The Myth: Once saved always saved!

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Scripture must be interpreted with certain protocols in place; it isn't enough to simply transliterate every word without careful consideration to the whole.

The passage in Hebrews must be first accurately read before it can be accurately interpreted... and, again, within the framework not only of the passages around it, but within the whole of Scripture, and including other factors.

In other words you dont know what these passages in Hebrews [eg Heb 6:4-6] mean. I thought so.

So here is the thing. You OSAS people take passages like this one in Romans:

Rom 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

and this one in John:

Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

without applying your fancy rules about ..

... Scripture must be interpreted with certain protocols in place; it isn't enough to simply transliterate every word without careful consideration to the whole....

That rule only applies to when you come across something that contradicts your cheap salvation doctrine.

Originally posted by Rajk999
In other words you dont know what these passages in Hebrews [eg Heb 6:4-6] mean. I thought so.

So here is the thing. You OSAS people take passages like this one in Romans:

Rom 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

and this ...[text shortened]... e only applies to when you come across something that contradicts your cheap salvation doctrine.

That's cute.

I have the entire Bible in the original languages, but that's not enough. I am not a pastor; nor are you. You cannot goad me into a contest wherein we vainly attempt to measure how more studied or dedicated to truth one is in comparison to the other.

That being said, my years as a student of not only the Bible but as an earnest seeker of the truths of God have not been a complete waste: I've picked up quite a bit of paradigm-shifting truth and principles in the forty years since I first asked about God.

Like you and some others, I originally thought Hebrews 6 was referencing a scenario wherein one could lose their salvation. I made my assessment on the basis of what I thought to be a straight-forward reading of the Scripture. As a matter of fact, the majority of my concepts regarding God were as a result of the same approach to the Bible. How can that be wrong, exactly?

Every Bible available to us in our native tongue has been--- to some degree or another--- translated according to the sensibilities of the folks making the work available to us. Note, that is translated not transliterated. If the Bible were at least transliterated, word-for-word, we'd be a little closer to the meaning, purity-speaking.

A casual comparative view of even this passage in Hebrews when seen in any online English version next to, say, the Greek interlinear available at such sights as Scripture4all.org and other sites immediately presents to the reader how emphatically different the methods are from each other.

I can read/understand some of the forms of Greek and even less of Hebrew, and Aramaic used in throughout the Bible. But I prefer to use interlinears such as I mentioned to do most of the heavy lifting when parsing out the Bible. Yet even armed more accurately with these, the task of interpretation is not even remotely feasible for anyone who is 1.) not a pastor, and 2.) ill-prepared (read: studied).

Much better minds than ours have undertaken their somber responsibilities and come to emphatic conclusions in opposition to the one you espouse. Granted, there are a good portion of folks who are in the same camp as you on the topic to seemingly negate if not at least counterbalance the topic.

The distinction, in my mind, is the quality of the study which has preceded the conclusions held. The group which holds that salvation is gained by work and thereby can be lost by action have studied, no doubt. However, their study is limited to the conscripts of such thinking, without allowing the Bible permission to speak for itself. They are beholden to an ideology instead of allegiance to the Bible, no matter what it says.

I subscribe to the other group, regardless their numbering among all believers. I believe the Bible is the one true source of God's plan and purpose for the believer, in that God has elevated it above His reputation. With that lofty position bestowed upon it, I allow it the full range of authority... even and especially when it trespasses my own images of God.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
That's cute.

I have the entire Bible in the original languages, but that's not enough. I am not a pastor; nor are you. You cannot goad me into a contest wherein we vainly attempt to measure how more studied or dedicated to truth one is in comparison to the other.

That being said, my years as a student of not only the Bible but as an earnest seeker ...[text shortened]... w it the full range of authority... even and especially when it trespasses my own images of God.

Thumbs up from me, very eloquently stated.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
That's cute.

I have the entire Bible in the original languages, but that's not enough. I am not a pastor; nor are you. You cannot goad me into a contest wherein we vainly attempt to measure how more studied or dedicated to truth one is in comparison to the other.

That being said, my years as a student of not only the Bible but as an earnest seeker ...[text shortened]... w it the full range of authority... even and especially when it trespasses my own images of God.

I agree with the intention of this post. However, as should be painfully obvious by now, there are those who read the very same scripture we do, and assume it says things it does not, in order to make that reader feel better about their own ideology.

How many arguments between Christians here end with one side saying, in essence, "I prefer to believe the Bible." This is because they are assuming it is saying the same things included in their ideology. Other people get different meanings all the time. People should realize that the Bible doesn't actually come out and say that it agrees with you*, yet a lot of people act like it does.

--
* Disclaimer: By 'you', here, I mean the reader 'you', and not the poster I am replying to.

Originally posted by Suzianne
I agree with the intention of this post. However, as should be painfully obvious by now, there are those who read the very same scripture we do, and assume it says things it does not, in order to make that reader feel better about their own ideology.

How many arguments between Christians here end with one side saying, in essence, "I prefer to believe th ...[text shortened]...
--
* Disclaimer: By 'you', here, I mean the reader 'you', and not the poster I am replying to.

Boy o boy, what a load of .. you know what. You probably can fool some gullible people with that nonsense. And thats exactly what preachers do these days. Nobody wants to hear what Christ says.

After sifting through your irrelevant post what I gather is that you rather ignore Christ and Paul and go along with those fallible humans who you have placed up on a pedestal. Apparently these people convinced you that you can never lose your salvation.

Anyway .. Im not arguing with you neither am I giving you any eloquent rubbish to read.

Just note that Hebrews 6 is not alone, and has lots of supporting friends. There are dozens of passages which:
- deny that every Christian or born again Christian gets eternal life immediately upon accepting Christ with their mouth.
- deny that Christians can sin and sin wilfully and still get eternal life.

So go ahead and twist the Bible all you like simply because you 'get comfort' from doing that. Your comfortable delusion will be very short lived.

Originally posted by Rajk999
Boy o boy, what a load of .. you know what. You probably can fool some gullible people with that nonsense. And thats exactly what preachers do these days. Nobody wants to hear what Christ says.

After sifting through your irrelevant post what I gather is that you rather ignore Christ and Paul and go along with those fallible humans who you have placed up o ...[text shortened]... y because you 'get comfort' from doing that. Your comfortable delusion will be very short lived.

Then why don't you try and reconcile the verses that say otherwise? All you do is spew out the same old thing, follow the words of Christ. Well I have news for you, the verses that you seem to disagree with , are also words of Christ.

Originally posted by Pudgenik
We are All children of God. I know you've heard me say it before. Even the "unsaved". So it begs the question, what is the difference? What was the difference between the two sons in the story of the prodigal son?

You, checkbaiter, are the son who was always with the Father, the unsaved are the other son. What did the unsaved son do? Before the Father saw him?

???? This does not even make sense..

Originally posted by checkbaiter
Then why don't you try and reconcile the verses that say otherwise? All you do is spew out the same old thing, follow the words of Christ. Well I have news for you, the verses that you seem to disagree with , are also words of Christ.

I think we went through that in another thread when you agreed that there is a limit to how much one can sin and that you cannot continue in a sinful lifestyle.

There is actually nothing to reconcile because there is no verse that says that if you accept Christ with your mouth you are will get eternal life and you cannot lose it. What you have done is to put several verses together to make that conclusion.

The flaw with that is that you leave out other verses dealing with salvation. If you take the whole story you can only come to the following conclusions:

- there are some who accept Christ with their mouth and their heart follows ie they live the Christlike life and they cannot lose their salvation because Christ would not allow anyone to take 'pluck them from His hand'.
- there are some who accept Christ with their mouth and their heart is not with Christ and they continue in their sinful lifestyle. The teachings of both Christ and the Apostles are clear that they are in danger of losing their salvation.

This represents the whole of the teachings of Christ and the Apostles. Both groups are born again Christians. It is much like the parable of the sower and the seed. Not all who say 'Lord Lord' will enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. It is also foolish to make claims like these were not 'true' Christians or these were not 'saved' from the start.

I have always said these things so it is you and your type that cannot reconcile the verses. What you do is ignore all the verses that you do not agree with. I am taking all into consideration by agreeing that someone can accept Christ with their mouth and heart and thereby be assured of salvation. But the assurance comes with a condition that Christ stated clearly that IF you follow in my word, THEN you are my disciples indeed.

Originally posted by Suzianne
I agree with the intention of this post. However, as should be painfully obvious by now, there are those who read the very same scripture we do, and assume it says things it does not, in order to make that reader feel better about their own ideology.

How many arguments between Christians here end with one side saying, in essence, "I prefer to believe th ...[text shortened]...
--
* Disclaimer: By 'you', here, I mean the reader 'you', and not the poster I am replying to.

there are those who read the very same scripture we do, and assume it says things it does not, in order to make that reader feel better about their own ideology.
I have acknowledged this very thing within my reply.

How many arguments between Christians here end with one side saying, in essence, "I prefer to believe the Bible."
This is precisely why I qualified my very similar sounding rejoinder. We are all very familiar with the devotion--- nearly zealotry--- evidenced by the various groups of Christian-like groups.
They carry Bibles.
They earnestly and diligently work to steer
every.
single.
conversation.
toward something to do with God...

Co-worker: "Hey, Bob: did you watch that game last night? We got killed on defense!"
True Believer: "Speaking of death, do you know where you're going to go when you die? I do."

By all indications, these folks are very and devotedly earnest.
Why?
Because they're working on their salvation.
They spend all their time on their fort, and precious little time on actual living.

The camp I eventually came to embrace was the one which allowed God to be God, and flushed all vestiges of human effort. It is decidedly counter-intuitive, but all the rest of the costumes require so much work, so much effort, they inevitably result in a dependence upon the weakest link: me.

Originally posted by Rajk999
Boy o boy, what a load of .. you know what. You probably can fool some gullible people with that nonsense. And thats exactly what preachers do these days. Nobody wants to hear what Christ says.

After sifting through your irrelevant post what I gather is that you rather ignore Christ and Paul and go along with those fallible humans who you have placed up o ...[text shortened]... y because you 'get comfort' from doing that. Your comfortable delusion will be very short lived.

I assume, sir, that you intended to direct your barb in my direction.

I will respond to one nugget, and one nugget alone: cheap grace.

Focus now...

Without even considering the plethora of supporting Scripture otherwise, I only ask you to consider the phrase. Do to the phrase what we used to do with a word when we were younger: say it over and over and over; repeat it until it has no meaning, until definition has become separated from sound. Completely deconstruct it to the point that your palette has been completely cleansed and the disassociation is successful.

Then start with 'grace.'

It's a wonderfully beautiful word, all by itself, sans meaning.
Feels good to say.
Feels better to hear.

Next, populate the field.
Color the petals, outline the stem.
Take the side of the chalk and suggest the fragrance.
Continue adding layer upon layer until the picture beckons the beholder to reach into it, attempting to pluck this beauty from the very canvas.

What God has done for man is this, only magnified.
He has saved man from a fate which even his darkest fears fall short of describing.
But the picture is so much better!
He has transported man to a place so much higher, so much purer, than even the depths of his despair could imagine: His goodness far outstrips even the bad of life without Him.
This is grace.

Now, put the word 'cheap' in front of that word and see what it does to your mood.

Yeah: me, too.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
I assume, sir, that you intended to direct your barb in my direction.

I will respond to one nugget, and one nugget alone: cheap grace.

Focus now...

Without even considering the plethora of supporting Scripture otherwise, I only ask you to consider the phrase. Do to the phrase what we used to do with a word when we were younger: say it over and ov ...[text shortened]... put the word 'cheap' in front of that word and see what it does to your mood.

Yeah: me, too.

Amen...
Grace: unmerited, undeserved, divine favor...

Originally posted by sonship
[quote] We are All children of God. I know you've heard me say it before. Even the "unsaved". So it begs the question, what is the difference? What was the difference between the two sons in the story of the prodigal son?

You, checkbaiter, are the son who was always with the Father, the unsaved are the other son. What did the unsaved son do? Before the Fa ...[text shortened]... ,5) . When the sinner is forgiven, saved, he is made alive (John 5:24-25; Col. 2:13) [/b]

Sonship i understand all that. However, you missed the question. What did the son do BEFORE the Father saw him?

Originally posted by checkbaiter
I did not call you any names.
The difference between us is that I KNOW I am saved, while you are not.
[b]1 John 3:1-3
Behold what manner of love the Father has bestowed on us, that we should be called children of God! Therefore the world does not know us, because it did not know Him. 2 Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been reve ...[text shortened]... it says we are NOW children of God.
In your world we are his children one day and not the next.

Checkbaiter i'm not trying to harp on you, but you state, "I know that m saved." (that is ok. It isn't you which i speak of here).

In Matthew, Jesus says when the judgement comes, the Father will place people on his left and right. Those on the right didn't KNOW Christ in their heads, they didn't know what they had done to deserve heaven. Salvation came from their hearts.

I'm not saying we shouldn't know Jesus. Infact we are far better off knowing Him. Growing in Him, Loving Him. But people can find salvation in living as Christ and not knowing Jesus. It is Jesus who lives in them.

Originally posted by checkbaiter
???? This does not even make sense..

Why doesn't it make sense?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
I've already said it: the terms must be understood as intended in order for the concepts to both make sense and be true.

God isn't looking for people who believe He exists[hidden]James 2:19[/hidden]; He is looking for people who are humble enough to make the exchange, i.e., His work for theirs.

Just like at Best Buy on day 31, there is no returning or exchanging on this transaction.

Correct. Read Matthew, 25:31-46