on the rocky places, this is the man who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy; 21 yet he has no firm root in himself, but is only temporary, and when affliction or persecution arises because of the word, immediately he falls away." (Matthew 13:20-21 NASB)

The scriptures plainly say that if you call on the name of the Lord you will be saved. But OSAS has taught us to question if God really does that or not, him secretly knowing who he should forgive and who he should not forgive when they ask for that forgiveness--but not tell them--and let them think they have been forgiven. We see in the parable of the unmerciful servant that the king does not withhold forgiveness on the basis of what they may do in the future.