Loss of salvation arguements compiled...

Read it. They deny the master who bought them. They are false teachers. They are unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgment. They have turned away from the holy commandment.

A question like this makes me think you haven’t even read the passage.

Yes, some have. Escaping defilements does not mean they have been saved.

You are not hearing many of the Calvinists correctly.

By reading the text and taking it seriously.

Yes. The people here for one. The NT and our experience is full of them, people who make changes in their outward lives, but never change inwardly.

 

Stop spamming the board Bob. Make clear concise responses, and do it all in one color.

It is easy. Read the text. These people are not going to live with Christ for ever. The text answers you.

What? This doesn’t even make sense. Lost people don’t become loster (that’s not even a word). Their sins do increase, and their judgment increases with that.

Of course not. No one said he was. What James is doing is pointing out that teacher incur a greater judgment for false teaching, which is exactly what Peter is saying.

Yes, there most likely are. That is what “judged according to the things written in the books” is talking about.

Yes. So?

How did I miss that? Again, this whole line of reasoning isn’t making sense. Paul is warning them not to fall away because they will be cut off.

I haven’t seen anyone here expose the flaws of OSAS. I certainly don’t find this to be a serious attempt. I don’t think you do either.

I have noticed that.

Asking a question isn’t the misuse. The misuse is your use of these texts to try to disprove God’s promise of eternal security.

That wasn’t my point, as you will be able to tell by reading. And it wasn’t Christ’s point.

How so? Do you understand how to interpret parables?

I did.

Again, Bob, it is hard to take this as serious interaction. You are ignoring contexts, ignoring clear statements of Scripture, and the net effect is that you are making God out to be a liar. I don’t think you want to do that, but I don’t think you have any choice. You have backed yourself into a corner from which you cannot escape.

 

Originally Posted by 2 peter 2:20-22
HOW can it be WORSE? Worse to live with Christ forever than burn in hell forever?? Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Larry
This is a question that has nothing to do with the text. It is irrelevant.


Stellar assumption -- but where is the logic? the Reason? the part where you "do the math"??

Please answer the question.

Your response relies on the reader not going to the full question to see that you have not answered as it was stated here

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1054642&postcount=96

 

Quote:
#1. That rationalization merely bends the text AS if to argue that "LOST people became LOSTER" in that view. You seem to say that Peter is arguing in favor of persevering in the first LOST state rather than falling into a LOSTER state!! You stand the Bible on its head in an attempt to spare OSAS.

Please answer the question

your response relies on the hope that the reader will not go to the link and read the question
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1054642&postcount=96

 

I answered the first question in my post to HP, showing how the text describes these people.

The second "question" does not even make sense as you have presented it. I did comment on it, however.

If you are confused, just say what confuses you and I will try to explain it more clearly.

I kind of wonder though if you dont' understand "shall never perish" if anything I say will make sense to you. But I will give it a shot.

 

Quote:
#3. You did not show "even once" that a misuse of the text is required for me to "ask the question" after simply QUOTING the text.

This response is perhaps the most direct and "to the point" I have ever gotten from Pastor Larry. Here you admit that simply quoting a text and asking a question about it FROM the context of one who does not already accept your POV is "a misuse of the text".

And the truth is we see that tactic from a number of other posters on your side of the isle. "Misuse" and "out of context" defined as nothing more than "does not agree with my bias".

I find the fact that you come so close to actually admitting that - to be astounding!

Now for another question - with such tactics as that in common use how could a follower of your methods ever hope to provide compelling cogent Bible based arguments to someone who does not already agree with them?

in Christ,

Bob

 

Probably not.

Perhaps some, but that has never been my standard. A text is misused when it is used to teach something that it does not teach.

It shouldn't be.

Not sure what the question is here. If someone does not accept the authority of hte Bible, I cannot convince them to. That is the work of the Spirit. But it is useless for me to cite Scripture out of context to prove a point that a passage does not teach. That makes me guilty of false teaching.

Perhaps your difficulty here is that you are used to people just rolling over for you, or humoring you by responding to a bad argument. If you say that 2+2=5 and therefore 8*8=72, I don't need to address the second. The foundation was faulty. You are asking us to address "second" issues, when you have built them from a faulty foundation. That foundation is what we must address. And no great argument needs to be employed to destroy the foundation. It is self-refuting.

 

HP: If in fact God purchased them, are we to believe that such a purchase did not constitute their escape, howbeit temporarily, from the defilements of the world and the hope of eternal damnation? Can one be ‘purchased of God’ and yet that purchase be of no eternal effect? Are we to assume then that all, saved and sinners alike, have been ‘purchased of God,’ and yet somehow mysteriously the blood of Christ is unable to succor those that will be eventually lost? Does not this make the blood of Christ ineffective to succor its intended ends?

HP: Where does the defilement of the world lie? Is it in the outward actions or in the heart, the motives, in the formation of the intents? If I were to believe you, and they are sinners all the time, before and after, how could they have escaped anything once? Are not ones actions nothing more than the subsequent effects of the hearts formed intents? Is it possible for one to live perfectly on the outside, yet be lost? Would not you agree that if one is a sinner that they will indeed act outwardly, in one manner or another, as defiled by selfishness and the world with all its pleasures, enticements and allurements?

I have never read one passage or seen one example of one escaping the defilement of this world that was not soundly born again. What ever happen to texts like the following?
Ps 14:3 They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
Ps 53:3 Every one of them is gone back: they are altogether become filthy; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

Does that sound like some have escaped the defilements of this world? Not to me unless again they have came to a saving knowledge of Christ and became born again.

 

HP: David, no offense, but thanks be to God someone is willing to go against what is commonly seen as ‘orothodox.’ Orthodoxy! When are we going to realize that unless we can support our ideas with Scripture, reason, and experience, regurgitating the errors of past men and dogmas will not facilitate the quest for truth. It is going to take men and women that are able to objectively search for truth, such as happened in the mid 1800’s if we are going to see a revival of religion again.

I am not trying in any way to defend anyone or any dogma. Neither am I trying to just throw mud at any dogma because it is said to be ‘orthodox’ Lets take just one point this detractor Mr. Wright says is a fact of Mr. Wright’s beliefs. For now I will give his detractor the benefit of the doubt and assume he is correct.

I would like for you, with Scripture , reason etc. establish that in fact the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us as a direct result of the atonement, as opposed to a result of our fulfilling the conditions of salvation i.e., repentance and faith. Show us where 'Scripture' establishes the fact that God imputed the righteousness of Christ to us personally and individually at the cross. Is this not in fact the heart and soul of what you see as the ‘orthodox’ position you seem to be in support of, i.e., that our sins were forgiven us at the cross by the imputation of Christ’s righteousness to us individually and on the account of every sin of the elect, past present and future?

 

The #1 quoted Scripture the eternal security proponents use to support their belief is John 10:28...

John 10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

...here the eternal security proponents places their emphasis on "they shall NEVER perish" so to them that proves once you are saved, you are always saved. HOWEVER, what they are not seeing is how this promise only applies to those who "TRULY" follow after Christ, and continues to follow after Christ "NEVER" waivering.

Though there are a number of Scriptures that contradicts the eternal security doctrine, I think 1Timothy 3:6 is by far the absolute undisputable...

1Timothy 3:6 Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.

...when read in context this is Paul giving the qualifications for being a bishop, which the apostle Paul states that a bishop is not to be a new convert, because a new convert may get prideful being placed in such a high position, and fall into the same condemnation as the devil. Now the eternal security doctrine teaches that a convert (new or old) "CANNOT" become condemned again. So if that is true, then how could 1Timothy 3:6 be true, which states that the new convert could fall into the same condemnation as the devil?

Certainly, people will twist the Scriptures and force the Scriptures to mean what they want them to mean, but it doesn't change what the Scriptures say or mean. In the end God's Word will stand, and all false teachings will crumble. :thumbs:

In the name of Jesus,

Ken

 

Some study on 2 Peter 2:1 is in order for you. I won't repeat it all here, but the answer is yes, being bought in this text does not mean being saved. If you don't study the text, you shouldn't draw conclusions about it.

I don't konw what the purpose of all these questions is. The defilement of the world is the way that the world acts. A person can escape defilement of the world without true salvation. Don't confuse the two things.

This passage in question is at least one such passage.

Again, you are confusing things. The verses you cite are true, and they are true of these false teachers. But these false teachers have made a show of religion without any inward change. Remember, not all people manifest their depravity equally.

 

How do you know? Is there a survey somewhere?

The verse does not apply to people who never waiver. It does apply to those who truly follow after Christ. That is what it means to be saved.

Perhaps the bigger issue here is that we have a confusion about what it means to be saved.

Where? So far, we have seen none that actually contradict it.

This Scripture simply teaches that one should be proved before being given leadership. What happened when Satan got proud? He fell. What happens when a pastor gets proud? He will fall. It would be too much to read "condemnation of the devil" as eternal condemnation. That is a twisting of the passage.

It may be that such a man was never truly saved. It may be that the condemnation of the devil is a fall into problems. Neither necessitates being able to lose your salvation.

I think you have just demonstrated the technique of someone determined to prove a doctrine regardless of what the text says.

This is absolutely true, and it is one reason why, no matter how much you believe you can lose your salvation, you can't. God's word is true.

 

HP: You have failed to establish that those that have escaped the defilement of this world are false professors or that they have had no inward change. You approach this whole passage from a presupposition of OSAS so it cannot be interpreted any other way than to believe that somehow they were not saved. Why do you act as if though my problem is 'not studying the text,' when no amount of study can or will safely or logically lead one to the conclusions you have assumed UNLESS one starts from the presupposition of OSAS? Show us the verse within this passage that supports your presupposition that the ‘unsaved’ have escaped the defilements of the world, and as such are the focus of this passage. If the sinner can in reality escape the defilemnts of sin in this world, what does salvation have to offer in this world that they do not already possess?

If you desire to believe in OSAS, fine, but admit to the presupposition that you approach the Word of God with i.e., ‘any text that would in any way support the notion that one saved can fall from that estate, must be addressing the lost because OSAS is my belief.’

 

No, I established it by quoting the passage and referring you to it. You have yet to interact with that.

Your question is flawed. Studying the text will lead to the conclusion taht you cannot lose your salvation. The only way you can avoid it is to make Christ out to be a liar. I reject that, as I am sure you do, but you have no answer for what Christ says. I think your problem is two fold: You have not studied the text and you have a presupposition about what it must say. (You accuse me of the same. I say the question will be answered by the text. I think the text shows that these men were not saved. If you can read 2 Peter 2 and conclude that these men are saved, then we have a very different view of what it means to be saved.

I have.

Freedom from sin and eternal life.

You think I should lie? I can't admit to a presupposition that I do not hold without being dishonest. The presupposition I hold is that God's word is true.

You have yet to account for the teaching of Christ and you rip these verses out of their own context and out of the context of Scripture. You provide no rationale for it.

 

God seems to repeat in His word things in according to
importance. The Messiah, His arrival twice, is mentioned
much -- it must be important. Among the most mentioned
is personal salvation. Indeed there are many word pictures
of Salvation in the Holy Bible. I've divided these word
pictures into two groups:

I. Word pictures of a salvation which
might seem they can be undone

1. Saved (one might be unsaved?)
2. redeemed (a slave term where one buys back a
--- family member they sold into slavery earlier. I guess
--- you might be sold back into slavery - but see #4 below)

II. Word pictures of a Salvation which cannot be undone

1. Born again (how can one be un-born again?)
2. Re-born into the Family of God
3. Adopted into the Family of God
4. Purchased with a Price (the Price is the
--- death & Resurrection of Messiah Jesus, it isn't going
--- to happen again, the price won't be paid again)
5. the Temple of the Holy Spirit
6. Clothed with Christ
7. Christian (Christ-like)
8. Part of the Body of Christ
9. Part of the Bride of Christ
10. Become the Salt of the Earth
11. Become the Children of Pronise
12. Become new creatures
13. Become baptized into Christ Jesus
14. Become enlisted into the Army of God;
---- Become Soldiers of Christ
15. Become Fishers of Men
16. -- etc. --

Also mentioned a lot is what one will do after
salvation. Some confuse these items as that
which will unsave you???

In fact, a better thing to do might me to encourage
one another to do the works of the saved person.
But people would rather argue about OSAS or
not-OSAS -- go filgure???

 

HP: Sorry Larry if I failed to interact with a verse you quoted. Would you be so kind as to post it once again with your comments as to what it establishes. I will try my best to be direct and to the point in responding. Thanks.

 

HP: Are you really that naïve? OSAS is touted as a cardinal doctrine of fellowship that I believe in all honesty I have found to be the watershed issue for real fellowship within ever Baptist or Calvinist church I have attended. If those in the Baptist circles would limit their instructions to the works of a saved person, there would eb no need for debate. Such is not the case. If you stick around for at least two services, you will find tht works have nothing to do with your salvation, have nothing to do with loosing ones salvation, and will not, no matter the depths of sin involved separate one from their salvation.

Let's see how long you can keep from bringing up or debating OSAS. Tell us about these ‘works of a saved person’ you mention Brother Ed.

 

HP: Just for the record, I personally do not speak in terms of losing ones salvation. I fully believe that Scriptures represent salvation in three tenses,

1. I have been saved (speaking of receiving by faith the earnest of our hope of eternal life and forgiveness of sins that are past, and granted the aide of the Holy Spirit in a new and fresh way to motivate us towards love towards God and our fellowman)

2. I am being saved ( speaking of our present walk with the Lortd in obedience to His Word, without which our salvation will not have an advocate at the judgment and will not inherit eternal life)

3. We will be saved (i.e., when we stand before God at the judgment, and Christ is our Advocate before the Father, we will be judged in Christ and as such be granted eternal entrance into His kingdom, and that without end to be forever with the Lord)

Salvation cannot be thought of in its entirety without incorporating all three senses into the concept of salvation as a whole. Now, in this present world, Scripture represents salvation by faith, with us as believers, having repented and forsaken our sins and trusting in Christ, as receiving the earnest of our salvation, the promise of the hope of eternal life. In a sense, we indeed do, by faith, receive the promise of eternal life, and although it can be said we have eternal life, that does not mandate or imply in any way the notion of OSAS. Scripture is clear. We can, in this life, reject the forgiveness we have received, make shipwreck of our faith, turn from our first estate, persevere in selfishness until the end refusing to repent, and find ourselves outside of the privileges of the faith at the judgment (having Christ the Righteous as our Advocate) and as such be eternally lost.

My turn to play the taget and give Pastor Larry a needed break

 

Well said. What you are describing is the very heart and soul of the eisegetical method so often practiced on behalf of OSAS were the "assumed point" is that any reading of the text that allows it to debunk OSAS is misuse of the text.

Such tactics are great for a "speaking to those who already agree with me" or who "will accept truth as being whatever I might make up while pounding the pulpit" -- but how could they ever work with the objective unbiaed reader OR with someone that does not already agree with your POV?

Indeed -- this is as far from Calvinism as one could imagine when it comes to hoping that "the total depravity of man includes successfully escaping the defilements of the wolrd and THEN RETURNING to them"


in Christ,

Bob

 

Ed you have given a great list to illustrate the utter failure in the salient "assumptions" of OSAS.

1. you show BOTH born-again AND RE-born which PROVES the need for those BORN to be RE-BORN.
2. You show the "family of God" to be irrevokable EVEN though ADAM is said by Luke to have been CREATED as "the son of God" - ie IN THE FAMILY. Adam dd not have to be UNCREATED or UNFAMILIED to be lost. Yet these are the horrible twists of logic that OSAS uses to establish itself.
12. Become new CREATIONS -- Adam did not need to first UNCREATE himself to be lost.
10. Matt 10 the "salt of the earth" Christ WARNS that if the SALT has lost is savor it is useless -- you claim that by the very MENTION of the term "salt" that it CAN NOT lose its savor - it can become worthless.
15. Fishers of men -Paul argues in 1Cor 9 "I buffet my body and make it my slave LEST AFTER preaching the gospel to OTHERS I myself should be DISQUALIFIED from it" - yet OSAS demands (as you point out) that we assume that such a fate is not even POSSIBLE!!

Look at the texts on page 1, page 5, page 9 GIVEN in color and highlight - HOW could those WARNING texts be construed as NOT motivating the saints to PERSEVERE???

in Christ,

Bob