toldailytopic: Can a saved person lose their salvation?
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
And isn't this the first point in your "answered here" argument.
I. Good Works in Sanctifying Grace are Necessary for Salvation. (Works, Works, Works)
Cruciform
New member
No Pelagianism or Semi-Pelagianism there, sorry. You appear to be endorsing the ancient heresy of Antinomianism.
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
Good, take it out of your answered here quote.
genuineoriginal
New member
Why are you proud that the Roman Catholic Church became heretick in the early centuries of Christian history?
Cruciform
New member
Already answered (Post #183).
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
Cruciform
New member
Why are you endorsing the ancient anti-Christian heresy of Ecclesial Deism? :doh:
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
Then post 183 answer is erroneous. Either it is or it isn't.
FYI Jesus answer is;
John 17:12
While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.
John 18:9
That the saying might be fulfilled, which he spake, Of them which thou gavest me have I lost none.
FYI Jesus answer is;
John 17:12
While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.
John 18:9
That the saying might be fulfilled, which he spake, Of them which thou gavest me have I lost none.
genuineoriginal
New member
Never heard of it, and your link seems to say it came from the Mormons, so it is not an ancient claim.
On the other hand, Augustine the heretick led the Roman Catholic Church into false doctrines based on Paganism and Greek Philosophy.
It has never repented from those heresies, and persists in canonizing the heretick as a saint.
Cruciform
New member
...and yet you ignorantly believe and teach it.
Perhaps you should take more than 20 seconds to actually read the article. Then you may have some small understanding of what you're talking about.
...or not. :yawn:
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
All within your #183 erroneous post of of verses for works salvation, not guaranteed salvation, Jesus and other apostolic teachings on losing salvation.
You are obviously not saved by grace through faith alone.
You are obviously not saved by grace through faith alone.
Cruciform
New member
By faith, yes; by "faith alone," of course not. Especially since such a concept is categorically and directly contradicted in the pages of the New Testament itself (e.g., Jas. 2:24; cf. Rom. 2:6-7; 1 Cor. 15:10; Phil. 2:12-13; Heb. 5:9). The sad fact (for you) is that the notion of sola fide ("faith alone") was completely unheard of in the Christian faith until Martin Luther and his followers invented it in the 16th century.
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
It is really sad to see how hard you have to work in order to be saved. You are under the bondage of the Old Covenant. And rah, rah for Martin Luther
Romans 1:16-17
16For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
17For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith
Ephesians 2:8-9
8For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9Not of works, lest any man should boast.
genuineoriginal
New member
It is obvious because no one is saved by faith alone.
In fact, there is only one verse in the Bible where "faith" and "alone" are mentioned together. (James 2:17 KJV)
A person must show his faith in order to merit favor (grace) with God. It must be the kind of faith that Abraham had and showed to God.
Even Paul showed that Israel should have attained to the law of righteousness by seeking it through faith. Their failure was treating it as a law unto itself instead of a way to follow God through faith.
Romans 9:31-32 31But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. 32Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone; |
Thank you very much.
I have.
Or you are deceived.
I'm actually sad for you also. Not because I don't think you are saved. But because you think that because I don't adhere to a particular doctrine you think I'm either not saved at all or at least badly deceived.I'm sad for you
That's not completely true. I don't have a firm stance on the matter. However, I think a large amount of scripture don't make sense if Jesus is God and I see no reason why Jesus must be God in order for salvation to be possible. So if I have to lean one way or the other I guess I'd lean toward the anti-divinity side. If you want to say I deny that Jesus is God I guess that's fine, but I just wanted to clarify.
See what I said above to heir. I am sad for you also.Sad indeed
:e4e:
Jedidiah
New member
Dear kmoney,
So long as you've done Romans 10:9-10, then the Lord may lead you to hold any number of views that diverge with whatever we call orthodoxy at any given moment in time. He has a purpose for everything He brings Us through, the Lord. We don't always - or hardly ever - know ahead of time why He's leading Us this way or that way, and sometimes we even lose all perceptible faith in Him at all, but if we've done Romans 10:9-10 then we're still saved, and it's actually the Lord living in Us Who is - for His own glorious purposes - driving Us to do, say, and believe whatever it is that we do, say and believe, all the time.
That's just what I think.
Consider this. Before the Lord came, the hierarchy of mankind went like this: The Father, Man, Woman, Child. The hierarchy within the subgroup Man went something like: Priest/Prophet/King (depending upon a lot things, either one of these might be at the top at any given moment in time), the rest of us plebs.
Since the Lord came, since the Gospel has been revealed, the new hierarchy is: The Father, the Son (Prophet, Priest and King; the risen Lord Jesus Christ), Man, Woman, Child. Now speaking purely fleshly, it makes sense to me that the old hierarchy was broken, which is why it had to be fixed, and between the pure spirit of the Father and the pure flesh of Man, there had to be a mediator, Who was both Spirit and flesh, both God and Man, so that, as opposed to Blaise Pascal, who said that there is a God-shaped vacuum within Man that can only be filled up with God, Paul implied that there is a Man-shaped vacuum that can only be filled up with God, and this Man/God is the risen Lord Jesus Christ.
That's just what I think.
Anyway, good post.
In Him,
-Jed
I'm really basic, if you've done Romans 10:9-10, then you're saved. I happen to share this view that you mentioned above with you, in this way, according to this reasoning:
So long as you've done Romans 10:9-10, then the Lord may lead you to hold any number of views that diverge with whatever we call orthodoxy at any given moment in time. He has a purpose for everything He brings Us through, the Lord. We don't always - or hardly ever - know ahead of time why He's leading Us this way or that way, and sometimes we even lose all perceptible faith in Him at all, but if we've done Romans 10:9-10 then we're still saved, and it's actually the Lord living in Us Who is - for His own glorious purposes - driving Us to do, say, and believe whatever it is that we do, say and believe, all the time.
That's just what I think.
That's one of the most level headed explanations for Unitarianism I've ever seen, kmoney. :up:
Consider this. Before the Lord came, the hierarchy of mankind went like this: The Father, Man, Woman, Child. The hierarchy within the subgroup Man went something like: Priest/Prophet/King (depending upon a lot things, either one of these might be at the top at any given moment in time), the rest of us plebs.
Since the Lord came, since the Gospel has been revealed, the new hierarchy is: The Father, the Son (Prophet, Priest and King; the risen Lord Jesus Christ), Man, Woman, Child. Now speaking purely fleshly, it makes sense to me that the old hierarchy was broken, which is why it had to be fixed, and between the pure spirit of the Father and the pure flesh of Man, there had to be a mediator, Who was both Spirit and flesh, both God and Man, so that, as opposed to Blaise Pascal, who said that there is a God-shaped vacuum within Man that can only be filled up with God, Paul implied that there is a Man-shaped vacuum that can only be filled up with God, and this Man/God is the risen Lord Jesus Christ.
That's just what I think.
Anyway, good post.
In Him,
-Jed
zippy2006
New member
What's interesting is that this "fundamentalist" understanding is antithetical to Paul's understanding of grace. It is perfectly analogous to a pagan or Jewish understanding: do this and you are magically saved. The Jews offered a sacrifice, the Christians say their incantation, "I accept Jesus as my personal Lord and Savior." This understanding falls neatly within that which Paul opposes. In chapter 10 he is still focusing on the universality (Jew and Greek) of salvation. Just look at the following three verses: Rom 10:11,12,13.
In truth, for Paul faith entails love (1 Cor 13:2), and the gospel produces sacrifice (Rom 15:16) in the footsteps of our High Priest (Lk 9:23, Phil 2:17, 2 Tim 4:6-7). "Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven." (Matthew 7:21)
:e4e:
Jedidiah
New member
Dear zippy2006,
Lord's not Jesus' first name. We know what Lord means. It means, when we call Someone else Lord, that we are a possession, a subject, a supplicant, a slave. And when we call Jesus Christ Lord, He is in control from then on.
Romans 10:11,12,13 only support this.
That's just what I think.
In Him,
-Jed
The incantation is part of it, and the belief in the heart that God has raised Him from the dead is part of it. We're physically, neurologically coordinating the verbal confession that Jesus Christ is Lord, with our honest and wholehearted belief that He has been raised from the dead. About the man Whom God has raised from the dead, named Jesus, Who has been made Lord and Christ, we call Him, Lord.
Lord's not Jesus' first name. We know what Lord means. It means, when we call Someone else Lord, that we are a possession, a subject, a supplicant, a slave. And when we call Jesus Christ Lord, He is in control from then on.
Romans 10:11,12,13 only support this.
Love is everything I do. I take up my cross daily. But it's not me doing it, as if I could ever do anything worthy of praise, but it is Him doing it because it is Him Who literally lives in me, for I have been crucified Gal2:20. Rom15:16 Phil 2:17 2Ti4:6-7 are all personal accounts of Paul, they're not written so that we can feel guilty about not being him.
That's just what I think.
In Him,
-Jed