If you believe you can lose your salvation, please take time to illustrate how a person can lose their salvation by making it applicable to the believer today.

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Carla on February 19, 2011 at 6:10am

This wonderful devotion came in my email today from 'The Institute for Creation research'.

Blessings, Carla

 

With Christ

February 19, 2011

 

"Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth. For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God." (Colossians 3:2-3)

 

The apostle Paul, looking forward to the time when we shall "ever be with the Lord" (1 Thessalonians 4:17), wrote: "For I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better: Nevertheless to abide in the flesh is more needful for you" (Philippians 1:23-24).

 

The fact is, however, that we can be "with Christ" even while still abiding in the flesh, as Paul himself emphasized. This is the great principle called positional truth. "Positionally," we are already "with Christ," for that is where God sees us and how He relates to us. He has "raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus" (Ephesians 2:6).

 

Before we could be raised up with Christ, however, we first had to die with Him. "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me" (Galatians 2:20). God even saw us as buried with Christ when He was buried, and this is the great truth symbolized in our baptism. "We are buried with him by baptism into death" (Romans 6:4).

 

"Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more" (Romans 6:8-9). He died for us, so our deserved death became His substitutionary death, and His victorious resurrection becomes our own unmerited deliverance from death in eternal resurrection life. This is our position now, and our assured everlasting possession then, for we are with Christ, who "dieth no more."

 

This truth is not only a wonderful doctrine, but as we see in our text, a focus for our thoughts, and real incentive for godly living. HMM

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Leonard T on February 20, 2011 at 5:33pm

Amanda,

 

The short answer:

 

He was fitted to be king, endowed by God's Spirit. Previously he was not ready to do this, serve as Israel's king.

 

David received God's Spirit and Solomon was given wisdom. God has always enables people to fulfill His purposes.

 

Lord Bless,

LT

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Leonard T on February 20, 2011 at 6:02pm

No, it does not.

 

Lord Bless,

LT

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David Abel on February 21, 2011 at 1:57am

Hi LT

 

The book of Hebrews was written (most probably) by a Hebrew to the Christian Hebrews, taking their Jewish backgrounds/religion/Old Covenant into account. Also, more historical context that applies here is that these very same Christian Hebrews are living in tough times. Judaism is allowed, so no problems with their old religion, but Christianity was forbidden, which posed untold problems/challenges to these new Christian converts, making it very tempting to go back to the “old”, but which meant denying the faith and Jesus Christ and all that they currently accepted and held as true in the New Covenant. When the going gets tough, what to do, what to do?

 

I have read much on this from other discussions and the internet, so I understand the long answers, but also taking the above into account, and looking at the two main passages in Hebrews (that many say refers to apostates, those who came CLOSE to the things of God but were never really saved), I ask the following specific and pertinent questions:

 

~~~~~~~

 

1. Heb 6:4-6.

 

KJV:	Amplified:
For it is impossible for those who	For it is impossible [to restore and bring again to repentance] those who
were once enlightened,	have been once for all enlightened,
and have tasted of the heavenly gift,	who have consciously tasted the heavenly gift
and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,	and have become sharers of the Holy Spirit,
And have tasted the good word of God,	And have felt how good the Word of God is
and the powers of the world to come,	and the mighty powers of the age and world to come,
If they shall fall away,	If they then deviate from the faith and turn away from their allegiance--
to renew them again unto repentance;	[it is impossible] to bring them back to repentance,

 

My questions:

1. Why renew them again unto repentance / bring them back to repentance?
2. Was their first repentance (and now compared to the second repentance) incorrectly done?
3. If yes, how so? Why then does the writer of Hebrews not rather simply say, “To bring them to repentance”?
4. But rather, “RENEW them AGAIN unto REPENTANCE”, and “to bring them BACK to REPENTANCE”. Was the writer of Hebrews referring to those who did not know true repentance or those who did know true repentance?

 

~~~~~~~

 

2. Heb 10:29.

 

KJV:	Amplified:
Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who	How much worse (sterner and heavier) punishment do you suppose he will be judged to deserve who
hath trodden under foot the Son of God,	has spurned and [thus] trampled underfoot the Son of God,
and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing,	and who has considered the covenant blood by which he was consecrated common and unhallowed, thus profaning it
and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?	and insulting and outraging the [Holy] Spirit [Who imparts] grace (the unmerited favor and blessing of God)?

 

My questions:

1. Who is the “he” that is being referred to here?
2. Was it “he” himself or someone else who was sanctified / consecrated?
3. If someone else, then who?
4. If it was “he” himself that was sanctified / consecrated, when and how did it happen in his life?
5. Or did the writer of Hebrews make a mistake here and was supposed to have said something to the effect of, “...wherewith he was supposed to be sanctified”, or “...by which he was supposed to be consecrated”?

 

God Bless,

David A.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Leonard T on February 21, 2011 at 7:56am

David A.,

 

Before I address your specific questions we need to address somethng else first. What do you understand the definition of repentance to be and how is repentance tied into the salvation process? In other words, does repentance bring salvation or is it a step toward salvation? The answer to this I believe is revealed in the complete definition of repentance and not the one that is often tossed out by many. The Bible helps in the understanding. Look for the word "repent" or "repentance" in any of the Apostle John's works, except for the Book of Revelation. 

 

Thus, before we can discuss the application and meaning of repentance in these verses we need to come to an agreement that we are talking about the same thing.

 

Lord Bless,
LT

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David Abel on February 21, 2011 at 12:39pm

Hi LT

 

How I see repentance and how it is linked to salvation (repentance = salvation):

Repentance as mentioned in the Bible is a turning away / complete turning point, a complete change of mind, all away from sin and towards God. In 2 Pet 3:9, not perishing (salvation) is possible through repentance.

 

I do not find the word "repent" or "repentance" in any of John's writings (except for Revelation, which you said I should exclude). I am not sure where you are going with this, but in order to compare apples with apples, why am I only looking for these words in certain books of the New Testament? The writer of Hebrews was not John.

 

God Bless,

David A.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Leonard T on February 21, 2011 at 3:23pm

LB,

 

No fair. You usually give me something to disagree with :-)

 

I have been slow to respond because I have been writting an LB length article :-)

 

All kidding aside, and am trusting you will take it that way, I like and agree with what you have said.

 

Lord Bless,

LT

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Leonard T on February 21, 2011 at 3:43pm

David A.,

 

There are many views on this text. I do not presume that we will solve it here to everyone’s satisfaction, but we can surely work through the various issues up to a point. The common three views summarized are 1) They were saved and lost it. 2) They were never saved and the statement is posed hypothetically. 3) They were never saved, but were brought to the precipice of salvation, the moment of decision.

 

(I say the following for the benefit of the community and is not directed to the current participants personally) When looking at Scripture we come at it based on the method of interpretation we have been taught and with doctrines guiding us. Some will argue this and they are free to, but I will disagree with them and let it go. If I believed that the totality of Scripture lead to one being able to lose salvation once attained I would accept view number one and discard the rest, or be hard pressed to believe it. I would then use these verses to try and support my view against other verses that teach the security of the believer. That is the way it works. If I believe in eternal security I will reject the first view and seek to discern which of the other two are in alignment with what I understand the Bible to teach regarding eternal security. Some will argue that they just want the simple truth. If only the truth were that simple then there would be no disagreements. Yet, these disagreements persist between people who love Jesus and live for Him. Not enemies of the cross, but soldiers of the cross. We sometimes forget this vital truth. Yes, there will be wolves in sheep’s clothing at times, but all who disagree (in fact most) are not wolves, but fellow followers of Christ with differing views.

 

Why did I say all of that? Clarity regarding where people are coming from when dealing with difficult subjects helps us to treat one another as brother/sisters while remaining on topic and true to our convictions while I trust teachable at the same time.

 

Now to the specific topic. Why did I bring up “what is repentance?” LB has already covered most, if not all of this. Repentance is one side of a coin that makes a whole. The other side is faith (Trust/surrender) in Jesus Christ. One without the other is incomplete regarding salvation. A person can be sorry for sin, know Jesus is God and still reject Him and choose the darkness over light. Once this knowledge has been revealed to us we cannot unlearn it, nor can we learn it again. This is part of the repentance process, for the whole of repentance is a process. Through repentance we are led to the point of decision.

 

Some come to this knowledge and decide to trust self and embrace religion and work hard only to remain lost. They see their sin and the Savior, but cannot come to the point of surrender. They reject Him as the payment for their sin. Some come to this knowledge and decide to just walk away. The Hebrews had another system to return to. Today people have many other religions and worldly trapping to snare them. Some come to this knowledge and actually surrender and they experience transformation. They are saved. Both sides of the coin are operable. This is followed by good works.

 

Some will argue that in Scripture there are times that only faith or only repentance is mentioned regarding being saved. That is another subject all together regarding language, culture, the author and who the hearer is.

 

Now to be specific regarding what is said in the text. Can this interpretation hold up?

Enlightened: Before a person can be saved they must be enlightened. This alone does not save them, but guides them to repentance and then surrender. This deals with the intellectual nature.

Tasted of the heavenly gift: Before a person can be saved there has to be a realization of the personage and work of Christ which is the heavenly gift, the Lamb of God who died for us. This deals with our spiritual nature.

Shared in the Holy Spirit: the Greek word hear means partaker or partner. No one comes to salvation who has not experienced the power and presence of the Holy Spirit who does the enlightening and gives the taste of the heavenly gift.

Verse 5 simply reemphasizes what is revealed in verse 4. They have had an experience with the Word of God and the powers of the age to come.

If they fall away: This term is significant. This is not regarding the person in the struggle of decision, but one who has outright rejected the gift of God. Since repentance requires a change of mind and a person cannot unlearn a truth they cannot have their minds changed a second time because they are already aware of the truth and experienced the working of God in their lives. There is no sacrifice left, they rejected it.

 

Further thought: This time of decision need not be a moment in time, but as part of the process. We have seen people agonizing over the decision to surrender to Jesus for months or years. This proves the Spirit is still working and that their hearts have not been closed and they have not committed the unpardonable sin. They are experiencing the repentance process.

 

I will stop here as I am sure there will be some good discussion spawn from this. Plus, I have to make sure my posts are shorter than LB’s after bringing the length of her posts to her attention … LOL

 

Lord Bless,
LT

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Leonard T on February 21, 2011 at 3:52pm

David A.,

 

I see this applying to Hebrews 10:29 as well.

 

Lord Bless,

LT

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David Abel on February 22, 2011 at 12:46am

Hi LB and LT

 

Thanks, that certainly helps to clarify things. I see that "believing" (from another argument used earlier in this discussion) and "repenting" are not as simple as and where they appear in the Bible. Especially in relation to salvation. They are sides of coins / parts of a whole toward a fuller/true picture of salvation.

 

I must admit, that even though having a life-changing, perhaps even saving experience with Jesus Christ in 1994 (even though brought up Christian prior to that), which changed my life completely, I was still very judgmental and unforgiving toward others. I always felt my sins (past and ongoing slip-ups) were not as bad as others', including certain loved ones very close to me.

 

If I understand what has been shared here, I realize then that only in recent years I experienced true repentance for my sins when I realized that I was (and have always been) as hopeless a sinner as any other sinner and need Jesus Christ so much to truly save me and cleanse me, so true repentance for me only came in recent years. Was I only truly saved then in recent years or in 1994 when I had that life-changing experience? Or is what I am going through in recent years part of the experiential sancification process?

 

And talking about sanctification, this then brings my other questions on Heb 10:29 into focus, about the person who was sanctified. I still do not see how such a specific word as sanctified/consecrated can be used here, as sanctification is only possible for someone who is saved. Question 4 is especially of interest to me...

 

"My questions:

1. Who is the “he” that is being referred to here?
2. Was it “he” himself or someone else who was sanctified / consecrated?
3. If someone else, then who?
4. If it was “he” himself that was sanctified / consecrated, when and how did it happen in his life?
5. Or did the writer of Hebrews make a mistake here and was supposed to have said something to the effect of, “...wherewith he was supposed to be sanctified”, or “...by which he was supposed to be consecrated”?"

 

God Bless,

David A.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David Abel on February 22, 2011 at 1:39am

P.S. I do not see these verses as hypothetical, but as applying to certain individuals (Christian Hebrews) who fell into these categories by their actions after initially turning to Christ/Christianity...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Leonard T on February 22, 2011 at 6:53am

David A.,

 

As Hebrews they had an understanding as to what the blood and sanctification (consecration) meant based on the O.T. teaching. To be sanctified in the O.T. meant to be set apart and it usually included the sprinkling with blood, the blood of animals. The problem is in their understanding regarding Jesus and the blood of Jesus as given in the verse. They reject Him and view His blood as no greater than the blood of an animal. Based on the terminology here they view his sacrifice as no more than that of the sacrifice of a bull or other animal. This alone tells us that they are not saved. Keep in mind that they would have had a Hebrew knowledge of the value of a sacrifice and the value of the day of Atonement, but they are not seeing the Son of God as the Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world (Jn. 1:19), once for all (Heb. 9:12; 10:10). The writer of Hebrews goes to great length in chapter 9 and in the early parts of chapter 10 to distinguish between the old covenant and the new covenant, between the priests works that used animals and the work of Christ which included Himself being the sacrifice. This clearly tells us about their confusion.

 

Is there any evidence that this can mean set-apart as in the O.T. view or sanctification as taught by Paul in the new covenant. Hebrews 9:13-14 speaks directly to this.

 

Thus, we have the O.T. view of sanctification (consecration) and the N.T. view of sanctification which has two parts (Positional and experiential) in play here.

 

I’ll stop here.

 

Lord Bless,
LT

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• …
• 10
• Next ›
• Page