Once Saved Always Saved (added pt 2 post #90)

[hummerpoo]

I think it's in line with what SemperFiDawg said;
"God knew every sin I had ever committed and every sin I would ever commit before I was even born, every thought I have ever had and every one I will ever have. When I was saved, I was saved with his foreknowledge of all this. Given this, what would be the point of me being saved only for him to know my later actions wouldn't warrant it, but here's the kicker: my former actions didn't warrant it."

I would agree, why would God grant you salvation on a temporary or losing ability when he already knows what our future sins will be? Why wouldn't the Father just never lead such a person to the Son?

"

Good point Art.

"Temporary Eternity"

Now that's funny; I don't care who you are that's funny.

 

[Madman]

I'm familiar with Templeton.
Lee Strobel interviewed him in his A Case for Faith.

This is his account of the interview.



Reading this I see a stark naked heart exposed and I'm reminded of God's mercy.

Yes I had read that; "I miss him" was heart wrenching to read.

The point was he used his free will to walk away.

 

[Madman]

The difference I see is who is understood to have the power, who is in control, who calls the shots, whose will is supreme, who's boss, who tells who, who commands and who must, of necessity, obey (yes, even disobedience is ultimately the prerogative of the ultimate commander).

God loves us enough to give us grace, he also loves us enough to give us free will.

 

[hummerpoo]

God loves us enough to give us grace, he also loves us enough to give us free will.

So it's all about "us". Got it. Anthropocentric.

 

[Madman]

So it's all about "us". Got it. Anthropocentric.

So who is salvation about saving?

 

[hummerpoo]

So who is salvation about saving?

God's people.

"I will be your God, and you will be My people" (pick your verse, there are about 40 of them).

 

[Madman]

God's people.

"I will be your God, and you will be My people" (pick your verse, there are about 40 of them).

And who are God's people?

 

[hummerpoo]

And who are God's people?

Those with whom God is in the stated covenantal relationship.

 

[Madman]

Jeremiah 30 "The word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord: 2 Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel: Write in a book all the words that I have spoken to you."

That was spoken to Israel, are they the only ones in the covenental relationship?

 

[gordon 2]

God is a Spirit. John 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Why do Christians disagree as to the spirit and truth of God? The spirit of God was in the beginning to turn Adam and Eve out of their rest and away ( a separation) from the original relationship He had with them. This is in the spirit of God to do this. Yes? No? It is truth or not truth?

Now God does not change. Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.

What is the truth on God's Spirit regards the event of man's separation from Him? To the churches in Revelations does Jesus warn Chritians of a possible separation with him? The church at Laodecia why was is warned to repent--- where they aiming towards a separation with Jesus?

 

[hummerpoo]

Jeremiah 30 "The word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord: 2 Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel: Write in a book all the words that I have spoken to you."

That was spoken to Israel, are they the only ones in the covenantal relationship?

National Israel?, or racial Israel?, or genealogical Israel?; yes, that would be an anthropocentric understanding. Theocentric understanding does not recognize corporeal distinctions.

 

[gordon 2]

What if Christians do not disagree?

Yes what if?

I find more evidence that they-we disagree regards God's Spirit and truth and so as to his will regards salvation than the other way around. Am I out of covenant for seeing what I see, or hugely carnal at least? From the day His seeding fell on me it is choked by my too many weeds? What do you see? I will admit that I thought that I might be least in the Kingdom, but a bit more than John the Baptist but all along I might have been incorrect about this?

 

[SemperFiDawg]

Notional Israel?, or racial Israel?, or genealogical Israel?;

Or GON Israel? Sorry, I couldn’t resist.

 

[hummerpoo]

Or GON Israel? Sorry, I couldn’t resist.

Yes, that has an appearance of irresistibility.

And it exposed "Notional" vs "National".

 

[gordon 2]

On disagreements: Was Martin Luther really listening for the others and did the others really listen to him? To the ones and the others on him we tagged on our self-regarding spins and so to the extent that the other might be as yourself as per the golden rule, but nevertheless we stopped listening to him, the other, as once Martin might have hoped?

 

[SemperFiDawg]

You fellows go considerably deeper than I do or can.

I am convinced that "once saved always saved" comes from Calvin's doctrines of the total depravity of man. (No where in church history do we see this, even in discussion, before Calvin.)

Calvin held that everyone is saved or dam**d before birth and there is nothing that he can do about it. Anyone who held to that belief in double predestination was then obligated to reform their own doctrine in a manner that could fit.

The Church has always taught, as we believe is proven in Holy Scripture, that man is saved by the grace of God which is freely received. Salvation and sanctification must be consented to (God forces no man).

Madman. I found this while reviewing your posts on this thread.

https://www.neverthirsty.org/bible-...each-the-doctrine-of-once-saved-always-saved/

It's a convincing read and leaves the whole subject a mystery to me, which is exactly where I was to start with. I just don't know the answer, and I'm OK with that. I only know I'm washed in the blood through no action of my own and it's wonderful. All the mysteries, well they will be a wonder to behold in the hereafter.

 

[StriperAddict]

What if Christians do not disagree?

Indeed. What if being in Christ is the big agreement we're not seeing?

Methinks how we go about disseminating such reality is troublesome at least, but thought provoking at best. I for one like to turn these discussions into further dialogue with dad, where we (all, heaven and earthers) grow relationally even if there are other trainings ABBA dad brings.

I'm growing here because sans disagreements our Lord is expressed, and I will choose to see him expressed in you, you and you. No condemnation in growth, which, in my opinion is the far greater gleaning.

Off topic but just a needful add on.

 

[SemperFiDawg]

I found this: while researching the views of the early Church followers. I'll post the link and the commentary on it.

https://chnetwork.org/2010/03/16/salvation-from-the-perspective-of-the-early-church-fathers/

What exactly did these first Christians believe and teach with regard to salvation? It is important to note that these Christian teachers of antiquity were not attempting to define precise theological points of doctrine; they were more concerned with general concepts, instructions, and admonitions for living the Christian faith in a time of often intense persecution. Therefore we won’t find the early Fathers engaged in dissecting a particular Pauline phrase in order to understand the Christian concept of justification. Moreover, such an approach would be foreign to the early Church since it can lead to misconceptions:

My first thought was "How lucky we are to live in a place where we have the luxury to debate such intricacies of doctrine and not burdened with the thought of persecution, but on second thought, maybe we're the unlucky ones. I don't recall any crowns promised to those who split doctrine.

The earliest Christian document outside the New Testament writings comes to us from Clement of Rome: The Letter of the Church of Rome to the Church of Corinth (commonly known as Clement’s First Letter). It was so highly esteemed in Christian antiquity that for a while it was even accepted as part of the canon of Scripture in Egypt and Syria. Many scholars believe Clement is identified as the Clement mentioned by Paul in Philippians 4:3. Regardless, Clement was the bishop of Rome at the close of the first century. He was familiar with St. Paul’s Epistles, and he certainly believed and taught that we are justified by faith:

And we, therefore…are not justified of ourselves or by our wisdom or insight or religious devotion or the holy deeds we have done from the heart, but by that faith by which almighty God has justified all men from the very beginning (ch. 32:4). ​

​

​

And it occurred to me that maybe so much hair-splitting has occurred and is occurring over the Works, that the Faith has been lost in the smoke. You know, The Faith, well that's kind of where the crux of the matter is. We don't focus on it because it's not tangible, physical, observable, like the Works. Probably a good thing it isn't or we would be debating it too. I guess I'm just asking myself "What's the point?"

I'm just gonna leave this here. Earlier this year I had something really bad happen. Something was handed to me I couldn't stop, couldn't avoid, couldn't fix. On the day of, I got up extra early that morning and hit my knees. I told God I couldn't understand why he was letting it happen, that it made no sense and went against what I clearly understood his word to teach. Through sobs and tears I told him I didn't want it and that I couldn't make it through it. A voice came back clear and distinct, "Haven't I done enough for you to trust me?" It hit me right between the eyes and shut me down in my tracks. The question was a mirror that reflected my lack of faith back to me and I could see the contrast between where it was and where it should be given all that God had done in my life over the last year. I answered "Yes, Lord you have." and I got up, because the conversation was over. I felt just like Job when he said "I will shut my mouth." I have tried to remember that every day since then. I try to go to that exact same spot to pray every morning, and it never fails that when I get on my knees in that spot I'm reminded like no other spot I pray at......that he has done enough for me to trust him and trust him completely. I like to think that on that day, in that moment, after that question, I had faith or the closest thing to faith I have ever attained. The memory of that exchange has changed my life and I can't imagine a day when it will fail to. Don't know what anyone can take from this, if anything. Just the wondering thoughts of an oft lost pilgrim, but reading what Clement wrote "but by that faith by which almighty God has justified all men from the very beginning." reminded me of it.

 

[Madman]

National Israel?, or racial Israel?, or genealogical Israel?;

Jeremiah 30 "The word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord: 2 Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel: Write in a book all the words that I have spoken to you."

Which Israel do believe is spoken of here?

yes, that would be an anthropocentric understanding. Theocentric understanding does not recognize corporeal distinctions.

More succinctly, How do you understand it?

 

[Madman]

Madman. I found this while reviewing your posts on this thread.

https://www.neverthirsty.org/bible-...each-the-doctrine-of-once-saved-always-saved/

It's a convincing read and leaves the whole subject a mystery to me, which is exactly where I was to start with. I just don't know the answer, and I'm OK with that. I only know I'm washed in the blood through no action of my own and it's wonderful. All the mysteries, well they will be a wonder to behold in the hereafter.

SemperFiDawg,

It is a good read, unfortunately, when you read the ancient documents so much must be taken into account to put them in context. Everyone has a bias, even me, I am inclined to read into the documents what I want them to say, therefore I yield to the church on most of it.

It can be confusing, Biblically and historically, I settled this issue ears ago.

Take care.