Instant
Active Member
Based on what? I do not see anywhere in scripture that indicates that if the chastisement does not work, that person will not wind up in hell.
Christ only died for past sins...
- Thread starter friend of
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Instant
Active Member
If he sincerely repents, he can be saved. Bloodbought believes that if that "Christian" dies in the very act of rape and murder, he goes to heaven because he believes in Jesus. I do not believe that.
Yes, no question about it. To believe otherwise is to elevate the ability of man above the Power of God.
That's an incorrect read on that
Start at 19-21. The author is contrasting mans ability to enter the "holy" ( in the presence of God) under "law" as opposed as to through Jesus.
That's the context for the rest of that. That "sacrifice' and things references were to the ceremonial sacrifices and punishments.
None of that is describing salvation of the soul under Jesus.
Jesus' sacrifice was and is sufficient for all sins of all men for all time PROVIDED we accept it. Once legitimately accepted and we are sealed, nothing ( not Satan or any deed we are capable of) can remove that salvation. It was never "ours' to get or earn or have in the first place since we are all sinners so its pure unsubstantiated hubris to think we could "keep" or maintain it of our own effort.
Instant
Active Member
My interpretation is correct. It is very plain to see for anyone who is not determined to find a way to defend the false unconditional security doctrine. Yes, your name can be removed from God's book, even if you legitimately accepted God's grace. God blotted out the name of sinners in Exodus, and says that it is overcomers that will not have their names blotted out of His book in Revelation. I just substantiated the fact that willful sins are not automatically covered by the original blood atonement, and you coming in here now and saying I am wrong does not make you right. I will give you more to substantiate the fact a Christian can lose their salvation.
"For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire." 2 Peter 2:20-22
Before they were saved, they were hell bound. The Bible says that it would be better if someone never became a Christian than to come to the Lord and be washed of their sins and turn back. Nothing is worse than eternity in hell, so it is obvious that this is saying their torments in hell will be worse. In addition, I have given a lot of scriptures that say that if you live a lifestyle of sin, you shall not inherit the Kingdom of God. There is no mention that Christians are excluded from this warning. That is more to substantiate what I have said. What is unsubstantiated is unconditional security. You have almost nothing in scripture to remotely prove this doctrine. I was amazed at how little scripture you use, and it is all out of context. When we actually bring you scripture, you just come back and say it does not mean what we say. I am not accepting that kind of response as the final word. I know what it says.
No, yours is not
Lets have those exact verses and i will correct them for you.
Good, give one scriptural example where a true Christian lost salvation. Chapter and verse because i have several that establish the opposite.
you are reading that wrong. They had the "intellectual" knowledge but never accepted it. Do a root word study
Again, give us the specific verses you believe make your points and i will correct it so you can see the truth.
GRACE ambassador
Well-Known Member
No, In Fact, Scripturally, And Legitimately, it cannot - please be enriched
In At Least 12 Dozen Passages From God Himself!:
God's OPERATION On All HIS New-born babes In CHRIST!
God's Eternal Assurance
Please Be Richly Encouraged, Enlightened, Exhorted, and Edified!
God's Simple Will!
Instant
Active Member
You cannot correct me because you do not understand the scriptures. I have already seen that by the way you have misinterpreted things. My interpretation is correct, and all you can do is play a game of us going back and forth saying the other person is wrong. I also interpreted the passage in 2 Peter right. It is not just speaking of people that only had intellectual knowledge, but it is speaking of people genuinely saved. Even if you want to continue to disagree, you cannot prove that you are right. Those people had been washed. The only way that was possible was through the blood of Jesus.
I do not have to give a scripture to show where a true Christian lost salvation, as you cannot give any Biblical proof they cannot lose salvation. Still, I can give you examples. Judas Iscariot was one of the disciples. You cannot prove he was never saved. You can speculate all day long, but cannot prove it. Then there is the prodigal son that was dead and lost while in the hog pen, but became found and "alive again." He was a son of the Father starting out, and he lost salvation and got it back when he repented. Another example is Ananias and Sapphira. Once again, the best you can do is claim they were never genuine Christians because that is all you can do to fit your narrative, but you cannot prove it.
All we will do is go back and forth with you claiming you are correcting me, and me saying I am interpreting things correctly and you are wrong. I have been through this before. The biggest difference is that I do not let people get away with supposedly correcting me. Someone having an alternative interpretation does not make them right. Most of the OSAS crowd is used to people just accepting what they say when they just come up with a lame excuse for what the verses supposedly mean. I will not accept that.
Instant
Active Member
There is nothing that you posted that proves unconditional security of the believer. I will point something out that I have not gotten into earlier. There is security for the elect, but the elect are not those who prayed a sinner's prayer. The elect are those that God chose to save before the foundation of the earth. He is all knowing, so God knows who will be saved when they die. We do not have that knowledge. Often times people will misuse scriptures that are speaking of pre-destination and election to prove unconditional security. The people that continue to live in sin and never repent are not the elect, even if they believe in Jesus Christ. This is easy to prove, as the Bible states that certain behavior will keep anyone from inheriting the Kingdom of God. It makes no exceptions for those who believe in Jesus.
"Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these, Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness. Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God." Galatians 5:19-21.
There are people who claim to be Christians who live like this. Paul says they shall not inherit the kingdom of God. He never says he is speaking only of people that never accepted Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. I know that professing Christians that live this way will not go to heaven, because verse 24 says, "And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts." If a person has not crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts, they do not belong to Christ.
Another reason I know that Christians cannot continue to live in sin and be saved is because of what it says in 1 John 3:3-9. "And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself even as he is pure. Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins, and in him is no sin. Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him. Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. Whoseover is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God."
According to this, every (not some) person that has this hope purifies himself. According to this, those who abide in Christ sin not. According to this passage, those who sin have not seen Christ or known him. We are told not to let anyone deceive us, because it is those that do righteous that are righteous, not just those who believe in Jesus. Those who sin are of the devil. How does that fit in with "faith plus nothing?" Finally, those born of God do not sin. They cannot sin. Either a person who is saved can lose salvation, or those who do not live right are not saved and never were. It really does not matter which is true, because it still amounts to the fact it matters how we live if we get to heaven. Do not bother to come back and say nobody can do this. I did not write the Bible. I am just pointing out what it says.
CharismaticLady
Well-Known Member
We must either believe what the Bible teaches, or rely on human reasoning to discount what it says as I was surprised to see that you have done.
2 Peter 1:9 does not say past, present and future sins as is commonly, but unscripturally misrepresented. It says old sins.
9 For he who lacks these things is shortsighted, even to blindness, and has forgotten that he was cleansed from his old sins.
It is also why Hebrews 10:26-31 talks about no more sacrifice covering willful sinning after they have been sanctified.
(We won't even get into the other error of the Church that says sanctification is a life-long process of overcoming sin.)
The assumption that those who teach sinlessness are teaching heresy is because you think we are saying that after your past sins are cleansed, we have to use willpower to keep from sinning all by ourselves and by the "law." NO! We can't. It is impossible to do on our own! There is no way! You know that as well as I do, so that is why they apply the teaching of imputed righteousness into the New Covenant, when it was for those who obeyed in the Old Testament, like Abraham. I've also heard people say that as they learn more they sin less. Now THAT is self-righteousness. But that is still US not willfully sinning, or as some have added, "practicing" sinning.
What is not realized is that we have an entirely different system for holiness in the New Covenant that makes sinlessness easy peasy. It is called being born again, or born of God which most on this forum who are only using their natural mind to discount freedom from sin have never experienced as is clear by the votes. I didn't for the first 30 years of going to church. It is not automatic, even when you are baptized as most hope. I was baptized 3 times BEFORE I was born again, and once after. And what I find ridiculous is the accusation that declaring freedom from sin is self-righteousness. HA!!! In my natural state I was like Paul's statement of being the chief of sinners. But that was before he also was born again.
Being born of God is a supernatural experience you will never forget. If anyone is interested in how I stumbled upon the key to this experience, just ask. I'm not just going to cast pearls to those set on believing they can sin and their past, present and future sins are forgiven.
Last edited:
<<<Jesus' sacrifice on the cross was sufficient to pay for all the sins of the entire world, but it does not do everyone good.>>>
With all due respect, I disagree. I believe that all that Jesus Christ did was good and does good to every man.
Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross had accomplished many things and all of them are good to mankind. There are no conditions. One way or another, His works had done and does everybody good.
<<<When a person gets saved, all past sins are washed away. In addition, sins done in error are washed away. What is not washed away are sins done on purpose after getting saved. >>>
I do not have the same view. I see a problem with that view. Consider the past sins. Consider the sins committed intentionally and willfully in the past. The view you hold would require one to remember each and all of them to be said to acknowledge them and admit his guilt regarding them, that he may ask for God’s forgiveness to be forgiven of them. My view on the other hand is that, Christ died for all of my sins, be they intentional or not, knowingly or not. So that at the time I was converted and was granted repentance by God, I was forgiven by God, on account of what Christ had done for me, through His sacrifice on the cross. For the sins that I committed that were the future to my having been forgiven at the time of my conversion and repentance, Christ had also covered in His sacrifice on the cross some 2000 years ago. For Christ will not die again for such sins. Some might argue why we still need to confess and ask God for forgiveness regarding such sins. And why not? Not that they were covered by the blood of Christ even then, as such were forgiven already, that it would mean we don’t have to repent of them as though it matters not. It does matter. For there are unpleasant and evil consequences that sin brings, even to the saved, that affects not only himself but even his loved ones and others. Besides, that is the will of God for His erring children.
As to the matter of sinning willfully with reference to Hebrews 10:26, a separate and dedicated thread on that I would say would be nice. As a general comment regarding that, there is issue as to whether that applies or not to genuine Believers or not. But yes, that part of scriptures speaks a lot about the sacrifice of Christ.
And regarding the book of Romans, a separate thread would also be nice.
Tong
R3987
I do not get your question “Based on what?”
<<<I do not see anywhere in scripture that indicates that if the chastisement does not work, that person will not wind up in hell.>>>
It’s I think because God does not fail. God’s chastisement is ever effective and accomplishes its intent on the erring legitimate child of God.
Tong
R3988
Instant
Active Member
My view does not require that I remember every single sin I ever committed to receive forgiveness. If I sin by mistake, that sin is under the blood. Only sins that I do knowingly are not under the blood. I know if I do something on purpose. In addition to that, we are taught in the Lord's prayer to ask forgiveness for any sins we have committed, as we forgive those who trespassed against us. We should all do that every day. Another thing about that is the fact that if we want the Lord's forgiveness, we must forgive others. If God will not forgive us, we cannot get to heaven, and Jesus said if we do not forgive others, he will not forgive us. There are many things professing Christians do that the Bible emphatically says will keep anyone out of heaven.
Instant
Active Member
That is nothing but speculation and a personal opinion. I do not see anywhere in scripture that indicates that everyone who is chastised repents. I do not know of anywhere in scripture where it says that if a person does not change after being chastised, they do not wind up in hell, even if they were saved at some time in their life.
A clarification. I was actually talking about a case of an unsaved murderer and rapist. I was asking if such a one can be saved by God. I was not really asking if God will or will not save him, when he repents or not.
Here’s a passage relevant to that.
Eph. 1:1 And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins, 2 in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience, 3 among whom also we all once conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, just as the others. 4 But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
Now, we see there that God had done that for us even when we were murderers, fornicators, liars, thieves, slanderers, etc. And did He do that unto us? Was it because of what good and righteousness we have done? The passage tells is why. It is one, because God is rich in mercy. Another is because of His great love with which He loved us.
Now, let’s consider the Christian, that is, the child of God. Would you say that one who claims to be a Christian is a legitimate child of God, if he willfully and continually live in sin, murdering, stealing, fornicating, raping, lying, etc.? I won’t.
With regards what you say @Blood Bought 1953 believes, I will let him take that up with you.
Tong
R3989
Instant
Active Member
I believe that God will forgive any repentant sinner for anything if they turn to Jesus Christ. I do not believe that a person who lives in a lifestyle of willful sin will go to heaven, whether they believe in Jesus or not.
Forget about BB. Do you believe that if a professing Christian is a rapist and murderer and that person never repents they will go to heaven when they die, simply because they believe?
The passage simply isn’t talking about the saved Christian, losing his salvation.
That passage was with reference to those spoken about in 2 Peter 2, of false teachers among them and those who are with them and follow them.
Tong
R3991
Last edited:
Instant
Active Member
The passage absolutely is talking about saved Christians losing salvation. There is no way you can prove otherwise, so it comes down to us disagreeing.
Peter was talking and referring to false teachers who are among them and those who are with them and who follow them.
There are none that I know of.
But there are certainly scriptures that speaks about the certainty of one’s salvation in Christ Jesus. One such is found in Romans 8:38-39.
With regards Judas Iscariot, while he was chosen to be one of Jesus’ disciples, we learn from Jesus himself the matter about him (Judas). Jesus knew about him. Jesus obviously could not have chosen to save him.
With regards the prodigal son, I’d say such a take on that is a misuse of the parable. For one, the son in the parable was not a story about a son who was saved, who later lost it and then saved again.
With regards Ananias and Sapphira, their case was not a case of them losing salvation.
Tong
R3992
Similar threads
