|
Post by atruebeliever on Jul 2, 2008 21:01:54 GMT -5
Once Saved, Always Saved – The Biblical Evidence
The Bible teaches “once saved, always saved” -- that we can be saved once and for all only through a repentant, saving faith in Jesus Christ. Once a person has accepted Christ as Savior, they may wonder if it is possible to lose that salvation. What if they commit a sin? What if they commit a lot of sins? What if they do something very, very wrong? Is it possible to be saved, and then lose that salvation? Fortunately, the answer is a resounding “no.” Once a person has accepted Jesus Christ as Savior, he/she is forever saved. This fact is referred to as the doctrine of “eternal security,” often summarized as “once saved, always saved.”
There are several reasons why a person can be confident in their “eternal security.” First and foremost is the evidence of Scripture. John 3:15-18 says about Christ: “The Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life. For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.”
The salvation in Christ is not temporary, it is eternal.
In John 10:28-30, Jesus says: “I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand. I and the Father are one." The forgiveness of God through Christ is sufficient to cover all of our sins -- past, present, and future. There is nothing a person can do that God cannot forgive. This doctrine is supported by Romans 8:38-39, Ephesians 4:30, and Jude 24, among others.
Once Saved, Always Saved – The Logical Evidence As with many other scriptural doctrines, the idea of “once saved, always saved” is also supported logically. Eternal security is consistent with everything else the Bible teaches about mankind, and God. Examining the doctrine in relation to the rest of Scripture demonstrates that it is consistent with all other biblically sound teachings. The idea of losing our salvation is not only unscriptural, but it creates monumental problems with other doctrines, including salvation by faith, the sin nature of man, and the purpose of Christ’s sacrifice.
The Bible teaches that man is inherently sinful -- that a sinful nature is a part of all of us (Romans 3:10). This means that even after being saved, every single believer is going to sin from time to time. Thinking that we can live a perfect, sinless life after our salvation is not only unscriptural, but arrogant (James 2:10). If we are not eternally secure, this sinning will cause us to lose our salvation, but how much sin is too much? There is no scriptural “yardstick” given to tell us how many or what kind of sins are enough to void our salvation. Without eternal security, the Bible would describe a situation where Christianity is a perpetual game of Russian Roulette; a life in which condemnation and salvation alternate every time we sin and confess, and we never know if we’re saved or not.
Scriptural passages (Ephesians 2:8-9, Isaiah 64:6) indicate that our attempts at good deeds will never earn us a place in heaven. We cannot make up for our past, present, or future sins by doing good works. A saved believer will, as a natural product of their faith, shun sin and practice good works (James 2:18). If “once saved, always saved” is not true, then by necessity we are saved both by our faith and our works. If we can do sinful things, or not do good things (James 4:17) and lose our security, then our good deeds are a part of our salvation. This is concept is contradictory to Scripture. It also creates an unlivable scenario where we have to try to do enough good to outweigh our sinful natures. The doctrine of “eternal security” goes hand in hand with the doctrine of “saved by faith alone.” To deny eternal security is to endorse a “faith plus works” salvation system.
Jesus Christ made some powerful statements about morality during His earthly ministry. In those three short years, He talked the talk and walked the walk of the toughest moral and ethical system in human history. Most religions focus on the external actions, but Christ took the concept of sin and holiness to a much deeper level. For example, most religions are satisfied to condemn the physical act of adultery, but Christ said “Whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart” (Matthew 5:28).
Christ set the bar for holiness at a level all Christians are called to aspire to, but none can ever fully live up to, because of our sin nature. Just as the law of Moses was meant, in part, to demonstrate to Israel how impossible it was for mortal man to obtain the moral perfection of God, the standards of Christ also remind us of how shallow our best efforts at goodness really are. Thankfully, God has always provided a way for us to be forgiven for our shortcomings. Christ’s sacrifice on the cross served the same purpose for all mankind that the sacrificial lambs did for specific families before His ministry. Christ was a sinless, blameless substitute for our sins. The Bible clearly tells us what Christ’s moral expectations are for us. If we lost our salvation every time we fell short of those ideals, then none of us would be saved for more than a few minutes at a time. If that were true, what purpose was there in His death?
Also, according to the Bible, if we could lose our salvation, then it would be lost forever, because Christ only died once. Hebrews 6:4-6 is an often misunderstood passage, which strongly supports the doctrine of eternal security in two ways: it implies that Christ’s sacrifice must be sufficient for all sins, and states that if it were possible for a person to lose their salvation, it would be forever lost. According to this passage, if a person could do something that cost them their salvation (which they cannot), then it would be “impossible” for them to be re-redeemed.
Once Saved, Always Saved – The New Creation Critics of the “once saved, always saved” doctrine claim that it gives Christians a license to sin. They presume that those who believe in eternal security intend to accept salvation, and then continue to willingly sin. This is inaccurate, because anyone who has been truly saved is a new creature (2 Corinthians 5:17), has the conviction of the Holy Spirit (John 14:26; 1 Thessalonians 4:8), and now wants to live for Christ. Someone who continues to willingly and blatantly live in sin has not truly accepted Christ (1 John 2:19; 1 John 3:6; James 1:26). While this false belief may be held by some, it is not a part of the teachings of any true Christian church (Romans 3:8).
A person who willingly, humbly, repents of sin and turns towards the cross, trusting Christ as their Savior, will be saved (Acts 16:31; John 6:37; John 14:6). That salvation is once and for all, eternal, and secure. Those who truly trust in Christ are saved once, and saved always.
|
|
|
Post by concern7 on Jul 2, 2008 22:27:49 GMT -5
Berts eyes are rolling call the i doctor
|
|
|
Post by déjà vu on Jul 2, 2008 22:44:11 GMT -5
good post atruebeliever! Thanks ,this is the way I understand salvation
|
|
|
Post by kiwi on Jul 2, 2008 23:15:47 GMT -5
I wonder if King Saul had been saved?
|
|
|
Post by InChrist on Jul 3, 2008 2:37:30 GMT -5
Don't worry about King Saul, Alan, worry about yourself. You obviously feel that salvation can be lost by your comment. All those who feel they must do something to gain salvation cannot believe that salvation is eternal for those to whom God has granted it. Those who know their salvation is because of faith in Christ alone believe that they have been saved only because God purposed to save them. This removes their insecurity and places it in the perfect sacrifice of Jesus and His righteousness to atone for their sin and make them acceptable before God.
It's sad so many choose to disbelieve God's word and in it's place seek to promote their own views which contradict scripture and lead others astray. Any who believe that salvation is gained cannot trust God alone to save and keep saved those whom God gave to Jesus to die for. These are the same ones who promote a works based salvation which is more logical to mans thinking.
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Jul 3, 2008 11:47:12 GMT -5
It's sad so many choose to disbelieve God's word and in it's place seek to promote their own views which contradict scripture and lead others astray. Any who believe that salvation is gained cannot trust God alone to save and keep saved those whom God gave to Jesus to die for. These are the same ones who promote a works based salvation which is more logical to mans thinking. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is [the book] of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. Clearly this "man's thinking" (John-the-author-of-Revelation) believed in judgment for our works. Does Revelation qualify as God's word? Can we finally drop this book from the canon if it's not divine?
|
|
|
Post by y me on Jul 3, 2008 12:38:10 GMT -5
It's sad so many choose to disbelieve God's word and in it's place seek to promote their own views which contradict scripture and lead others astray. Any who believe that salvation is gained cannot trust God alone to save and keep saved those whom God gave to Jesus to die for. These are the same ones who promote a works based salvation which is more logical to mans thinking. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is [the book] of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
Clearly this "man's thinking" (John-the-author-of-Revelation) believed in judgment for our works. Does Revelation qualify as God's word? Can we finally drop this book from the canon if it's not divine? DC, I guess some people have already editted out the verses in Rev. that they don't like, eh? (sorry people, couldn't resist.)
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Jul 3, 2008 13:03:55 GMT -5
that suits me, "y me". There are several more verses I'd like to weed out, if y'all agree.
|
|
|
Post by y me on Jul 3, 2008 18:33:37 GMT -5
that suits me, "y me". There are several more verses I'd like to weed out, if y'all agree. ya, just make sure that they are ''weed'' verses indeed! ;D We don't want to spoil the fruit any...
|
|
|
Post by Johnny DeRaad on Jul 3, 2008 23:48:50 GMT -5
It's sad so many choose to disbelieve God's word and in it's place seek to promote their own views which contradict scripture and lead others astray. Any who believe that salvation is gained cannot trust God alone to save and keep saved those whom God gave to Jesus to die for. These are the same ones who promote a works based salvation which is more logical to mans thinking. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is [the book] of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. Clearly this "man's thinking" (John-the-author-of-Revelation) believed in judgment for our works. Does Revelation qualify as God's word? Can we finally drop this book from the canon if it's not divine? Incorrect interpretation of the judgement for whom, for what works
|
|
|
Post by learnedaboutgrace on Jul 4, 2008 0:06:34 GMT -5
Yes, we will be judged according to our works, but not whether or not we receive eternal life, believers will receive eternal life. The judgement of our works will determine our reward (which is not eternal life, it is a "sliding scale")
Also, if you want to use scripture to bolster your position, it is important for you to "read the address". Was it meant for the Jews, the 12 tribes, or for those living (and dieing) during the dispensation of grace?
|
|
|
Post by oh reel lee on Jul 4, 2008 1:31:20 GMT -5
Yes, we will be judged according to our works, but not whether or not we receive eternal life, believers will receive eternal life. The judgement of our works will determine our reward (which is not eternal life, it is a "sliding scale") Also, if you want to use scripture to bolster your position, it is important for you to "read the address". Was it meant for the Jews, the 12 tribes, or for those living (and dieing) during the dispensation of grace? yes, and you are incorrectly interpreting and defining position, ''address'', ''meant'', ''living'', ''grace''. Please rewrite your reply, using ther correct usages, thanks! ;D
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on Jul 4, 2008 2:16:55 GMT -5
Once Saved, Always Saved – The Biblical Evidence The Bible teaches “once saved, always saved” Wrong and very dangerous.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2008 7:28:51 GMT -5
Those who believe they are saved by grace don't seem to have a lot of it, oddly. Those who reject being judged by our works don't seem to have much in the way of works, either.
Are we onto something here?
|
|
|
Post by Johnny DeRaad on Jul 4, 2008 7:42:06 GMT -5
Once Saved, Always Saved – The Biblical Evidence The Bible teaches “once saved, always saved” Wrong and very dangerous. Absolutely right, with amazing freedom when you finally understand it and start to live it..... .. ...your looking from the wrong side of the photo negative.
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on Jul 4, 2008 7:43:58 GMT -5
Those who believe they are saved by grace don't seem to have a lot of it, oddly. That's an equivocation on "grace". That's something you can't possibly know so it's an argument from ignorance. Nope. But as you were complaining in another thread about logical fallacies, well....time to brush up.
|
|
|
Post by Why Yes You Are On on Jul 4, 2008 7:44:57 GMT -5
Those who believe they are saved by grace don't seem to have a lot of it, oddly. Those who reject being judged by our works don't seem to have much in the way of works. Are we onto something here? To Something. It is the same circle you have been stuck for a long time now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2008 8:02:05 GMT -5
Hey! Who's the front guy? Ilylo, Brad? Ranman? Maybe its that Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, and his general synod seeking to find their way in turbulent times.
|
|
|
Post by Johnny DeRaad on Jul 4, 2008 8:03:12 GMT -5
Those who believe they are saved by grace don't seem to have a lot of it, oddly. Those who reject being judged by our works don't seem to have much in the way of works. Are we onto something here? Bert...who are the "they" your referring to?? . ..Myself, and most of the others on this forum, don't have a problem with you practicing your religion in the manner you wish, but do have a problem with you and your church telling us how we HAVE to do it your way to have a proper relationship with the Creator. This disagreement, and the ensuing discussions that take place, are all that you can use in your claim of "absence of grace on our part".... .. or maybe better said this way ... . when we correct you on YOUR understanding of proper relationship with the Father. And what works do you know of in my life, or most every other posters life on this forum, that are of insufficient quality or quantity, that you can make the "judgement" that they don't exist?? Are you following me around? .. I'll call the law on ya. . .stalking is illegal in Belle Plaine!!
|
|
|
Post by Johnny DeRaad on Jul 4, 2008 8:07:08 GMT -5
By the way, Bert... I don't believe your new personal statement . .. you love the dialog!!!!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2008 8:21:09 GMT -5
quote - "... have a problem with you and your church telling us how we HAVE to do it your way to have a proper relationship with the Creator."
I think the real thrust of the arguments here does not really touch my church. They revolved largely around the idea that we have it all wrong. "Grace" involves notions of a deeper and Christ-like humanity of love, patience, understanding, empathy etc.
ps My good mate Ilylo helped me with the profile 'cos he has a neat one too! Like it?
|
|
|
Post by interestingly true on Jul 4, 2008 8:26:20 GMT -5
Those who believe they are saved by grace don't seem to have a lot of it, oddly.[/e] That's a good point. They assume that grace is owed to them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2008 8:56:27 GMT -5
One question: was King Saul saved? If not, why not?
|
|
|
Post by Was on Jul 4, 2008 9:51:03 GMT -5
Was the family of Job who were killed while being sifted by Satan saved?
|
|
|
Post by No iT on Jul 4, 2008 9:52:27 GMT -5
Hey! Who's the front guy? Ilylo, Brad? Ranman? Maybe its that Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, and his general synod seeking to find their way in turbulent times. iT is G it and you are the second in line
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Jul 4, 2008 11:20:47 GMT -5
Incorrect interpretation of the judgement for whom, for what works Johnny, Revelation is pretty darn clear. It says what it says. Grant Osborne's 800-page tome is a leading commentary on the book, and he sure accepts "judgment by works." Look, nobody is making you believe what Revelation says. We are free to believe Paul if we prefer. Wouldn't it be a lot easier to just admit that Revelation means what it says, and then kick the book out of the canon cuz its teachings are contrary to the opinions of other N.T. writers?
|
|
changing scriptures
Guest
|
Post by changing scriptures on Jul 4, 2008 11:34:36 GMT -5
Incorrect interpretation of the judgement for whom, for what works kick the book out of the canon cuz its teachings are contrary to the opinions of other N.T. writers? Ya, open the door wider, especially if we can all agree that we can add and subtract at the will of the people, come to think of it....isn't Revelations the only book that warns us not to change any scripture----ha, if you get rid of that verse, we could rewrite the whole bible, eh? Why not make everyone happy to believe whatever the want to believe, why not believe some fairy tales, too. ;D what ever you want to believe . Go to the church of your own construction , disregarding the truth just kidding!!
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Jul 4, 2008 11:41:31 GMT -5
Why not make everyone happy to believe whatever the want to believe, why not believe some fairy tales, too. ;D what ever you want to believe . Go to the church of your own construction , disregarding the truth just kidding!! Why are you ridiculing this? This is exactly what every one of us is doing, except that none of us think we are disregarding the truth...we all think we know the truth ;D
|
|