The unpopular (but deadly) truth of conditional salvation

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

I never said that. But what we mean by obedience to the faith may well be different. If you or anyone means obedience to moral law, then I say no. Mainly because the word "continue" implies that it was required in the first place. It is not. Obedience to moral law cannot initially save anyone. So then, once having been given everlasting life (by grace through faith and humility), and still living in this world in this sinful body, the thought that moral obedience is required to 'maintain' or 'keep' everlasting life represents a change in the requirement and not a continuation of a requirement. Remaining in faith is done by continuing to accept the gift of life as a freely given gift of grace. This is where the rubber meets the highway in these discussions, because if one is required to keep his life by his behavior, it disqualifies and contradicts salvation by faith. It doesn't support it. If I am traveling on a road, I cannot continue to travel on it by changing which road I am on. This is what I am getting at. Thanks for the question and allowing me to clarify.

I didn't say 'obedience to the faith', but 'the obedience of faith'. I'm merely asking if a person is required to continue in faith in order to be saved. I think that you would agree with that per your comment that 'If I am traveling on a road, I cannot continue to travel on it by changing which road I am on.'

So if faith is required to stay on the road, and one cannot reach the destination (salvation) unless one stays on the road, I think it is fair to say that salvation is based on the condition that one remain on the road, i.e., continue in the obedience of faith.

IMO, that is really all those verses that the OP posted mean.

 

[FHII]

My apologies. I'll try to exercise better judgement next time.

 

[williemac]

I didn't say 'obedience to the faith', but 'the obedience of faith'. I'm merely asking if a person is required to continue in faith in order to be saved. I think that you would agree with that per your comment that 'If I am traveling on a road, I cannot continue to travel on it by changing which road I am on.'

So if faith is required to stay on the road, and one cannot reach the destination (salvation) unless one stays on the road, I think it is fair to say that salvation is based on the condition that one remain on the road, i.e., continue in the obedience of faith.

IMO, that is really all those verses that the OP posted mean.

The verses in the op are not the problem. The person who is quoting them has an interpretation of them that is being presented over and over on this website, which in so many words insists that sin can and will cut a person off from everlasting life. This is the other road that I am referring to. My comment was a response to the agenda of that doctrine. The agenda is to entice or threaten a person to add works of law to their faith, for justification. (sin being transgression of law)
And contrary to what some may suggest, sin is not the equivalent of falling from the faith. If it was, there would be no sense in having an advocate with the Father (1John2:1). According to Heb.6:1-6, one who has turned away from the faith cannot be brought back, so the Advocate for the sinning believer would not be returning one back to something he has lost. The advocate's role is to keep one from losing his life due to sin. It is not our role to keep ourselves saved through our moral behavior, which is what the author of the op is bent on "warning" everyone to do.

 

[veteran]

So if faith is required to stay on the road, and one cannot reach the destination (salvation) unless one stays on the road, I think it is fair to say that salvation is based on the condition that one remain on the road, i.e., continue in the obedience of faith.

IMO, that is really all those verses that the OP posted mean.

That's my take on those Scriptures too.

The parable of the unprofitable servant reveals we're to have works in Christ too that go along with our Faith.

I also apply the view of 'family' with this matter. If someone cuts theirself off from their family can they expect to be a part of that family? Likewise if a believer cuts theirself off from Christ and His family, where does that leave them? Outside.

 

[Asyncritus]

One quick cure to that is to become Catholic.

A lack of humility is at the heart of thinking the Bible just fell out of the sky last week. Christians have been reading the Bible for centuries and have plumbed the depths of it, engaged in weighty and often heated debates, and passed on to us the fruits of their wisdom. In particular, the Christians in greatest proximity to the apostolic age are more likely to give a perspective that complies with what Jesus and the apostles originally taught, which is why those debates in particular should cause us to take heed. The Church has been around for 2000 years and even the Protestant Reformation has 500 years under its belt along with its own sets of founders, councils, catechisms, and confessions, all of which bequeath to us the deep insight of the reformers.

We really should be more humble, shouldn't we?

In short, there have been 20 centuries of accumulated and accreted tosh.

Is that what you want us to dive headlong into? I for one, won't.

Sorry.

As we're on the subject, let me point out that there is only one sin that will not and cannot be forgiven.

Mt 12:31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.

There are therefore 2 degrees of sin: the forgivable sins, and the unforgivable sin. This proves categorically that not all sins are the same or equal in magnitude.

The question is, what is the unforgivable sin? Answer, 'the blasphemy against the holy spirit'.

Next question: What does that mean?

The only parallel passage in the NT which sheds any light on the matter, is Hebrews 10:

26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.

So what is this 'sinning wilfully'? He explains:

28 He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

There is the equivalent of 'the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit'. But what does it mean?

The context, the context, always the context tells us plainly.

First, the context of the whole letter. It says, and the thunderclap resounds throughout the whole letter, that under no circumstances, should we return to the Law of Moses and leave Christ. I leave it to readers to go through the Letter and see for yourselves.

Second, the immediate context, which is:

25 Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.
26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.

Forsaking is a terrible word. It means to run away, to leave behind permanently (as in the marriage vows: 'forsaking all others')

The believer is NOT TO FORSAKE HIS FAITH IN CHRIST: and in the context of this letter, and return to the law of Moses, believing that it can save.

The Hebrew believers had suffered greatly at the hands of the Jews, and some were in grave danger of abandoning Christ and returning to Moses. Hence these words:

32 But call to remembrance the former days, in which, after ye were illuminated, ye endured a great fight of afflictions;
33 Partly, whilst ye were made a gazingstock both by reproaches and afflictions; and partly, whilst ye became companions of them that were so used.
34 For ye had compassion of me in my bonds, and took joyfully the spoiling of your goods, knowing in yourselves that ye have in heaven a better and an enduring substance.
35 Cast not away therefore your confidence, which hath great recompence of reward.

Therefore, all those passages quoted above to the effect that one must 'remain in the faith' in order to be saved mean that one is to 'remain in Christ', and not forsake Him for greener pastures, such as (in the first century) returning to judaism, and in our time, becoming moslem, buddhist, hindu or otherwise.

 

[Rach1370]

The verses in the op are not the problem. The person who is quoting them has an interpretation of them that is being presented over and over on this website, which in so many words insists that sin can and will cut a person off from everlasting life. This is the other road that I am referring to. My comment was a response to the agenda of that doctrine. The agenda is to entice or threaten a person to add works of law to their faith, for justification. (sin being transgression of law)
And contrary to what some may suggest, sin is not the equivalent of falling from the faith. If it was, there would be no sense in having an advocate with the Father (1John2:1). According to Heb.6:1-6, one who has turned away from the faith cannot be brought back, so the Advocate for the sinning believer would not be returning one back to something he has lost. The advocate's role is to keep one from losing his life due to sin. It is not our role to keep ourselves saved through our moral behavior, which is what the author of the op is bent on "warning" everyone to do.

Hey Williemac...I'm really enjoying reading your posts...keep 'em coming!
Just a quick question...I agree with what you've said, but I'm wondering how you deal with the works that we are to do as we walk. I've noticed that a few here are mentioning those works...how we are to 'walk in good works that have been prepared in advance for us'. I think they're seeing all the references to these works and focusing on them as a condition for continued salvation. I see them as an outpouring of a salvation we already have, but I'm wondering about your take on it....

 

[John Zain]

In particular, the Christians in greatest proximity to the apostolic age are more likely to give a perspective
that complies with what Jesus and the apostles originally taught ...
We really should be more humble, shouldn't we?

Are you humble enough to admit the post-apostolic church made a horrendous error
by being deceived by Satan into forming the disastrous doctrine of cessationism?

If this had not happened, the whole world would have been evangelized
many centuries ago, and many millions would have been healed of their
physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual problems!

So WM, is there no requirement to continue in the obedience of faith to be saved?

Yes, not only that, but obedience to Christ and His commands!
New thread on this coming tomorrow.

As far as the OP goes...I do believe in unconditonal salvation...but I'm not sure I understand, or agree, about the comment that not all 'born again Christians' are the 'elect'....wondering if there could be some elaboration?

Yes, please consider these reasons:
-- man has free will to do what he pleases
-- many dozens of warnings to the churches
-- some warnings specifically mention losing eternal life
-- pastors testify to knowing BACs who have run away from the faith
-- there are many reasons for BACs to get mad at God, leave the faith, etc.

STILL WAITING for someone to understand Romans 6:15-23 ...
http://www.christianityboard.com/topic/19153-oh-well-at-least-clint-eastwood-understood-apostle-paul/
Iz I waiting in vain?

 

[williemac]

Hey Williemac...I'm really enjoying reading your posts...keep 'em coming!
Just a quick question...I agree with what you've said, but I'm wondering how you deal with the works that we are to do as we walk. I've noticed that a few here are mentioning those works...how we are to 'walk in good works that have been prepared in advance for us'. I think they're seeing all the references to these works and focusing on them as a condition for continued salvation. I see them as an outpouring of a salvation we already have, but I'm wondering about your take on it....

Thank you for your kind words. My take on works looks to be the same as yours. We are called to bear fruit. I think that anyone who has heard and responded to the gospel has realized that and is on board with it. But in my opinion the quality and quantity of love we have for others is proportionate with the understanding and experience of God's love toward us.
It would follow then, that the more conditional one feels God's love is for him, the more conditional his own will be for others. And this is where I part ways with some doctrines that make their way around the body of Christ. I think God intends to fully equip us for fruit, and has done just that in the new man. But if a person is preoccupied with attending to his own salvation, what kind of fruit could he possibly bear? Love does not seek its own. So those who are going about doing things for their own benefit (seeking their own) are hindered from bearing the highest kind of fruit. Therefore it makes no sense to me that God would motivate us to bear fruit by using threats of death, condemnation, or loss of salvation. And I certainly don't see that in scripture. I see the wisdom in giving us the most secure and assured heart that is possible. One that can love Him and others because He first loved us....not because that one is afraid of the consequences of failure. How much can a faint heart endure, or produce?

 

[Rach1370]

Yes, please consider these reasons:
-- man has free will to do what he pleases
-- many dozens of warnings to the churches
-- some warnings specifically mention losing eternal life
-- pastors testify to knowing BACs who have run away from the faith
-- there are many reasons for BACs to get mad at God, leave the faith, etc.

STILL WAITING for someone to understand Romans 6:15-23 ...
http://www.christianityboard.com/topic/19153-oh-well-at-least-clint-eastwood-understood-apostle-paul/
Iz I waiting in vain?

-- I believe the bible teaches that man is either elect or 'instruments of wrath'...in regards to salvation. Those who claim to be "BAC" but 'fall away eventually', were not, in fact, truly regenerated, saved Christians.

-- Some verses may appear to be 'warnings' to christians, or 'mention losing eternal life', but how do you deal with the many, many verses that speak of the assurance we have IN CHRIST...in other words, salvation (Both the earning of and keeping) is not on our shoulders, to preserve or loose, but completely on Christ and his work and intercession for us...and he cannot fail.

-- Pastors testify to what others claim. This is not evidence of the true state of their heart.

-- There are many reasons anyone gets mad at God. Or confused with him, or life's circumstances. Life IS hard, the ways of God ARE a mystery to us at times, especially when we're hurting. But the 'highs and lows' of a Christians walk do not mean that everytime we struggle, we loose our faith. Those who 'leave the faith' were never in it truly to begin with. The proof of a true life and heart change, comes from the perseverance of that person.

-- It sounds as if, in regards to Rom 6:15-23, that what you are really wanting, is a specific understanding of the verse.....why don't you just tell us what you think it means?? Really...the drama is unecessary.

 

[williemac]

Are you humble enough to admit the post-apostolic church made a horrendous error
by being deceived by Satan into forming the disastrous doctrine of cessationism?

If this had not happened, the whole world would have been evangelized
many centuries ago, and many millions would have been healed of their
physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual problems!

Funny, but in my studies, I came to the conclusion that the second death is actually the cessation of life. Is this what you call 'cessationism"? If so, I disagree with your comment. I have offered the scriptural support for my conclusion many times on this website. I resisted this idea at first because of the unwillingness to be corrected. I finally gave in and opened up to correction and teaching. I did not receive this from any source other than the bible and my own personal prayer, study, and meditation. Your opinion that the whole world would have been evangelized is puzzling to me. My own opinion is that many in the world has backed away from the presentation of a horrible and hating God who has no problem tormenting human souls for eternity. However, the human soul is not immortal. It can be killed (Math.10:28) by God. That is why we should fear Him according to Jesus in that verse.

Yes, not only that, but obedience to Christ and His commands!
New thread on this coming tomorrow.

The commands we are to obey are found in 1John 3:23. They are 1: faith in Jesus...2: love one another. Just two commandments. I wait with baited breath for your new thread.

STILL WAITING for someone to understand Romans 6:15-23 ...
http://www.christianityboard.com/topic/19153-oh-well-at-least-clint-eastwood-understood-apostle-paul/
Iz I waiting in vain?

As Rach commented, the dram is unnecessary. But why start at vs. 15? verse 14 states that we are no longer under law but under grace, and this is why sin no longer has dominion over us. This is part of the context. What is the dominion he is referring to then? Hint: it has something to do with not being under law. The strength of sin is the law.
In vs.18, Paul says having been set free from sin you became slaves of righteousness. Your take on this is that being a slave of righteousness means that we are obligated to behave righteously. That is not what it means. If we have an obligation to not sin, then we were never set free from it. What we were set free from is the sin nature. This happened when the old man was declared dead, crucified with Christ. We died with Christ, thus fulfilling the penalty of law for sin. This is why we are set free from the law. Paul, in Rom.7"1-4 explains that if one dies he becomes free from the law. He declares that we have become dead to the law. The law is what judges men for sin. It cannot do that to us now. We are free from its judgment and condemnation.

The fact is, our new man is righteous. This was God's doing, not ours. Our righteousness was an inheritance by faith. It has nothing to do with our behavior. Therefore it has enslaved us by virtue of the fact that righteousness is our new identity. Paul is simply telling them to act accordingly. There is no condition of salvation attached to this portion of scripture. The condition for salvation is found later on, in Rom.10:9,10.

In Rom.7:4, Paul states that we have become dead to the law that we might be married to Christ. Here's the deal. If we go back under the law for justification to life (salvation) we commit spiritual adultery, in attempting to be married to both. The only way a Christian can be condemned for sin is if he is under the law. Do you wish us to be adulterers?

 

[justaname]

1John 3
1 See ahow great a love the Father has bestowed on us, that we would be called children of God; and such we are. For this reason the world does not know us, because it did not know Him.
2 Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be. We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is.
3 And everyone who has this hope fixed on Him purifies himself, just as He is pure.
4 Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.
5 You know that He appeared in order to take away sins; and in Him there is no sin.
6 No one who abides in Him sins; no one who sins has seen Him or bknows Him.
7 Little children, make sure no one deceives you; the one who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous;
8 the one who practices sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning. The Son of God appeared for this purpose, to destroy the works of the devil.
9 No one who is aborn of God practices sin, because His seed abides in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
10 By this the children of God and the children of the devil are obvious: anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor the one who does not love his brother.
11 For this is the message which you have heard from the beginning, that we should love one another;
12 not as Cain, who was of the evil one and slew his brother. And for what reason did he slay him? Because his deeds were evil, and his brother’s were righteous.
13 Do not be surprised, brethren, if the world hates you.
14 We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brethren. He who does not love abides in death.
15 Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer; and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.
16 We know love by this, that He laid down His life for us; and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.
17 But whoever has the world’s goods, and sees his brother in need and closes his heart against him, how does the love of God abide in him?
18 Little children, let us not love with word or with tongue, but in deed and truth.
19 We will know by this that we are of the truth, and will assure our heart before Him
20 in whatever our heart condemns us; for God is greater than our heart and knows all things.
21 Beloved, if our heart does not condemn us, we have confidence before God;
22 and whatever we ask we receive from Him, because we keep His commandments and do the things that are pleasing in His sight.
23 This is His commandment, that we abelieve in the name of His Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, just as He commanded us.
24 The one who keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in him. We know by this that He abides in us, by the Spirit whom He has given us.

I have highlighted in red what I feel relative in this discussion, yet I wanted the entire context posted so for the reader references can be made. I want to draw to your attention first a few points.

1. We are not under the Law, rather under grace.
2. Being that we are not under the Law does not mean we are antinomians (lawless ones). We are under the law of liberty. (James 1:25)
3. Coming from John's epistle above the one who practices righteousness is righteous, so we are to be practicing what we preach.
4. The Son of Man came to destroy the works of the devil, so in every act of sin we are cooperating with the devil and rebelling against the completed work of Christ. Not that the work of Christ is not finished and our sins are not atoned for, rather this world has not seen the cessation of sin and evil and we are still in this world. Our relation is with Christ and His completed work, thereby our outward lives and inward thoughts must align with such, otherwise we make God a liar.
5. This is not am immediate event of sinlessness, rather a continual and ongoing process of sanctification.


2 Corinthians 3:5-6
5 Not that we are adequate in ourselves to consider anything as coming from ourselves, but our adequacy is from God,
6 who also made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.


Let me tie this all together hopefully so we can reach an understanding. John states and is collaborated throughout the NT, now we are children of God. Justification and sanctification are not the same concepts. in one sense we are completely pure and holy through the shed blood of the Christ, yet our deeds in this world are not always in complete agreement with that reality. We need to continually seek the highest good in every situation thereby living out expressed love or agape' in our lives so that we are in agreement with Christ's work. With this stated we must keep a posture of humility knowing we are not the source of the love rather it is God that enables us. In this we must also keep in perspective this work does not secure, maintain, or qualify anything for salvation. Salvation is a work of God alone, by God alone, and is presented as a free gift. Upon acceptance of the gift, the believer is not required to work to keep the gift, rather the believer willingly cooperates with the inward working of the Holy Spirit expressing love in the life of the believer. Here I speak in terms of what happens in the life of a true conversion. In cases where this is not present, the truth of the conversion comes into question.

So in terms of you must do this, "stop sinning, remain in the faith, etc." in order to gain salvation, is not a valid or correct statement. This is because in these terms you are the provider of salvation and not God. God gives the gift and the gift is received by faith. To better convey what is being expressed in the so called warning passages it could be expressed, this is what happens in the life of one who is a child of God, they avoid sin, they remain in the vine, etc.

To be completely clear John quotes Jesus in his gospel and restates it in his epistle the commandment of God is to believe that Jesus is the Christ and to love one another. (John 15:5-12; 1John 3:23) Jesus makes it clear in the gospel (John 15:5) that if you abide in Him you will bear fruit. He also is clear that good trees do not bear bad fruit. (Matthew 7:18-23) Thereby it follows that sanctification is also an act that is provided by God. (Philippians 1:6)

In every sense of the gospel we are completely dependent on God for salvation, and must remain in that dependency in order to receive salvation. It is When we decide we are going to go it on our own is when we get into trouble. Thereby it is Christ we need always look to for salvation, not ourselves. Yet we must not fool ourselves into thinking we are immune to sin, and must do everything in our power to cooperate with the sanctification process provided by God. By doing such again will not secure or maintain our salvation, yet by refusing to do such we either attempt to prove God a liar, which is impossible, or prove our faith a lie.

 

[John Zain]

Rach,

Your post was well received.

I gave the link to the thread in question ... esp. about Romans 6:15-23.
I have met no one anywhere who agrees with my understanding of it.

To me, Paul's intent was CRYSTAL CLEAR!
He was giving the reasons why they did not need to continue being slaves of sin.

No drama this time!

 

[Rach1370]

Rach,

Your post was well received.

I gave the link to the thread in question ... esp. about Romans 6:15-23.
I have met no one anywhere who agrees with my understanding of it.

To me, Paul's intent was CRYSTAL CLEAR!
He was giving the reasons why they did not need to continue being slaves of sin.

No drama this time!

Ok...I agree that the passage is talking about how we are no longer 'slaves to sin'. But I'm still wondering what that has to do with this topic...
...unless you are saying that now we are 'slaves to righteousness' instead, in effect, being obediant to God....and you are tying that with our need to follow Christ in order to 'keep' our salvation.

I don't agree with that...if indeed that is the point you're trying to make.
You see, I see scripture as giving us too many 'assurances' of salvation; too many passages that show salvation is from Christ, a free gift; to ever think it could be, or will be, upheld by anything I do. I see scripture as saying that once Jesus has justified us, we receive a new heart and mind and most importantly, the Holy Spirit as 'helper'. It is with these things that we walk in our faith...sanctification. We know scripture says that Jesus is both author and perfector of our faith, and we know he is in heaven interceeding for us with the Father. We know that the Holy Spirit is within us, guiding and helping us. The clear picture we get from scripture is that God does not just save us and then dump us to see the rest through on our own...to keep or loose as we stuff up or triumph.
So....are we free from slavery to sin? Absolutely! But the reason we are free, and therefore now slaves to righteouness, is the same reason. New birth and spiritual guidance. We are free to turn from sin and obey Jesus because he is upholding our faith and salvation!

 

[John Zain]

Ok...I agree that the passage is talking about how we are no longer 'slaves to sin'. But I'm still wondering what that has to do with this topic...
...unless you are saying that now we are 'slaves to righteousness' instead, in effect, being obediant to God....and you are tying that with our need to follow Christ in order to 'keep' our salvation.
I don't agree with that...if indeed that is the point you're trying to make.
You see, I see scripture as giving us too many 'assurances' of salvation; too many passages that show salvation is from Christ, a free gift; to ever think it could be, or will be, upheld by anything I do. I see scripture as saying that once Jesus has justified us, we receive a new heart and mind and most importantly, the Holy Spirit as 'helper'. It is with these things that we walk in our faith...sanctification. We know scripture says that Jesus is both author and perfector of our faith, and we know he is in heaven interceeding for us with the Father. We know that the Holy Spirit is within us, guiding and helping us. The clear picture we get from scripture is that God does not just save us and then dump us to see the rest through on our own...to keep or loose as we stuff up or triumph.
So....are we free from slavery to sin? Absolutely! But the reason we are free, and therefore now slaves to righteouness, is the same reason. New birth and spiritual guidance. We are free to turn from sin and obey Jesus because he is upholding our faith and salvation!

Did you check the thread? It explains Paul's super-tactful writing to the Romans.
Paul is saying:
-- they have the capability now to be the good things he mentions
-- but capability is NOT doing
-- only BACs can choose who they wish to be slaves of
-- 3 times, he gives the end result of those choosing to be slaves of sin,
which applies to everyone

Just like the habitual sin lists in the NT, which apply to absolutely everyone.
Not only does Scripture teach this, but do you really think that
God would condemn unbelievers for doing these things ... and not BACs?

 

[FHII]

Just like the habitual sin lists in the NT, which apply to absolutely everyone.
Not only does Scripture teach this, but do you really think that
God would condemn unbelievers for doing these things ... and not BACs?

Well.... Um.... One of those two groups is covered by grace through faith, and the other isn't. One group is under the law, and the other isn't... One group has their sins COVERED and the other doesn't.

 

[John Zain]

Well.... Um.... One of those two groups is covered by grace through faith, and the other isn't. One group is under the law, and the other isn't... One group has their sins COVERED and the other doesn't.

How many times am I goin' to have to quote this?

It's okay, and even expected, that you will sin occasionally.
And you can take care of the situation, i.e. maintain your righteousness ...

"But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another,
and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.
If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
If we confess (repent of) our sins, He is faithful and just
to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us." (1 John 1:7-10)

Throughout the whole Bible ... Sinners are unrighteous! ... Obedient believers are righteous!

 

[williemac]

How many times am I goin' to have to quote this?

It's okay, and even expected, that you will sin occasionally.
And you can take care of the situation, i.e. maintain your righteousness ...


Throughout the whole Bible ... Sinners are unrighteous! ... Obedient believers are righteous!

This is not true. If it were, then righteousness could not be 1.imputed (Rom.4:11,23,24) by faith. 2; a gift (Rom.5:17) by faith.

If righteousness comes by faith, then the only way it is maintained is also by faith. It is only demonstrated by works.

 

[Rach1370]

Just like the habitual sin lists in the NT, which apply to absolutely everyone.
Not only does Scripture teach this, but do you really think that
God would condemn unbelievers for doing these things ... and not BACs?

Why are we told to come to Jesus for salvation, grace and forgiveness of sins, if doing so makes absolutely no difference between us and unsaved people?

We are also told that in Christ we HAVE fogiveness for our sins....not that we WILL have forgiveness...as long as we shape up...

That whole notion that we have to act correctly in order to preserve our salvation leads to two conclusions:
One: that salvation is, in fact, based on works, not grace...and clearly that is NOT so.....and
Two: that Jesus' work on the cross was not sufficient, nor his promises or powers, to keep us....and that also is clearly untrue....

So, all in all, I don't find your reasonings factual or logical when considered against scripture. Sorry.

 

[williemac]

How many times am I goin' to have to quote this?

It's okay, and even expected, that you will sin occasionally.
And you can take care of the situation, i.e. maintain your righteousness ...

"But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another,
and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.
If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
If we confess (repent of) our sins, He is faithful and just
to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us." (1 John 1:7-10)

This passage is not meant to be an instruction to the believer to maintain his salvation. It is a truth taught to the believer about the principle of salvation. The gnostic teaching of that day was being addressed, which is that there is no sin. However in order to be forgiven of sin and cleansed from ALL unrighteousness, one must first acknowledge and confess his sin. This is a one time event. It is not to be repeated over and over. If it were, it certainly would not be to maintain anything as you insist.

The passage is not about maintaining something but rather ATTAINING it. Read it correctly! If it is meant as a repeated exercise, then the passage is directly saying that forgiveness and cleansing were taken away and need to be re-instated. Do you really intend anyone to believe that crap?

Read the very next verse if you want to see what happens to the believer who sins. 1John 2:1 assures us that we HAVE an advocate with the Father. Jesus is our High Priest and our intercessor. It is His blood that cleanses us from sin. And this event is not necessary to be repeated (Heb.10:18) . He has perfected forever, those who are being sanctified. (Heb.10:14)

The fact is that our sins have been remitted. But apparently you do not believe that. Do we need to maintain what has been accomplished by Another?

Further to that, you are contradicting your own doctrine (undoubtedly that which another has taught you). You have started another thread that insists we are to obey the commandments of Jesus in order to have everlasting life. However, in this thread you are saying that the repeated confession of sin is all that is required. So which is it? Both? I wait with baited breath to see what other hoops are required to be jumped.

 

[John Zain]

Why are we told to come to Jesus for salvation, grace and forgiveness of sins, if doing so makes absolutely no difference between us and unsaved people?
We are also told that in Christ we HAVE fogiveness for our sins....not that we WILL have forgiveness...as long as we shape up...
That whole notion that we have to act correctly in order to preserve our salvation leads to two conclusions:
One: that salvation is, in fact, based on works, not grace...and clearly that is NOT so.....and
Two: that Jesus' work on the cross was not sufficient, nor his promises or powers, to keep us....and that also is clearly untrue....
So, all in all, I don't find your reasonings factual or logical when considered against scripture. Sorry.

You don't even understand my position, so what's the point?

With the Muslims, I say:
I'm not asking you to believe our position, just understand it.
E.G. They insist that we believe that GOD had (procreated) a Son (in the normal fashion).