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

[Jethro Bodine]

imo
The verses you have quoted here is not about losing salvation.

How can it not be? Even you agree that he is telling them they have embraced another Christ that can not save. But you say this is not about 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....

Correct.

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.

Did you read what I wrote to chessman. I proved that this can NOT be what he means. I showed that he is addressing saved people in this congregation. The passage is not about questioning the believing they have done to see if it was genuine to begin with. The passage is clearly about whether or not they will continue in the believing they have done already in the correct Christ he preached to them and which they accepted, and in which they stand, and by which they were saved.

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.

Correct. And for the purpose of continuing to be saved by the resurrection they preached to them.

 

[Deborah13]

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.

Every OSAS belief, including TULIP Calvinism, that I know of, says that one will preserver and if in the end have not done that, then they were not saved to begin with.
That does not mean they are perfected but that the desire of their heart is to please the Lord. God doesn't do anything to fool anyone. If their desire is to please the Lord they will repent of their transgressions because they are convicted in some way. They believe that if one's heart is in the right relationship with God, HE will keep them, He will in some way bring them to repentance.
One can examine their own heart and know.
I haven't really put enough prayer and time into understanding the parable that you speak of but what I see that the debts owed if not forgiven lead to death. So the man who does not forgive has placed himself in the position of the Lord, a position he does not own, that he has no right to, he is in effect saying he thinks that those who owe him are deserving of death.

 

[Deborah13]

How can it not be? Even you agree that he is telling them they have embraced another Christ that can not save. But you say this is not about salvation?

I don't see where he says they 'have' embraced it. I do see where he tells them 'not' to embrace it.
Because it is a false gospel.
This false gospel says that 'They' will not be bodily raised from the dead.
Those that had believed the gospel message that Paul preached believe that Christ was bodily raised from the dead, not just His soul/spirit. This was the message that saved them, unless they had not believed that.
Now someone has come along saying that 'They' won't be raised from the dead. So Paul has to give further instruction and explain that if They are not raised then neither was Christ and if Christ wasn't then He hadn't overcome death.
So believing that Christ was raised they must also understand that They will be raised and don't believe anyone that tells them anything different.
I just picture their confusion, Christ was raised but we won't be? The fact was that those who told them they wouldn't be, didn't believe that Christ was bodily raised from the dead and some of them may have been fooled by this false teaching. At least some of them were babes in Christ and could be led astray. But I see that God sent Paul to the rescue to straighten it out, too.

Correct.
Did you read what I wrote to chessman. I proved that this can NOT be what he means. I showed that he is addressing saved people in this congregation. The passage is not about questioning the believing they have done to see if it was genuine to begin with. The passage is clearly about whether or not they will continue in the believing they have done already in the correct Christ he preached to them and which they accepted, and in which they stand, and by which they were saved.
Correct. And for the purpose of continuing to be saved by the resurrection they preached to them.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Every OSAS belief, including TULIP Calvinism, that I know of, says that one will preserver and if in the end have not done that, then they were not saved to begin with.

Which is why I wonder why they insist they have the doctrine of the surety of salvation. If persevering is what determines if your original confession of faith was real or not, then you can not know if you ever had the faith that saves until the time to persevere has passed--that is when you leave the body. Meanwhile, by definition, it's impossible for you to know ahead of time if you are truly saved or not.

Also, too, since the Bible says it is impossible for the fake believer to then come to repentance, once they do fall and reveal the lack of their saving faith, OSAS makes salvation all the more precarious. Not only can you not know if you are truly saved or not until the time of persevering has passed (when you die), but if you do find out while you are alive that you do not have true saving faith by failing, you then have no opportunity to then repent and be saved.

OSAS simply does not stand up to scrutiny. Non-OSAS is the only doctrine of the two that makes sense and actually lines up with what the Bible teaches.

I haven't really put enough prayer and time into understanding the parable that you speak of but what I see that the debts owed if not forgiven lead to death. So the man who does not forgive has placed himself in the position of the Lord, a position he does not own, that he has no right to, he is in effect saying he thinks that those who owe him are deserving of death.

How can it not be about salvation considering that it is about the king forgiving the servant's un-payable debt. It looks like a very clear picture of the forgiveness of sin debt and salvation to me. I don't know where else forgiveness of sins has anything to do but with the matter of salvation. You can't be saved without being forgiven. Forgiveness is a salvation issue.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I don't see where he says they 'have' embraced it. I do see where he tells them 'not' to embrace it.

"33 Do not be deceived: "Bad company corrupts goodmorals." 34 Become sober-minded as you ought, and stop sinning..." (1 Corinthians 15:33 NASB)

I don't know to what extent they have embraced it, but they have definitely been sinning in the matter. But it's obvious that God has not turned them over to this false gospel of Christ, yet.

Because it is a false gospel.
This false gospel says that 'They' will not be bodily raised from the dead.
Those that had believed the gospel message that Paul preached believe that Christ was bodily raised from the dead, not just His soul/spirit. This was the message that saved them, unless they had not believed that.

Obviously that's true, that if they had not believed their message from the beginning they are not now saved, but I showed you that is NOT the matter he goes on to address. He reminds them they did believe the original message they heard and were saved by it, which is in complete contradiction to what OSAS says he's questioning about them.

OSAS says 'unless you have believed in vain' means he is questioning whether they really got saved by his message or not. That is not at all in any way shape or form consistent with the context of the passage, which asserts in more than one place that they are indeed very much saved. Not even remotely consistent.

I just picture their confusion, Christ was raised but we won't be? The fact was that those who told them they wouldn't be, didn't believe that Christ was bodily raised from the dead and some of them may have been fooled by this false teaching. At least some of them were babes in Christ and could be led astray. But I see that God sent Paul to the rescue to straighten it out, too.

Led astray to what? To a gospel that can't save them. Not that they will remain saved, but simply have an incorrect doctrine about what happens to dead people who hoped in Christ in this lifetime and he'd like to straighten them out on that. I admit that to me, even, it seems moot to make such a big fuss over what things are like after death that really don't matter (if they really don't), but Paul is showing that what you believe about bodily resurrection and Christ being raised from the dead is a make-or-break proposition with God. For as I pointed out in Romans, belief in the resurrection of Christ is in fact how one is saved. He warns them they are backsliding into a gospel that can not save them. Which makes the believing they did do (which Paul said they did in fact do) in vain. God hasn't turned them over yet, so Paul's mission to rescue them can reverse the vanity of the effective believing they once did, but previous believing which can not now save them on the Day of Wrath--believing that was done in vain.

 

[Deborah13]

Also, too, since the Bible says it is impossible for the fake believer to then come to repentance, once they do fall and reveal the lack of their saving faith, OSAS makes salvation all the more precarious.
Not only can you not know if you are truly saved or not until the time of persevering has passed (when you die), but if you do find out while you are alive that you do not have true saving faith by failing, you then have no opportunity to then repent and be saved.

A fake believer, was never saved to begin with. One cannot fall from something they never had. So of coarse they still can be saved.
I don't see where the Bible ever says a person who has never been saved cannot be saved?

OSAS simply does not stand up to scrutiny. Non-OSAS is the only doctrine of the two that makes sense and actually lines up with what the Bible teaches.

How can it not be about salvation considering that it is about the king forgiving the servant's un-payable debt. It looks like a very clear picture of the forgiveness of sin debt and salvation to me. I don't know where else forgiveness of sins has anything to do but with the matter of salvation. You can't be saved without being forgiven, or by not forgiving others.

Each parable teaches a lesson/s. Yes, this one definitely is using salvation in a very important lesson. But the lesson I see is that we are not God and we don't have the right to condemn others by not forgiving them. "Who are you, oh man". We are playing God when we don't forgive others. Why should the Lord forgive you, if you don't forgive others. Our unforgiveness can injure the kingdom and the gospel message. I don't want to be guilty of that and I'm sure you don't either.
So I don't see this parable as a parable that is teaching about loosing salvation.

 

[Deborah13]

"33 Do not be deceived: "Bad company corrupts goodmorals." 34 Become sober-minded as you ought, and stop sinning..." (1 Corinthians 15:33 NASB)

I don't know to what extent they have embraced it, but they have definitely been sinning in the matter. But it's obvious that God has not turned them over to this false gospel of Christ, yet.

Obviously that's true, that if they had not believed their message from the beginning they are not now saved, but I showed you that is NOT the matter he goes on to address. He reminds them they did believe the original message they heard and were saved by it, which is in complete contradiction to what OSAS says he's questioning about them.

OSAS says 'unless you have believed in vain' means he is questioning whether they really got saved by his message or not. That is not at all in any way shape or form consistent with the context of the passage, which asserts in more than one place that they are indeed very much saved. Not even remotely consistent.

Led astray to what? To a gospel that can't save them. Not that they will remain saved, but simply have an incorrect doctrine about what happens to dead people who hoped in Christ in this lifetime and he'd like to straighten them out on that. I admit that to me, even, it seems moot to make such a big fuss over what things are like after death that really don't matter (if they really don't), but Paul is showing that what you believe about bodily resurrection and Christ being raised from the dead is a make-or-break proposition with God. For as I pointed out in Romans, belief in the resurrection of Christ is in fact how one is saved. He warns them they are backsliding into a gospel that can not save them. Which makes the believing they did do (which Paul said they did in fact do) in vain. God hasn't turned them over yet, so Paul's mission to rescue them can reverse the vanity of the effective believing they once did, but previous believing which can not now save them on the Day of Wrath--believing that was done in vain.

This is part of what OSAS says, that God will rescue those who are in Christ. Even if He has to use the rod to do it.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

A fake believer, was never saved to begin with. One cannot fall from something they never had. So of coarse they still can be saved.
I don't see where the Bible ever says a person who has never been saved cannot be saved?

I'm glad to see you don't agree with that aspect of OSAS then either.

You can't fall from something you never had. And the Bible does say that these who have fallen can't come back. So it's clear that he's not talking about people who never really believed to begin with.

Each parable teaches a lesson/s. Yes, this one definitely is using salvation in a very important lesson. But the lesson I see is that we are not God and we don't have the right to condemn others by not forgiving them. "Who are you, oh man". We are playing God when we don't forgive others. Why should the Lord forgive you, if you don't forgive others. Our unforgiveness can injure the kingdom and the gospel message. I don't want to be guilty of that and I'm sure you don't either.
So I don't see this parable as a parable that is teaching about loosing salvation.

You acknowledge that this parable is "using salvation in a very important lesson", yet you don't think the servant having his debt reinstated is not a salvation issue?

IOW, if being forgiven the debt is indicitive of having your sin debt forgiven and being saved, how can having that debt reinstated not be about losing your salvation?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

This is part of what OSAS says, that God will rescue those who are in Christ. Even if He has to use the rod to do it.

Yes, and argues that's it will always be 100% successful. The end result being a believer can never lose his faith. But then OSAS will argue that you are still saved if you lose your faith. This is the duplicity of the OSAS that I've been pointing out. I think it important that OSAS make up it's mind about whether a believer can lose their faith or not. Then they can explain why God has given so many baseless, theoretical, false warnings to believers to not stop believing.

 

[Deborah13]

I'm glad to see you don't agree with that aspect of OSAS then either.

You can't fall from something you never had. And the Bible does say that these who have fallen can't come back. So it's clear that he's not talking about people who never really believed to begin with.

You acknowledge that this parable is "using salvation in a very important lesson", yet you don't think the servant having his debt reinstated is not a salvation issue?

IOW, if being forgiven the debt is indicitive of having your sin debt forgiven and being saved, how can having that debt reinstated not be about losing your salvation?

I'm just saying that I don't think that is the purpose of the parable.
I don't think the purpose was to teach one can loose their salvation.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I'm just saying that I don't think that is the purpose of the parable.
I don't think the purpose was to teach one can loose their salvation.

The main point is that salvation and the forgiveness of one's sins really does have an implicit responsibility attached to it. One that OSAS says it does not have. It says it is so utterly free and of God alone that we have no obligation to 'work' to keep something that we did not 'work' to get in the first place. But we see in the parable that the forgiveness of sins and it being able to effect salvation for us is that it demands that you extend that same forgiveness to those who are indebted to you. But OSAS says you don't have to do that to retain God's forgiveness.

If the forgiveness of your sins--God's salvation--does not change you into a different person you can not be saved by the forgiveness you have received. God will reinstate your sin debt if you do not respond in the expected and obligatory way having your sins forgiven demands.

There is something implicitly understood in having your sins forgiven that makes that forgiveness of any value in salvation. The implicit understanding is that you were forgiven and no longer owe the King anything. This is the 'believing' that is demanded when you have your sins forgiven. We can tell if you are 'doing' that believing by if you extend the same mercy you have received to your fellow debtor. Obviously, the unmerciful servant didn't 'believe' his debt was forgiven after he had it forgiven because he told the king he'd pay it back, yet he was forgiven nonetheless.

 

[Deborah13]

Yes, and argues that's it will always be 100% successful. The end result being a believer can never lose his faith. But then OSAS will argue that you are still saved if you lose your faith. This is the duplicity of the OSAS that I've been pointing out. I think it important that OSAS make up it's mind about whether a believer can lose their faith or not. Then they can explain why God has given so many baseless, theoretical, false warnings to believers to not stop believing.

So post a scripture that clearly says that a believer can reject Christ.
Even Charles Spurgeon said that he thought the people in Hebrews 4 were believers. But that he couldn't find any example in scripture where someone had actually rejected their salvation. He has a sermon on this scripture.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

So post a scripture that clearly says that a believer can reject Christ.
Even Charles Spurgeon said that he thought the people in Hebrews 4 were believers. But that he couldn't find any example in scripture where someone had actually rejected their salvation. He has a sermon on this scripture.

(I'm going to publish all my doctrinal positions so I can get the respect that writers of commentaries automatically get, lol)

I have posted the scriptures, but they all get cleverly dismissed as not really talking about real believers.

No one has bothered to answer my question of why the Bible clearly and plainly warns saved, believing people to not stop believing if it's as OSAS says that you can't stop believing (I mean when they are arguing that side of their conflicting doctrine).

 

[DRS81]

No one has bothered to answer my question of why the Bible clearly and plainly warns saved, believing people to not stop believing if it's as OSAS says that you can't stop believing (I mean when they are arguing that side of their conflicting doctrine).

But that's the thing, you can't stop believing because the Holy Spirit never leaves you.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

But that's the thing, you can't stop believing because the Holy Spirit never leaves you.

Why does God warn believers who can't stop believing--because the Holy Spirit is in them--to not stop believing?

 

[DRS81]

Why does God warn believers who can't stop believing--because the Holy Spirit is in them--to not stop believing?

Give me your best scripture that relates to this.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Give me your best scripture that relates to this.

Let's look at this one. It deals directly with the point you made that believers can not stop believing:

"12 Take care, brethren, that there not be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart that falls away from the living God. 13 But encourage one another day after day, as long as it is still called "Today," so that none of you will be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. 14 For we have become partakers of Christ, if we hold fast the beginning of our assurance firm until the end" (Hebrews 3:12-14 NASB)

Here we see Paul warning the believers to not fall away from God through the hardening of the heart in unbelief caused by the deceitfulness of sin. And that we are partakers of Christ if we hold fast the assurance of faith we had in the beginning all the way to the end.

 

[DRS81]

Let's look at this one. It deals directly with the point you made that believers can not stop believing:

"12 Take care, brethren, that there not be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart that falls away from the living God. 13 But encourage one another day after day, as long as it is still called "Today," so that none of you will be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. 14 For we have become partakers of Christ, if we hold fast the beginning of our assurance firm until the end" (Hebrews 3:12-14 NASB)

Here we see Paul warning the believers to not fall away from God through the hardening of the heart in unbelief caused by the deceitfulness of sin. And that we are partakers of Christ if we hold fast the assurance of faith we had in the beginning all the way to the end.

This is speaking of religious christians, not born again christians.
You also need to understand the times in which Hebrews was written, the church age in biblical times. http://www.crivoice.org/biblestudy/bbheb1.html
http://www.crivoice.org/biblestudy/bbheb1.html

The Letter to the Hebrews was written for a second generation of Christians sometime between the persecution of Nero in 64 AD and the persecution of Domitian about 85 AD. It was likely written around 80 AD. There is a reference to some of the community's leaders who were martyred in past times (Heb. 13:7).

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible - in departing from the living God; that is, from Christ, who is the Son over his own house, and whose voice is to be heard; for of no other is the apostle speaking in the context; and who is not only the Son of the living God, but he is himself the living God; he is life in himself, and is the fountain and author of life, natural, spiritual, and eternal. This is mentioned to exalt the person of Christ, the apostle and high priest of our profession; and to discover the greatness and heinousness of the sin of such as depart from him and his Gospel, and to deter men from it: there is a final and total departure from Christ, from his Gospel and ordinances, from his people, and from a former profession of faith, which is never to be found in true believers; for they are as Mount Zion. http://biblehub.com/hebrews/3-12.htm

 

[Jethro Bodine]

This is speaking of religious christians, not born again christians.

That's not what the Bible study you posted says:

The book of Hebrews was probably written to Jewish Christians in Rome who were facing persecution under Nero. Judaism was a legal and recognized religion at that time. Jews who did not believe in Christ were not in danger of persecution from Nero at that time. Christians were in that danger. It would have been a very tempting thought to Jewish Christians who were being persecuted to down play their commitment to Christ. If they would deny their faith in Christ and present themselves only as Jews (and not as Jewish Christians) they would be safe from the persecution. Then, perhaps at a later and safer date, they could pick up their commitment to Christ again. Hebrews makes best sense as an argument to prevent the first readers from being enticed into following such a tempting course of action.
http://www.crivoice.org/biblestudy/bbheb1.html​

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible -
...there is a final and total departure from Christ, from his Gospel and ordinances, from his people, and from a former profession of faith, which is never to be found in true believers; for they are as Mount Zion. http://biblehub.com/hebrews/3-12.htm

Oh, I see. He's saying the letter to the Hebrews can't be talking about 'real' believers, because real believers can't lose their salvation. There's that circular reasoning of the OSAS argument again.

How did Dr. Gill miss this?

"26 For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27 but a terrifying expectation of judgment and THE FURY OF A FIRE WHICH WILL CONSUME THE ADVERSARIES. 28 Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 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 10:26-30 NASB)

It's very clear the author of Hebrews is talking to sanctified, saved Christians and warning them about a punishment worse than death, one reserved for the enemies of God, if they turn away from, and lose the one sacrifice for sin God has provided in Jesus Christ.

 

[chessman]

OSAS says 'unless you have believed in vain' means he is questioning whether they really got saved by his message or not.

Wrong. He's not questioning it. He's giving them a test. A conditional test that proves they either believed in vain(past tense) or didn't. That's what the text says. Plain and simple. You simply cannot argue rightly from Paul's words and avoid the fact that he said "believed in vain" using the past tense of the verb for belief. Your view has him questioning a non-vain believer's future belief. Which couldn't be further from the truth. Paul gives assurances of the future. Based on belief, sure. But in the case of 1 Cor 15:1-2 he IS speaking of their past belief.

Paul is showing that what you believe about bodily resurrection and Christ being raised from the dead is a make-or-break proposition with God.

Paul in verse 1-2 is showing that what you believed (past tense) about bodily resurrection and Christ being raised from the dead is a make-or-break proposition with God.

OSAS will argue that you are still saved if you lose your faith.

Quote me one published reformed theologian that teaches this. It's ALWAYS the non-OSAS person that says this about the OSAS doctrine in my study. Thus, they either; 1) don't understand OSAS or (unless they do understand it) 2) are intentionally misrepresenting it.

Why does God warn believers who can't stop believing--because the Holy Spirit is in them--to not stop believing?

For the same reason He commands believers to pray always (without ceasing) knowing full well they must sleep at night. It B the best thing for them to strive to both pray and believe always.

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.

Which is way the whole counsel of God says the HS is not just a Seal but a Seal and a Guarantee. A Godly Seal and Guarantee at that. A seal/guarantee that an earthly king only wishes he possessed. God's Seal is guaranteed to secure things that are in it. That's the point of the passage. Else, why even mention that the HS is a Seal and Guarantee? Additionally, if/when the things put under His Seal become lukewarm, as all things tend to do at times (even Peter and Paul), they are then guaranteed to be vomited out for their re-proof and discipline as any loving Father must do. Else, the Father is not loving these things, He'd be ignoring them.