Featured Can a Born Again Christian lose thei salvation?

The following is not addressed to anyone specifically.

I often have wondered why discussion of this doctrine brings out hostility. In my general area, there are OSAS Baptist churches and free will Baptist churches. While they disagree on this subject, I don't see open hostility between them because of it.

Regardless, I have stated my views and will never change them, as I expect that those who here believe opposite from me will not change theirs. So, I see no reason to continue the discussion from my side.

God bless, and may we all meet in heaven one day.

 

Well, you follow the Baptist view, and I'll follow the view set forth in First Century texts, which we can with great certainty say have been recovered to the extent that we don't have to guess what was said.

I have given some references to the First Century teaching directly from the source, if you want to dispute them, feel free.


God bless.

 

That is curious.

So do you have any thoughts about it now?


God bless.

 

How is a sinner enslaved by sin able to exercise a free will to either accept or reject God, yet a freed sinner can't exercise a free will, seeing they are free?

 

I believe scripture is clear, once saved always saved, we are kept as in a locked cell, 1 Peter 1:3-5.

Not the way it actually reads. It says "because you are not of My sheep." Of My Sheep is not the same as My Sheep. Folks who are "of My Sheep" are those who are open to the gospel, perhaps worshipers of God. Jesus tells us we must believe in the One that sent Him, in order to believe in Him.

But just because a person professes belief, does not mean they are saved. Matthew 7 teaches us of those who did works and said "Lord, Lord" yet Jesus said of them, "I never knew you." Not He knew them once, but they fell away.

John tells us of those who departed, left because they were not "of us." So again, these were professors of belief in Jesus, yet Jesus never knew them, they had not been born anew.

 

I guess the first English Baptists didn't have the same Bible that the later Particular Baptists had then. You know, the Bible written in the first century by the apostles of Jesus.

 

Yes, but neither you nor anyone else here would want to know them. I can with certainty predict the result, even though it would be based on misunderstanding of my position. I don't want to subject myself to that -- already have on other forums and don't want to have it repeated here.

 

I would offer a few suggestions:

1. Those who are not studied enough on the matter get offended when the faith they borrow from others is challenged. It is a matter of them being wrong, not the Doctrine itself.

2. Immaturity.

3. Wickedness. Some people get off on telling others they are going to Hell. This can be seen to be true on both sides.

4. Emotional response to insult, which can also be seen, and sometimes perceived, on both sides.

5. Guilt: some people know they don't have a clue either way and their conscience is pricked.

6. Uncertainty. some are mostly convinced one way or the other, and not knowing bugs the dickens out of them (and I have no idea what a dickens is, or why one would like to retain it).


We could probably add to this list, and it might make a good thread, lol.

And we don't see them forming a union either.

Let them get together on a forum such as this and we will see the same hostility arise.

Any time someone has the audacity to charge error on the behalf of another, offenses will come, and the fact remains...

...only one side is right.

Never say never.

Our walk usually results in growth, and there are just going to be preconceived notions many of us carry into our studies that have to be corrected by Scripture.

Some do.

Most usually "grow up" in a Church teaching one side, and because they never embraced it, or had doubts, they make a dogmatic change in their view.

This is true in a number of areas. I've seen Baptists become Catholics, Charismatics, and even Mormons. One fellow that converted to the Mormon faith was a person I am convinced was demon possessed.

The question remains...what does Scripture teach? I deal with many people who teach the L.O.S.T. (loss of salvation teachings) and I can tell you that every passage used to teach loss of salvation is yanked out of it's immediate context then strung together with equally wrested passages.

If you would care to test this statement, to see that I am not boasting, simply give me a proof-text of the L.O.S.T.

All I ask is that you do so quickly, as I hjave made this to be my last day for the time being, and that when I respond that you show me the same courtesy and respond to the response, and show where my address is in error. What always happens is that the response is ignored and the typical response is "Oh yeah, well what about__________(fill in the blank with next L.O.S.T. proof-text)."

There is much good reason to continue.

What you say when you say that Salvation in Christ can be lost is that Scripture is in error.

Tell me what this...


Hebrews 10:14

King James Version (KJV)

14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.


...means.

Is that "I hope you make it?" or "I hope we make it?" lol


God bless.

 

It is very simple, you are beginning with a false premise,
which is that the natural man has an ability within him to comprehend the spiritual things of God, the Gospel topping the list in relevant revelation.

Salvation is wholly the work of Holy God.

It is initiated through the Ministry of the Holy Spirit Who began the Ministry of the Comforter (as contrasted with the external ministry of empowerment in the Old Testament) whereby natural man is enlightened to his condition. The Holy Spirit convicts of sin, righteousness, and judgment, and just like every other Age in history, man responds.

When God told Adam not to eat of the Tree of the Fruit of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, was Adam subject to punishment or reward...before knowing God's will?

The caricatures of Arminian and Calvinistic teachings which both do a disservice to the Sovereignty and Holiness of God neglect to calculate a very basic Bible Principle: God always has, and always will...judge man according to the response to the revelation they have been provided.

The punishments differ, as in the Old Testament sin resulted in physical death. Probably one of the clearest pictures of that is the death of David's baby. Another would be most of those who were redeemed out of Egypt. Another would be Samson.

The only "free will" any man will ever exercise in regards to salvation is to reject the will of God. In this Age it is rejecting the Ministry of the Comforter Who glorifies Christ and brings understanding to the natural mind.

When one responds favorably, this could be viewed as much a choice as grasping a hand that seeks to pull a drowning victim out of the water.

When is the last time someone claimed to have saved themselves from drowning by grabbing that hand?

Translations can impact theology, to be sure. Then couple that with man's tradition and there you go: recipe for disaster.

We have no such excuse, as Bible Scholarship in large part has recovered, they say, 99.99% of Scripture.

And even it had not, those who had particular translations, whether it was that meticulously copied by Scribes, the LXX, the Latin Vulgate, or the King James Version...every individual that studied those translations were not bereft of God Himself enlightening the texts for those diligently and sincerely seeking to do His will.

And each of us, going back to the first reading of the Law, will be judged according to our response to that revelation. No-one will reasonably tell God "but you planted me in a fellowship that had it wrong! It's your fault!"

That is an absolute caricature of the Sovereign God. To think He would reveal Himself through His Word then hide that revelation from those seeking to obey.

Caricature.

I wouldn't mind hearing them. Why do you think I asked?

My guess is that you have embraced something unorthodox and are ashamed to admit it, because your heart is troubled that you might have it wrong.

Try me out.

Could I guess and say you have embraced the latest rage in Modern Christendom?

That unbelievers will not suffer eternal torment in Hell?

Just a guess, but if it is, can I tell you that I am familiar with the view, and though I reject it, I also would treat it as any other doctrinal issue. Doctrinally. lol

Whatever it is, is it kosher with the Baptists you have just used as a positive reference?


God bless.

 

I'm thinking you're a four pointer, DC?

 

I am not of the opinion of many Arminians, especially in the Wesleyan tradition, that salvation can be "lost", or lost, regained, lost again, regained again, etc. My position is that of Thomas Helwys, that salvation can be forfeited -- that is, by an act of the will.

 

Be well Rebel. Don't let the "love" here get to ya. :1_grouphug:

 

I am not ashamed of my belief. And I wouldn't mind sharing it with you. But I will not subject myself to being condemned to hell for believing it and being banned from the forum for believing it, either. Let me just say that my belief does not fit into any of the three theories of hell: universalism, annihilationism, or eternal hell.

 

Thanks, Zaac.

It's not love in its normal sense that I'm worried about.

 

No, I consider myself to be an "All-Pointer."



I have no ties to Systematic Theology, though you will see areas where my doctrine agrees with points in several.

Yeah, I remember the thread we discussed it in.

How about trying out the Pauline version, the Johannine version, and the version testified by Christ Himself?

Not being a smart-aleck, just saying that the Systems should not take precedence over the Scripture.

Then you should be ashamed of it, lol. If you call yourself a Baptist and fear being banned, then it is not likely that it is a view embraced by any Baptist.

And whether it is a view that is presented in Scripture can only be discerned by measuring it against Scripture.

As far as being "condemned to Hell" for this belief, unless it is tantamount to a denial of Christ then it would be foolish to think it would raise such a charge, though I know some are a little more apt to take the seat of judgment on Christian forums.

Salvation is dependent on a response to the Gospel, and while I believe (which motivated the statement to begin with) that fear of God is usually also coupled with fear of the Judgment of God, which is ultimately Hell, I also understand that God does not withhold or withdraw salvation due to our understanding or doctrinal flawlessness.

That would be contrary to the numerous teachings which make it clear that salvation is wholly attributed to the kindness, grace, and mercy of God...never of works.

Here is an example of that you may not have considered:


Titus 3:4-5

King James Version (KJV)

4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,

5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

You do not think that someone discussing Scripture with you can be a labor of love?

It can be. Disagreement doesn't nullify love, my friend, only sometimes a view that one must conform to our views that can breed such a sentiment.


God bless.

 

Five point Calvinist? I ask to get a clearer view of your beliefs...

 

I am an "All-Pointer," and not a Calvinist.

I believe we are called to be correct on all points, not just a few. Not the points of TULIP, of which RC Sproul would like to change "Perseverance of the Saints" to Preservation of the Saints" (which would make it more understandable for some).

I am usually called a Calvinist on the forums I visit. I am not. While I am in full agreement on many of Calvin's views, and have nothing against Calvin. our efforts should be expended in pointing people to Christ, not Calvin. We can study, teach, expound Scripture all day long and never once mention John Calvin.

But, devotees usually make Calvin a more important figure than Christ. Who do they quote? Who's teachings do they debate?

So again, I am at least trying to be an All=Pointer, rather than limit myself to topics within that System.

Few would question RC Sproul as one of the finest teachers the Reformed have ever seen, and yet he has said he has seriously thought about starting a new denomination. But he then says he will never do that, because it would just be more of the same.


God bless.

 

But the Baptist world is bigger than this forum and bigger than fundamentalism.

 

Brother Rebel,

The Greek word for eternal in the New Testament is "aiónios" and it's definition is similar to the English definition of "eternal", that is it means " age-long, and therefore: practically eternal, unending" See http://biblehub.com/greek/166.htm

How can it be "unending" or "eternal" if it can cease in the life of an individual?

God bless,

Brother Joe

 

Brother Rebel,

If you believe you can lose your eternal salvation, I guess you basically have a view of God as a probation officer , is that your view of God? Do you have salvation or probation?

Also, perseverance of the saints did not originate from Calvin, Augustine was born in 354 and per Wikipedia "Church Father Augustine of Hippo taught that all whom God chooses to save are given, in addition to the gift of faith, a gift of perseverance which enables them to continue to believe, and precludes the possibility of falling away.[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perseverance_of_the_saints

Regarding if the first Baptists held to it, that would depend on if you view Thomas Helwys Declaration of Faith of 1611 to be a "true Baptist" confession or the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith to be the true Baptist confession. The 2nd, in my opinion, has more scripture to back it up.

The doctrine of course has its origins in scripture, but I have been on Baptisboard all week and need to take a break to be with family at least until Monday or Wednesday at latest. Lord willing, if this thread is still active at that time I hope to respond with a scriptural defense of the doctrine.

Just out of curiosity, and you do not have to answer me if you do not feel comfortable, what church order (if any) do you attend or belong to Brother Rebel?

God bless and enjoy the rest of the weekend (don't spend it all online)! LOL