Will all born-again Christians make it to heaven?

[gr8grace]

I can't imagine coming into the presence of God without fear and trembling.
That's where Jesus comes in, he is our advocate.
I hold onto Romans 10:9-10.
Our hearts are the center of life.

I agree with this, but are we not told to work out our salvation with fear and trembling? That would seem to perhaps indicate now? If we are in the light, we can not sin. But we do sin. So doesn't this take a momentary walking away from the light? The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. The moment that Peter took his eyes from the Lord, he began to sink. The moment that a child let's go of his fathers hand while at the carnival, they get lost, perhaps abducted (by sin).

If you knew that you would die in your sleep tonight, would you live your life any differently today? Perhaps. I would. No little white lies today thank you. Perhaps there is some significance in this. I wouldn't want to be caught sleeping. To adopt a view of perhaps not OSAS may indeed be a safer position to hold by bringing in the fear that would cause one to cling more tightly to God. Hmm.

Hi Edward, I think what is in view here is the "position" and the "condition" of the believer. Every time we have doubts that the Lord is Going to toss us to the Curb, we are living and thinking in our "condition". Not in our "position" in Christ.

Peter walked on water thinking in His "position in Christ" as soon as He started thinking about his "condition" he started to sink.

The Child who is holding His fathers hand is thinking and acting in His "position". Let go of that hand and we are acting in our "condition", but if we let go of that Hand are we still a Child to that Father? Our position never changes. Once a Child of God ALWAYS a Child of God. Even an earthly father would forever save that Child who let go of His hand. How much more would our Heavenly Father do for us?

 

[francisdesales]

There may in fact be five types of believers. One thing for sure, there are verities of maturity in the Christian faith that I think would be difficult for some to see depending on their own maturity in Christ, but here are some examples I'd site for you. You can make of theses what you will depending on the answer you may already have in mind of your question, but since your asking me, I owe you an answer and examples, so here it is.

You may very well be correct in distinguishing the variety of points of the journey to complete sanctification. However, each and every one are given the same initial forgiveness of sins, the same promises, the same Holy Spirit and the same status of righteousness.

In other words, these distinctions have nothing to do with whether there are a group of Christians who are "immune from falling away", while all the rest are not. The Scriptures themselves never makes such a distinction, as far as the gifts from God are concerned, or the likelihood of falling away. I am not aware of any "uber Christians are immune" or "Super Christians cannot sin" or "born agains receive the knowledge of full election before they die".

The exhortations are said to ALL Christians. Weak or strong, childlike or mature. The warnings are given to all. And while I appreciate your attempts to relate how Christians are at different levels of their walks, it doesn't effect the OP concerns that I have. ANYONE who is baptized has been baptized into Christ. Weak or strong.

Thus, there is no "uber Christian" who cannot fall away, the "born agains" who are beyond all that...

Regards

 

[chessman]

I feel pretty certain that you are begging the question here. You are basing your "hypotheticals" on your already preconceived notion that OSAS must be true. Thus, through that lense, you will discount any Scriptures that appear to make OSAS false. The simple reading is that something DID happen. Peter is not wasting words on "when if there were false teachers"...

I’m pretty sure you're not seeing my point as a minimum or intentionally misrepresenting what I’ve said at worst. I never said nor do I think something did not happen or that there were no false prophets. I get this from Scripture and in fact pointed it out already.

2 But false prophets also arose among the people
​

It's not until verse 20 and 21 (your “kicker†verse) that Peter clearly and unambiguously brings in the hypothetical statement “if they were to escape the defilement of the world…†Talk about "preconceived notions" that must be true even if the text says otherwise.

That the previously defined prophets are indeed false prophets (always have been) is my very point. So it’s a little hard to believe you just missed this. Reasonable people (and God) notice this type of thing.

I did not answer that question because it didn't have much to do with the topic at hand

My question was a clarifying question based on one of your statements. So if it was off topic for you, then just forget about it. I'd much rather you just ignore or not dialog/answer than to answer them with another question or certianly not to misrepresent my arguments back to me.

I like your tagline by the way (Let us consider what He has done for us... There is no fear that a perception of what He has given you will puff you up, so long as you keep steadily in mind that whatever is good in you is not of yourself.)

How do you come about reconciling Francis’ point with the question I’d asked you earlier, that you thought off topic?

Originally Posted by francisdesales Is it not evident from Scriptures that one must call upon God and ask for forgiveness BEFORE He grants it?

No, not to me. I'm not that knowledgeable, however. What Scriptures do you mean specifically here?

 

[Danus]

There may in fact be five types of believers. One thing for sure, there are verities of maturity in the Christian faith that I think would be difficult for some to see depending on their own maturity in Christ, but here are some examples I'd site for you. You can make of theses what you will depending on the answer you may already have in mind of your question, but since your asking me, I owe you an answer and examples, so here it is.

You may very well be correct in distinguishing the variety of points of the journey to complete sanctification. However, each and every one are given the same initial forgiveness of sins, the same promises, the same Holy Spirit and the same status of righteousness.

In other words, these distinctions have nothing to do with whether there are a group of Christians who are "immune from falling away", while all the rest are not. The Scriptures themselves never makes such a distinction, as far as the gifts from God are concerned, or the likelihood of falling away. I am not aware of any "uber Christians are immune" or "Super Christians cannot sin" or "born agains receive the knowledge of full election before they die".

The exhortations are said to ALL Christians. Weak or strong, childlike or mature. The warnings are given to all. And while I appreciate your attempts to relate how Christians are at different levels of their walks, it doesn't effect the OP concerns that I have. ANYONE who is baptized has been baptized into Christ. Weak or strong.

Thus, there is no "uber Christian" who cannot fall away, the "born agains" who are beyond all that...

Regards

Well, forgive me, but the notion of, as you say, a "Super Christian" seems a notion born from your own theology, that being, that one can indeed loose their salvation, ie their eternal life. insomuch as anyone might hold that thought to be true, there then would have to be a Supper Christian so that such a person could indeed be saved.

The theology I am ascribing, one I believe the gospels clearly teach, affirm and uphold, would not just suggest, but say plainly, that it is God who chooses anyone, God who saves anyone, and God who edifies and keeps anyone in the faith, thereby no supper Christian is required, and no need to worry about loosing ones life. All who are in Christ, on any level, will be saved. They will live the Christian life and they will grow in that life to the ultimate end, as surly tomorrow as today. They will loose their life for Christ and be saved, and they will do so by faith.

Romans 8:30, (NIV) 30 And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.

This is no stumbling block in the way of any brother or sister, who might be weak, hurting or in need in their faith, but rather true to the end; a promise that only points to and magnifies the ultimate promise we have in Christ Jesus.

Anyone filled with such worry of their salvation, should be filled with Hope, Peace and Joy in the clear promise of God's love for them, not to be warned of something they already know and are concerned about. To tell a stumbling or weak believer they may be doomed to hell because of their weakness is not lifting them up; it is not showing the love of Christ, and it is not giving them hope, but only pushing them down and pointing them away from God. In saying such things, we are in the way of God's work, rather than conduits of his spirit to a dying world.

Should we then be concerned about our salvation? Sure we should, but we should be rightly concerned not of our loosing it, but of our growing in it; our maturing in the faith to be stronger, more assured even, and completely dependent on Christ, for in Christ we find our salvation. We do not go backwards, we move forward, so that we are not burying out faith in the ground for fear of loosing it; NO, but investing it for the profit of the kingdom of God so that we may be richly blessed.

If we are rightly concerned about the salvation of others, or even our own, then we should be not be asking who is save and who is not. Rather, we should be pointing to the only one who does save, and encouraging others to let go of their life in faith of the one who gives everlasting life.

 

[francisdesales]

I’m pretty sure you're not seeing my point as a minimum or intentionally misrepresenting what I’ve said at worst. I never said nor do I think something did not happen or that there were no false prophets. I get this from Scripture and in fact pointed it out already.

2 But false prophets also arose among the people
​

It's not until verse 20 and 21 (your “kicker” verse) that Peter clearly and unambiguously brings in the hypothetical statement “if they were to escape the defilement of the world…” Talk about "preconceived notions" that must be true even if the text says otherwise.

That is not a hypothetical statement. It is a confirmed conditional, IF you read 2 Peter 2...

Now, when someone writes 19 verses that speaks of a group of teachers as Peter does, wouldn't it make sense that HE thinks that the conditional in verse 20 has OBVIOUSLY been fulfilled? I think one cannot interpret it any other way. Let's look at this again:

if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning

Now, do we agree that "they" is the people refered to for 19 verses immediately following? And "they are AGAIN entangled", strongly suggests that they were once untangled. The persons mentioned above. Thus, we can say with certainty that verse 20 is a resulting summary of verses 1-19.

Here is an example, perhaps a more unbiased subject will allow you to see that the "if" has been conditionally satisfied and applies, is not hypothetical...

Let's imagine that we have the following:

The football team has a score of three points.
The football team has a score of three points.
The football team has a score of three points.
The football team has a score of three points.
The football team has a score of three points.
The football team has a score of three points.
The football team has a score of three points.
The football team has a score of three points.
The football team has a score of three points.
{for brevity's sake, let's say that I repeat this another 9 times}

If a kicker in football kicks the ball through the uprights, the team receives three points.

Now, isn't it certainly obvious that the condition has been satisfied, the "if" statement above??? It is beyond argument that a kicker in football had kicked the ball through the uprights, since the conditional sentence, the "then" of the "if"/"then" statement, was satisfied.

Now certainly, a football team can get points by other means. That is why I asked you "is there another way of being freed from sin". You seem to believe there is not, although you appear to be non-committal to that, as well (vs what Peter says in Acts)

This is exactly what we find in 2 Peter. Over and over again, he repeats the offenses of the false teacher and how they are sinful men. He describes them in many different ways, all the result that they were view as unrighteous.

THEN, Peter tells us verse 20, where it becomes apparent that this is no hypothetical. HOW could this be a hypothetical when he goes on and on for 19 verses about false teachers? Is Peter daft? Imagination running away with him? Do these false teachers exist? One must think that the Bible is a fairy tale if we make such claims that Peter is thinking of hypothetical false teachers.

Is this established? Is Peter talking about real people in v 1-19?

The "if" statement is then attached to the reality, the result. When one sees a result that has been discussed for 19 verses, it becomes very clear that the conditional WAS satisfied, that the result was done by the conditional just mentioned!

Unfortunately, your argument is based upon your view of OSAS as being true, not on the plain reading of what is there, isolated from any other interpretations in other parts of the Bible.

The context is clear. Peter sees the conditional of v 20 met. And continues again, stating that they were like dogs returning to the vomit.

That the previously defined prophets are indeed false prophets (always have been) is my very point. So it’s a little hard to believe you just missed this. Reasonable people (and God) notice this type of thing.

PROVE the "always have been", chessman. Nowhere does the passage state that they "always have been". That is your understanding of OSAS poking its head in again. What is called "eigesis". You are presuming, based upon nothing in the text.

Again, I ask you to consider, how many atheists do you have preach at your congregation? How many people who are known public sinners who know nothing of the Bible come to spread the Gospel where you worship at? The reason why any of these teachers received an audience to preach was because they WERE one of them - at one point. This is suggested in the first several verses! The "always have been" is just not supported by the text, or by common sense.

I like your tagline by the way (Let us consider what He has done for us... There is no fear that a perception of what He has given you will puff you up, so long as you keep steadily in mind that whatever is good in you is not of yourself.)

Well, at least we agree on that!

[

How do you come about reconciling Francis’ point with the question I’d asked you earlier, that you thought off topic?

No, not to me. I'm not that knowledgeable, however. What Scriptures do you mean specifically here?

I thought I had answered that, and we have discussed it since.

And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel Mark 1:15

Or

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. Acts 2:38

I had thought that the idea of repentance before forgiveness went without saying, sort of like saying Jesus died on the cross, a given.
Repentance in the OT was not granted UNTIL the Jews asked for it. I am not aware of forgiveness being granted without repentance in the Bible.

Are you thinking of a Scripture verse that states that God offers salvation to people before they repent of sin?


Regards

 

[francisdesales]

Well, forgive me, but the notion of, as you say, a "Super Christian" seems a notion born from your own theology, that being, that one can indeed loose their salvation, ie their eternal life. insomuch as anyone might hold that thought to be true, there then would have to be a Supper Christian so that such a person could indeed be saved.

Huh? I am not following your logic. The OSAS mentality is that there are people who claim to be Christians, sitting in the pews, practicing Christianity, etc., but are not "saved", not "born agains". Only the REAL Christians, the "born agains", have been given the promises. The "truly saved" persons cannot be lost. The other Christians, well, they never were saved.

Isn't that what you are stating with OSAS? That there are two classes of Christians? I am not making that statement. I am and HAVE stated, that ALL Christians have been saved, have been baptized in the Spirit, have been given the promise. I have posted this today. Now, my "own theology" says otherwise???

The theology I am ascribing, one I believe the gospels clearly teach, affirm and uphold, would not just suggest, but say plainly, that it is God who chooses anyone, God who saves anyone, and God who edifies and keeps anyone in the faith, thereby no supper Christian is required, and no need to worry about loosing ones life.

And how exactly have you come to this information of the secrets of the mind of God, UNLESS you have granted it to yourself? There is nothing written in Scriptures that grant individuals this knowledge of the FUTURE. How exactly have you become aware of this information, viz a viz other Christians who have 'never received it". Now, remember, the OSAS claims that IF you sin grieviously and falter, you were NEVER part of the elect that God chose. And recall, these "never received it" people appeared to whup it up at their altar call and perhaps for years appeared to have been granted the secret knowledge that THEY TOO could never fall. But lo and behold, they fall. They ACTUALLY were "never received it" people... There doesn't seem to be a way to KNOW whether you are a "never received it" person until the end.

Well, I can see why the Bible says PERSEVERE until the end. It doesn't seem to fit in well with the ideal of OSAS, though.

All who are in Christ, on any level, will be saved.

AGREE!!!!
1 John 5:12
That's all you need to know about eschatological salvation. Be found in Christ at the END.

They will live the Christian life and they will grow in that life to the ultimate end, as surly tomorrow as today. They will loose their life for Christ and be saved, and they will do so by faith.

But what happens to the ones who are "In Christ" today, but 5 years from now, are not? You will say that "they never were saved" to maintain the 100% absolute certainty. The problem is that the only thing absolutely certain about salvation is that one must REMAIN in Christ. NO INDIVIDUAL has that guarantee that they will remain.

Romans 8:30, (NIV) 30 And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.

Again, we don't know which are predestined. After the fact, we will. That will be the path for everyone. The predestined are all called. And eventually glorified. God's elect, however, are not everyone in the Church. Christ states this when He speaks of the wheat and the weeds parable. Also, the parable of the net. Also, the parable of the sower.

Not all present in the building are predestined. The ones who fall away were not predestined. That is true.

The issue, though, is that WE do not know if we are one of those predestined seen from all eternity by God. Only when we make it through our trials and remain in our faith, THEN will we know that we were called, predestined and so forth.

This is no stumbling block in the way of any brother or sister, who might be weak, hurting or in need in their faith, but rather true to the end; a promise that only points to and magnifies the ultimate promise we have in Christ Jesus.

If one remains in Him, sure enough. If one does not, there is no life. One John makes this clear over and over again.

Anyone filled with such worry of their salvation, should be filled with Hope, Peace and Joy in the clear promise of God's love for them, not to be warned of something they already know and are concerned about. To tell a stumbling or weak believer they may be doomed to hell because of their weakness is not lifting them up;

That is a good point. I presumed you were not "weak" in your faith. I would certainly make different arguments to someone who was "weak" in their faith. However, I certainly would not give them a false hope and tell them not to worry, you are saved for heaven.

Should we then be concerned about our salvation? Sure we should, but we should be rightly concerned not of our loosing it, but of our growing in it;

That is true, but it is the nature of disagreeing with false theology that a negative is stressed. It would appear that I am focusing only on the negative aspect of losing faith. However, when one attacks an extreme, you counteract it with opposing arguments. I have tried to balance it somewhat, but perhaps I have not been so successful while attempting to point out the problems with OSAS.

If we are rightly concerned about the salvation of others, or even our own, then we should be not be asking who is save and who is not. Rather, we should be pointing to the only one who does save, and encouraging others to let go of their life in faith of the one who gives everlasting life.

I am not asking anyone about that, nor am I questioning anyone's personal journey. I am merely stating that OSAS is not Scriptural and gives false hope. One should strive to be found in Christ. Any preacher or pastor concerned with their flock would make similar statements, for they know that a person who becomes lethargic or makes no advances in the spiritual realm is falling backwards and will become prey for Satan, who prowls looking for more victims.

Regards

 

[Elijah674]

Hebrews 11
[1] Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Hebrews 11
[13] These all died in faith, [not having received the promises], but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.

--Elijah

 

[Grappler]

To be born-again to me means that I have a personal relationship with Jesus the Son of God. God regenerated my spirit with His Spirit and now i have become a new creature in Christ...

OK, fair enough. I have no problems with that. By your definition, I am "born again".

Even if i wanted to go back to being spiritually "dead" i cound not. Can a man become un-born? Sure he may wish he was never born but he can never be un-born...i am speaking of the flesh. Can a child of God become un-born...in a spiritual sense? No. Just as the body can not become un-born neither can the soul once God has regenerated it. Nothing i did earned my salvation....nothing i can do will lose my salvation.

The question is not about whether you can lose your initial salvation!!! The question is whether that initial salvation perseveres until the end. NEVER have I said that a person becomes "unborn" and that something that once happened "never happened". That is the OSAS comment. "you were never saved to begin with". You can't be "unborn". But that is what we hear when Johnny Smith is born again - by your definition - lives a life in Christ for 5 years, and then commits adultery and falls away from service to Christ, gradually falling further into sin. Two Peter 2 would describe this man very well. An OSAS will then proclaim "you were never saved to begin with".

In other words, "POOF - you are unborn"

Regards

Johnny Smith was never saved to begin with. POOF you are wrong.

 

[francisdesales]

To be born-again to me means that I have a personal relationship with Jesus the Son of God. God regenerated my spirit with His Spirit and now i have become a new creature in Christ...

OK, fair enough. I have no problems with that. By your definition, I am "born again".

Even if i wanted to go back to being spiritually "dead" i cound not. Can a man become un-born? Sure he may wish he was never born but he can never be un-born...i am speaking of the flesh. Can a child of God become un-born...in a spiritual sense? No. Just as the body can not become un-born neither can the soul once God has regenerated it. Nothing i did earned my salvation....nothing i can do will lose my salvation.

The question is not about whether you can lose your initial salvation!!! The question is whether that initial salvation perseveres until the end. NEVER have I said that a person becomes "unborn" and that something that once happened "never happened". That is the OSAS comment. "you were never saved to begin with". You can't be "unborn". But that is what we hear when Johnny Smith is born again - by your definition - lives a life in Christ for 5 years, and then commits adultery and falls away from service to Christ, gradually falling further into sin. Two Peter 2 would describe this man very well. An OSAS will then proclaim "you were never saved to begin with".

In other words, "POOF - you are unborn"

Regards

Johnny Smith was never saved to begin with. POOF you are wrong.

:biglol

Not according to Jesus. People begin in faith, having received the Word of God - and then fall away...

They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away Luke 8:13

 

[Elijah674]

Matt.23

[1] Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,
[2] Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
[3] All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

--Elijah

PS: Knowing the truth does not make Christians. (these were Christ's VERY OWN ones)

 

[chessman]

Thanks once again for so much time/effort that you've put into this discussion. It indicates, if not demonstrates, that you care about this issue. I do too. It's my desire to discuss it logically and weigh the evidence either for it or against it. It's worth here re-defining the "it" that we are discussing. Broadly it's the OP question (Will all born-again Christians make it to heaven?).

My original post was requesting you to clarify how 2 Peter 2 provides evidence the OP question’s answer = no. I do now understand and have considered your clarifyed arguments for 2 Peter 2’s evidence.
Just to clear up one of your arguments related to 2 Peter 2; I never said, nor do I believe that the people discussed within 2 Peter 2 were hypothetical.

Is this established? Is Peter talking about real people in v 1-19?

Yes, I never said otherwise.
To answer your other questions:

How does a person become a teacher within the Christian community without becoming a Christian?

Under false pretenses.

Who would listen to such a person, considering Christianity had been around for at least 30 years when this was written?

People with itchy ears that liked what they heard from them. By human nature, all people (even me) like what sounds good to them. They liked the message they got from false prophets more than the message they got from true prophets.

Does your community invite secular speakers to preach the Word of God to you?

Unfortunately, yes, occasionally. It’s a crying shame. My church tries to defend against false prophets but it occasionally occurs. It’s a sickening feeling when it does. Makes me want to vomit. Fortunately, it’s often very easy to spot false prophets and their secular views when you bounce it up against Scripture. Good thing I’m not relying on their message or my acceptance of it, for my salvation. I’m relying on Christ and Him alone. Logically speaking (I just love good logic, I am SpockJ), Christ is the only thing that has even been in this world that is unchanging. Messages change, popes change, churches change, people change, yes even my feelings of closeness to Christ changes. Only Christ/God does not change.

That seems mighty strange that you think this person had NOT been freed from sin.

I’m only reading what’s in the text itself. The evidence in 2 Peter 2 is these people were false prophets condemned to destruction, vomit and mire. What’s strange is how anyone could logically ever view this passage as providing evidence to answer the OP=no. I didn’t say they were false prophets condemned to destruction, Peter did. Plus Peter ends the message here with their return to “vomit” and “wallowing in the mire”; neither of which sounds like heaven to me. Therefore, how this passage could, in the slightest, provide logical evidence to answer the OP=no, seems strange to me actually. Which is why I even asked for clarification from you way back in post #221.

BTW, I feel way more qualified to post how I feel than anyone else (except God).

That seems mighty strange that you think…

Always more logical to just ask somebody how they feel about something than to put words in their mouth or assume wrongly how they feel.
​

No matter how you look at the passages in-between verse 2 and verse 22, you start out “false” and end up in vomit. Using an open-minded yet logical reading of the passage, that is. But that’s just me. As you say, I might very well be overly OSAS presuppositioned to see it any other way.

Unfortunately, your argument is based upon your view of OSAS as being true, not on the plain reading of what is there

That is your understanding of OSAS poking its head in again. What is called "eigesis". You are presuming, based upon nothing in the text.

But, thanks for clarifying your evidence within 2 Peter 2 to me.

For 2 Peter 2 specifically, in summary:
You are saying:

It would silly to talk about Christian preachers who had fallen away (because of the actions described in 1-19) and THEN say, "well, this can't happen".

I am saying: “A dog returns to its own vomit,” and, “A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire.”

 

[francisdesales]

Thanks once again for so much time/effort that you've put into this discussion. It indicates, if not demonstrates, that you care about this issue. I do too. It's my desire to discuss it logically and weigh the evidence either for it or against it. It's worth here re-defining the "it" that we are discussing. Broadly it's the OP question (Will all born-again Christians make it to heaven?).

Well, now it appears you are stating that the preachers of 2 Peter 2 are falsely infiltrating the church and were always "evil". Of course, that begs the question why the need for the "if" clause in v 20. WHY would Peter mention this, and just state what you are - that they were always evil and were never Christian? Perhaps you could explain 2 Peter 2:20 "if", when it does not even describe these men, according to you?

Your interpretation tortures the clear reading, since there is no reason to make the sudden conditional statement, PRESUMING these men were never freed from sin in the first place... WHY place this conditional in here if experienced had told them that ALL saved Christians go to heaven? Christianity had been around for decades by then, and they would certainly have experienced that every saved Christian remained in holiness and were presumed in heaven.

The conditional makes it quite obvious that that was not the case. Thus, what would be a ridiculous statement in the world you are imagining (why tell us this if after 30 years, NO ONE has fallen away who was once saved) is an ordinary exhortation to "remain faithful" "persevere until the end", etc. THESE sort of warnings serve no purpose when it is "impossible to fall away if you are saved".

How about we take another tack?

In your mind, what constitutes a "born again Christian", as per the OP?

Perhaps your answer will explain something about your thinking on this passage. I am guessing that your definition of a "saved Christian" will be different from mine, thus, our disagreement here.

People with itchy ears that liked what they heard from them. By human nature, all people (even me) like what sounds good to them.

Yes, OSAS falls into this category, I believe, for Scriptures discount the idea.

Unfortunately, yes, occasionally. It’s a crying shame. My church tries to defend against false prophets but it occasionally occurs. It’s a sickening feeling when it does. Makes me want to vomit. Fortunately, it’s often very easy to spot false prophets and their secular views when you bounce it up against Scripture. Good thing I’m not relying on their message or my acceptance of it, for my salvation.

Well, if that is the case, your pastor is irresponsible for inviting unsaved people who are publicly known sinners to talk to Christians on the subjects of Scriptures.

I’m only reading what’s in the text itself. The evidence in 2 Peter 2 is these people were false prophets condemned to destruction, vomit and mire.

Like I said, the chapter is not in chronological order, that much is clear by the summary and conditional in v. 20. There is no other explanation for our "if" clause and the other conditionals that follow.

What’s strange is how anyone could logically ever view this passage as providing evidence to answer the OP=no.

How on earth do you come to that conclusion?

IF a person escaped sin (being saved) and then RETURNED to a life of sin - his condition is WORSE OFF.

Now, please explain how someone is STILL SAVED if they are WORSE OFF than if they had NEVER BEEN SAVED? :p

I'm thinking you are truly in love with this OSAS idea. Where's that "love of logic" you were talking about?

Plus Peter ends the message here with their return to “vomit” and “wallowing in the mire”; neither of which sounds like heaven to me. Therefore, how this passage could, in the slightest, provide logical evidence to answer the OP=yes, seems strange to me actually.

That's because you have already read into the passage that they weren't saved to begin with. I don't see any evidence that this was the case. You are assuming it. Peter is merely describing their current condition. We judge a person by their fruits. But NOWHERE do we see in v 1-19 any evidence that these people were not of the type Jesus describes in Luke 8:

Those on the rocky ground are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it, but they have no root. They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away. The seed that fell among thorns stands for those who hear, but as they go on their way they are choked by life’s worries, riches and pleasures, and they do not mature. Luke 8:13-14

Now, it goes without saying that these verses by themselves ALSO are a "no" to the OP. As you can see here, as to my point, that 2 Peter 2 could easily be describing one of the two classes of "seed receivers" above. Within 1-19, there is no evidence to support your assumption. What IS known is that they were NOW evil, so they must have been one of these two (and not of Luke 8:15). There is no indication that they were ALWAYS false prophets.

But when we read v 20, it becomes clear that they DID once receive the Word and DID escape the pollutions of life.

And they then returned to a life of sin, as Peter makes clear in v 1-19.

Regards

 

[chessman]

Peter is merely describing their current condition.

I believe that is wrong. Peter is describing much more than simply their current condition (hypothetical or not). It’s a shortsighted view and a terrible hermeneutic method simply to look at verse 21 (or any other single verse in the Bible) without considering the context of the entire broader message. Sometimes it takes a chapter; sometimes it takes several chapters to grasp the intended message. Depends on the message God is trying to convey. Reading just a verse or two so very often leads to a very improper understanding of the text (any text). Whether that misunderstanding of a single verse supports OSAS or not, it’s a terrible way to grasp the true message of God’s word to us. Certainly not to build a doctrine on. I refuse to do it that way.
For example here, in no way is Peter “merely describing their current conditionâ€. Peter is explaining, exampling and demonstrating a real example of “somethingâ€. It takes more than one or two sentences to get that message across. In this case, Peter is using a parenthetical statement at the verses 20-21 point (and hypothetical-I still believe that, but you can certainly disagree with me on this one point-as you have).

It doesn’t really matter to the broader point, however and ironically now multiple posts later. Their final destination as depicted both in the early verse of 2 Peter and the final verse, is not heaven to begin wtih. I've notiiced no response to this point from you.

The broader message is clearly a principle that you’ve not even acknowledge, oddly. The summary/principle of Chapter 2 is in verse 22 “It has happened to them according to the true proverb, “A dog returns to its own vomit,†and, “A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire.†Whoever these people are, whatever their state, however they got there, they wind up in vomit. So they CANNOT be an example of someone going to heaven, as is the OP question.

But that’s fine. I’m not trying to convince you of anything.
We do not agree on the details within verses 1-21 but since you seem to agree on their final destination (at least as the Scriptural evidence goes within 2 Peter) with

… And they then returned to a life of sin

. I don’t see the point of continuing with anymore discussion on 2 Peter as evidence to answering the OP question.
I still don’t mind dialoging other Scriptures with you, but I’m afraid that because of some of your statements and just generally getting less civil, that further dialog will simply go down-hill and be even less efficient and productive use of our time.
I’ll just say may God bless you brother and hope that we can discuss this later in heaven with each other and laugh about how trivial a matter it was. J

 

[gr8grace]

I'm sitting here researching this and praying about it and have come across a couple verses that need interpreted for me. Can someone be so kind? Trying to keep an open mind on this issue and consider everything. OSAS is a very desirable notion, but boy I wouldn't want to be wrong, so I continue to research and pray about it for that reason.

Revelation 3:4-5

4 Yet you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their clothes. They will walk with me, dressed in white, for they are worthy. 5 The one who is victorious will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out the name of that person from the book of life, but will acknowledge that name before my Father and his angels./

Galatians 5:4

4 You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace./

Rev 3:5~~'He who overcomes will thus be clothed in white garments; and I will not erase his name from the book of life, and I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels.

1 John 5:4-5~~For whatever is born of God overcomes the world; and this is the victory that has overcome the world-- our faith.

5 Who is the one who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?

Gal 5:4~~4 You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace./

A better translation is "drifted of course from Grace." A carnal believer, can drift off course. But it does not say " OUT of Grace." And this verse is dealing with the believers "condition as a creature" He let Go of the hand. But still solid in his "position"

Another thing Edward, I have really been studying 2 Pet 2, because of this thread and i had to change my view. I thought Peter was dealing with believers in 20-22 and it was divine discipline that would be worse.

This is what I have come up with lately.

what were the false teachers SPECIFICALLY teaching? In verse 19 we see "freedom" and this word speaks or denotes the Laws of divine establishment that God sets up for nations and peoples.(for believers and unbelievers)

So the cosmic, worldly teachers were teaching the people freedom from Gods established Law, and teaching them to break these laws and live as they wanted, consequence free. (the vomit)

Like this nation we have the laws of establishment and many unbelievers that follow those laws. In verse 20 we see some of these unbelievers, that "escape" this worldly and cosmic teaching, by not following the false teachers because they had the true Gospel presented to them and they ultimately reject it and Go back to the "Vomit" of the false teachers.

They are worse off now because they have become antagonistic to the truth, now that they had heard the truth. In their prior state, they were better of because they knew no better.

So I believe that these are unbelievers in view.

 

[Deborah13]

4 You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace./

To me the key word here is "trying" to be justified by the law, implying that you "cannot" be justified by the law. This is a person has moved of away from their faith that it is "only" by the blood of the Savior that he can be justified and this is only available to them by the "grace" of God.
Eph, 2:8-9 Tells us our salvation is by grace, through faith, not works.

I believe there is a balance between grace and faith, some people get into "grace only" and forget that "faith" is vital. Some get into "faith only" and forget that it is only by the grace of God that they are able to be saved at all. This throws their views off balance and effects their walk with God. They then wonder why their prayer in faith has not been profitable to them but they have forgotten that their prayers are answered only because of the amazing grace of our Lord.

Some get so into doing the works and obeying the law that they lose sight of the fact that it is not them doing the works and obeying the law but that it is Christ who lives in them. All the glory belongs to Him.

 

[John 8:32]

I'm sitting here researching this and praying about it and have come across a couple verses that need interpreted for me. Can someone be so kind? Trying to keep an open mind on this issue and consider everything. OSAS is a very desirable notion, but boy I wouldn't want to be wrong, so I continue to research and pray about it for that reason.

Revelation 3:4-5

4 Yet you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their clothes. They will walk with me, dressed in white, for they are worthy. 5 The one who is victorious will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out the name of that person from the book of life, but will acknowledge that name before my Father and his angels./

Galatians 5:4

4 You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace./

Here are a couple of passages you may want to consider...

Heb 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
Heb 6:5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
Heb 6:6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

Heb 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
Heb 10:27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
Heb 10:28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
Heb 10:29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
Heb 10:30 For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.
Heb 10:31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

 

[Deborah13]

verses quoted

This is a request. I would ask that you would use the name of the person that you are quoting in your quote as I have above.
I love the new quote button that has recently been added and makes it so much easier to make a partial quote.
Before hitting the reply to quote, I can just highlight the portion I wish to quote and hit the quote button. Maybe you know this.

I like to know who someone else is quoting and go back and read their post. I like to know when someone quotes me so I can respond/or not.
I also think it is just nice to let someone know when you mention someone in your quote by [MENTION=90700]Edward[/MENTION] so they know they were mentioned.

Not trying to be bossy. Just what I prefer.

 

[Deborah13]

They are worse off now because they have become antagonistic to the truth, now that they had heard the truth. In their prior state, they were better of because they knew no better.

I agree with this, once someone has rejected the Truth of the Gospel it is very hard for the Holy Spirit to change their heart, they become "stiff necked and hard hearted".

 

[Grappler]

OK, fair enough. I have no problems with that. By your definition, I am "born again".



The question is not about whether you can lose your initial salvation!!! The question is whether that initial salvation perseveres until the end. NEVER have I said that a person becomes "unborn" and that something that once happened "never happened". That is the OSAS comment. "you were never saved to begin with". You can't be "unborn". But that is what we hear when Johnny Smith is born again - by your definition - lives a life in Christ for 5 years, and then commits adultery and falls away from service to Christ, gradually falling further into sin. Two Peter 2 would describe this man very well. An OSAS will then proclaim "you were never saved to begin with".

In other words, "POOF - you are unborn"

Regards

Johnny Smith was never saved to begin with. POOF you are wrong.

:biglol

Not according to Jesus. People begin in faith, having received the Word of God - and then fall away...

They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away Luke 8:13

All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.

Here is also something Jesus said "All that the Father gives me will come to me and whoever comes to me i will never cast out." John 6:37 POOF! you are wrong again.lol Here is a riddle just for you francis....how many times must a person be born in order to be a person? How many times must a person be born-again to be a born-again child of YHWH?

 

[Deborah13]

I still think it is our Christian duty to resist temptation

This may be a matter of semantics which I think happens often on the threads. I don't see it is a duty to resist temptation. I see it as smart. I see it as recognizing the God tells us how to live for our protection and good not just because He wants us to obey Him for the sake of obeying. I see Him as my Father who loves me and wants only the best for me and others in my life. Also, when I comply ( and this is the number one reason) it brings glory to Him.