Once Saved always saved?

[Jac3510]

It's useless to discuss with you, all you do is insert words and thoughts into my mouth that you wish I believed. I told you, I believe John 3:16...just that it's not the ONLY verse in the scripture that explains the Gospel...at least not to one so apparently aquainted with the rest of it.

Not like the pharisees...only using Christ's words...but you ignore that...it's convenient for you.

When you use those other verses to disprove John 3:16 by denying what it teaches, then you are using those other verses to justify your disbelief. That's what the Pharisees did.

Christians' do have and can have full assurance in Christ that they are indeed saved. Sometimes this takes time to for some people realize this as the Lord may have to teach them something so they'll learn to realize they are saved. I'll let the Lord work on the person as he so wills. If it takes time to remove a person's doubts and fears of being saved or not, or lose that works mentality — so be it. God is God and who am I to stand in his way and declare he cannot do this? I hope you are not saying this.

What I am saying is what Calvin said. Assurance is of the essence of saving faith. The moment a person is saved, they KNOW that they are saved. If they don't KNOW that they are saved, then they aren't. Now, a person can obviously be confused thereafter by bad theology. Someone can come along and tell them things like they can lose their salvation if they don't do works, or that they won't really know they are saved until they manifest good works. Such teaching will obviously cause them to lose any assurance that they might have had. But if a person doesn't have FULL assurance, then they, at that moment, do not believe the Gospel. Thankfully, continued faith (nor continued faithfulness) is not necessary for salvation. But to lose your assurance is to lose faith in the Gospel.

Also, I do not think you are saying that mental credence alone saves. You appear to understand that believing in Christ changes / transforms a person. Therefore, how can you deny evidences of such transformation in a person life as well as limit God's work within a person's soul how ever so God wills?

You are confusing two separate issues here. One is what a person must do to be saved. The other is what happens to them after they are saved. To be saved, I must only believe. Period. End of story. Nothing more. If I say I have to do any more, then I am making God a liar and don't believe the Gospel. Once a person has believed, then God gives them a new nature that exists alongside of the old, for the old is not eradicated (Rom 7:14ff). But does that new nature mean it must necessarily manifest itself? The answer is no. It should, but it is up to the person to walk in the Spirit rather than in the flesh.

Sometimes, the Jacob method (wrestling with God) is best for one person to find rest and for another the Abraham method (just believe) works best?

You aren't advocating two ways of salvation, are you? I can't believe that you are suggesting that for some they must wrestle with God to be saved whereas with others the must believe to be saved.

If you are talking about assurance, I, again, disagree. If a person does not have assurance, it is because they don't believe the Gospel. If anyone must wrestle with God to gain that assurance, it is only because they are wrestling with unbelief. God asks them only one question: "Do you believe me?" They give Him all the reasons in the world that they should not. They quote Scripture at Him that proves His promise to be wrong. But He simply asks, "Do you believe?" When they lay aside their doubts and simply believe that God told the truth, assurance is the inevitable result, not because it is something mystical, but because of what they are believing. Jesus said if they believe then they have everlasting life. Therefore, the moment the stop arguing with God and simply believe Him, then they know that they have everlasting life.

The Lord does know that we all need changing and helps us to change in many diverse ways one on one. Maybe a person needs assurance they are doing the right thing and are on the right course? Let God be God in a person's life.

There is a difference in being assured that you are on the right course and being assured that you are saved.

Next, Mounce's Bible Dictionary does a great job tracing the etymology of the Hebrew and Greek words translated believe and faith in our English bibles. What I am discovering is that it appears, Jac, you are interpreting the word 'believe' according to one limited definition. The Greek words translated both for Believe and Faith are from the same word groups. Simply put, one is verb from and the other a noun form.

I've read Mounce, and with all due respect to him, he is wrong. He commits TWO errors in his definition:

1. The Etymological Fallacy - Contrary to popular belief, tracing a word's etymology gives us next to no information on what it actually means. Over time, the definitions of words can widen, narrow, or take on more positive or negative connotations over time. Consider, for example, the Greek word fobeo, from which we get our word "phobia." In classical Greek, it meant "to flee," and that itself came from the Lithuanian begu, begti ("to run"). Thus, while the original sense of the word meant "to be startled" or "to run away," it, naturally, developed a connotation of "to fear." But even that progressed further to which the word could be used of reverential awe, as in the "fear" of God.

If, then, a preacher were to look at the etymology of the word "fobeo" (fear) and preach that the "fear of God" is a bad thing because it meant "to run from God," then he would be committing the etymological fallacy. Put simply, in linguistics and semantics, it does not matter how a word was used in the past. It only matters how it was used at the time of the particular writing.

2. Illegitimate Totality Transfer - This second fallacy is committed when a person finds that a word has a range of meanings and attempts to import them all into a word's meaning at any given time. Take the example above. A person notes that fobeo may mean, "to run," "to fear," "to respect," "to be terrified," etc. If a person insists that all of those meanings are present every time the word is used, he has committed this fallacy.

When Mounce tells us that included in faith is the concept of obedience and submission, he is simply mistaken. His theology is driving his definitions.

Added to the difficulty is that our English words "faith" and "believe" are from separate roots, whereas in Greek, they are the same. That is, in Greek, the noun form is pistis, which means "belief." The verb form is pisteuo, which means "to believe." The participle is pisteuon, which means "believing." You can see the common stem in each. But when we translate these words as "faith," "I trust," and "believing," respectively, we lose that closeness of association. These are all referring to the same idea in both Greek and Hebrew. Now, the word itself has a range of meanings, but the two most prominent of these are "to believe" (in the intellectual sense of the word) and "to entrust." But neither of these has any aspect of submission in them, regardless of whatever Mounce may say.

The Hebrew is just as clear here. The word in this case is aman, and in the Qal it means "to declare steadfast." When the Bible says that Abraham "believed" (aman) God, it means that he declared that God was capable of doing what He said He could. Whether or not there is any personal submission in this is another matter entirely. In fact, I submit to you that you may be obedient to one in whom you have no faith (haven't you ever done something your boss told you to do, even though you thought that they were incompetent?); likewise, you may not be obedient to one in whom you have great faith.

To believe in Jesus is to believe that God told the truth concerning who He is. God declares that Jesus is the Christ, His Son, the Guarantor of everlasting life. It is to recognize that Jesus is the Messiah--the King of the Old Testament prophecy--the One who will rule and reign forever. In so believing that fact about Jesus, we believe that He alone can give us entrance into His kingdom, for that is what it means to be Christ. And when we believe THAT, then God--because we declared Him true--declares us righteous. Submission and obedience are totally separate issues, and to make them part of the Gospel is to deny the Gospel.

The Hebrew word used to translate faith and believe has the meaning of action. Your belief / faith produce something. Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him as righteousness. Abraham's actions did not make him right before God. He made many mistakes but there was action. He believed and bore fruit of this belief.

This is just false. Allow me to quote from the Theological Word Book of the Old Testament, on aman (I:115-16):

• This very important concept in biblical doctrine gives clear evidence of the biblical meaning of "Faith" in contradistinction to the many popular concepts of the term. At the heart of the meaning of the root is the idea of certainty. And this is borne out by the NT definition of faith found in Heb. 11:1.
  The basic root idea is firmness or certainty. In the Qal it expresses the basic concept of support and is used in the sense of the strong arms of the parent supporting the helpless infant. The constancy involved in the verbal idea is further seen in that it occurs in the Qal only as a participle (expressing continuance). The idea of support is also seen in II Kgs 18:16, where it refers to pillars of support.
  In the Hiphil (causative), it basically means "to cause to be certain, sure" or "to be certain about," "to be assured." In this sense the word in the Hiphil conjugation is the biblical word for "to believe" and shows that biblical faith is an assurance, a certainty, in contrast with modern concepts of faith as something possible, hopefully true, but not certain.
  Following from this we find the word in the passive Qal participle used with a passive meaning "one who is established" or "one who is confirmed," i.e. "faithful one" (II Sam 20:19; Ps 12:1 [H 2]; 31:23 [H 24]).
  In the Niphal conjugation the meaning is "to be established" (II Sam 7:16; I Chr 17:23; II Chr 6:17; Isa 7:9). The Niphal participle means "to be faithful, sure, dependable" and describes believers (Num 12:7; I Sam 2:35; Neh 9:8). This form is used to describe that upon which all certainty rests; God himself (Deut 7:9), and his covenant (Ps 89:28 [H 29]).
  One interesting illustration of the relationship between "belief" and "being established" is seen in Isa 7:9. Ahaz is told that unless he believes (Hiphil) he will not be established (Niphal), i.e., without faith he has no stability.
  The various derivatives reflect the same concept of certainty and dependability. The derivative 'amen "verily" is carried over into the New Testament in the word amen which is our English word, "amen." Jesus used the word frequently (Mt 5:18, 26, etc.) to stress the certainty of a matter. The Hebrew and Greek forms come at the end of prayers and hymns of praise (Ps 41:13 [H 14]; 106:48; II Tim 4:18; Rev 22:20, etc.). This indicates that the term so used in our prayers ought to express certainty and assurance in the Lord to whom we pray.

There is in all of this no necessarily result of action. There is only the declaration of certainty and steadfastness. Abraham's own faithfulness is a different issue in his faith in God. It is true that faith SHOULD bear good fruit, but it in no way is a guarantee.

Someone who is born again believes, as you so stated, but they also have growth that bears fruit that they are saved. This growth comes in a wide array of ways; conviction, lessons learned, learning to love as God does and demonstrating it, lesson of increasing trust in God, putting off the old man - putting on the new, etc and etc.

Again, we should bear fruit, but it is in no way a guarantee. Just the opposite, we will only bear fruit if we abide in Christ.

It appears to me that what you are saying is that growth is not necessary, only simple belief. The bible does not teach this. Paul does not teach this, nor did Jesus. You will know a tree by its fruit Jesus said. Paul mentions putting off the old man - putting on the new man, growing in grace, loving one another. James stated that faith (belief) without works is dead.

This is exactly why I said that such a teaching denies the Gospel. You are saying that simple belief is insufficient for salvation, that growth is also necessary. Like Bav, you are appealing to other Scriptures to prove your point, but in doing so, you are only setting up one Scripture against another. Contrary to your doctrine, Jesus says that simple faith is sufficient. If you do not believe that, then you do not believe the Gospel.

I do not think anyone here is saying that good works saves you or keeps you saved. Rather what I am hearing is that when one believes what follows initial belief 'comes' a change in a person. There is fruit to ones faith so if a person is 'truly' saved there will be bonafide empirical evidence for this.

Show me a single verse in Scripture that describes a person as "truly" or "genuinely" or "really" saved. The fact is that such a qualification is entirely man made. The Bible says that WHOEVER believes, not whoever TRULY believes. We can't stand the thought of that, because that would mean that people who believe and continue in sin are still saved. How could it be that a person who continues in sin could go to heaven?!? Of course, the answer is that we all continue in sin. No one, not even the best of us, is worthy of heaven. And if the best of us is not worthy of heaven, then the worst of us is no more worthy of hell. Do you really believe that a Christian who lives his life it total submission to Christ is more worthy of heaven than the believer who falls away and spends his life undermining the Gospel of Jesus? No, but they are both just as worthy of Hell.

Further, and this is where I started my conversation with you, how much evidence must a person have before they can be sure that they are saved? None is ever enough. And if none is ever enough, then no work is ever any evidence at all! Matt 7:21ff tells us that many will do great and wonderful works in the name of Jesus. It is only at the Judgment that Jesus will reveal that their works were from a faithless heart. Are you, or am I, so wise that we can look at a person's work and distinguish between the works of faith and the works of faithlessness? No, we aren't. And if we cannot distinguish such works, we cannot distinguish the believer from the unbeliever by his behavior.

And praise God we cannot. For if we could, then both you and I would stand condemned. Do you do enough good works and do you sin so little that you can proudly look in the mirror and declare yourself justified? Have you repented enough? Have I done enough good that I know I must be saved? Such is the height of arrogance, for on our best day, our best righteousness is but filthy rags to God Almighty. No, our works can give us no assurance, but only fear of condemnation, even on our best days, and to say otherwise is to be the Pharisee that proudly thanked God that he was not like the sinner next to him. But it was the sinner who begged for mercy who left justified, not the Pharisee who believed his works demonstrated his righteousness.

This change is not works based. It is natural or better put, the Lord fashioning you into his workmanship for his works. It appears to me that you are confusing this as works that keep you saved. These are not. The reason why many people use terms such as 'perfectly' believe, 'truly' believe, etc, is to qualify the meaning of the word 'believe' putting it in the proper biblical sense faith/believe is used.

There is no such proper biblical sense. The Bible offers no distinctions, so you may not either. It simply says that whoever believes has everlasting life. It is YOU who would deny that message by adding qualifiers that Jesus Himself does not add. Jesus gave one condition: faith. But you redefine faith so that not everyone who believes has everlasting life, but instead, only those who believe and are then changed. But Jesus did not say that. Jesus said EVERYONE who believes. When you say NOT EVERYONE who believes, then you don't believe Him.

Is the Lord changing us? Yes, to the extent that we believe in Him for that change. But to believe in Him for that change is not the same thing as to believe in Him for salvation. To walk by faith is different than to be born again by faith.

As I understand what you are conveying is this:

Abraham believed the Lord, and God counted it to him as righteousness; therefore, Abraham hypothetically could have stayed in his home town and never went to the Promised Land. He believed and only that was important - nothing else! Anything else is considered works and is anathema to belief. Abraham could have stayed where he was at simply because he believed the Lord, and God counted it to him as righteousness.

Yes, that is exactly what I am conveying, and if you believe that Abraham's subsequent obedience was required for faith, then you deny the Gospel. Further, if subsequent obedience is required--or even only a necessary result--then you deny assurance, for until I have put into practice that obedience (and then, how much obedience must I see?), you cannot know that your faith is real. But if you do not have assurance, as I showed above, then you do not have faith, for faith is assurance.

Question: if that were the case, then, did Abraham really believe?

Yes, Abraham would have "really" believed in that case. Notice, again, that YOU, not the Bible, have added the word "really." Look at your own quote above: "Abraham believed the Lord, and God counted it to him as righteousness." If the Bible says that Abraham believed, then he believed. To look at his lack of works (had that been the case), then the Bible would have lied to say he believed at all. If the Bible says, "He believed," then you, my friend, have NO RIGHT to ask the question, "Did he really believe?"

You may say this doesn't apply here, because Abraham DID show obedience, and had he not, then the Bible would not have made such an assertion. But there are other believers who show no such obedience. Consider Lot, Simon Magnus, and the Pharisees of John 12:42, to name only three off the very top of my head.

Are you telling people to simply believe and not necessary to put off the old man? That what Paul wrote in Romans 13:11-14 is not applicable: “Besides this you know the time, that the hour has come for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed. 12 The night is far gone; the day is at hand. So then let us cast off the works of darkness and put on the armor of light. 13 Let us walk properly as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and sensuality, not in quarreling and jealousy. 14 But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires.” ESV

I am telling people that, for salvation, they must simply believe. If they think that they have to put off the old man in order to be saved, then they do not believe the Gospel.

Why, B.W., are you trying to use other Scripture to deny John 3:16? Do you not believe that every single person who believes, REGARDLESS OF FUTURE BEHAVIOR, is saved?

I have met many people who call themselves Christians because they simply believe; however, I would never trust them due to their constant bad character and infamous behavior. A tree is known by its fruit. Do they believe yes! Is there fruit to their belief — No!

And here we come to the heart of the matter. Take the log out of your own eye, brother, before you take the speck from theirs! Do you REALLY think you are any better than they? Do you REALLY think that you are any more righteous than they? Do you REALLY think that your good behavior qualifies you for heaven any more than they?

No, your behavior is no indicator that you are saved, and their behavior is no indicator that they are not. They simply believe. If they simply believe, then, B.W., REGARDLESS OF THEIR BEHAVIOR, they are saved! To think otherwise is the height of all arrogance and is to deny your own salvation.

There is more to believing than simply acknowledging something as true, or a feeling it is true, or simple mental credence, or fully convinced. It is also living what you believe.

This is a false Gospel, B.W. Living what you believe is a work. Walking in faith is not the condition for salvation. Placing your trust in Christ, one time, is. To change the condition from believing to walking in belief is to change the Gospel, which Paul says is anathema. Believe the Gospel, B.W.! It is Good News. Everyone who believes has everlasting life. EVERYONE. By attempting to keep those whom you deem sinners out of heaven, you only deny yourself a place there.

Titus 3:8-9, “The saying is trustworthy, and I want you to insist on these things, so that those who have believed in God may be careful to devote themselves to good works. These things are excellent and profitable for people. 9 But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless.

Titus 1:1, “Paul, a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ, for the sake of the faith of God's elect and their knowledge of the truth, which accords with godliness, 2 in hope of eternal life, which God, who never lies, promised before the ages began “

Ephesians 2:10, “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.”

These verses mean what they mean. As I said to Bav, I will not allow you to use other verses to contradict John 3:16. We can talk about each of them in their own contexts, but only after you decide whether or not you first believe John 3:16 AS IT IS WRITTEN. For none of these contradict the Gospel as presented, that whoever simply believes has everlasting life.

No one here, as far as I can tell as of this date, is teaching that good works save you. They are saying to believe in Christ, just as you state, but also understand that one also lives by what they believe.

B.W., this is dangerously close to admitting to a complete rejection of the Gospel! Look again at your words:

"They are saying to believe in Christ, just as you state, but also understand that one also lives by what they believe."

Can you not see that you have two conditions? Where in John 3:16 are there two conditions? Where in John 3:16 are we told to live by faith? No where. We are told only to believe in Jesus Christ. To add a condition is to deny the truthfulness of that verse.

Remember, there is Jesus' Gospel, and there is Andy's Gospel. Jesus' Gospel is that everyone who believes has everlasting life. Andy's Gospel is that to be saved, a man must believe AND HE'S got to live by his faith. Who do you believe, B.W.? Jesus or Andy?

[madscientist]

"They are saying to believe in Christ, just as you state, but also understand that one also lives by what they believe."

Can you not see that you have two conditions? Where in John 3:16 are there two conditions? Where in John 3:16 are we told to live by faith? No where. We are told only to believe in Jesus Christ. To add a condition is to deny the truthfulness of that verse.

Remember, there is Jesus' Gospel, and there is Andy's Gospel. Jesus' Gospel is that everyone who believes has everlasting life. Andy's Gospel is that to be saved, a man must believe AND HE'S got to live by his faith. Who do you believe, B.W.? Jesus or Andy?

Ok but could not that simply mean that one also had to live by faith? it could be sort of "obvious" or so that one also have to live by faith. OK consider this example: I believe in Chrirst (like Satan), or just believe but am evil? will that save me? no! then why are we Christians to do good to others and also are told numerous other things? here are a few of them:
1. Pray
2. Go to church on Sundays etc.
3. Teach about Christ
4. Confess
5. Not commit deadly sins or least
6. The thing i mentioned before comes again - so does dying with a deadly sin mean one goes to hell?

One alternative - quite harsh - is, that if one continues to sin (e.g. accepts JC, is good and then kills people, does bad things, etc. but still says "I'm a believer) - is a hypocrite, meaning he never believed in the first place - or believed, but didnt live such life. We know that we have to keep control of ourselves, try to go away from temptation, resist in temptation, etc. Why would God command these things?
Moreover we are to love God and other people. That means one should not sin etc. If one could believe in JC and commit bad sins (possibly "not love God"?) then he does not fulfill the commandment. hence, if one sins that means he doesnt love God (even if he declares to the universe he believes JC died on cross and took our sins). If one doesnt love God he cant be saved. Then does it mean he didnt believe in first place?

I'd say that the word "believe" does not simply mean believe as we say (believe He died and is God) but also includes living by faith. Although not stated explicitly, the 'magic' word "believe" could represent these things. Remeber Satan believes in God yet is not saved... so, a pure belief but hatred and ignorance and bad sins account for a belief as "I believe in Satan" (i.e. his existence) but not that I live by satan's laws. So, I'd say that a belief in God's existence does not necessarily mean "belief in God" as existence does not save us.
That could be the problem for all of this belief may include some stuff i mentioned, such as resist of temptation, trouble with our free will and overcoming temptation, as well as doing things for God which should mean we are really His disciples...

And plz answer something on the thing on dying with a deadly sin what i mentioned before - or i'll start a new topic, it's quite troubling me.. thx. God bless and give us understanding.

[Jac3510]

MC, I just want to highlight one thing you said in particular:

If one doesnt love God he cant be saved.

[
Here's the key to your entire post. Now, you know that the only condition to salvation is faith, so you redefine faith so as to include living by faith, which, of course, presupposes a love for God. But loving God is not a condition of salvation. Notice the brief word study I did above on aman (the Hebrew word for believe).

If the condition for salvation was loving God, then John 3:16 would have said, "Whoever LOVES Him will not perish, but has everlasting life," and in the very context of John 3:16, it would have meant "serve,"--that is, "live by faith." But it doesn't say that. It says whoever believes. You have to decide whether or not you believe John 3:16 as it is written, that whoever believes is saved, not whoever loves God is saved. Those sentences to not mean the same thing. So which one is the Gospel (if either). Well, the Bible says whoever believes, and we must submit our thinking to Scripture.

God commands us to do other things so that we may grow in our relationship with Him, and there are great--even eternal--blessings to such a relationship. But is a growing relationship a condition of salvation? Not according to John 3:16. It is faith alone. Every single person who believes--just believes, and believes only--has everlasting life and will not perish. If you add any conditions to that, as we have been trying to do throughout this entire thread, then you are adding to the Gospel, which means that you don't believe the Gospel as Jesus presented it.

And briefly, the "deadly sins"--as John calls, the "sin unto death"--is just what it sounds like. It is a sin that, when a Christian commits it, leads to physical death, but physical death is not the same thing as the loss of salvation. For reasons I won't get into in this thread (we can start another), I take that sin to be idolatry in the strictest sense of the word (actually worshiping other gods).

[BavarianWheels]

It's useless to discuss with you, all you do is insert words and thoughts into my mouth that you wish I believed. I told you, I believe John 3:16...just that it's not the ONLY verse in the scripture that explains the Gospel...at least not to one so apparently aquainted with the rest of it.

Not like the pharisees...only using Christ's words...but you ignore that...it's convenient for you.

When you use those other verses to disprove John 3:16 by denying what it teaches, then you are using those other verses to justify your disbelief. That's what the Pharisees did.

Who is disproving "John 3:16"?? You act as though John 3:16 is a stand-alone-statement...it's part of a whole "scene" if you will. There is a continuation in the thought...It's not some statement Christ, from silence, stopped and uttered, then continued in silence.

No where in that verse does it say, "OSAS" One MIGHT presume OSAS if that is the only thing Christ spoke...but to your dismay there is much more he said...problem is YOU THINK CHRIST'S WORDS "DISPROVE" CHRIST'S WORDS. They don't...they clarify the Gospel for mature Christians. The assurance is given a new Christian, but as that Christian grows, he/she finds soon that there is a Christian life...a truth to follow..."but whoever lives by the truth comes into the light,..."

Jac, it is you that deny's Christ's words.
.
.

[Jac3510]

Bav, you are just repeating points I've already refuted. I'll demonstrate, and unless you have something new to add to the conversation, we can let it drop, because I'm not going to keep repeating points when you just ignore them:

Who is disproving "John 3:16"??

But I have already written:

• I put forward John 3:16 as a clear presentation of the Gospel. You presented OTHER VERSES to refute John 3:16

You act as though John 3:16 is a stand-alone-statement...it's part of a whole "scene" if you will. There is a continuation in the thought...It's not some statement Christ, from silence, stopped and uttered, then continued in silence.

But I have already written:

• If you want to talk about how we should understand 3:16 in its context, we will.

No where in that verse does it say, "OSAS"

But I have already written:

• Of course He said OSAS. I already addressed that in my last post. How long does everlasting life last?
  
  A person who is unsaved is dead. When they are born again, they are now alive (regenerated). They have life. They have passed out of death and into life. If they lose that salvation, that means they have lost life, which means they died. But if you died, then the life you had was not EVERLASTING life, because you died.

One MIGHT presume OSAS if that is the only thing Christ spoke...but to your dismay there is much more he said...problem is YOU THINK CHRIST'S WORDS "DISPROVE" CHRIST'S WORDS. They don't...they clarify the Gospel for mature Christians.

But I have already written:

• So if you present a verse that "proves" you can lose your salvation, you still have to deal with John 3:16, which says you can't.
  .
  .
  you may as well just admit that you don't believe John 3:16 because you can't seem to reconcile it with the way you view the rest of Scripture.
  .
  .
  You say that it is true that whoever believes has everlasting life, but then you say that it is ALSO true that a person can lose his salvation. Those ideas are contradictories. BOTH cannot be true. You can't put them "TOGETHER to form truth." That would be like me saying, "It is true that the shape is a circle, but it is ALSO true that the shape is a square. It is a culmination of ideas we put TOGETHER to form truth."
  
  You'd charge me, rightly, with being irrational.
  
  Now, you either affirm that a person has EVERLASTING LIFE, which, by definition, cannot be lost (else it is no longer everlasting), or you deny that a person has EVERLASTING LIFE. John 3:16 affirms it. You don't. That means you don't believe John 3:16. That means you don't believe the Gospel.

The assurance is given a new Christian, but as that Christian grows, he/she finds soon that there is a Christian life...a truth to follow..."but whoever lives by the truth comes into the light,..."

But I have already written:

• the text does NOT say that a person must LIVE the truth. Allow me to quote it for you:
  
  "But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light"
  
  Notice it says that IF you live by the truth, THEN you come to the light (believe). It does not say that once you believe, you must then LIVE by the truth. So your claim is simply false.

The reality, Bav, is that you don't believe that every single person who believes has everlasting life. You believe that everyone who believes AND lives according to the truth has CONTINGENT life, life the will BECOME everlasting if they stay in that truth until death. But that, of course, contradicts (not clarifies) John 3:16.

I am all for comparing Scripture with Scripture and for having one Scripture shed light on another, but in no way will that additional illumination ever contradict the first statement. But your theology contradicts John 3:16 and so renders it so that it is incompatible with how it was originally stated. Like the Pharisees, your traditions have caused you to reject Jesus' claims. By the very Word of God, I'm asking you to reconsider your position. Just take Jesus at His Word, Bav. To do so means everlasting life, and that is GOOD NEWS! Bav, I have good news for you. You can be saved by faith ALONE in Christ ALONE, regardless of how you live your life! I have good news! Your works have no bearing on your eternal destiny, either good or bad. You best day is but filthy rags, and you stand before a perfectly holy God condemned, but Bav, if you just believe what Jesus said, then you will stand justified, not because you so righteously lived in the truth, but because you declared Him Truthful who is the Truth, and in so doing, He, in His Grace and Mercy, declared you justified Good news, Bav. It's the Gospel. Faith alone in Christ alone saves, but it is the only way of salvation, and the one who does not believe stands condemned already.

God bless

[BavarianWheels]

Bav, you are just repeating points I've already refuted. I'll demonstrate, and unless you have something new to add to the conversation, we can let it drop, because I'm not going to keep repeating points when you just ignore them:

Who is disproving "John 3:16"??

But I have already written:

• I put forward John 3:16 as a clear presentation of the Gospel. You presented OTHER VERSES to refute John 3:16

You act as though John 3:16 is a stand-alone-statement...it's part of a whole "scene" if you will. There is a continuation in the thought...It's not some statement Christ, from silence, stopped and uttered, then continued in silence.

But I have already written:

• If you want to talk about how we should understand 3:16 in its context, we will.

No where in that verse does it say, "OSAS"

But I have already written:

• Of course He said OSAS. I already addressed that in my last post. How long does everlasting life last?
  
  A person who is unsaved is dead. When they are born again, they are now alive (regenerated). They have life. They have passed out of death and into life. If they lose that salvation, that means they have lost life, which means they died. But if you died, then the life you had was not EVERLASTING life, because you died.

One MIGHT presume OSAS if that is the only thing Christ spoke...but to your dismay there is much more he said...problem is YOU THINK CHRIST'S WORDS "DISPROVE" CHRIST'S WORDS. They don't...they clarify the Gospel for mature Christians.

But I have already written:

• So if you present a verse that "proves" you can lose your salvation, you still have to deal with John 3:16, which says you can't.
  .
  .
  you may as well just admit that you don't believe John 3:16 because you can't seem to reconcile it with the way you view the rest of Scripture.
  .
  .
  You say that it is true that whoever believes has everlasting life, but then you say that it is ALSO true that a person can lose his salvation. Those ideas are contradictories. BOTH cannot be true. You can't put them "TOGETHER to form truth." That would be like me saying, "It is true that the shape is a circle, but it is ALSO true that the shape is a square. It is a culmination of ideas we put TOGETHER to form truth."
  
  You'd charge me, rightly, with being irrational.
  
  Now, you either affirm that a person has EVERLASTING LIFE, which, by definition, cannot be lost (else it is no longer everlasting), or you deny that a person has EVERLASTING LIFE. John 3:16 affirms it. You don't. That means you don't believe John 3:16. That means you don't believe the Gospel.

The assurance is given a new Christian, but as that Christian grows, he/she finds soon that there is a Christian life...a truth to follow..."but whoever lives by the truth comes into the light,..."

But I have already written:

• the text does NOT say that a person must LIVE the truth. Allow me to quote it for you:
  
  "But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light"
  
  Notice it says that IF you live by the truth, THEN you come to the light (believe). It does not say that once you believe, you must then LIVE by the truth. So your claim is simply false.

The reality, Bav, is that you don't believe that every single person who believes has everlasting life. You believe that everyone who believes AND lives according to the truth has CONTINGENT life, life the will BECOME everlasting if they stay in that truth until death. But that, of course, contradicts (not clarifies) John 3:16.

I am all for comparing Scripture with Scripture and for having one Scripture shed light on another, but in no way will that additional illumination ever contradict the first statement. But your theology contradicts John 3:16 and so renders it so that it is incompatible with how it was originally stated. Like the Pharisees, your traditions have caused you to reject Jesus' claims. By the very Word of God, I'm asking you to reconsider your position. Just take Jesus at His Word, Bav. To do so means everlasting life, and that is GOOD NEWS! Bav, I have good news for you. You can be saved by faith ALONE in Christ ALONE, regardless of how you live your life! I have good news! Your works have no bearing on your eternal destiny, either good or bad. You best day is but filthy rags, and you stand before a perfectly holy God condemned, but Bav, if you just believe what Jesus said, then you will stand justified, not because you so righteously lived in the truth, but because you declared Him Truthful who is the Truth, and in so doing, He, in His Grace and Mercy, declared you justified Good news, Bav. It's the Gospel. Faith alone in Christ alone saves, but it is the only way of salvation, and the one who does not believe stands condemned already.

God bless

As I said...you can't reconcile Christ's words in the whole of the context...you cannot seem to understand that Christ himself used the words I'm putting as clearing up...if Christ himself uses terms that one can fall away, ONE CAN FALL AWAY...there is no assurance of salvation to one that does not "REMAIN IN ME"...these are not my words, but Christ's...

It is you that must recognize that you refuse to believe Christ at His word.

It's just comical to see you struggle...because the logical conclusion of OSAS is the same as Once Created Perfect, Always Created Perfect (sinless)...and we all know that is not true...why you ask? Because in God's perfection He adds or allows for FREE WILL. In other words, one can change his/her mind. OSAS does not apply to one that at one point accepts, then at another refuses.
.
.

[Jac3510]

It's just comical to see you struggle...because the logical conclusion of OSAS is the same as Once Created Perfect, Always Created Perfect (sinless)...and we all know that is not true...why you ask? Because in God's perfection He adds or allows for FREE WILL. In other words, one can change his/her mind. OSAS does not apply to one that at one point accepts, then at another refuses.

Well, minus the first part, which was just a repeat of the same objection I handled in the very post you replied to, at least this is an attempt at a new approach for you. It's illogical, but an attempt, none the less.

So, if free will in a required part of perfection, then you must believe that in Heaven we will have Free Will, and if Free Will, then, by your definition, we will be able to lose salvation there, too. After all, in Heaven, we will be perfect, and "in God's perfection He adds or allows for FREE WILL." And if in Heaven we have free will, then "one can change his/her mind."

Nice. See where denying the Gospel takes you, Bav? You have not only a false gospel on earth, but the belief that you can lose your place in Heaven once there.

[BavarianWheels]

It's just comical to see you struggle...because the logical conclusion of OSAS is the same as Once Created Perfect, Always Created Perfect (sinless)...and we all know that is not true...why you ask? Because in God's perfection He adds or allows for FREE WILL. In other words, one can change his/her mind. OSAS does not apply to one that at one point accepts, then at another refuses.

Well, minus the first part, which was just a repeat of the same objection I handled in the very post you replied to, at least this is an attempt at a new approach for you. It's illogical, but an attempt, none the less.

So, if free will in a required part of perfection, then you must believe that in Heaven we will have Free Will, and if Free Will, then, by your definition, we will be able to lose salvation there, too. After all, in Heaven, we will be perfect, and "in God's perfection He adds or allows for FREE WILL." And if in Heaven we have free will, then "one can change his/her mind."

Nice. See where denying the Gospel takes you, Bav? You have not only a false gospel on earth, but the belief that you can lose your place in Heaven once there.

Funny how you make it a "false gospel" to have free will...actually, it is exactly what I believe...free will will not be removed when we are changed in the twinkling of an eye...at the last trump...where we will be made perfect. We will still have free will...but we also will have the knowledge of sin and it's consequences...kind of like not standing in front of a train coming at full speed...it's suicide. But I suppose your heaven is like a military basic training where all we'll see or do is dictated by the Sergeant. Sorry, my God is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow!
.
.

[Jac3510]

Well, there you have it. A man who believes that, even in Heaven, our salvation can be lost. I suppose I need say no more. To everyone else who is reading the thread, THAT is the logical conclusion of believing that you can lose your salvation, and THAT is why Jesus preached OSAS in John 3:16.

I appreciate that you've left everyone with a very solid contrast. Either you can lose salvation in Heaven, or Jesus preached eternal security in John 3:16. To anyone who is and will read this thread, I simply say the same thing I've been saying all along: John 3:16 says that whoever believes has EVERLASTING LIFE. He does not say that whoever believes has life that can be lost--temporary, contingent life. Bav has stated that he does not believe that, even to the extent of denying everlasting life to those who are in Heaven. I hope no one else chooses his road. It's a false Gospel, or, as Paul says, no gospel at all.

[BavarianWheels]

Then he told them many things in parables, saying: "A farmer went out to sow his seed. As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root. Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants. Still other seed fell on good soil, where it produced a crop--a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown. He who has ears, let him hear."

I guess the ones that "sprang up quickly" are OSAS? If so, why then does Christ say the plants were scorched and withered...? What about the plants that apparently grew among the thorns AND THEN were choked?

Oh I guess Christ is a liar and/or didn't quite choose His words correctly.

Oh but wait...Christ actually explains this paradox of yours...

"Listen then to what the parable of the sower means: When anyone hears the message about the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what was sown in his heart. This is the seed sown along the path. The one who received the seed that fell on rocky places is the man who hears the word and at once receives it with joy. But since he has no root, he lasts only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, he quickly falls away. The one who received the seed that fell among the thorns is the man who hears the word, but the worries of this life and the deceitfulness of wealth choke it, making it unfruitful. But the one who received the seed that fell on good soil is the man who hears the word and understands it. He produces a crop, yielding a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown."

Hmmm...sounds very much to me that one can receive the Word with joy...but only last a short time. Then the ones that receive the Word on good soil...Produce...Oh my goodness...is that work? Maybe that's the "living by the truth" part...
.
.

[BavarianWheels]

Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers.* Be shepherds of the church of God,* which he bought with his own blood. I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them.

Why would anyone need to be "watched over" if OSAS is correct as you interpret it? Savage wolves distort the truth...and DRAW AWAY? Hmmm...

The only person(s) that can claim OSAS are the ones that REMAIN in Christ...no one can take them out of Christ's hand if they REMAIN in Him...no one. But this passage suggests that wolves can distort and draw away...Oh I suppose this is one I should throw out since it doesn't gel with John 3:16 as you interpret it. heh.
.
.

[BavarianWheels]

and THAT is why Jesus preached OSAS in John 3:16.

No where does it mention OSAS in John 3:16. Show me...or quit this line of thinking.

It mentions everyone who believes has everlasting life...then it goes on to say "whoever lives by the truth comes into the light."

You still neglect all of Christ's Word.
.
.

[BavarianWheels]

Well, there you have it. A man who believes that, even in Heaven, our salvation can be lost. I suppose I need say no more. To everyone else who is reading the thread, THAT is the logical conclusion of believing that you can lose your salvation, and THAT is why Jesus preached OSAS in John 3:16.

I appreciate that you've left everyone with a very solid contrast. Either you can lose salvation in Heaven, or Jesus preached eternal security in John 3:16. To anyone who is and will read this thread, I simply say the same thing I've been saying all along: John 3:16 says that whoever believes has EVERLASTING LIFE. He does not say that whoever believes has life that can be lost--temporary, contingent life. Bav has stated that he does not believe that, even to the extent of denying everlasting life to those who are in Heaven. I hope no one else chooses his road. It's a false Gospel, or, as Paul says, no gospel at all.

To anyone else reading this...the scriptures are clear, that while I believe as John 3:16 says, that whoever believes has everlasting life, it is also clear that one must continue to put faith in Christ...it's not a one time deal of confess and forget. It's a confession and an submittal to His Word, to His ways...If it were a system of believe and forget, then OSAS (as you interpret it) would be true. OSAS is true...if one REMAINS in Christ.
.
.

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

OSAS is true...if one REMAINS in Christ.

Once Saved Always Saved

There really are no ifs about it BMW. But if your religion wants to add ifs, so be it.

FL

[B. W.]

Jac, after reading your response to my last post, I can see that you totally misunderstood what I was conveying in that post. Maybe I did not write clear enough. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt as I may not have been clear enough.

Let me state that in no way was I being derogatory toward you personally or your views. In fact we both agree that when one believes — you are saved. What I was trying to convey is that when you believe, let me qualify this as 'truly believe', there comes a change in a person's life. You can call this sanctification if you like. It is this that makes the difference between the children of darkness and the child of God. That road of sanctification reveals the difference.

True, new believers may not make this road as their time of earth may end shortly after conversion but there is still a change, rather a transformation. When one is born again something does happen to person. I hope you are not denying that. Born of the indwelling Holy Spirit does something to a person.

Your point is true — at the moment of believing is what saves you. I do not deny that. I do not think many people reading this would deny that either. You seem to read into what I wrote in last post things that are not there and you do the same with what others wrote too. This irritates people as you put words in people's mouths things they do not mean or are really saying. I call this - leading the witness.

There are true believers — why do I say that? For something to be true the opposite (false) must be there to make truth true. Bible speaks of false brethren, does it not? If there are false brethren, then there are true.

If there is true belief then there also is false belief. Believing in Santa Claus would be a false belief. The Pharisees of Jesus time had a false religious belief even though it was derived from the same scriptures Jesus taught from. There are true believers and false believers. Add brethren for believers if you need scripture for support on what just wrote and you'll get the picture.

That is why I can say and qualify those that truly believe from those that falsely believe. There are true brethren and there are false brethren. For something to be true an opposite of true must exist. Therefore, there is true believing as opposed to false believing. Bible has many examples of people believing in false things.

What I described in my last posting was an attempt to explain what 'follows after' someone first believes: Sanctification. This process is different for each person. For some reason, unknown to me, is that you appear incapable of making this distinction. No offense intended but your extremist view is what gives OSAS a bad rap (name). Sad but true.

You totally read into what I wrote things not intended nor suggested in an attempt to 'lead the witness.' There is not a lot of difference in Mounce's and TWOT exposition of the Hebrew word for believe and faith. They both bring out the same points, however in the writers own words. There is no easy definition to define belief / faith.

So I'll propose this too you:

What is belief — how does one believe? Under your definition of believing, believing would be considered a work. To get around this, then the next thing I often heard during such discussion as this is that a form of the doctrine of election is used to get around this obstacle. I have heard often that God makes you believe so that believing is not a work of human agency in any shape, manner, or form.

“He (God) puts the want too in your wanter” as I heard a radio preacher put it once. To follow this logic further to its conclusion, you'll discover that you are either selected or not as no works are allowed — not even the 'work of believing.'

However, it takes brain power (human agency at work) to hear and to become convinced beyond all doubt. Bioelectrical impulses are at work in the human brain for us to hear, think, believe, etc. That is human effort, hmmm, human agency at work — is it not? However, No works are allowed in the equation whatsoever!

And I also have heard that it does not matter if one remains an adulterer, fornicator, or vile person — hey all they need only to believe and they are in. No change necessary or allowed. You clearly stated this in your discussion of Abraham.

That certainly is Good News. All you need is a loud speaker to proclaim the following (which encapsulates your doctrine):

“Come all come everyone: believe in Jesus as John 3:16 states and you'll have eternal life. Escape Hell — believe! No change necessary, remain as you are. You can rape and pillage, lie and cheat, steal and profane — you are in and heaven bound because you believed. The work of sanctification ol Bryan (B. W.) wrote about — why that is not the gospel! He's a heretic!

However if you ever doubt your salvation — you are lost doomed — doomed! Never were you saved! Never!! You may lose a reward in heaven if you remain in sin but who cares — you believed without doubting and are heaven bound. That work, err, grace saved you! Come all come one! No need to obey God at all just believe but you must believe without ever doubting!"

For something to be true a false also must exist. Believe without doubting comes about how? What work of human agency is involved in this? The Brain at work processing this? We learn not to doubt through the process of sanctification and repentance. I think your definition of Works is eschewed and off. The process of reformation comes through the hand of God after you believe - he will not let you go. That what set's apart the children of God and the children of the devil. A child of God faith in the Lord grows during the process. It does not remain stagnate but bears good fruit.

This Reminds me of a true story I heard a year ago: A Young teenage women believed and was saved. She doubted not and became years later a young woman. She was brutally gang raped by a bunch of thugs. After the assault she doubted God and as she said, hated God for allowing this to happen, she turned away from the Lord and burned her bibles. Became involved in all kinds of anti Christian things.

According to you, she never believed and was never saved because she doubted! Imagine her doubt could override the love of God and his grace! She later, as I have heard, said she never lost the pull of God drawing her back to him. Later, she came back to the Lord after a bit of grief. The lord never let her go. She started a ministry for women who have been raped and battered and can reach them like none other having gone through what they did. I wish I could remember her name and ministry. Maybe someone may have heard of her could chime in.

With all due respect Jac — I guess Jesus did not teach the correct gospel:

Luke 24:46-47, “ and said to them, "Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, 47 and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem."

Matthew 28:19-20, “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age."

Nor did Peter:

Acts 11:18, “When they heard these things they fell silent. And they glorified God, saying, "Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life."

Nor did Paul:

Acts 20:21, "...testifying both to Jews and to Greeks of repentance toward God and of faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. "

Act 26:20-21, “...but declared first to those in Damascus, then in Jerusalem and throughout all the region of Judea, and also to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, performing deeds in keeping with their repentance. 21 For this reason the Jews seized me in the temple and tried to kill me.”

Yes there is Godly grief that comes in many diverse ways as I wrote about in my last post

2 Co 7:10, “For godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation without regret, whereas worldly grief produces death."

The tones of your discourses appear to be simply quarrelsome for no other reason than just to be:

2 Timothy 2:24-26,”And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, 25 correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, 26 and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will.”

According to your system of belief, I have to ask, is the entire bible is wrong to ask us to obey God and bear the fruit of repentance because we believed - truly believed?
-
-
-
Bible quotes from ESV