Is it possible to lose salvation?

[Muna]

It's amazing, it's like an American citizen having no idea who George Washington is and not only that but not having even the slightest interest in finding out who he was.

If that man leads you away from God shouldn't you be afraid of him?

You do not believe in Jesus Christ?

Which man is it that you are promoting that people should follow?

 

[nedsk]

You do not believe in Jesus Christ?

Which man is it that you are promoting that people should follow?

I do and I know you do but what you believe is a perversion of the truth perpetrated on millions upon millions of people since the 1500s by Martin Luther.

You should follow the church which Jesus said is his church but his church doesn't teach salvation can't be lost but Luthers does.

 

[Muna]

I do and I know you do but what you believe is a perversion of the truth perpetrated on millions upon millions of people since the 1500s by Martin Luther.

You should follow the church which Jesus said is his church but his church doesn't teach salvation can't be lost but Luthers does.

And you are a living example of said church?

 

[complete]

None of that means you can't lose your salvation

'For the wages of sin is death;
but the gift of God is eternal life
through Jesus Christ our Lord.'
(Rom 6:23)

Hello @nedsk:

'For the gifts and calling of God
are without repentance.'
(Rom 11:29)

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[nedsk]

And you are a living example of said church?

I'm a weak and fallen example of that church but I don't believe in heresies like you can't lose your salvation. Or sola scriptura or sola fide. Those are heresies friend I'm not sure what to tell you. Scripture is full of people who lost their salvation starting with Adam and eve. The very first book of scripture. It can be regained but to believe it can't be lost is incorrect at best and a heresy at worst. Thats has nothing to do with me.

 

[nedsk]

'For the wages of sin is death;
but the gift of God is eternal life
through Jesus Christ our Lord.'
(Rom 6:23)

Hello @nedsk:

'For the gifts and calling of God
are without repentance.'
(Rom 11:29)

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

And? Nothing there says salvation can't be lost. You want it to say that but that's not what it says

 

[Muna]

I'm a weak and fallen example of that church

Why would you be here lecturing others about them being on some perverse course if they do not belong to your particular church if you are a fallen example of it?

Afterall Paul did say to Timothy

1Ti 4:16 Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.

but I don't believe in heresies like you can't lose your salvation. Or sola scriptura or sola fide. Those are heresies friend I'm not sure what to tell you.

And can you quote me very specifically where I have spoken of these things you call heresies which you have attributed to me?

 

[nedsk]

Why would you be here lecturing others about them being on some perverse course if they do not belong to your particular church if you are a fallen example of it?

Afterall Paul did say to Timothy

1Ti 4:16 Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.



And can you quote me very specifically where I have spoken of these things you call heresies which you have attributed to me?

My shortcomings don't translate into what I believe being wrong. That's really a failure in your thinking process. Unlike you I realize I'm not perfect. That's the danger of believing you can't lose your salvation you think you have it sewn up.

Again another failure in logic on your part. I never attributed the heresies to you I properly attributed them to the responsible party, Luther who you have no interest in but none the less have been duped by. That's what I said not that I attribute anything to you. Goodness gracious

 

[LoveYeshua]

The Cross of Christ is where Salvation is found "in the Time of the Gentiles".

"The Time of the Gentiles" didnt begin until Jesus died on The Cross, which is The Gospel that Paul Teaches.

"we preach CHRIST CRUCIFIED"...

Jesus could not have given this "Gospel" to the JEWS, when He was dealing with "the House of Israel", as He had not died yet, so, He could not offer them Paul's Gospel.

Pehaps you could cut and past much much less, and try listening and thinking, instead @LoveYeshua

The claim that Jesus had one gospel for Israel and Paul had a different gospel for Gentiles is completely false and goes against what Jesus Himself said. Jesus never taught two gospels—He said there is one gospel of the kingdom that must be preached to all nations (Matthew 24:14): “And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.”

You claim that the “time of the Gentiles” began only after the cross and that before that, Jesus could not preach the same gospel because He had not died yet. This is wrong for several reasons:

First, Jesus Himself declared before the cross that His message was for the whole world, not just Israel. In John 10:16, Jesus said: “And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd.” This was said before His death, and He clearly said there would be one flock under one shepherd, not two different messages or gospels.

Second, Jesus already spoke of His death and resurrection as part of the gospel long before the cross. In Matthew 16:21, it says: “From that time Jesus began to show to His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised the third day.” He told them about His death and resurrection as part of His teaching—so to say He could not offer that gospel yet is completely false.

Third, the Old Testament foretold that salvation would go to the Gentiles, but through Israel’s Messiah, not through Paul’s new message. Isaiah 49:6 says: “I will also give You as a light to the Gentiles, that You should be My salvation to the ends of the earth.” This is about the Messiah—Jesus—bringing salvation to the Gentiles. It does not say salvation will come through another man with a different gospel.

Fourth, Jesus commanded the apostles after His resurrection (before Paul was ever called) to preach the very same gospel to all nations. Matthew 28:19–20 says: “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you.” This is the Great Commission, given before Paul, and it included all nations—not just Jews.

Fifth, the “time of the Gentiles” that you speak of is a misused term. Jesus mentioned it only once in Luke 21:24, and it refers to Jerusalem being trampled by Gentiles until the end times, not to a new gospel or a new plan of salvation. There is no verse where Jesus said the gospel changes at the cross or that Paul would have a different gospel for Gentiles.

Finally, Jesus warned about adding or changing His message. In John 12:48 He said: “He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him—the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day.” Not Paul’s words—Jesus’ words will judge all. That proves there is only one gospel—the one Jesus preached.

Since you reject Jesus and his message and Gospel, I reject you also and we will no longer discuss I have done all I can for you but you will not listen.

“And whoever will not receive you nor hear your words, when you depart from that house or city, shake off the dust from your feet.” (Matthew 10:14)

 

[Behold]

The claim that Jesus had one gospel for Israel and Paul had a different gospel for Gentiles is completely false

-
The Cross of Christ is where Salvation is found "in the Time of the Gentiles".

"The Time of the Gentiles" didnt begin until Jesus died on The Cross, which is The Gospel that Paul Teaches.

"we preach CHRIST CRUCIFIED"...

Jesus could not have given this "Gospel" to the JEWS, when He was dealing with "the House of Israel", as He had not died yet, so, He could not offer them Paul's Gospel.

Pehaps you could cut and past much much less, and try listening and thinking, instead @LoveYeshua

 

[nedsk]

The claim that Jesus had one gospel for Israel and Paul had a different gospel for Gentiles is completely false and goes against what Jesus Himself said. Jesus never taught two gospels—He said there is one gospel of the kingdom that must be preached to all nations (Matthew 24:14): “And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.”

You claim that the “time of the Gentiles” began only after the cross and that before that, Jesus could not preach the same gospel because He had not died yet. This is wrong for several reasons:

First, Jesus Himself declared before the cross that His message was for the whole world, not just Israel. In John 10:16, Jesus said: “And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd.” This was said before His death, and He clearly said there would be one flock under one shepherd, not two different messages or gospels.

Second, Jesus already spoke of His death and resurrection as part of the gospel long before the cross. In Matthew 16:21, it says: “From that time Jesus began to show to His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised the third day.” He told them about His death and resurrection as part of His teaching—so to say He could not offer that gospel yet is completely false.

Third, the Old Testament foretold that salvation would go to the Gentiles, but through Israel’s Messiah, not through Paul’s new message. Isaiah 49:6 says: “I will also give You as a light to the Gentiles, that You should be My salvation to the ends of the earth.” This is about the Messiah—Jesus—bringing salvation to the Gentiles. It does not say salvation will come through another man with a different gospel.

Fourth, Jesus commanded the apostles after His resurrection (before Paul was ever called) to preach the very same gospel to all nations. Matthew 28:19–20 says: “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you.” This is the Great Commission, given before Paul, and it included all nations—not just Jews.

Fifth, the “time of the Gentiles” that you speak of is a misused term. Jesus mentioned it only once in Luke 21:24, and it refers to Jerusalem being trampled by Gentiles until the end times, not to a new gospel or a new plan of salvation. There is no verse where Jesus said the gospel changes at the cross or that Paul would have a different gospel for Gentiles.

Finally, Jesus warned about adding or changing His message. In John 12:48 He said: “He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him—the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day.” Not Paul’s words—Jesus’ words will judge all. That proves there is only one gospel—the one Jesus preached.

Since you reject Jesus and his message and Gospel, I reject you also and we will no longer discuss I have done all I can for you but you will not listen.

“And whoever will not receive you nor hear your words, when you depart from that house or city, shake off the dust from your feet.” (Matthew 10:14)

Some are stubborn like the Jews in the desert.

 

[Muna]

My shortcomings don't translate into what I believe being wrong. Unlike you I realize I'm not perfect. That's the danger of believing you can't lose your salvation you think you have it sewn up.

Again another failure in logic on your part. I never attributed the heresies to you I properly attributed them to the responsible party, Luther who you have no interest in but none the less have been duped by. That's what I said not that I attribute anything to you.

I did not go back to grab them all but you certainly did say this

but what you believe is a perversion of the truth perpetrated on millions upon millions of people since the 1500s by Martin Luther.

 

[Rich R]

The statement you shared is in direct conflict with the words of Jesus Christ and the testimony of Scripture. To say that Gentiles are not bound to God’s commandments is to reject the very foundation of the new covenant, because Jesus Himself said, “If you love Me, keep My commandments” (John 14:15, NKJV). He did not say, “If you are Jewish, keep My commandments,” but spoke to all who would follow Him.

Jesus gave the Great Commission to His eleven apostles after His resurrection, commanding them: “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations… teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:19–20, NKJV). “All things” includes His commandments, which are rooted in the Law of God, because Jesus declared: “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill”(Matthew 5:17). Fulfill does not mean abolish, because He immediately warned that “Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:19).

The idea that the commandments are not for Gentiles is completely false. Jesus said plainly that His words will judge everyone: “He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him—the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day” (John 12:48). His words include the commandments of God, which He never annulled but affirmed throughout His ministry.

The Book of Revelation, written decades after the resurrection and ascension of Christ, makes it clear that the commandments remain binding for all who follow Jesus. In describing the true saints, John wrote: “Here is the patience of the saints; here are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus” (Revelation 14:12). Again in Revelation 22:14, a blessing is pronounced: “Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city.” This proves beyond doubt that the commandments are not temporary, not for one nation only, and not optional—they are the very mark of God’s faithful people at the end of the age.

The claim that the new covenant is “in abeyance” is equally unscriptural. Jesus declared that the covenant was sealed with His blood: “For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins” (Matthew 26:28). The covenant is not waiting for some future day to take effect—it was ratified at the cross, confirmed by His resurrection, and applied when the Holy Spirit was given at Pentecost. To say otherwise is to deny the words of Christ and the outpouring of the Spirit that began the church.

Anyone who teaches that the commandments are not for Gentile believers is not teaching the gospel that Jesus preached. Jesus Himself said the gospel of the kingdom must go to “all nations” (Matthew 24:14), and that includes the laws of the kingdom.

To reject God’s commandments is to reject His authority. Jesus said clearly: “If you want to enter into life, keep the commandments” (Matthew 19:17). He spoke these words not to Israel alone, but to anyone who desires eternal life.

Therefore, let no one deceive you with empty words. The new covenant is not lawlessness. It is the law of God written on the heart, as Jeremiah prophesied and as Jesus confirmed (Jeremiah 31:33; Hebrews 8:10). True disciples of Christ obey His voice and walk as He walked—in obedience to the Father’s will.

It's clear from Exodus that God gave a covenant, which contained the commandments, to Israel. Where does it say anywhere that a covenant was made with either Gentiles or Christians? As much as it goes against the grain of tradition, there is nowhere in the scriptures that said He did. It's just not there!

Tradition says the new covenant is for gentiles and Christians. However, The Bible clearly says:

Jer 31:31,

Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:​

​

I have no more to do with God's covenant (which is a contract, agreed upon by both parties, Ex 24:7) than I have to do with the contract that the Philadelphia Eagles made with Jalen Hurts.

Tradition, especially ones that the orthodox church has held for thousands of years, is a hard nut to crack. Nonetheless, the Bible has been around just as long as the tradition. Jeremiah 31:31 wasn't written last year by some Johnie Come Lately.

 

[nedsk]

-
The Cross of Christ is where Salvation is found "in the Time of the Gentiles".

"The Time of the Gentiles" didnt begin until Jesus died on The Cross, which is The Gospel that Paul Teaches.

"we preach CHRIST CRUCIFIED"...

Jesus could not have given this "Gospel" to the JEWS, when He was dealing with "the House of Israel", as He had not died yet, so, He could not offer them Paul's Gospel.

Pehaps you could cut and past much much less, and try listening and thinking, instead @LoveYeshua

It's ironic to see you tell others they should try listening and thinking. Lol

I did not go back to grab them all but you certainly did say

Do you know what attribute means? To regard something as being caused by.

You didn't cause the perversion but you believe the perversion. That's what I said. I never attributed the perversion to you. This is fascinating stuff

 

[LoveYeshua]

-
The Cross of Christ is where Salvation is found "in the Time of the Gentiles".

"The Time of the Gentiles" didnt begin until Jesus died on The Cross, which is The Gospel that Paul Teaches.

"we preach CHRIST CRUCIFIED"...

Jesus could not have given this "Gospel" to the JEWS, when He was dealing with "the House of Israel", as He had not died yet, so, He could not offer them Paul's Gospel.

Pehaps you could cut and past much much less, and try listening and thinking, instead @LoveYeshua

I preach the same Jesus My Lord and Master and My God whom I love with all my heart did, the Kingdom of Heaven, Repentance and keeping the Commandments and yes also the cross. I wish you well nonetheless and may God show you Behold, the true path you must follow to have eternal life if it is His will.

 

[Muna]

It's clear from Exodus that God gave a covenant, which contained the commandments, to Israel. Where does it say anywhere that a covenant was made with either Gentiles or Christians? As much as it goes against the grain of tradition, there is nowhere in the scriptures that said He did. It's just not there!

Tradition says the new covenant is for gentiles and Christians. However, The Bible clearly says:

Jer 31:31,

Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:​

​

I have no more to do with God's covenant (which is a contract, agreed upon by both parties, Ex 24:7) than I have to do with the contract that the Philadelphia Eagles made with Jalen Hurts.

Tradition, especially ones that the orthodox church has held for thousands of years, is a hard nut to crack. Nonetheless, the Bible has been around just as long as the tradition. Jeremiah 31:31 wasn't written last year by some Johnie Come Lately.

Jerm 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

Repeated here in Hebrews

Heb 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

Hebrews adds

Heb 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

And here is Jesus the mediator of it

Heb 12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

 

[LoveYeshua]

It's clear from Exodus that God gave a covenant, which contained the commandments, to Israel. Where does it say anywhere that a covenant was made with either Gentiles or Christians? As much as it goes against the grain of tradition, there is nowhere in the scriptures that said He did. It's just not there!

Tradition says the new covenant is for gentiles and Christians. However, The Bible clearly says:

Jer 31:31,

Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:​

​

I have no more to do with God's covenant (which is a contract, agreed upon by both parties, Ex 24:7) than I have to do with the contract that the Philadelphia Eagles made with Jalen Hurts.

Tradition, especially ones that the orthodox church has held for thousands of years, is a hard nut to crack. Nonetheless, the Bible has been around just as long as the tradition. Jeremiah 31:31 wasn't written last year by some Johnie Come Lately.

You are right that Jeremiah 31:31 says the new covenant is with the house of Israel and Judah—but notice what Jesus said at the Last Supper: “This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is shed for you” (Luke 22:20). After His resurrection, He commanded: “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations… teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:19–20).

This is not new. The Old Testament already showed that Gentiles could join God’s covenant people: “One law shall be for the native-born and for the stranger who dwells among you” (Exodus 12:49), and “The stranger who dwells among you shall be as one born among you, and you shall love him as yourself” (Leviticus 19:34). So strangers were never excluded—they became part of Israel by faith and obedience.

Isaiah foretold the same about the Messiah: “I will give You as a light to the Gentiles, that You should be My salvation to the ends of the earth” (Isaiah 49:6). So Gentiles share in the same covenant through Christ, the Shepherd who said: “Other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring… and there will be one flock and one shepherd”(John 10:16).

Blessings.

 

[complete]

'For as the Father raiseth up the dead,
and quickeneth them;
even so the Son quickeneth whom He will.
For the Father judgeth no man,
but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:
That all men should honour the Son,
even as they honour the Father.
He that honoureth not the Son
honoureth not the Father which hath sent Him.
Verily, verily, I say unto you,
He that heareth My word, and believeth on Him that sent Me,
hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation;
but is passed from death unto life.'
(Joh 5:21-24)

Praise God!

 

[LoveYeshua]

I am off for a few days but will return late Friday.

 

[Muna]

Do you know what attribute means? To regard something as being caused by.

You didn't cause the perversion but you believe the perversion. That's what I said. I never attributed the perversion to you. This is fascinating stuff

If I have not heard of the man or read his doctrine and you are saying,

Of course you aren't which is why you're so blissfully ignorant of the history of your own belief system.

You are speaking of my own belief system which you cannot provide but accuse me of

Well you should be interested since it was a man that has led you and millions upon millions of others into the heresies that you are so blissfully ignorant of but cling to as if your next breath depended on it.

So its a heresy that I am blissfully ignorant of (but you are "in the know" on) concerning my own heresy, but cannot provide proof of me spreading this heresy?

Well he deluded you and most of the people you know I suspect. It's your decision but you are direct result of the heresy that Luther brought into the world.

So my life is somehow intricately bound togther with this man who died 500 years before I was born?

You're his disciple.

That would be Jesus, I don't know this other fellow

you believe is a perversion of the truth perpetrated on millions upon millions of people since the 1500s by Martin Luther.

And I supposedly believe in a perversion of the truth you accuse me of while never once quoting me on anything I have said. That's convenient.

It would probably be more fruitful if we did not discuss things hereon out, I am not the better for engaging in this conversation with you.