I refer you to Romans 8:38-39:

"For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord."

I answer your question with a question.  Are you part of creation?  I'd say so.  Therefore, if you're part of creation, and nothing in all creation can separate you from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus, then even you can't do that.

I've often heard that if one claims to accept Christ, and then turns away, then in reality, they were never truly with Christ.  Romans 8:38-39 seems to confirm this.

Hope that's helpful,
Justin

I would argue that salvation can be lost...but I don't think it is done for minor trnagressions, but more of willful rejection of God.  I am not 100% sure this verse is appropriate, but it seems to say to me that in Rom 11:22  "Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off." might suggest that there is a possibility of being cut off from God.

Rom 11:13  For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:
Rom 11:14  If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them.
Rom 11:15  For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?
Rom 11:16  For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches.
Rom 11:17  And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
Rom 11:18  Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
Rom 11:19  Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.
Rom 11:20  Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
Rom 11:21  For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
Rom 11:22  Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
Rom 11:23  And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.
Rom 11:24  For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?
Rom 11:25  For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
Rom 11:26  And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
Rom 11:27  For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

Would someone who is truly saved turn from Christ?

I believe the above verse is pretty clear.

Brother Chris

Hello Freinds I also agree to thee point that Our salvation is secured in Christ. It is not our grip on HIM but it is His grip on what matters. and He will not loose us. His Promise will not fail. He is the good Shephered no sheep can go away from HIM, if lost, or misguided, He will, as a Good Shephered, go and find his sheep out.

 Raj

Answer to #1- I do what's right out of appreciation for what Christ has done for me. I do what's right because when I became a believer, God gave me a whole new kind of "want to!" I no longer had a desire to do the things I was doing. If I had to answer your question in one word, I would have to say -conviction.

Answer to number 2- We cannot look at the writings of very Jewish men with very Jewish customs and project our modern, Christological conjectures onto them. We are in a covenant that was sealed in blood. If we accept the covenant that God has offered, no matter what we do, the covenant is always in force. We think of a contract and how there is a way out of most (usually with a price). It's different with covenant. Neither party gets out.

Josh, regarding your first of these two questions, I feel like it would be hard pressed to say it any better than Paul does in Romans 6.  Check it out here.

 
I think your second question is really interesting for those that believe you can lose your salvation.  The question would then be, what must you do to continue to maintain your salvation?  If one thinks they could lose their salvation, it would seem then that their motivation for following God would be out of fear of losing their salvation, and not out of a thankful response to God's grace.  This would seem to run counter to the gospel.

"whats to stop people from doing what they want after they get saved?"

This would not call into question whether they are still saved, but rather it would call into question whether they were ever saved. Salvation undoubtedly cannot be lost, nor given away. All the words that describe the salvation experience (born again, new creation, etc.) are words of permanence. ~mike

The Bible gives us two clues:

By their fruits you shall know them...

By this shall all men know you are my disciples, that you have love one for another...

I have no way of knowing if you are saved of not, only God knows that. But I can have some idea by applying the two verses alluded to above.

Haha, that depends on whether you're Armenian or Calvinistic.

 I've thought this through enough to make my head hurt.  I've heard good views, good views based on scripture.  Somehow, people have managed to make conflicting views based on scripture.  I'm not really sure how.  You also get goofy cycles.  It's hard to believe that a) you know when you're saved and b) people who lose salvation never really had it, though that's the best reasoning I've came to on the doctrine, because then some people begin to worry they might be one of the ones who never really had it and then that takes away their knowledge of eternal security and then all sorts of crazy things start happening -- and they lose focus.  There are ways of understanding it, all sorts of ways, and people debate them for ages.  Sometimes the debates stop being about the Truth and start being about who's the better, louder, smarter, more eloquent speaker.

I came to the conclusion once, I think, that I was going to stop worrying about "once saved, always saved," whether it's true or not, because it sounds like one of those things that we are going fatally wrong if we disagree so sincerely.  Or maybe we actually agree at the very core of things, but we're getting to that conclusion an odd way.  I hate not worrying about things because I want to be a missionary, and I want to be able to teach these things.  Then again, maybe there's a greater message to be taught, here.

Rather than worrying about it, I think I'm just going to live out my relationship to God, because when you really accept Christ and really see Him for what He's said and done, you ... I don't know, you change.  It stops mattering how many sins you can get away with.  You don't want to sin.  You may be tempted into some sins at times, but at the core of things, your desires for your life are driven by God's heart, not a selfish one.  Sin begins to hurt even before the reprocussions get to you.  It begins to hurt the moment it enters your thought.  You're embracing God's Spirit in yourself so much that sin actually hurts.

 Life stops being about selfish things.  It starts to be about serving Him and knowing Him, and it's the beautiful sort of thing that inspires songs of praise and good works.

Maybe it's better to ask if that can be lost?  I hope not, but all kinds of crazy things happen.  I think we lose that spiritual vigour, at least, when we forget that we're doing it for God and because of God -- not for and because of ourselves.

 I certainly believe I am saved, perhaps by pure process of "overkill."  I've accepted Christ, but I'm going to go fifty steps further and completely give my life over to God, live for Him, make it about Him, love Him, and do good things for Him because of this love.  At what point did I cross the "line"?  At what point did God's saving grace touch my soul?  I'm going to venture to say that it was when I accepted Christ with my heart, not just my tongue, and that all of this is the simply the confirming result of the slow transformation that took place as I began to learn to turn away on my sinful nature and pour out the spirit.

But it's important, I think, to do these things out of our love for God, in response to our relationship with Him -- not so that we can "do things to get saved."  We all know the problem in that philosophy. 

  Can you lose that by turning away, denying God, turning back to sinful nature?  I don't know.  Who would want to?  That's what I want to know.  There is so much freedom in not having to worry about my life anymore because I've put it in God's hands -- so much freedom in being able to focus on Him, where I know I'm really getting somewhere in life, rather than trying and failing to find my own happiness. When you've experienced even a taste of God's mercy and glory and grace and love, it becomes a drug of the soul for which we are willing to give everything we have to have more.  It's not easy and it's not always an overnight process for many of us, but what is in our hearts, it's undeniably changed.  I'd venture to say that this experience--though it touches all of us differently--is a sign that God has blessed us with His saving grace, and that we can find our security in that.    When we turn away from God's ways after knowing them, it undeniably causes us to question salvation.  It causes the Spirit in us to convict us.  There's nothing that strikes a soul with greater fear, I think, than God's conviction.  What does that say about salvation, itself?  I don't know.  God knows.  If we want to know, maybe we should set our hearts back on Him so that he can let us know.  I think that's what He wants from us, to begin with.

Hey Joel, that was refreshing. Finally someone put some Scripture together!

Thank you! 

Amazingly, everyone answered the question according to their positional belief!  LOL.  Calvinist answered according to the Calvinist thinking and Armenian will answer according to the Armenian thinking.  The problem isn't with your doctrinal upbringing or position, the problem is with the actual question which invites such a response.  Respectfully, I would submit to all of you that "triangulation" of both doctrines would create a realistic perspective to consider regarding this question.  Hence, are you telling me that once "I choose" to serve God, I have lost my "free will" to unchoose (this is for the Calvinist-line thinkers")?  Are you going to unfairly brandish me as not being "truly" saved?  Which, by the way, that adjective is a human attempt to regulate "real salvation" from "unreal salvation."  Friends, you are either saved or not... let's leave the weak "truly" saved label off.

On the other hand, are you telling me that I am responsible for my own eternity (this is for the Armenian positioned Christian)?  My goodness, I can't even keep my own promise when I start a diet!!!!  Haaaaaaaaa... let alone, trust in myself for salvation!  I have a problem with folks who "get saved again" every day of the week.  This position weakens the power of the cross and leaves me "alone" to "work out my salvation with fear and trembling."  I don't want to live a paranoid life thinking that every minute of every hour I am going to slip off the Titanic and no one will know that I am drowning in a sea of sin heading to hell!

 Well, as you can already see, my answer is quite different than the postional answers already mentioned above.  I say this respectfully and humbly to all of my brothers and sisters in the Christian arena.  You are not going to simply ignore, downplay, or brutally put down the other's position and satisfy the answer fully.  Can you marry both and realize that we are secure in Christ and that we are responsible to choose to "walk in the Spirit"?  Maintain it ourselves... No!   Live wreckless lives because we are saved no matter what... No!  Read carefully throughout that Old Testament and the New Testament... especially Pauline theology and you will have to honestly weigh my position.  If you can't bring both into one... then how do you then explain the Trinity... is he three or one... or is he one in three?  Which by the way, is another controversial question we must consider in a different blog. Or how about Jesus... was he 100% God or was he 100% man? How can he be both without violating the essence of the other?  Hmmm... I guess my point is becoming a little clearer on triangulation...

In closing, this is not whether you are are "democrat" or a "republican" type of question... this is honestly looking at the entire scope of scripture and re-evalutating our traditional responses.  I respectfully submit this perspective for your consideration and welcome proper dialogue! 

Hey all, I think I'm going to cut out from this dialogue as I'm not sure how much more fruitful its going to be.  Just wanted to say sorry if any of my wording came across in the wrong way. Dr. Wilson, I think your "truly" comment was aimed at me, but in my defense, I was using the term to only refer to people who don't believe in Christ, not people who do.  Nonetheless, I know these issues are really sensitive so I should have been more careful with my language.

Johnathan Thomas, I understand your position for wanting more scripture references.  I think that's wise.  You now seem satisfied, so that's good.

I agree with the all the comments about this being the wrong question.  I pray that no one who follows Christ would ever reject Him.  We could spend tons of time discussing this issue, but I'd rather spend the time encouraging you all, building you up, and working together to advance God's Kingdom and making Him known.

In closing, I'd just like to make Paul's prayer for the Phillippians my prayer for you all:

"..That your love may abound more and more in knowledge and depth of insight, so that you may be able to discern what is best and may be pure and blameless until the day of Christ, filled with the fruit of righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ - to the glory and praise of God."

Amen,
Justin

For me, two things wrap this one up:

1. What Wyatt said...if I can't do anything to earn it, then how can I do anything to unearn it.

2. The fact that God gives me the choice to live life more abundantly, if I want to. This scripture drives the point him;

Johnathan, This is one topic that I have studied intently.  You might want to consider a study for yourself.  I wish I had the time some have to gather all of the scriptures and lay it out in a nice format.  For lack of time, I simply paraphase my thoughts referring to certain scriptures.  I assume most of you know which ones I am referring to. 

Wyatt, Preach it Bro!  Right on my brother :)  If salvation was based on us, ie: our works, I would have lost mine a long time ago.  I would not want to walk around wondering if I lost my salvation based on my actions.  What freedom to KNOW we are secure in Him.

Thanks be to God that we are saved by grace alone, through faith and that is a gift from God, so that no man should boast!  When He gives his Spirit as a deposit guaranteeing our salvation, it is a guarantee!  Give the credit and glory where it belongs!  To Him alone! 

Wow, this certainly gives us all alot to ponder...

What I have taken away from this is that the bottomline about the scripture that we can all agree on is this...Jesus will judge whether or not we are worthy of salvation when we kneel before him.  And though I feel I am one of the worst sinners and am completely unsure of my salvation becasue I sin more "unintentionally" than I would like to admit. When I am being judged I would understand completely if he did not give me salvation because I am truly not worthy of the honor and glory that will come in Heaven... But still I hope and pray that my faith in Jesus Christ and my works will be sufficent for him to grace me with the gift of his salvation.   To me the bottomline answer to this question is that no one really knows for sure, but we should act and live as though we could lose it...

Christ Jesus came into my heart at my most sinful state, when I needed Him most - when I humbly turned to Him for help. I most certainly was not saved due to any merit of my own - all I did was turn away from my sin and turn to Jesus Christ for help! 

There is no doubt in my mind that my salvation is not based on any good works of my own, but upon the merits of Jesus Christ alone. As long as I humbly keep my face turned to Jesus Christ for help, He will never turn away!  His grace is sufficient!

"The one who comes to Me I will in no way cast out."  (John 6:37)

JJ, you can be assured of salvation. You are indeed correct that when you stand before the judgment seat, if you (or I, or anyone) were measured on their own works or merits, it would not be enough, but those who are saved, when God looks upon us, He sees his son and says "enter in".

Karl, I would contend that His grace is so sufficient that even when we don't keep our face turned toward Him, he still never turns away.  He let's us walk the walk we choose and suffer the consequences of our actions in this world, but the beauty, the glory, the mercy of it all is that absolutely nothing can separate us.  Makes me ask, "Who am I?"

Frankly Jonathan, I don't believe one needs to do "an exhaustive systematic study" to come to the truth concerning the statement "once saved always saved."  God's Word does not contradict itself (how can truth contradict truth!), therefore it is really a matter of reading the appropriate passages, not ALL the passages of ALL of Scripture, to find the answer.  Joel has obviously done the research, and I believe he addressed the heart of the matter.  The question was resolved for me a long time ago too, but as I continue to read Scripture daily I find God continually confirming Joel's conclusion with everything I read.

As I said previously, the question may actually be more one of "were they ever really saved in the first place."  Which is why Peter says, "my brothers, be all the more eager to make your calling and election sure."  If we have it, we can't lose it, but let's just make sure we have it!!

~sealed with you (I believe!), mike

It is there, but not as clearly as it is presented in the NT. I've heard our pastors refer to the OT as the NT concealed, and the NT as the OT revealed. Jesus was discussed in great detail throughout the OT, yet not so clearly that every Jewish person knew exactly when to watch for Him and what to expect. ~mike

So, with all sincerity, what do we do with the following Scripture? What does it mean?

"Only those who sin will be put to death. Children won't suffer for the sins of their parents, and parents won't suffer for the sins of their children.

Good people will be rewarded for what they do, and evil people will be punished for what they do.

Suppose wicked people stop sinning and start obeying my laws and doing right. They won't be put to death. All their sins will be forgiven, and they will live because they did right. I, the LORD God, don't like to see wicked people die. I enjoy seeing them turn from their sins and live.

But when good people start sinning and doing disgusting things, will they live? No! All their good deeds will be forgotten, and they will be put to death because of their sins.

You people of Israel accuse me of being unfair! But listen--I'm not unfair; you are!

If good people start doing evil, they must be put to death, because they have sinned.

And if wicked people start doing right, they will save themselves from punishment.

They will think about what they've done and stop sinning, and so they won't be put to death.

But you still say that I am unfair. You are the ones who have done wrong and are unfair!

I will judge each of you for what you've done.

So stop sinning, or else you will certainly be punished.

Give up your evil ways and start thinking pure thoughts. And be faithful to me!

Do you really want to be put to death for your sins? I, the LORD God, don't want to see that happen to anyone. So stop sinning and live!"   (Ezekiel 18:20-32)

I don't know about others, but I have gone through times in my Christian walk where I have been living in open rebellion to Him - either because of giving in to temptation or from being angry with God. I was especially angry with God after my nervous breakdown. I know though, that all through these times, the Holy Spirit was working overtime to draw me away from my rebellion.  Conviction always won out - the Holy Spirit has always succeeded in drawing me back.

But what if I had resisted the work of the Holy Spirit? What if I had continued in my rebellion?  What if I had died in my state of rebellion?

Well, I see God's preservation during those times of rebellion as just one more evidence of His amazing grace!  He did not let me die in my state of rebellion! 

But, the question begs to be asked... does He ever let a Christian die in a state of rebellion?  And if He does, doesn't Ezekiel 18:20-32 lead us to believe that such people will perish?

We know that God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.  We know that as long as we have life and breath we have the opportunity to repent.

"If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." (1 John 1:9)

But is the converse true? If we refuse/fail to confess our sins will we remain unforgiven and uncleansed?

In those times when I was in open rebellion to God the Holy Spirit definitely convicted me that I was treading on dangerous ground. I had the definite sense that I had better get back on the right track - or else. Or else what? I had the definite sense that the salvation of my soul was at stake if I didn't turn back to God.  It was a loving God calling me to return to the salvation of my soul. 

But why would the Holy Spirit warn me if there was nothing to fear?  If I could not lose my salvation, why should I have been concerned about my rebellion?

Perhaps this Scripture from Hebrews addressing believers holds the answer:

"See that you do not refuse Him who speaks. For if they did not escape, those who refused him that spoke on earth, much more we shall not escape if we turn away from Him who speaks from Heaven, whose voice then shook the earth; but now He has promised, saying, "Yet once more I will not only shake the earth, but also the heavens."And this word, "Yet once more," signifies the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that have been made, so that the things which cannot be shaken may remain.Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us have grace, by which we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear, for also, "Our God is a consuming fire." (Hebrews 12:25-29)

So, I said I was gone, but now I'm back.  I don't have the time to write answers to several of the questions above, but since I don't have the time, I wanted to point you all to a pretty great resource to help with some of the above topics (but definitely not all). 

At my church several months ago, Tim Keller gave a talk on "Does God Control Everything?".  I thought it was really good and hopefully it will be thought provoking for a lot of you as well.  Check it out here. You can get the mp3 for $2.50.  It touches on a lot of the above topics way better than I ever could.

One other quick resource which deals with the topic of election can be found here.  I'm not trying to push it, just providing some more food for thought.

Luke 12:10
And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven.

1 Timothy 1:13
Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.

Luke tells us in verse 29  that blaspheme against the Holy Ghost is not forgiveable, thus this is the unpardonable sin as defined by the Bible Scripture .

 In verse 30 Luke also defines what the unpardonable blaspheming sin is.  Timothy tells us that only those that do this in unbelief can ,obtain mercy.

Therefore, an unbelieving sinner or one that has not accepted Jesu Christ as it were and is not aware of what he has done in blaspheme agaisnt the Holy Ghost is not subject to unforgiveness.

 Logic would then dictate that only a saved person could commit the unpardonable sin, and that the saved person would have to know what he has done. This is obiviously a possible occurrence  for a saved person,  if not, for what other purpose could there be for even mentioning, or warning about the possibibilty of committing that sin?

All Holy Scripture is for reproof and correction....

The beauty of "blogging" is found in the exchange of thoughts and perspective without the pre-emptiveness of judgmental thinking.  I honestly enjoy reading the various predictable positions and the open ended ones too.  Awesome dialogue folks... this is what makes the body of Christ so incredibly united and so incredibly diverse.

I do wish to state that I whole heartedly agree with Jonathan Thomas that it is imperative to view doctrinal positions from a wholistic view (Old and New Testament).  The reason that this is important can be found in the "intertwining" of thought within the Old and New Testament.  Many times, one can find in Matthew the phrase, "that it might be fulfilled"... which in turn reveals Old Testament roots in that given passage.  On the other hand, one can find that in Genesis 3:15 there is mention of an awesome truth that later can be found in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.  Hence, as Jonathan adamently purports, it is sound doctrine to attempt a wholistic view of given doctrines by approaching them from an Old/New Testament understanding.

In closing, as this blog may continue for quite some time, I would like to say that it was my fifteen year old son that began this blog.  He will be leaving on a mission trip to Romania, Bulgaria, and Hungary in the Fall... praise the Lord!  I am honestly proud of him and his willingness to launch out on "risky blogs" in order to grasp a better understanding of how the body of Christ responds to such questions.

I have taught both my boys the importance of leading with open hearts and minds when it comes to the scripture.  I do warn them that there are those who claim Calvinism as a cloak for sin.  Hence, such persons can live like the devil, behave like the devil, and even look like him; but, since they are saved, Grace covers it all.  Some how, I find it dangerours to have grace without holiness as part of our "salvation package."

On the other hand, I have also taught my sons that many who claim the Armenian form of thinking live paranoid spiritual lives wondering whether they "maintained" it well that day or "lost" their salvation because of some pet sin. Such individuals live in fear and tend to judge everyone who fails or comes short of their standard.  How sad! 

An honest evaluation of scripture reveals that you can "biblically" argue both sides quite well (as can be seen with some of the blogs above).  Hence, just for the sake of argument, how can one "merge" or "converge" or "triangulate" these two opposing positions and still maintain a biblical perspective?  Please, if you are going to argue one or the other, I already know your position.  Nonetheless, I would invite an honest response to this request...

I think JReed has a very good point, here.

Before we look at whether salvation can be lost or not, lets remember what salvation is and what the Christian life calls for.

I personally believe that there is a level of truth to all perspectives, and the fact that most perspectives attempt to come to their conclusions by seeing God in the best way they can, is a good thing.  Because while our heads may be getting things wrong, at least our hearts are on the right track.  That said, I don't think any of us will ever get it completely right; God is not a high school subject, he is GOD!  So, whatever you believe, believe it to glorify God as best your human mind can glorify anything--which probably isn't much--and make sure that He's the God of your life and that His heart comes before yours.  He's what's important here.  The rest is just details!

Joel said

Look at the entire view of the Gospel writers and NT writers. Look at the words and parables of Jesus (Matthew 13 "The Parable of the Sower & Seed) and put the pieces of this answer together and you'll see the CASE FOR ETERNAL SECURITY!

Hi guys, I didn't read through this whole thing I'll just admit. But I caught this at the end of Joel's statement. Here's the explanation by Jesus of the Parable in question

Matt 13:18-23
18 Hear ye therefore the parable of the sower.
19 When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side.
20 But he that received the seed into stony places, the same is he that heareth the word, and anon with joy receiveth it;
21 Yet hath he not root in himself, but dureth for a while: for when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he is offended.
22 He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful.
23 But he that received seed into the good ground is he that heareth the word, and understandeth it; which also beareth fruit, and bringeth forth, some an hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.
(KJV)

Here I do not see at all the case for eternal security - I find just the opposite actually. I find one case where the Word is heard and rejected - it's taken away by the enemy. Probably equating to the devil whispering "You don't need that garbage. It's only gonna ruin your life. Who wants to go to church all the time and regulate their entire life to the dumb ol' Bible. Forget it." and so they never follow Christ.

The next two examples are those of people who do "receive the word with joy". Who go on in a relationship with the Lord for a while and allow the cares and worries of life, or the deceitfulness of riches - or whatever it may be to draw them away from the Lord.

These two groups seem to me to be the ones that do not keep their confidence in Christ steadfast unto the end (HEB 3:14).

I am unsure of the way you can put the pieces of this together and see that anyone that starts out believing in Christ will end up believing in Christ and thus be unconditionally eternally secure.

I am also waiting for your replies in my blog. As I've said I've not yet read through this blog. But I'd like to see you answer on my blog as well without evading it by baselss "context" replies. But I'll try to look at the things you've posted, bro.

Later on.

Answers to Joel's concerns against Unconditional Eternal Security

Joel in BLUE

1. If you could NOT do anything to EARN your salvation, what then can you possibly do to KEEP it?

You must hold the confidence you began with(Heb 3:14)
14 For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end;
- You do not do anything to "earn" your salvation, but you must do something to obtain it. It is a gift, but one that has a requirement...faith in Christ. If I told you that I would give you a car, you'd still have to accept it, and drive it. It wasn't anything you 'earned' but you had to do something to have it. And as Joh 15 says (which I'll post in a second and as Hebrews 3:14 says) we must hold fast to this confidence and remain in Christ.

John 15:1-6
1 I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.
2 Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.
3 Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.
4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.
5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.
(KJV)

Why would we be warned to remain in Him if it were impossible for us to do otherwise?

2. You're born only ONCE physically, and born ONLY ONCE spiritually... if you can become "UN-born" spiritually, can you also become UN-born physically?

You are making reaches into the illustration that were never intended by Jesus Himself. True you are only born once, but you also die once. Would you say that we all must also die once spiritually? I've heard this before and it's not based on scripture but assumptions of the extent of the illustration. Faulty ones in my opinion.

3. How many sins is TOO many, to the point where a believer "crosses the line" and is somehow "lost" again? Is it "ONE and you're done"? "TWO and you're through?" "THREE strikes and you're out?" "FOUR and no more?" Is this mysterious number a generic sum, applicable to all, or is each believer allowed a certain number on a case-by-case basis?

It's not about sin removing you from the grace of Christ, it's about no more faith in Him. It's about placing your faith in Him and then removing it from Him and placing it elswhere or nowhere. You don't understand the postition of conditional eternal security - you are making a 'straw man'.

4. If you do lose your salvation, as some believe is possible, does that mean you have to be
"born again-AGAIN" or "saved again" or "re-saved?" How about if you "backslide" countless times? Do you just keep adding "RE" to saved, or "AGAIN" to the prior "agains"? ( IN the NT, I see NO reference or USE of the term "backslider/backsliding"...)

This is an empty argument designed to make something sound silly. There's no real substance here to respond to. You are either in Christ or you are not in Christ. If you place your faith in Him and then turn from him and eventually turn back to Him - you can call it 'resaved' if you want. It doesn't matter to me.

5. If you are now "not your own, but are bought with a price" then is your own "free will" able to undo your salvation, negating the saving and keeping power of Christ? Do you honestly have the power to UNSEAL what God's Spirit has SEALED UNTIL THE DAY OF REDEMPTION?

We are sealed so long as we place our faith in Christ's sacrifice. If we place our trust in Him we are given the indwelling of the Holy Ghost. The assurity that God will hold up his end of the bargain. But if you place no faith in Christ, that seal is broken.

6. In the infamous story of the "prodical son", did the "prodical son" lose his sonship during his season of prodical living? Is this NOT a story of restoration, rather than of salvation or being "saved again"? Was the younger son's "sonship" restored, or was the FELLOWSHIP actually restored, since the son remained a son thru all of his time away? Did the father EVER refer to his youngest son in any other term besides "son?"

The Prodigal son did not lose his sonship, but he was said to be dead and lost.
Luke 15:24
24 For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found. And they began to be merry.
(KJV)

Luke 15:32
32 It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found.
(KJV)

You may take it as you wish, but to me - he was pronounced 'dead' and 'lost'. It is accompanied in the same chapter with other parables - the lost coin and the lost sheep. Are those also (in your opinion) about lost relationship? Are we saved if we are a sheep not following the shepherd. If we are not in the Father's will. Jesus says no......

Matt 7:21
21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
(KJV)

7. If Jesus is our Good Shepherd, and His statement in John 10:28-29 "And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand" says that NOONE can snatch us out of His grip, then does NOONE exclude the individual "sheep" himself/herself?

Yes, it does. Jesus is explaining that God will hold up his end of the deal. That there is nothing in the world that can take our salvation away from us - I firmly believe that. But our salvation is dependant on our faith in Christ. If we do not have faith in Christ, we have forfeited that promise. We have decided to not remain in CHrist (remember John 15).

8. When Christ died on Calvary's cross, did His sacrifice pay IN FULL mankind's sin debt for all past, present and future sin? By placing your faith in Him, doesn't that also mean that ALL of your sins - past, present & future - are forgiven as well? Doesn't that mean that your salvation of your soul is complete/finished upon conversion? Isn't that what the writer of Hebrews meant when he wrote Hebrews 7:25 "Therefore He is also able to save to the uttermost those who come to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them" in regards to the COMPLETE salvation of the believer's soul?

I agree fully with what you just said. The only difference being that when we have turned from faith in Christ, we can no longer allow this promise to apply to us. He is able to save those that come to God through Him.The word for "come" is a sense of contuously doing so. To approach God through Him - a one time act of faith in Christ is not a be all end all. We are in a relationship with him through faith. If we remove our faith from Him - we can no longer expect all our sins to be atoned for.

I rest my case FOR eternal security with I John 3:7-9 "Little children, let no one deceive you. He who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous. 8 He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has sinned from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil. 9 Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God."

Right, the person that is born again. Who has placed his faith in God is no longer the servant of sin. But the person that does not place their faith in Christ (whether they did at one point or not) is not of God. It all hinges on faith. Not on - do we sin or is sin not our lifestyle. If we place our faith in Christ, sin will not be our lifestyle. Not to say we never will, but it will not be part of our being....as a new creation in Christ.

WHEN YOU'RE "BORN AGAIN" INTO THE KINGDOM, THE HOLY SPIRIT IS THE AGENT DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN YOUR SALVATION. WHEN GOD'S SEED (HIS SPIRIT) REGENERATES THE BELIEVER, THE BELIEVER'S CAPACITY TO GO BACK INTO, AND REMAIN IN WILLFULL SIN IS NULLIFIED! Not that we're perfect or teach perfection, but that sin is NO LONGER our nature! When you're His child, you are NOT exempt from sin, but rather your life is NOT characterized by sin! In other words, a believer might fall down, but WILL NOT fall away... I John 2:1-2 "My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. 2 And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world."

I was totally agreeing with you here until you said a believer will not (as in cannot) fall away...let me complete the entire message of what you copied.

I Jn 1:9-2:2
9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

CHAPTER 2

1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
(KJV)

The part from Chapter one is important. It helps us understand the 2 verses in chapter 2. If we get saved and then go on from there saying we are not sinners and ignore what sin we may commit. If we don't bring it before God, His word is not in us. But "IF WE CONFESS OUR SINS" he is faithful and justified to do so because of Christ. So - John says - I would hope you don't sin, but if you do - our advocate is Christ. Those that got saved when they were 9 years old and 12 years later are hittin' the bars - foolin around and not caring what Jesus thinks about it, are no longer saved. I have no reason to doubt that they may have been though when they were younger.

Would you conclude a child that says they are saved may or may not be saved. Do you not take them at their word that they trust Christ, or do you wait out their life to see if it measures up? Do you yourself know if you are truly saved or not, since you may turn to a life of unrepentant sin and find that you never were saved? Is this truly how you view salvation?

I John 2:19-22 " They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.
20 But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you know all things.[d] 21 I have not written to you because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and that no lie is of the truth.

John is just letting them know that there are some that were among them that are teaching contradictory to the truth. They began among the apostles but were not of the faith, so they went out so that they be shown for what they truly are. How does this prove unconditional eternal security??????? 

22 Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son. 23 Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father either; he who acknowledges the Son has the Father also."

again I fail to see your point???

I could go on and on with more reasoning and scriptural references, but I leave off with this. I'm so thankful that the same God Who saved me from sin is able to KEEP me from sin, and my soul is TOTALLY SAVED! I'm saved, sealed, and delivered!

I totally agree. You put your trust in Him and he will see it through.

WOW Joel

I just came to understand we are part of the same denomination!!

COOL!!

Guess we don't all see eye to eye on everything within it - but good to know. Talk to ya later, man.

Hey Aaron, I am right in your grandstand, I have posted info my self on this very topic. It goes hand in hand in the debate over the unpardonable sin issue.

Your point for point reply to Wyatt was excellent, Good to see another level headed Christian on this blog. Check out my post and you will see the immature and childish remarks from those with no substance  have to say. 

A brother and musician In Christ Jesus , Clyde

Jared,

What question did you answer, this one??

Joel your response above is identical to your response in my blog....so I suppose I'll just copy and paste here too...

........(everything in blue is copied and pasted from my blog)

Joel, I still have to disagree with your handling of Hebrews 7.

Let me copy out more of it to grab a better context....

Heb 7:22-28
22 By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament.
23 And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death:
24 But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.
25 Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.
26 For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;
27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.
28 For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore.
(KJV)

He is able to save us to the uttermost in that he doesn't have to redo what has already been done like the Levitical priests did. He did it all at once. He died on the cross. That was the true sacrifice. The antitype of all the previous types. He will save to the uttermost those that come unto God by Him. His priesthood will never end. He won't pass the baton to another high priest. We don't have to wait until a certain point of the year to come to Him for forgiveness, he is always there and ready. But to say that if we come to Him once in a moment of faith, and then walk away and months, years or (what have you ) down the road, turn from him, we are no longer coming to him.

Does this put the burden on the one who needs the salvation?? I don't know if that's how you see it, but yeah, we have a part to play. We must remain (or abide) in Him (John 15) we must repent of sin, even if it is after our initial coming to Him (1 John 1:9-2 John 2:2). I am not saying that after we commit a sin, we are not saved, then we ask forgiveness and we're saved again until our next sin, etc. etc. etc. But if we yield to sin, and allow it to be our master, even after a conversion experience, we are no longer saved.

If this is not the case please tell me why (and don't avoid the question) Paul said this to the Romans...

Rom 6:12-16
12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.
13 Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.
14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.
15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.
16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?
(KJV)

......I can hardly believe that a Church of God guy has this doctrine. I don't know anyone in the Cleveland TN Church of God that holds to unconditional eternal security.

Anyhow -hope to hear from ya soon, bro

Anyhow, Joel, though I may have not answered your concerns to your satisfaction, I have answered them. Now would you do me the honor of resoponding to my other points in my blog. I look forward to more discussion.

God bless.

Does "my choice" have any part in my salvation? 

“For God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son (God) , so that everyone who believes  in him (humans) will not perish but have eternal life. (Jn3:16)   "I am the gate (Jesus); whoever enters (humans) through me will be saved..." (Jn 10:9).

The beginning of ch 6 reveals the nature of Paul's intent in his addressing the issue of SIN and the believer. He says that if you're now DEAD to sin, then why allow bondage to it any longer in your life! He exhorts us to walk in the newness of life in Christ, and not to settle for a second-rate testimony! Again, look at the entire chapter and its context.

Yes, exactly, the believer is dead to sin. Not the former believer. If you are a believer. If you are currently trusting in Christ for your salvation, you are dead to the consequence of your sin. Do you not see him issuing a warning in this chapter. NOT TO FALL BACK INTO SIN!!
It's not a good suggestion so that you'll have a good witness. It's a warning. I don't know how verse 16 could be any clearer. He is stating this to believers, that if they decide to yield to a life of sin, they are now the servant of that sin. If they serve sin they will receive the wages of sin. If you are a believer and your faith is in Christ, you will turn and repent from sin, or you will be struggling against it, you will not yield to it. If you yield to it, you no longer are trusting in Christ for your salvation.

You never responded to my prior post on this passage and explanation, so here it is again... Your answers to my statements again put the BURDEN of salvation on the believer, and NOT on the Savior. I John 2:19-22 " They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.  makes the case in itself for the concept of the perserverence of the born-again believer! John is saying that those who leave the faith, renounce the faith, turn away from the truth obviously were NOT born-again to start with. They may have made a "confession" but NEVER had a "possession" of salvation. Thus, they fell away, departed from or abandoned the faith, and it was manifested - or shown - thru their lackof perserverence.

Actually I did respond to this. I guess it didn't satisfy you though....here's what I posted a few posts above:

"John is just letting them know that there are some that were among them that are teaching contradictory to the truth. They began among the apostles but were not of the faith, so they went out so that they be shown for what they truly are. How does this prove unconditional eternal security???????"

I agree, these guys were never of the faith. Is that proof that this is the case with all such as depart from a group of believers. Can I say that this is a unilateral truth. The text does nothing to support that. They did depart to be shown what they were.....so what? This is an instance of people who were not true believers. Does that mean that every case where someone departs from the people of God that they were never truly believers? I have a whole lot of trouble seeing this as a slam dunk for your case by a long shot.

Using your rationale for "losing your salvation" or rejecting Christ altogether, under your own free will, then there must be NO hope for someone in a "backslidden" state! Especially looking at Hebrews 6:4-8...

Hebrews 6:4-8 "For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 if they fall away,[b] to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame.
7 For the earth which drinks in the rain that often comes upon it, and bears herbs useful for those by whom it is cultivated, receives blessing from God; 8 but if it bears thorns and briers, it is rejected and near to being cursed, whose end is to be burned." (NKJV)

I'll make no bones about the fact that this particular text has been a little troubling to me over the years. But I don't doubt it would be equally troubling if I were to take your position. I don't have a great answer for this one admittedly. But I'll do what I can..... I kind of think it means exactly what it says. It is referring to someone with a full salvation experience. Someone who has truly lived in the presence of almighty God. The vivid wording seems to indicate that they knew all the pleasures of living for the Lord and yet turned away from it. That these are the people who will not turn back to the Lord if they turned away from Him. If they can turn away from Him in the midst of all His goodness being showered down on them, they evidently have little or no hope of turning back - they are way too hardened....

I may be wrong in my interpretation, but what do you suppose it means in accordance to unconditional eternal security for the initial believer?? Is it a hypothetical situation that the author speaks of? and if so, what's the point?

 The writer warns those who contemplate "turning back" towards Judaism, or away from faith (those who have a mind concept of Christ, but NO heart change or conversion). The writer then EXHORTS and ENCOURAGES the believers in this same assembly or congregation that they're NOT going back, but forward; that this is NOT you when you continue forward. Read Hebrews 6, for example, and let's look at this concept of rebuking ONE group while EXHORTING another group in the same assembly

Joel,

When I read through Hebrews I see a sort of roller coaster kind of epistle. He first explains why the New Covenant is better than the old and then issues a warning not to turn back to the Old Covenant. You assert that he's trying to weed out the ones that in their heart never left the old system. I seem to see that he's trying to warn them not to do so (which seems to be a more natural reading of a warning). That is where the difference is. He does indeed say that he is confident of better things concerning his audience. He's encouraging them not to do what he's warned them not to do. He warns them that it would be impossible to have such a grand experience with the true Lord and the true salvation and turn away from it - then to come back. Because you have rejected it already. You have already shown that though you experience it, you will just throw it away.

I would like to know what it is that clues you in to your opinion that some are not truly saved but only have a head knowledge of Christ. If that's the case what's the point of 6:4-6. It seems to really rob it of any meaning.

Telling a bunch of people that are truly saved who can never be not saved that it would be impossible to be saved again if they turned from such a thorough experience with God.

 OR -

Telling a bunch of people who are not really even saved anyhow that if they were saved and happened to turn away from that salvation that it would be impossible to return to true repentance.

Eiher case seems absolutely like a waste of good ink......what's the real point here, Joel?

Now if he were telling this to a group of people that trusted in Christ, but were on the verge of returning to the old system, it would have a lot of impact on all his audience, plus it would carry the weight that such a warning should. 

I don't necessarily think it's talking about just anyone that gets saved and then turns away. It seems to be describing a dynamic relationship with Christ in which much has been lavished on you and you turn away.....it doesn't say simply that anyone who trusts in Christ and turns away cannot turn back to Him. It says this
Heb 6:4-6
4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
(KJV)

It seems that the proponents of unconditional eternal security for the initial believer - want to put this verse forth but are afraid of it's literal reading. Because if it is read literally it would mean that there's a situation possible of falling away - unless you assume the author is speaking of a hypothetical situation (which I've still never heard a good reason why he would). I am not afraid to take it literally. I believe it literally at this point, because it's the best interpretation I can understand it to mean.

I don't believe it to mean that all who are saved and turn away are doomed, but those that have known the true benefit of a life with Christ and neglect it will not turn back to him. Why would they? They rejected his great blessing once, why would they repent and turn back to Him again? But those that have been saved (say as a child) and loved the Lord (I was one such child) and then in later life turned away from him (I was one such teen) and then later on realized that they did not allow him to work fully in their life turned back to him (I was once such 24 year old). Do I have any delusions that I was saved all the while I was fornicating, drinking, cussing, etc. and totally ignoring the Lord at best and making fun of Christians at worst when I was in my teens ? - Not at all. But do I have any doubt that I was saved when I was 6 or 7 years old? - No doubts whatsoever. I am one that has been saved, turned from the Lord and turned back to Him.

Mike or Joel, please please please tell me I beg you!!!
 Why are those three verses in the Bible if they have absolutely no meaning???

Am I the ONLY one that isn't afraid to take them literally??

(we're all still friend right??);D

No prob, Joel, I'm enjoying the conversation, but truth be known I'm spending a little too much time infront of the computer screen for my tastes too.

Later on!

I would love to read your denominations of each of you that posted.  I have a reason for asking. 

When asking me what am I?  I'm Christian.  I have a personnal relationship with Jesus.  He is my Savior, King, Friend, my all.  Then you say what denomination am I?  I use to say Baptist.  Then I received Baptism of the Holy Ghost.  Now, I'm Pentacostal. 

Baptist preach, teach, walk: Once saved always saved.  Pentacostal preach, teach, walk: Salvation can me lost. 

If you want a great book to read:  Read Driven By Eternity: Making Your Life Count Today and Forever by John Bevere.  Now I pray, God keep me all the days of my life.  Keep my heart pure for you, Father God, Keep me saved, and following Jesus all the days of my life.

Make sure you don't turn away from Jesus.  This is what the Baptist call backsliden, but it's when you turn away, turn cold and stop following Jesus.  If you die, and to your supprise you were no longer saved.  How sad.  Don't let this be YOU!

Suzy Payne
Christian
Eagle's Landing Church Of God
Pentacostal

Greetings

I am not sure if any one else saw what I did in the scripture that Mike used to hold on to the, Once Saved Eternal Security Always Saved belief.  However, consider this.

It seems many Christians take a scripture and twist what it is really saying in a literal sense, if it doe not meet their theological outlook, whether on purpose or out of ignorance.  As Brother Aaron has been laboriously trying to point out to Wyatt repeatedly to no avail.

The impossible part of this passage is the crucial point in dispute. Mike and others are claiming that the impossible part is the falling away and not the renewing again to repentance. Two little key words in this passage give a clear indication where the ‘impossible’ emphasis lies. 

IF and TO,

‘If’ they shall fall away, the ‘if’ presupposes the possibility that they can.  

Example;

If I were to say to you if you get into trouble call me. That presupposes that you can get into trouble.

The ‘to’ presupposes some kind of a condition; In this case, the ‘if’ they shall fall away found behind the comma of ‘to’ renew again. The ‘if’ and ‘to’ relate back to the impossible part to renew those once enlighten, not the falling away clarified by ‘IF’

This is elementary sentence analysis; any sixth grader would know this.

If there are any Christian English teachers out there, how could you let this get by? I am not an English teacher however, I taught Elementary 5th grade, Middle school and Culinary Arts at a level 10 youth facility and I would have failed any one my students for trying to make that kind of shoddy analysis.

I am not accusing anyone of purposely misleading, ignorance is ignorance, and it just means they knew not.

Blessings, Clyde

Amen Suzy,

You are singing my song, I too was once a baptist until the Holy Ghost shook my cage, I claim the same pedigree as you do,simply a Bible believing follower of the Lord Jesus Christ Christian.

Blessings Clyde

Regardless of your doctrinal position, may I humbly suggest the following three books for your consideration.   You will note that the first two authors basically will defer to one of the positions contended for above and the third book mentions four perspectives to understanding the doctrine eternal security!

If you decide to obtain these books, you are in for a serious ride!  First, Charles Stanley is no novice when it comes to presenting his position on Eternal Security.  Second, Dr. French Arrington is a noted Biblical Scholar who presents a solid exegetical position for conditional eternal security.  Third, is a careful panel-view of four different perspectives on Eternal Security by Horton, Geisler, Ashby, and Harper.  Here they present the arguments for four different positions on eternal security and summative reviews.

As anyone reading this blog will note, rarely will anyone "convert over" to the other side by just reading blogs such as this one.  Hence, if you are going to "argue" your point here in an attempt to convince someone how wrong they are and level headed they are not, then you will enjoy blogging on this site until we are literally in eternity (LOLOLOL).  Nonetheless, if you are willing to honestly let the scriptures speak for themselves (and I am not limiting scripture to any particular english translation--whether 17th century or 21st Century english translation... I am talking about allowing the original language speak to us with its original intent) and consider the wisdom from these scholars, you will note that the answer you find may make you rethink your position.

Hence, here are the books I respectfully submit for your consideration...

1.  Eternal Security by Charles F. Stanley.  Thomas Nelson.  Nashville, TN, 1990.

2.  Unconditional Eternal Security:  Myth or Truth? by Dr. French Arrington.  Pathway.  Cleveland, TN.  2005.

3.  Four Views on Eternal Security.  J. Matthew Pinson, General Editor.  Grand Rapids, Michigan.  2002.

Dr. Mo

Clyde,

IF I were to fly too close to the sun I'd probably get burned and fall out of the sky. Does this IF presuppose the possibility that I can fly?  I am afraid you are mistaken in that particular observation, my friend. 6th grade analysis? :-)   ~mike

I love it Clyde,

Holy Ghost cage shaking. 

Awesome huh: Church Of God / Pentacostal Fire.

---------------------------
I say stay in the race for Jesus all the days of you life, press forward working for Him until the end.  Share Jesus will all around you.  And pray your unsaved family and friends into our precious family.  We shout and praise God when we see them accept Jesus as saviour.

Suzy

Good night all, it's late here in Georgia.

Suzy

Nice try Mike, but yes it does your statement does not say that you can fly on your own power, besides it is a nonsenical response,. as is the proposition that can God create a rock that he can not pick up  to prove that he can not do everything.

 Hold on to your view as long as you like it is your choice,  but your analaysis is still faulty.

Of course it's a "nonsensical response", just as is the thought the one can possess the gift of the Holy Spirit and then somehow lose it!!!  Thank you for further making the point for us. 

Now to the rest of the thought that the author of Hebrews is saying. It is so obvious that you can't lose this precious gift that God gives (the Holy Spirit, or Himself), that he exhorts people like YOU and ME to leave these elementary teachings behind and go on to maturity (Heb. 6:1). QUIT relaying the foundation of repentance (that leads to salvation), and move on!  And that is just what I will now due, as it is really pointless to remain stuck on this resolved issue.  Blog on something meaningful!  You and I are saved already, why beat about a hypothetical situation that isn't going to happen anyway!

Goodnight Clyde and everyone, God loves you and so do I! ~Lord bless, mike

Nice closing  thought Mike, that is  exactly what I have always wondered,  why would one dwell on the point that could we  or could not lose our salvation. I do not know about others but I did not get  saved with thought that I could somehow loose it down the road.The Holy Ghost will continually check a beleiver, in that convicting from the Holy Ghost lies our eternal salvation.

Blessings .Clyde

My post is buried way in the middle there, but ...

Hmm.. What's my denomination? 

Baptised Catholic, but sort of defected somewhere in the middle. First church I went to as a Christian was Mennonite Brethren, and then I went between there and a Baptist church, depending on where I was.  Also served on kitchen staff at a camp funded by Evangelicals.  Visited an Episcopal church, but it reminded me too much of the Catholic service, which just has too much "extra stuff" for my taste.  Came across another church in my search upon returning to the States, which I think was undenominated -- and finally landed in a large, Evangelical-Free church.

In conclusion, I'm undenominated, protestant-leaning.  I just like to call myself "Christian."  And I love that I've been to so many places!

Chrishankhah, I love reading your post above.  You mentioned Mennonite Brethren, Is that the same church as Church Of The Brethren?  My Mom went to Church Of The Brethern in Fla, when she was a little girl.  She went to a Baptist when she was a teenager here in Georgia.  I was alway curious about what Church Of The Brethern beleived.  I love Mom's story of the children learning their bible verses.  They were given one bible verse in the bible.  Mom learned the all verses of Pslams 121.   To this day she resites it to me.  The teacher was amazed. 

 1 I lift up my eyes to the hills—
       where does my help come from?

 2 My help comes from the LORD,
       the Maker of heaven and earth.

 3 He will not let your foot slip—
       he who watches over you will not slumber;

 4 indeed, he who watches over Israel
       will neither slumber nor sleep.

 5 The LORD watches over you—
       the LORD is your shade at your right hand;

 6 the sun will not harm you by day,
       nor the moon by night.

 7 The LORD will keep you from all harm—
       he will watch over your life;

 8 the LORD will watch over your coming and going
       both now and forevermore.

redmax, unfortunately your comment displays a fundamental misunderstanding of the point of salvation. "Salvation" represents a relationship restored for all eternity. The "saved" would literally ONLY be those who understood what severed the relationship in the first place and responded to that which restored it, that being Jesus death and resurrection. If someone claims to be saved and then scoffs at the cross of Christ by continuing to live in sin (the very thing that severed the relationship to begin with), then that person demonstrates with their own behavior that they have NOT embraced the Savior or the solution and the relationship for that person continues in its severed state. 

Belief is all it takes to apply the solution and restore the relationship, BUT belief is evidenced by far more than just a one-time profession of faith! Belief in Christ's sacrifice is a life-changing realization that God gave up ALL for us so we could walk with Him again as Adam and Eve did before the Fall, and is seen in the believer's willingness to give up ALL for Him in return!!

ps... It saddens me somewhat to see this basic doctrine misunderstood and maligned. Those who argue against it seem to place far more emphasis on what man does to save himself than on what God did to save man. Here is a blog on the concept of "time" which says a lot about who God is and the way in which He brought us to Him, with very definite implications for those who deny "once saved always saved."

God bless, mike n laura

Mike n Laura said this

 It saddens me somewhat to see this basic doctrine misunderstood and maligned. Those who argue against it seem to place far more emphasis on what man does to save himself than on what God did to save man.

I've explained the position I take over and over and it is always misrepresented in this exact way. In no way have I ever said that man does anything to save himself, only that he must accept what has been done for him by Jesus to obtain that salvation. If you think that my saying accepting by faith the sacrifice of Christ is in some way meriting salvation, you are quite mistaken. If I am drowning in the ocean and someone comes along in a boat to rescue me, I have to reach up and take their hand to pull me in. I wouldn't go around bragging about how I did it all on my own by lifting my hand up.

Do you think that the man with the withered hand healed himself by stretching forth his hand? I don't. But I think if he had not stretched forth his hand, as Jesus told him to do, he may have not been healed. If the man that was paralysed had not taken the action of faith to actually try to stand and walk, he probably would not have been healed. And if we don't act in faith to accept the sacrifice of Christ by faith, we will not be saved. And if we neglect to beleive on Him for our salvation, we are not saved. If you think that's earning your salvation, you are either not thinking clearly or you are intentionally trying to misrepresent those that espouse my position.

By the way - I feel I've made several very valid points in this and the other blog and have received very very little actual critical responses. I would love to see how the "unconditional eternal security for the initial believer" position would defend some of my arguments like (and I'm copy and pasting here):

Heb 3:12-14
12 Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.
13 But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.
14 For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end;
(KJV)

Notice that there is a warning against "departing from the living God." If there is a 'departing' there must have been an attachment to depart from. If there is no chance of this being possible, is this an empty warning of a hypothetical situation?

Verse 14 claims we are partakers of Christ "IF" we hold this confidence to the end. Our part is to keep our faith grounded in Christ. If not, we are not to be partakers of the eternal life he gives to all his body.

----------

2 Tim 2:11-13
11 It is a faithful saying: For if we be dead with him, we shall also live with him:
12 If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us:
13 If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.
(KJV)

This is said to have been a common saying or perhaps even a song at the time of the writing of the epistle...but Paul said it is faithful, and putting it down in his inspired writing, it is assuredly so. In verse 12 we see that Paul says if "we" deny him, he will also deny 'us'. Now, the problem those that claim you are either saved for good or never saved at all have is that they have to decide if Paul is claiming He himself (nearing the end of his ministry) may not ever have actually have been saved, or if he's saying that his salvation could be forfeit. 

He uses the words "us" and "we" and he's writing to Timothy, another brother in Christ. Is Paul claiming that Timothy perhaps could not be saved as well, or is he saying that Timothy could walk from his salvation if he were to deny Christ?

The next verse has often been (mis)used by the other side of this discussion to prove that Christ would never deny salvation to one he has already saved. The verse says "If we believe not yet he abideth faithful, he cannot deny himself."

I can't see how that could mean we are saved no matter what. It is simply saying he will be true to his word. He will be faithful to his promises and warnings. If we don't do what's right. If we lose our faith in him, it's not his fault. He will continuously stay faithful. He's unable to be otherwise.

-----------------

I look forward to an analysis of this by someone.

I now see that Pastor's of the Church Of God, as we too are the same Church Of God, Cleveland Tn Orgin have different beliefs of the "Once Saved Always Saved" subject.  My pastor has been with Eagle's Landing Church Of God for 26 years now and is in my mind a very loving pastor to his church.  He doesn't beleive that once saved always saved.  He gives scripture to proof his beleif.  I have asked him to come and post.  He is a memeber of MyChurch too.  I didn't realize that there was different beliefs in our Church Of God / Pentacostal Denomination. 
-------------------------------------
I in no way have made any comments that would hurt another memeber here on this board.
The Wyatt's wife hopefully was not threatened by my posts, I pray.  My posts are just from what God has spoke to our church through His word in the bible.

I will not post here again, not because I'm backing down from what we beleive as God's Children from Eagle's Landing Church Of God, but not to be in argument which is what the devil thrives on.
For the devil is the author of confussion, and I say Brothers and Sisters in Christ, Lets Not Do It.

May God bless you all,
Love in Christ,
Suzy

Thank you Doc,

I'm so pleased that you were not offended.  I emailed you a email from my heart.  Have a blessed day.

Love in Christ,

Suzy

Aaron, I am sorry if it appeared that I misrepresented anything you wrote, that certainly wasn't the intention. Just to be sure, you wrote:

"In no way have I ever said that man does anything to save himself, only that he must accept what has been done for him by Jesus to obtain that salvation."

But you keep going back to the possibility of losing that salvation. So that clearly implies (to me) that you believe man must maintain it in some way. Is that fair to say? If so, that is what I mean when I say "emphasis on what man does to save himself". It takes the emphasis, work, and the glory away from God.

To address the other points you brought up. The phrase "departing from the living God" doesn't necessarily refer to someone who has the Spirit of God indwelling them. I would submit that it refers to those who spent time with the believers, attending their worship services, even becoming intimately involved with the believers in friendship, but were never regenerated. There is plenty of scripture that alludes to people in the church who are not really God's -- for example the parable of the wheat and the tares. So no, that verse does not unequivocably say salvation can be lost.

The same passage said "for we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end."  Again this doesn't clearly say salvation can be lost, only that those authentically saved are the ones who hold fast till the end. Those who have not received the glorious gift of the Holy Spirit wouldn't be expected to hold on through intense times of suffering.

The saying in 2 Tim 2:11-13, although repeated by Paul as a "trustworthy saying", is not a word for word literal statement of truth but a generality whose point was the believer's identification with Christ when facing suffering and martyrdom. Conversely, those who deny Christ will themselves be denied by Christ at judgment.

Actually, the last thing I want to say is that I actually disagree with the following statement as written, "unconditional eternal security for the initial believer."  Of course there is a condition for eternal security, and it is belief in Jesus' death and resurrection, the taking away of all our sins by the Son of God Himself!!

God bless, mike

Hey Suzy and The Doc

Great way to come together in love even when your positions are different. We can be divided by ideas, interpretations, etc. but we are united by the blood of Jesus.  Great display of maturity ladies.  Bless you ;-)

Hey Mike.

I do in fact believe that we must maintain our salvation. The way we do so is to remain in Christ. The way we do that is to continue to keep our faith in Him. Here's what John says....

Jhn 6:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

I fully believe in the eternal security of the believer! But I believe the operative word is "believer". Not in the eternal security of the former believer. I understand the Bible to tell us that the person that is believing on Christ for their salvation is in line for eternity, however, should they turn from belief on Him, they no longer share in His life (Heb 3:14) also 1John 5:11-And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.

 I see that you have taken time to respond to my statements. I appreciate that very much.

The text in Hebrews is directed to current believers, and is a warning not to depart from the Living God. You would make this to be a warning to unbelievers not to depart from a nominal association to God....when it is plainly stated as a warning from departing from God. Why would he warn them against departing from God - if they aren't truly God's children anyhow?

So is this what you think the text means...........

The writer of Hebrews is telling people who are not truly believers not to depart from the company of believers? But if that's so why does it say that they should not depart from the living God? And why is the writer so worried about warning people who don't believe in God not to get separated from the group that does believe in God? This really seems illogical and a scripture twisting for the purpose of reaching a harmony in an imported belief. Plainly read, the writer warns Christians not to depart from God....dont you think?

And if you'd not mind can you tell me what we are warned against in this passage (which I've highlighted)

Thanks again for the interaction. I would hope you'll respond to what I've said about the text in Hebrews and John.

Also did you say that the text in Timothy should not be taken literally? Why not? It's scripture.

Hey Aaron, I too appreciate your posts.

Our basic difference appears to be whether or not a permanent change takes place when someone first believes/accepts Christ. When Jesus says to Nicodemas that one must be "born again", that says to me a permanent change has taken place. That is a very clear scripture, one that can be taken literally (as spiritual birth). Also, when Paul says that we become a new creation/creature when the Spirit of Christ comes in, that also says to me that a permanent change has taken place.

The Hebrews passage you were referring to was written to the church, presumably believers. But Paul would have to account for the possibility that some readers had not yet believed. Nominal believers? Yes. Here is the NIV rendering:

"See to it, brothers, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God."

Seems reasonable to me that they are nominal believers.  As far as all scripture being taken literally, obvious you need to account for figures of speech, context, allegory, etc. For example, "I long to dwell in your tent forever and take refuge in the shelter of your wings" doesn't literally mean God has a tent or wings!!

Again I appreciate the give n take Aaron, and still hope you'll drop a little feedback off at my blog, which I sent you the link for. (I think I've earned your response now, right?) I'm burned out on this topic, so I submit this response and you can have the last word. Ok brother? God bless!! ~mike

Okay, Mike. I am sorry I haven't gotten on your blog yet. I really and truly will. I have just been jumping right onto this topic every 5 minutes I get to jump on here.

I have heard the idea many times that since a person is naturally only born once, he can only be spiritually born once. Well, that may make sense, but how far do you want to carry the illustration. It certainly doesn't make plain how far it goes. It does say there is a new birth. A new life began. But since there is always a death of a natural life - would you go so far as to say that there is always a spiritual death? I wouldn't, but if you try to make Jesus' illustration match up evenly with natural life - you'd have to concede that.

We do become a new creation as we believe on Christ. But what if we turn from Him? Are we still saved. I got saved honestly - truly with all my heart when I was about 8 years old, and I have no doubt about it. I loved the Lord, but my desires for other things drew me from Him in my teens and I am certain I was not saved. Then - at age 24 I came back to Him and He accepted me back.

You quoted from the NIV. Not my favorite version, but that's okay - I'll go with your quote

"See to it, brothers, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God."

Who did he address? The BROTHERS! That means Fellow Christians. What did he tell them..."See to it" - in other words, "take special care" - to do what??? Not turn away from the living God! Turn away? How do you turn FROM what you never turned TO?? That I cannot understand.

I cannot see why the writer would warn unbelievers not to turn from the God they never trusted in the first place. It seems senseless to me. I may just be dull, but I can't see any logic in it. I can see perfect logic in a man warning fellow Christians not to turn from the living God. That is a very natural understanding that requires no mind contortion at all.

I really will get on your blog I swear..Just give me til tomorrow.

God bless.

So, if you are eternaly secure,then do you have to ask forgiveness for your sins? Or is it not a necessity and you can go through your christian walk without it.

JoshMo, I'm having a deja vu moment here, have we seen this comment before?! If you are saved I would think that you would want to seek forgiveness more than ever for the times your heart wanders from God or you fail to obey Him. Salvation being a relationship w/Creator, if you do something that hurts that relationship (ie., sin) wouldn't you want to seek forgiveness asap and right the relationship??

When Christ died at Calvary, forgiveness wasn't the accomplishment, payment for the penalty (death) was! Christ died for our sins, paying the penalty the LAW (legal term) demanded. Since Jesus committed no sin, He was in a position to pay the penalty for others. Since Jesus was God (eternal, infinite) He could pay the penalty for ALL sins of ALL time.

1 Jn 2:2 - He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world. (the KJV uses 'propitiation' - a legal term - in place of 'atoning sacrifice'; the idea is a substitutionary payment of the penalty the law demands)

Once the legal demands are satisfied (payment made), daily restoration of our relationship with God becomes a matter of mere forgiveness. Does that make sense to you? ~mike

Shame on me for back t back posting, but to address Aaron, "in the church buildings, but not of the true Church" is who I am convinced the author is writing to when He says "See to it, brothers, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God." In fact, if Paul says to see that none of you has an unbelieving heart, that right there removes the reader from the company of the 'saved.'

I thought of the passage in Revelations after the previous post b/c many who think being 'saved' can be temporary cite that scripture as evidence as well. God bless you, and thanks for getting around to reading my blog as well, brother!! ~mike

Mike and Aaron, you will be eternally discussing this, because as you already noticed there are enough verses in the Bible to prove you both right.  Remember this has been going on since the 1600s.  The good thing about this is that you both have found a friend and a brother in each other. Hey, that is cool! 

Take a look at JoshMo's starting post that he begins.  Not only this one, but look at his other topics. There seams to be more behind this than just starting up his innocent topics.  JoshMo, I hope and pray that your not just on MyChurch to stir up the pot and start bible verse wars! 

Aaron, "in the church buildings, but not of the true Church" is who I am convinced the author is writing to when He says "See to it, brothers, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God." In fact, if Paul says to see that none of you has an unbelieving heart, that right there removes the reader from the company of the 'saved.'

I know this is going on and on and on and on, and I'll try like everything to stop this endless posting (but I can't control myself...lol). Anyway. The difference you and I have with this is that you think that the author is warning people not to turn away from the living God who have never actually turned TO the living God. You've not really explained the sense of that to me yet - you just keep repeating it.

I think He's warning them against having an unbelieving heart. Not a condition they currently have, but if they listen to the wrong people, a condition they could obtain.

Please, really, Mike. Please I beg of you! Tell me why he's warning them not to depart from the living God! And why does he call them brothers, if he's addressing people who are not truly saved? I don't really understand your position at all, even though you've said it over and over. I honestly want to understand you. I do think you make some good points sometimes. But I can't gather the least little ounce of logic out of this one.

Pretend I'm a kindergartner and take me baby step by baby step, and help me understand why unbelievers (who are called brothers) are warned not to depart from the living God (who've they've never approached).

Thanks, brother Mike.

Ok, why he might warn them not to depart from the living God, although they aren't saved. There are people at my church, maybe even in my small group or other ministry that meets weekly, who I have a close relationship with -- I'd refer to them affectionately as "brother" or "sister" given the venue in which I came to know them. I am tempted to assume they are fully saved/regenerated, but I don't really know for sure b/c only God knows, right? Some of these people are not very far along the walk of faith, in fact some there is little if any evidence or "fruit" to distinguish them from the world around us. We would call these people nominally Christian, in that they associate with Christians and could easily be considered Christian by total outsiders, but they are unbelieving in that they haven't surrendered their life to Christ, haven't experienced the Holy Spirit come into them and take up residence. (Biblically, belief is more than mere intellectual assent.) The people I'm describing are the same type of "believers" addressed in Rev. 3:16, they are not hot (Christian) or cold (mockers), but lukewarm (seem 'warm' to the idea of Christianity but no life change has taken place). 

So it would be very reasonable in my mind to urge these people, who hear the truth of the Gospel regularly, who experience the fellowship of authentic Christians, not to harden their hearts in response to adversity or temptation and thus turn away from the Lord. These are the same people I believe Jesus addressed in Matt 7:21-23, "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven."

My sincerest hope is that folks who read this deeply evaluate their life to see if in fact they have surrendered and truly made Jesus their Lord. How tragic when folks who have been hangin around the church, perhaps even for years, turn away from the opportunity to deeply know the full and satisfying mercy of God Almighty! Aaron, I'm not too worried about you, bro. I'm not even worried about winning or losing a debate. For your sake though I hope I've been able to clearly convey where I'm coming from, so your mental torture can cease! :-)

Again, God bless... ~mike

Thanks, Mike. You have made it a little clearer. It still doesn't seem to me to be that this is what is spoken of. I'll let this be the last post I leave here (unless one of my views is challenged to the extent that someone evokes a response from me, but I will try as hard as I can).

Here's the problem I take with your view. If all he was trying to do was to make them examine themselves, he stated it so strangely.

Heb 3:11-14
12 Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.
13 But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.
14 For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end;
(KJV)

He is issuing a warning, not an urging to soul search. It is evidenced by verse 13. If they are already hardened, why is he referring to a future possible (lest) hardening.

The whole theme of the book is that the New Covenant is better than the old. It is occasioned on the temptation to some to turn back to the older more familiar covenant. They were indeed pressured to do so by those that never deserted it, or who had gone back to it. The people addressed are the people that did leave the Old way that was only a shadow, for the new way, which is the true object that cast the shadow.

The author is telling them over and over how much better it is, and that it is the only true thing. It's all wrapped up in Jesus. The testator or the New Testament. He is urging them to support one another daily, because the draw back to the old way is strong. Then he wraps it up by saying that Jesus is the only way. We will be made partakers with Christ, co-heirs of eternity, if we hold the "beginning of our confidence steadfast to the end". There was a beginning of a confidence. It had to be held onto. Though they trusted in Christ initially, if that were then rejected, they would not receive the promise. The people (in my opinion) he is addressing are currently in line for that promise, but only so long as they hold the beginning of their confidence (not an illusion of confidence, not a nominal confidence) steadfast to the end.

I don't believe he's patronizing unbelievers here. I believe that He sees them as people who have put their trust in Christ, yet there is a significant threat to their confidence, and so this letter is written. A letter that lays out the case for this New Way being the true way (he compares the old Levitical Priesthood with the eternal Priesthood of Christ, He compares the old Sabbath rest and the new true rest it represented all those years, etc. etc.).

I just don't buy into your interpretation, and I suppose you don't buy into mine. But as I've said, I'll try to stay away from the subject we've been hammering away at and if you wish to have one last word - be my guest.

It's been a good discussion (for the most part) I believe.

God bless.

Suzy,

For whatever its worth and in his defense... Josh is a young inquisitve teen-ager with a deep love for God, Family, Church, and Country.  His questions are the ones I normally get from him throughout the entire week.  You see, His father is a Pastor and deals with doctrinal issues from an array of sources.  Consequently,  these issues are now a part of his own theological development and journey and for that, I am truly proud of him (see above post by me regarding Josh).

Hence, please don't misread his intentions nor brand him as one to "stir up" or start "verse wars."  We, the ones responding to these blogs throughout mychurch.org are ultimately responsible for the outcome, flavor, and message we deliver not only from our posts but to those who from "outside" the Christian community carefully read and consider our dialogues.

Respectfully,

Dr W

Sorry Josh.  Please indeed ask and post your questions and comments.  To be honest, I love to see young folks with interest in our lord Jesus.  And concerns of Salvation.  Too many young folks don't even want to be bothered with hearing about Jesus.

------------------------

Dr. Wilson,

Thank you for clearing that up.  I didn't mean any harm.

God bless you,

Suzy

My personal experience is that this subject is one of the hardest to understand. There seems to be scripture that supports both points of view. However both points of view seem to be able to become a serious stumbling block for a believer.

For if we are to look at the first point of view – losing salvation. We now take a look into the journey of a backslidden Christian (Christian). His journey of backsliding is typically one that is never started intentionally. It may start through a certain trial in his life which causes him to sin. Now these sins may seem minor (thin edge of the wedge) but soon start to open up into other sins. Now the backslidden Christian when he realizes his folly is full of repentance but may start to believe that he can not return to the lord and may have indeed committed the unforgivable sin. At this time the Christian knows he has done wrong is full of repentance but is now being constantly attacked by the devil in to believing there is now no forgiveness, thinking he has blown his salvation. He then may fall into what I would categorize as the worst feeling a human may feel, a belief in god, the devil, heaven and hell and a firm conviction that they are now eternally separated from god with no way back, a horrible place to be.

At this point Christian starts to separate from the lord because he feels full of guilt and cannot bring himself to talk to the lord. The devil starts to attack him and tempting him in his weakness and he starts to slide back into the world and his old sinful ways. He is still fighting against his sins but seems to have lost his strength against them. He is still repentful however believes there is no forgiveness. He stops attending church as he feels like a hypocrite, but in the same respect, internally craves for the church, fellowship and to be with the lord and so on and so on.

In this instance Christian still loves, and believes in the lord Jesus but is straying away further and further. Christian although still warring against his sins they have now got hold of him and he is becoming less repentant. For in this state Christian still believes in the lord but full of guilt and a belief of no forgiveness, it becomes less painful to stray from the lord and stop reading the bible.

At this stage is Christian still saved? Does the lord still love and call Christian his child?

For it is easy for another Christian to look at Christian in this state and judge him. Especially if they have not experienced any form or feeling of separation from the lord before. For a Christian can easily say how could that man go back to that state? He must never off loved the lord; I could never go back to those sins. 1Cor 10:12

Now if we look at the other point – on saved always saved. Christians initial sins that started his backslidden journey may have been caused in the belief that in his mind he started to believe that this sin will be ok, the lord will forgive me for this one sin, I am internally secure (unconditional in my salvation). This belief caused Christian to start his backslidden journey through the belief of on-saved-always-saved.

If he had held the opposing belief then he may not have started his backslidden journey by taken his sin so lightly.

When you look at the topics this way then his whole salvation may be based on what he initially believes on these topics. Had Christian believed in the once-saved-always-saved then he may have returned sooner to the lord through belief in his forgiveness. On the other hand had he believed in the loss of ones salvation he may never have started the slide in the first place.

WOW MarkJ from Australia.  Salutation from Maryland, USA ;-)

You have really put a lot of thought to this subject.  You have an objective way to make sense out of it. Like you, I try to see difficult issues like "salvation - eternal security and free will" from both sides.  It helps!

Thank you for your post

If a Christian commits suicide, is that person eternally secure?

As I've thought a little more about this, I wonder if it would be good to review again the terms justification and sanctification.  It becomes problematic when the two are confused and likewise creates problems when they are separated.  A simple google search produces a number of great resources to read up on this.

I think this should also shed light on your eternal security question.  Additionally, I'd recommend the CARM website to you, which is actually the first link in the google search.  You seem to have a lot of questions, and I think its a good place to go for answers.

Jeremy,

There might not be a degree for sinning, but there is a degreee to consequence

Josh,

As you may have assumed I don't think that it's likely you can kill yourself and go to heaven. But maybe my reasoning is not according to how you believe. I believe that suicide is murder. You are taking a life for no wrong done. You are stepping in the place of God and ending a life prematurely simply because you want out. That to me is murder. It's self murder.

Here's what the Bible says about such people as murderers.

I Jn 3:15
15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.
(KJV)

Now, I know that the main point of that verse is not to make the announcement that "murderers are not saved" but he's saying that if you hate your brother, you have the same problem a murderer has, and it's very evident that a murderer does not have the eternal life of Christ dwelling in Him, so neither does one that hates his brother.

Though it is a secondary meaning in the verse - the verse does say that no murderer has eternal life in Him. So I'd have to say that if you were committing suicide, and you're in your right mind, there'd be no way you'd still be saved.

I would like to thank everyone for there input. I have taken your input to heart and thank you for it! God bless 

Here he says that he, "God", will destroy those who didnt believe. What does he mean by "those who do not believe"? He also says that they should not listen to false teachers or be swayed by them. If you can be swayed by false teachers, can you be swayed away from God himself?

http://thenarrowpath.com/

If you go to this link and click on TOPICAL LECTURES on the left hand column.

Then when you go to that page there is a debate on this subject - a very friendly debate, but it brings out some great points. The link on that page is found on the left hand column of lectures in the top box. You'll see it right away. It is a very good debate.

PS I definately do not recommend the other lectures on that page though. Although I agree with Steve Gregg's position on eternal security being conditional, I definately disagree with many of his other opinions.

Here's a question for those who believe you can't walk away once you've accepted Christ.  What was the point of Satan trying to tempt Christ then?  And unless Jesus *could* be tempted (meaning he could walk away from the Father) can we really call them temptations? 

I'm also surprised someone hasn't mentioned this 

anyone want to comment on this?

Surprisingly - I'd actually answer that by saying that the people that were spoken to were still by and large Christians, on the verge of walking away from the faith. Jesus was talking to a group of people here, a church, the church of Ephesus. He warned them in the next verse that if their heart attitude did not change, he would remove that candlestick. I assume he means he will disassemble that group. I don't necessarily take that to mean that every individual in that group had lost their right standing with God, but no doubt a good number of them had, or were about to.

Rev 2:4-5
4 Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love.
5 Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.
(KJV)

I honestly don't think that was his main point. I do think that there would be some that would walk away from the faith and therefore no longer be taking advantage of the grace offered through faith. But that the seven candlesticks were the seven churches is plainly stated by Jesus. If He were to remove one of the candlesticks out of its place, it would seem to me that it would either mean that the church as a whole would be disassembled or that they would be ineffective.

Even if they were to still meet together and still maintain connections, if Jesus removes the candlestick from it's place, it's obviously not satisfying any longer to Him. So, in my opinion, the loss of the state of salvation to some (or even most) in that church is an issue as well (though it is not particularly addressed), but his main point is that the church body in Ephesus would no longer be in the pleasing condition it began in, if there is no repentance.