Total Posts:37|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Salvation is permanent?

Skepticalone
Posts: 6,136
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation?
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Geogeer
Posts: 4,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2015 10:55:23 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation?

No, yes. I would think that the obvious example would be Judas. Here is one of Christ's chosen 12, he casted out demons in Christ's name, and yet it is better that he was never born. I don't think it can be much clearer than that.

To go to heaven you need to die in a state of sanctifying grace.

Anything less becomes a denial of free will.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,136
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2015 11:00:35 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/8/2015 10:55:23 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation?

No, yes. I would think that the obvious example would be Judas. Here is one of Christ's chosen 12, he casted out demons in Christ's name, and yet it is better that he was never born. I don't think it can be much clearer than that.

To go to heaven you need to die in a state of sanctifying grace.

Anything less becomes a denial of free will.

If we assume the story is true, then without Judas (or someone like him) Christ would not have been sacrificed and no salvation would be possible - yet he loses his salvation? Is that what we're going with here?
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,386
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2015 11:11:01 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/8/2015 11:00:35 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:55:23 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation?

No, yes. I would think that the obvious example would be Judas. Here is one of Christ's chosen 12, he casted out demons in Christ's name, and yet it is better that he was never born. I don't think it can be much clearer than that.

To go to heaven you need to die in a state of sanctifying grace.

Anything less becomes a denial of free will.

If we assume the story is true, then without Judas (or someone like him) Christ would not have been sacrificed and no salvation would be possible - yet he loses his salvation? Is that what we're going with here?
There's really no evidence that Judas was ever saved.

One of the arguments suggesting Judas was saved was that Judas walked with Christ, witnessed his miracles, etc. However, close proximity to Jesus Christ in human form was never a guarantee of belief that Christ is the Son of God professed by Peter. The pharisees were a good example, as well as people who knew Jesus Christ growing up.

Another argument is that Jesus referred to Judas as friend.

Matthew 26:50
Parallel Verses
New International Version
Jesus replied, "Do what you came for, friend." Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him.

The problem here of course is that it would stand for reason that if Judas lost his salvation, he would have already lost it at this point.
Geogeer
Posts: 4,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2015 11:14:36 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/8/2015 11:00:35 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:55:23 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation?

No, yes. I would think that the obvious example would be Judas. Here is one of Christ's chosen 12, he casted out demons in Christ's name, and yet it is better that he was never born. I don't think it can be much clearer than that.

To go to heaven you need to die in a state of sanctifying grace.

Anything less becomes a denial of free will.

If we assume the story is true, then without Judas (or someone like him) Christ would not have been sacrificed and no salvation would be possible - yet he loses his salvation? Is that what we're going with here?

Yup. Nobody forced Judas to perform his actions. Was not Peter's triple denial virtually equivalent to Judas' betrayal? Do you not suppose that if instead of committing suicide Judas was on his knees before the cross begging for forgiveness (which is pretty much what every Catholic does in confession) that he wouldn't have been saved - instead of it being better that he was never born (a phrase that could not possibly apply to anyone who makes it to heaven).

If once saved always saved applies why would Paul write about being severed from Christ (Galatians 5:4) or if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you either (Romans 11:21).

He goes on to warn about sins that will lose salvation:

But immorality or any impurity or greed must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints; and there must be no filthiness and silly talk, or coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks. For this you know with certainty, that no immoral or impure person or covetous man, who is an idolater, has an inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. (Ephesians 5:3-5)

Heck a huge percentage of what Paul writes is about how to stay on the "narrow path." Just because one finds the path it doesn't mean they stay on it.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,136
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2015 11:18:46 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/8/2015 11:11:01 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:00:35 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:55:23 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation?

No, yes. I would think that the obvious example would be Judas. Here is one of Christ's chosen 12, he casted out demons in Christ's name, and yet it is better that he was never born. I don't think it can be much clearer than that.

To go to heaven you need to die in a state of sanctifying grace.

Anything less becomes a denial of free will.

If we assume the story is true, then without Judas (or someone like him) Christ would not have been sacrificed and no salvation would be possible - yet he loses his salvation? Is that what we're going with here?
There's really no evidence that Judas was ever saved.

One of the arguments suggesting Judas was saved was that Judas walked with Christ, witnessed his miracles, etc. However, close proximity to Jesus Christ in human form was never a guarantee of belief that Christ is the Son of God professed by Peter. The pharisees were a good example, as well as people who knew Jesus Christ growing up.

Another argument is that Jesus referred to Judas as friend.

Matthew 26:50
Parallel Verses
New International Version
Jesus replied, "Do what you came for, friend." Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him.

The problem here of course is that it would stand for reason that if Judas lost his salvation, he would have already lost it at this point.

You might as well claim he was pretending to be a follower of Jesus from day one, and that his intentions were always malevolent (he was never saved) or salvation is not permanent. I think it is fair to say he accepted Jesus at some point even if he went to the dark side eventually.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2015 11:22:32 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Even if I believed in a divinely dispensed sort of Salvation, I never liked the idea of "once you're in, you are in for good" theodicy.

Just seems to easy. And that it also would give you carte blanche to do whatever you wish after getting your Free Pass to Heaven from the murderous Yahweh.

This dogma also reminds me of guys like all those Mafia greaseballs. Most of them devout Catholics, of course. So they are baptized catholic and then they go out and wack some guy and stuff his johnson in his mouth and burn down his house and then go to confession. And hey, it's all cool.

Way too easy. Any entity capable of designing and creating and sustaining the Universe would be smarter than that. And not nearly so naive. Don't you think?

As far as christian theologians go, for my money John Calvin had some good ideas that I found intriguing. A couple of which are diametrically opposed to the theodicy in the OP here.
Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
JJ50
Posts: 2,144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2015 11:29:10 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Some 'born agains' believe that once they get 'saved' they will get into heaven however bad they are thereafter. What a seriously flawed crazy dogma!
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,386
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2015 11:38:12 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/8/2015 11:18:46 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:11:01 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:00:35 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:55:23 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation?

No, yes. I would think that the obvious example would be Judas. Here is one of Christ's chosen 12, he casted out demons in Christ's name, and yet it is better that he was never born. I don't think it can be much clearer than that.

To go to heaven you need to die in a state of sanctifying grace.

Anything less becomes a denial of free will.

If we assume the story is true, then without Judas (or someone like him) Christ would not have been sacrificed and no salvation would be possible - yet he loses his salvation? Is that what we're going with here?
There's really no evidence that Judas was ever saved.

One of the arguments suggesting Judas was saved was that Judas walked with Christ, witnessed his miracles, etc. However, close proximity to Jesus Christ in human form was never a guarantee of belief that Christ is the Son of God professed by Peter. The pharisees were a good example, as well as people who knew Jesus Christ growing up.

Another argument is that Jesus referred to Judas as friend.

Matthew 26:50
Parallel Verses
New International Version
Jesus replied, "Do what you came for, friend." Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him.

The problem here of course is that it would stand for reason that if Judas lost his salvation, he would have already lost it at this point.

You might as well claim he was pretending to be a follower of Jesus from day one, and that his intentions were always malevolent (he was never saved) or salvation is not permanent. I think it is fair to say he accepted Jesus at some point even if he went to the dark side eventually.
At what point? At what point do you think he lost his salvation? What caused it?

An example,

John 12

12 Six days before the Passover, Jesus came to Bethany, where Lazarus lived, whom Jesus had raised from the dead. 2 Here a dinner was given in Jesus" honor. Martha served, while Lazarus was among those reclining at the table with him. 3 Then Mary took about a pint[a] of pure nard, an expensive perfume; she poured it on Jesus" feet and wiped his feet with her hair. And the house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume.

4 But one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, who was later to betray him, objected, 5 "Why wasn"t this perfume sold and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year"s wages.[b]" 6 He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it.


Why would you assume he didn't have ulterior motives to begin with?
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,136
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2015 11:51:31 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/8/2015 11:14:36 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:00:35 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:55:23 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation?

No, yes. I would think that the obvious example would be Judas. Here is one of Christ's chosen 12, he casted out demons in Christ's name, and yet it is better that he was never born. I don't think it can be much clearer than that.

To go to heaven you need to die in a state of sanctifying grace.

Anything less becomes a denial of free will.

If we assume the story is true, then without Judas (or someone like him) Christ would not have been sacrificed and no salvation would be possible - yet he loses his salvation? Is that what we're going with here?

Yup. Nobody forced Judas to perform his actions. Was not Peter's triple denial virtually equivalent to Judas' betrayal? Do you not suppose that if instead of committing suicide Judas was on his knees before the cross begging for forgiveness (which is pretty much what every Catholic does in confession) that he wouldn't have been saved - instead of it being better that he was never born (a phrase that could not possibly apply to anyone who makes it to heaven).

If once saved always saved applies why would Paul write about being severed from Christ (Galatians 5:4) or if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you either (Romans 11:21).

Well, I think you are missing the point of Galation 5:4. He is basically saying if you believe adherence to the law will get you there then you are wrong. Look at Galations 5:1:

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

Then he mentions how circumcision requires a man to adhere to the law, and Christ is null and void to those without the requisite foreskin.

Romans 11:21 is a bit more complicated analogy and I haven't deciphered exactly what I think he is saying, but I believe it is something along the lines of 'the Jews were cut-off for their unbelief and you can be too' (if you choose not to believe). I really hope one of our seminary students will chime in on this thread.

He goes on to warn about sins that will lose salvation:

But immorality or any impurity or greed must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints; and there must be no filthiness and silly talk, or coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks. For this you know with certainty, that no immoral or impure person or covetous man, who is an idolater, has an inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. (Ephesians 5:3-5)

I cannot say I completely disagree with your interpretation here. I will try to look into this one some more.

Heck a huge percentage of what Paul writes is about how to stay on the "narrow path." Just because one finds the path it doesn't mean they stay on it.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Geogeer
Posts: 4,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2015 12:07:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/8/2015 11:51:31 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:14:36 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:00:35 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:55:23 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation?

No, yes. I would think that the obvious example would be Judas. Here is one of Christ's chosen 12, he casted out demons in Christ's name, and yet it is better that he was never born. I don't think it can be much clearer than that.

To go to heaven you need to die in a state of sanctifying grace.

Anything less becomes a denial of free will.

If we assume the story is true, then without Judas (or someone like him) Christ would not have been sacrificed and no salvation would be possible - yet he loses his salvation? Is that what we're going with here?

Yup. Nobody forced Judas to perform his actions. Was not Peter's triple denial virtually equivalent to Judas' betrayal? Do you not suppose that if instead of committing suicide Judas was on his knees before the cross begging for forgiveness (which is pretty much what every Catholic does in confession) that he wouldn't have been saved - instead of it being better that he was never born (a phrase that could not possibly apply to anyone who makes it to heaven).

If once saved always saved applies why would Paul write about being severed from Christ (Galatians 5:4) or if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you either (Romans 11:21).

Well, I think you are missing the point of Galation 5:4. He is basically saying if you believe adherence to the law will get you there then you are wrong. Look at Galations 5:1:

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

AKA you're free from sin, but if you do this you've bonded yourself to sin again (lost salvation) because you are placing your faith in ceremonies for salvation instead of the salvation offered by Jesus.

Then he mentions how circumcision requires a man to adhere to the law, and Christ is null and void to those without the requisite foreskin.

The two are not exclusive of each other. That is precisely what he is saying. However he is explaining that believing that these rituals are necessary for salvation is a denial of the sacrifice of Christ. To deny the saving power of Christ's sacrifice is sinful and thus you lose salvation.

Romans 11:21 is a bit more complicated analogy and I haven't deciphered exactly what I think he is saying, but I believe it is something along the lines of 'the Jews were cut-off for their unbelief and you can be too' (if you choose not to believe). I really hope one of our seminary students will chime in on this thread.

Yup. The Jews were the natural branches to whom salvation was given. With the rejection of Jesus by the Jews, their branches were broken off the tree of salvation and the believing Gentiles were grafted on. However, Paul is warning that even though you've been grafted on, if God was willing to remove the natural branches for unbelief/sins, He will be just as willing to remove the grafted branches.

He goes on to warn about sins that will lose salvation:

But immorality or any impurity or greed must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints; and there must be no filthiness and silly talk, or coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks. For this you know with certainty, that no immoral or impure person or covetous man, who is an idolater, has an inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. (Ephesians 5:3-5)

I cannot say I completely disagree with your interpretation here. I will try to look into this one some more.

I wish to thank-you for your recent threads. They have been a pleasant change from the regular threads on this site.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,136
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2015 12:09:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/8/2015 11:38:12 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:18:46 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:11:01 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:00:35 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:55:23 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation?

No, yes. I would think that the obvious example would be Judas. Here is one of Christ's chosen 12, he casted out demons in Christ's name, and yet it is better that he was never born. I don't think it can be much clearer than that.

To go to heaven you need to die in a state of sanctifying grace.

Anything less becomes a denial of free will.

If we assume the story is true, then without Judas (or someone like him) Christ would not have been sacrificed and no salvation would be possible - yet he loses his salvation? Is that what we're going with here?
There's really no evidence that Judas was ever saved.

One of the arguments suggesting Judas was saved was that Judas walked with Christ, witnessed his miracles, etc. However, close proximity to Jesus Christ in human form was never a guarantee of belief that Christ is the Son of God professed by Peter. The pharisees were a good example, as well as people who knew Jesus Christ growing up.

Another argument is that Jesus referred to Judas as friend.

Matthew 26:50
Parallel Verses
New International Version
Jesus replied, "Do what you came for, friend." Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him.

The problem here of course is that it would stand for reason that if Judas lost his salvation, he would have already lost it at this point.

You might as well claim he was pretending to be a follower of Jesus from day one, and that his intentions were always malevolent (he was never saved) or salvation is not permanent. I think it is fair to say he accepted Jesus at some point even if he went to the dark side eventually.
At what point? At what point do you think he lost his salvation? What caused it?

I don't assume he was saved (and lost it) or never saved. I was trying to determine what you believe.

An example,

John 12

12 Six days before the Passover, Jesus came to Bethany, where Lazarus lived, whom Jesus had raised from the dead. 2 Here a dinner was given in Jesus" honor. Martha served, while Lazarus was among those reclining at the table with him. 3 Then Mary took about a pint[a] of pure nard, an expensive perfume; she poured it on Jesus" feet and wiped his feet with her hair. And the house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume.

4 But one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, who was later to betray him, objected, 5 "Why wasn"t this perfume sold and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year"s wages.[b]" 6 He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it.


Why would you assume he didn't have ulterior motives to begin with?

Why would you assume he did? I would point out John was written much later than the synoptic gospels and is much more likely to reflect the embellishment of legend. Judas did a bad thing, and by the time the story had been repeated many thousands of times and written down in the book of John, Judas had turned into a spectacularly awful guy as well. The synoptics tell the story of a guy who did betray Jesus but was remorseful about it, eventually taking his own life over it. John portrays Judas in a different light.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2015 12:11:32 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/8/2015 12:07:45 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:51:31 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:14:36 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:00:35 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:55:23 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation?

No, yes. I would think that the obvious example would be Judas. Here is one of Christ's chosen 12, he casted out demons in Christ's name, and yet it is better that he was never born. I don't think it can be much clearer than that.

To go to heaven you need to die in a state of sanctifying grace.

Anything less becomes a denial of free will.

If we assume the story is true, then without Judas (or someone like him) Christ would not have been sacrificed and no salvation would be possible - yet he loses his salvation? Is that what we're going with here?

Yup. Nobody forced Judas to perform his actions. Was not Peter's triple denial virtually equivalent to Judas' betrayal? Do you not suppose that if instead of committing suicide Judas was on his knees before the cross begging for forgiveness (which is pretty much what every Catholic does in confession) that he wouldn't have been saved - instead of it being better that he was never born (a phrase that could not possibly apply to anyone who makes it to heaven).

If once saved always saved applies why would Paul write about being severed from Christ (Galatians 5:4) or if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you either (Romans 11:21).

Well, I think you are missing the point of Galation 5:4. He is basically saying if you believe adherence to the law will get you there then you are wrong. Look at Galations 5:1:

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

AKA you're free from sin, but if you do this you've bonded yourself to sin again (lost salvation) because you are placing your faith in ceremonies for salvation instead of the salvation offered by Jesus.

Then he mentions how circumcision requires a man to adhere to the law, and Christ is null and void to those without the requisite foreskin.

The two are not exclusive of each other. That is precisely what he is saying. However he is explaining that believing that these rituals are necessary for salvation is a denial of the sacrifice of Christ. To deny the saving power of Christ's sacrifice is sinful and thus you lose salvation.

Romans 11:21 is a bit more complicated analogy and I haven't deciphered exactly what I think he is saying, but I believe it is something along the lines of 'the Jews were cut-off for their unbelief and you can be too' (if you choose not to believe). I really hope one of our seminary students will chime in on this thread.

Yup. The Jews were the natural branches to whom salvation was given. With the rejection of Jesus by the Jews, their branches were broken off the tree of salvation and the believing Gentiles were grafted on. However, Paul is warning that even though you've been grafted on, if God was willing to remove the natural branches for unbelief/sins, He will be just as willing to remove the grafted branches.

He goes on to warn about sins that will lose salvation:

But immorality or any impurity or greed must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints; and there must be no filthiness and silly talk, or coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks. For this you know with certainty, that no immoral or impure person or covetous man, who is an idolater, has an inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. (Ephesians 5:3-5)

I cannot say I completely disagree with your interpretation here. I will try to look into this one some more.

I wish to thank-you for your recent threads. They have been a pleasant change from the regular threads on this site.

I am going to jump in here.

1. Either Judas betrayed Jesus by his own free will, or he did not
2. If he did not, then your arguments against Judas' salvation are invalid
3. If he did, then God could not in principle have sacrificed Jesus, since it was simply a roll of the dice by Judas' whims that Jesus was executed

Pick which horn to grapple.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2015 12:14:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/8/2015 10:55:23 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation?

No, yes. I would think that the obvious example would be Judas. Here is one of Christ's chosen 12, he casted out demons in Christ's name, and yet it is better that he was never born. I don't think it can be much clearer than that.

To go to heaven you need to die in a state of sanctifying grace.

Anything less becomes a denial of free will.

Judas's actions led to the crucifixion which is central to the fulfillment of prophecy and the salvation of Christians. How come he is better off never being born?
Geogeer
Posts: 4,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2015 12:28:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/8/2015 12:11:32 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 6/8/2015 12:07:45 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:51:31 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:14:36 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:00:35 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:55:23 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation?

No, yes. I would think that the obvious example would be Judas. Here is one of Christ's chosen 12, he casted out demons in Christ's name, and yet it is better that he was never born. I don't think it can be much clearer than that.

To go to heaven you need to die in a state of sanctifying grace.

Anything less becomes a denial of free will.

If we assume the story is true, then without Judas (or someone like him) Christ would not have been sacrificed and no salvation would be possible - yet he loses his salvation? Is that what we're going with here?

Yup. Nobody forced Judas to perform his actions. Was not Peter's triple denial virtually equivalent to Judas' betrayal? Do you not suppose that if instead of committing suicide Judas was on his knees before the cross begging for forgiveness (which is pretty much what every Catholic does in confession) that he wouldn't have been saved - instead of it being better that he was never born (a phrase that could not possibly apply to anyone who makes it to heaven).

If once saved always saved applies why would Paul write about being severed from Christ (Galatians 5:4) or if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you either (Romans 11:21).

Well, I think you are missing the point of Galation 5:4. He is basically saying if you believe adherence to the law will get you there then you are wrong. Look at Galations 5:1:

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

AKA you're free from sin, but if you do this you've bonded yourself to sin again (lost salvation) because you are placing your faith in ceremonies for salvation instead of the salvation offered by Jesus.

Then he mentions how circumcision requires a man to adhere to the law, and Christ is null and void to those without the requisite foreskin.

The two are not exclusive of each other. That is precisely what he is saying. However he is explaining that believing that these rituals are necessary for salvation is a denial of the sacrifice of Christ. To deny the saving power of Christ's sacrifice is sinful and thus you lose salvation.

Romans 11:21 is a bit more complicated analogy and I haven't deciphered exactly what I think he is saying, but I believe it is something along the lines of 'the Jews were cut-off for their unbelief and you can be too' (if you choose not to believe). I really hope one of our seminary students will chime in on this thread.

Yup. The Jews were the natural branches to whom salvation was given. With the rejection of Jesus by the Jews, their branches were broken off the tree of salvation and the believing Gentiles were grafted on. However, Paul is warning that even though you've been grafted on, if God was willing to remove the natural branches for unbelief/sins, He will be just as willing to remove the grafted branches.

He goes on to warn about sins that will lose salvation:

But immorality or any impurity or greed must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints; and there must be no filthiness and silly talk, or coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks. For this you know with certainty, that no immoral or impure person or covetous man, who is an idolater, has an inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. (Ephesians 5:3-5)

I cannot say I completely disagree with your interpretation here. I will try to look into this one some more.

I wish to thank-you for your recent threads. They have been a pleasant change from the regular threads on this site.

I am going to jump in here.

1. Either Judas betrayed Jesus by his own free will, or he did not
2. If he did not, then your arguments against Judas' salvation are invalid
3. If he did, then God could not in principle have sacrificed Jesus, since it was simply a roll of the dice by Judas' whims that Jesus was executed
Pick which horn to grapple.

Lol, I got both you and Wylted to reply with nearly the same response... I'm drawing out the big guns today! ;-)

Definitely #3.

If God does not permit free will then I would have to say that Calvin was right and that God creates people for the sole purpose of being damned just to show that he can. That would be the definition of the Evil God, and not the God of Love, that atheists continually talk about.

At the same time it would also have been an even greater roll of the dice that Mary would've said yes. The entirety of Salvation history rested on a young teenage girl's acceptance of God's will for her. I think that it is difficult for us to grasp the entirety of the omniscience of God and him allowing each of us perfect free will while enabling us to perform our unique part in his plan. Thus He permitted Judas to be the betrayer knowing it would be his damnation, even though the decision was not forced upon Judas.
Geogeer
Posts: 4,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2015 12:36:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/8/2015 12:14:44 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:55:23 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation?

No, yes. I would think that the obvious example would be Judas. Here is one of Christ's chosen 12, he casted out demons in Christ's name, and yet it is better that he was never born. I don't think it can be much clearer than that.

To go to heaven you need to die in a state of sanctifying grace.

Anything less becomes a denial of free will.

Judas's actions led to the crucifixion which is central to the fulfillment of prophecy and the salvation of Christians. How come he is better off never being born?

Personally. The soul is meant for God. To go to hell is the opposite of the purpose we were created for.
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,386
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2015 12:39:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/8/2015 12:09:28 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:38:12 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:18:46 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:11:01 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:00:35 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:55:23 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation?

No, yes. I would think that the obvious example would be Judas. Here is one of Christ's chosen 12, he casted out demons in Christ's name, and yet it is better that he was never born. I don't think it can be much clearer than that.

To go to heaven you need to die in a state of sanctifying grace.

Anything less becomes a denial of free will.

If we assume the story is true, then without Judas (or someone like him) Christ would not have been sacrificed and no salvation would be possible - yet he loses his salvation? Is that what we're going with here?
There's really no evidence that Judas was ever saved.

One of the arguments suggesting Judas was saved was that Judas walked with Christ, witnessed his miracles, etc. However, close proximity to Jesus Christ in human form was never a guarantee of belief that Christ is the Son of God professed by Peter. The pharisees were a good example, as well as people who knew Jesus Christ growing up.

Another argument is that Jesus referred to Judas as friend.

Matthew 26:50
Parallel Verses
New International Version
Jesus replied, "Do what you came for, friend." Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him.

The problem here of course is that it would stand for reason that if Judas lost his salvation, he would have already lost it at this point.

You might as well claim he was pretending to be a follower of Jesus from day one, and that his intentions were always malevolent (he was never saved) or salvation is not permanent. I think it is fair to say he accepted Jesus at some point even if he went to the dark side eventually.
At what point? At what point do you think he lost his salvation? What caused it?

I don't assume he was saved (and lost it) or never saved. I was trying to determine what you believe.

Of course I have to question exactly what do you mean by he accepted Jesus at some point? He accepted Jesus to some degree (as one to follow), but that doesn't really address salvation. I know you don't believe in salvation, but I was assuming from your statement "I think it is fair to say he accepted Jesus at some point even if he went to the dark side eventually", that at one point he must've been saved per biblical definition:

John 3:7
Parallel Verses
New International Version
You should not be surprised at my saying, 'You must be born again.'


The individual Christ said this to, by the way, was someone who accepted Jesus as well as a good person. So did the rich man who went away saddened by the command to sell his possessions. Christ was accepted, yet these individuals were not saved, at least at the point of their reference.

An example,

John 12

12 Six days before the Passover, Jesus came to Bethany, where Lazarus lived, whom Jesus had raised from the dead. 2 Here a dinner was given in Jesus" honor. Martha served, while Lazarus was among those reclining at the table with him. 3 Then Mary took about a pint[a] of pure nard, an expensive perfume; she poured it on Jesus" feet and wiped his feet with her hair. And the house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume.

4 But one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, who was later to betray him, objected, 5 "Why wasn"t this perfume sold and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year"s wages.[b]" 6 He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it.


Why would you assume he didn't have ulterior motives to begin with?

Why would you assume he did? I would point out John was written much later than the synoptic gospels and is much more likely to reflect the embellishment of legend. Judas did a bad thing, and by the time the story had been repeated many thousands of times and written down in the book of John, Judas had turned into a spectacularly awful guy as well. The synoptics tell the story of a guy who did betray Jesus but was remorseful about it, eventually taking his own life over it. John portrays Judas in a different light.
The argument about whether or not the Gospels are accurate is another story.

And of course the problem is that since the idea of being saved is not within your belief, your argument might lead towards more of whether or not Judas was a bad guy, or good guy, good guy turned bad guy....

Are you arguing that Judas was a good guy, turned bad guy? Because if that's the argument, there really is no argument in terms of salvation. He might have been relatively good at the beginning of his discipleship, and got worse as time went on. But that doesn't really have to do with the question of whether or not Judas was ever saved.

If you can entertain the Bible's reference to divine salvation as real, I look at it this way. Jesus, being the Son of God spoke differently on the matter of salvation than Paul did in a sense because Paul was human, and wasn't able to distinguish (at least not always) who was saved or not. He did have a strong enough conviction that a certain party that left them were never with them to begin with (perhaps not saved Christians), but he never made the bold claims that Jesus did, who being the Son of God, could literally prophesy where one would end up in eternity.

John 13:18
Parallel Verses
New International Version
"I am not referring to all of you; I know those I have chosen. But this is to fulfill this passage of Scripture: 'He who shared my bread has turned against me.'


This had been predicted since the time of King David.

This is what happens when a sinner repents (becomes born again, saved).

Luke 15:10
Parallel Verses
New International Version
In the same way, I tell you, there is rejoicing in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents."


If Judas had repented and become born again, saved, at some point, it would be unusual for angels to rejoice over one who is prophesied for judgement.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,136
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2015 5:17:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/8/2015 12:39:56 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:

I don't assume he was saved (and lost it) or never saved. I was trying to determine what you believe.

Of course I have to question exactly what do you mean by he accepted Jesus at some point? He accepted Jesus to some degree (as one to follow), but that doesn't really address salvation. I know you don't believe in salvation, but I was assuming from your statement "I think it is fair to say he accepted Jesus at some point even if he went to the dark side eventually", that at one point he must've been saved per biblical definition:

Salvation - deliverance from sin and its consequences, believed by Christians to be brought about by faith in Christ.

I would assume Judas acknowledged Jesus for what he claimed to be (assuming the claim was what Christians believe now) or he would not have been a follower...

John 3:7
Parallel Verses
New International Version
You should not be surprised at my saying, 'You must be born again.'


The individual Christ said this to, by the way, was someone who accepted Jesus as well as a good person. So did the rich man who went away saddened by the command to sell his possessions. Christ was accepted, yet these individuals were not saved, at least at the point of their reference.

Yes, but the rich man was not willing to turn away from what was holding him back and follow Jesus - Judas literally followed Jesus for three years!

An example,

John 12

12 Six days before the Passover, Jesus came to Bethany, where Lazarus lived, whom Jesus had raised from the dead. 2 Here a dinner was given in Jesus" honor. Martha served, while Lazarus was among those reclining at the table with him. 3 Then Mary took about a pint[a] of pure nard, an expensive perfume; she poured it on Jesus" feet and wiped his feet with her hair. And the house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume.

4 But one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, who was later to betray him, objected, 5 "Why wasn"t this perfume sold and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year"s wages.[b]" 6 He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it.


Why would you assume he didn't have ulterior motives to begin with?

Why would you assume he did? I would point out John was written much later than the synoptic gospels and is much more likely to reflect the embellishment of legend. Judas did a bad thing, and by the time the story had been repeated many thousands of times and written down in the book of John, Judas had turned into a spectacularly awful guy as well. The synoptics tell the story of a guy who did betray Jesus but was remorseful about it, eventually taking his own life over it. John portrays Judas in a different light.
The argument about whether or not the Gospels are accurate is another story.

And of course the problem is that since the idea of being saved is not within your belief, your argument might lead towards more of whether or not Judas was a bad guy, or good guy, good guy turned bad guy....

Are you arguing that Judas was a good guy, turned bad guy? Because if that's the argument, there really is no argument in terms of salvation. He might have been relatively good at the beginning of his discipleship, and got worse as time went on. But that doesn't really have to do with the question of whether or not Judas was ever saved.

Assuming the story is true, we have no way to know if Judas was actually saved, but I assume he would be after leaving his life, casting out demons, healing the sick/lame, (etc) all in the name of Jesus all the while being WITH Jesus.

If you can entertain the Bible's reference to divine salvation as real, I look at it this way. Jesus, being the Son of God spoke differently on the matter of salvation than Paul did in a sense because Paul was human, and wasn't able to distinguish (at least not always) who was saved or not. He did have a strong enough conviction that a certain party that left them were never with them to begin with (perhaps not saved Christians), but he never made the bold claims that Jesus did, who being the Son of God, could literally prophesy where one would end up in eternity.

John 13:18
Parallel Verses
New International Version
"I am not referring to all of you; I know those I have chosen. But this is to fulfill this passage of Scripture: 'He who shared my bread has turned against me.'


This had been predicted since the time of King David.

That really has nothing to do with salvation.

This is what happens when a sinner repents (becomes born again, saved).

Luke 15:10
Parallel Verses
New International Version
In the same way, I tell you, there is rejoicing in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents."


If Judas had repented and become born again, saved, at some point, it would be unusual for angels to rejoice over one who is prophesied for judgement.

The alternative would be that Judas was able to invoke the name of Jesus while not actually being saved all the while Jesus being cognizant of that fact. In addition to this (assuming salvation is true), without Judas there would be no salvation for you or anyone else. Judas was an integral part of the plan to sacrifice Jesus to God.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,136
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2015 5:37:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/8/2015 12:07:45 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:51:31 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:14:36 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:00:35 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:55:23 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation?

No, yes. I would think that the obvious example would be Judas. Here is one of Christ's chosen 12, he casted out demons in Christ's name, and yet it is better that he was never born. I don't think it can be much clearer than that.

To go to heaven you need to die in a state of sanctifying grace.

Anything less becomes a denial of free will.

If we assume the story is true, then without Judas (or someone like him) Christ would not have been sacrificed and no salvation would be possible - yet he loses his salvation? Is that what we're going with here?

Yup. Nobody forced Judas to perform his actions. Was not Peter's triple denial virtually equivalent to Judas' betrayal? Do you not suppose that if instead of committing suicide Judas was on his knees before the cross begging for forgiveness (which is pretty much what every Catholic does in confession) that he wouldn't have been saved - instead of it being better that he was never born (a phrase that could not possibly apply to anyone who makes it to heaven).

If once saved always saved applies why would Paul write about being severed from Christ (Galatians 5:4) or if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you either (Romans 11:21).

Well, I think you are missing the point of Galation 5:4. He is basically saying if you believe adherence to the law will get you there then you are wrong. Look at Galations 5:1:

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

AKA you're free from sin, but if you do this you've bonded yourself to sin again (lost salvation) because you are placing your faith in ceremonies for salvation instead of the salvation offered by Jesus.

No, I don't believe the Bible ever suggests humans can be free from sin. Jesus covers the debt incurred by sin thus the 'yoke' of bondage' is never to be worn again.

Then he mentions how circumcision requires a man to adhere to the law, and Christ is null and void to those without the requisite foreskin.

The two are not exclusive of each other. That is precisely what he is saying. However he is explaining that believing that these rituals are necessary for salvation is a denial of the sacrifice of Christ.

I agree

To deny the saving power of Christ's sacrifice is sinful and thus you lose salvation.

If you deny the 'saving power of Christ's sacrifice' then could it not be argued that you never had salvation to begin with? This is how I interpret it.


Romans 11:21 is a bit more complicated analogy and I haven't deciphered exactly what I think he is saying, but I believe it is something along the lines of 'the Jews were cut-off for their unbelief and you can be too' (if you choose not to believe). I really hope one of our seminary students will chime in on this thread.

Yup. The Jews were the natural branches to whom salvation was given. With the rejection of Jesus by the Jews, their branches were broken off the tree of salvation and the believing Gentiles were grafted on. However, Paul is warning that even though you've been grafted on, if God was willing to remove the natural branches for unbelief/sins, He will be just as willing to remove the grafted branches.

Their branches were 'broken off' because they did not believe in the salvation Jesus offered. I don't believe "salvation" is even a concept in Judaism. Jews go to heaven by choosing to be righteous (if I understand it correctly). So, basically the Jews were lost since they did not acknowledge Jesus, and if "God's people" can be dropped for disbelief then the Gentiles certainly can. Shape up or ship out, Gentiles!! ;-)

He goes on to warn about sins that will lose salvation:

But immorality or any impurity or greed must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints; and there must be no filthiness and silly talk, or coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks. For this you know with certainty, that no immoral or impure person or covetous man, who is an idolater, has an inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. (Ephesians 5:3-5)

I cannot say I completely disagree with your interpretation here. I will try to look into this one some more.

I wish to thank-you for your recent threads. They have been a pleasant change from the regular threads on this site.

Thanks. BTW, good luck with Envisage and Wylted! I will try to steer our conversation away from the points they are making...
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
gloriakim623
Posts: 13
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2015 8:26:51 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I think a Christian can lose their salvation. So how do we get salvation? We get it by receiving Him as our Lord and Saviour. So I think we lose it when we deny that He rose from the grave and when they confess that Jesus isn't that person's Lord and Saviour anymore. If you are a true believer, no matter how much you go through, you will never deny his resurrection and that He is your Lord and Saviour.

I hope this answered you question!! :)

If you oppose against my opinion, plz message me
4runner
Posts: 103
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2015 9:18:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation? : :

Salvation is for all people, not just Christians.
Geogeer
Posts: 4,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2015 12:31:18 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/8/2015 5:37:20 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 12:07:45 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:51:31 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:14:36 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:00:35 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:55:23 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation?

No, yes. I would think that the obvious example would be Judas. Here is one of Christ's chosen 12, he casted out demons in Christ's name, and yet it is better that he was never born. I don't think it can be much clearer than that.

To go to heaven you need to die in a state of sanctifying grace.

Anything less becomes a denial of free will.

If we assume the story is true, then without Judas (or someone like him) Christ would not have been sacrificed and no salvation would be possible - yet he loses his salvation? Is that what we're going with here?

Yup. Nobody forced Judas to perform his actions. Was not Peter's triple denial virtually equivalent to Judas' betrayal? Do you not suppose that if instead of committing suicide Judas was on his knees before the cross begging for forgiveness (which is pretty much what every Catholic does in confession) that he wouldn't have been saved - instead of it being better that he was never born (a phrase that could not possibly apply to anyone who makes it to heaven).

If once saved always saved applies why would Paul write about being severed from Christ (Galatians 5:4) or if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you either (Romans 11:21).

Well, I think you are missing the point of Galation 5:4. He is basically saying if you believe adherence to the law will get you there then you are wrong. Look at Galations 5:1:

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

AKA you're free from sin, but if you do this you've bonded yourself to sin again (lost salvation) because you are placing your faith in ceremonies for salvation instead of the salvation offered by Jesus.

No, I don't believe the Bible ever suggests humans can be free from sin. Jesus covers the debt incurred by sin thus the 'yoke' of bondage' is never to be worn again.

However, Paul says not to become entangled with the yoke of bondage. The word entangled clearly states that it is possible to be re-yoked.

Then he mentions how circumcision requires a man to adhere to the law, and Christ is null and void to those without the requisite foreskin.

The two are not exclusive of each other. That is precisely what he is saying. However he is explaining that believing that these rituals are necessary for salvation is a denial of the sacrifice of Christ.

I agree

To deny the saving power of Christ's sacrifice is sinful and thus you lose salvation.

If you deny the 'saving power of Christ's sacrifice' then could it not be argued that you never had salvation to begin with? This is how I interpret it.

Then you have denied the power of baptism. However, if you consider that Paul writes in 2 Timothy:

I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith;

I think it is pretty clear that salvation can be lost, and that Paul realizes that love requires effort every day. The perfect Love of God is all demanding upon one to maintain. At the end one is rewarded with the crown of righteousness.

I wish to thank-you for your recent threads. They have been a pleasant change from the regular threads on this site.

Thanks. BTW, good luck with Envisage and Wylted! I will try to steer our conversation away from the points they are making...

Lol, thanks, I guess. Actually I love discussing stuff with Envisage and Wylted. Though I share very little in common belief with either of them, I can always trust in an intelligent discussion arising.
JJ50
Posts: 2,144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2015 6:34:58 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/8/2015 9:18:06 PM, 4runner wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation? : :

Salvation is for all people, not just Christians.

From what do we require 'saving'?
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2015 7:20:10 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
If you save a person from drowning, he has been saved from drowning but does that mean he will never drown? Of course not, especially if he jumps back in at the deep end and thinks that no matter how many times he jumps in you will always be there to save him. That is sheer recklessness on his part and it is taking the life saver for granted.

The principle taught in the salvation story is that Jesus forgives people of sins but he also says Go and sin no more. He does not say now you can continue in sin because I will always forgive you as long as you confess how stupid and sinful you are.
Sinners are not saved if they continue to sin. Drowning people are not saved if they jump back in to the water and insists on drowning.
Alcoholics are not saved from alcohol addiction if they continue to drink alcohol.
No man is saved from his own stupidity if he continues to be stupid.

People are only saved from sin IF they stop sinning.
4runner
Posts: 103
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2015 10:50:28 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/9/2015 6:34:58 AM, JJ50 wrote:
At 6/8/2015 9:18:06 PM, 4runner wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation? : :

Salvation is for all people, not just Christians.

From what do we require 'saving'? : :

From this old heaven and earth to the new heaven and earth as it is written in the biblical prophecies.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,136
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2015 10:53:25 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/9/2015 12:31:18 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 5:37:20 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 12:07:45 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:51:31 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:14:36 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 11:00:35 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:55:23 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation?

No, yes. I would think that the obvious example would be Judas. Here is one of Christ's chosen 12, he casted out demons in Christ's name, and yet it is better that he was never born. I don't think it can be much clearer than that.

To go to heaven you need to die in a state of sanctifying grace.

Anything less becomes a denial of free will.

If we assume the story is true, then without Judas (or someone like him) Christ would not have been sacrificed and no salvation would be possible - yet he loses his salvation? Is that what we're going with here?

Yup. Nobody forced Judas to perform his actions. Was not Peter's triple denial virtually equivalent to Judas' betrayal? Do you not suppose that if instead of committing suicide Judas was on his knees before the cross begging for forgiveness (which is pretty much what every Catholic does in confession) that he wouldn't have been saved - instead of it being better that he was never born (a phrase that could not possibly apply to anyone who makes it to heaven).

If once saved always saved applies why would Paul write about being severed from Christ (Galatians 5:4) or if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you either (Romans 11:21).

Well, I think you are missing the point of Galation 5:4. He is basically saying if you believe adherence to the law will get you there then you are wrong. Look at Galations 5:1:

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

AKA you're free from sin, but if you do this you've bonded yourself to sin again (lost salvation) because you are placing your faith in ceremonies for salvation instead of the salvation offered by Jesus.

No, I don't believe the Bible ever suggests humans can be free from sin. Jesus covers the debt incurred by sin thus the 'yoke' of bondage' is never to be worn again.

However, Paul says not to become entangled with the yoke of bondage. The word entangled clearly states that it is possible to be re-yoked.

I am willing to concede that he may have meant it is possible to be "re-yoked", but I see no reason to equate sin with loss of salvation. That is not clear to me.

Then he mentions how circumcision requires a man to adhere to the law, and Christ is null and void to those without the requisite foreskin.

The two are not exclusive of each other. That is precisely what he is saying. However he is explaining that believing that these rituals are necessary for salvation is a denial of the sacrifice of Christ.

I agree

To deny the saving power of Christ's sacrifice is sinful and thus you lose salvation.

If you deny the 'saving power of Christ's sacrifice' then could it not be argued that you never had salvation to begin with? This is how I interpret it.

Then you have denied the power of baptism.

I never considered baptism to be an absolute - sure it is common and accepted, but do you really think salvation would be denied because an individual was unable to get baptized?

However, if you consider that Paul writes in 2 Timothy:

I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith;

I think it is pretty clear that salvation can be lost, and that Paul realizes that love requires effort every day. The perfect Love of God is all demanding upon one to maintain. At the end one is rewarded with the crown of righteousness.

Are faith and salvation synonymous? Again, I don't think so. One is something you do, and the other is something god does. You are relying on equivocation.


I wish to thank-you for your recent threads. They have been a pleasant change from the regular threads on this site.

Thanks. BTW, good luck with Envisage and Wylted! I will try to steer our conversation away from the points they are making...

Lol, thanks, I guess. Actually I love discussing stuff with Envisage and Wylted. Though I share very little in common belief with either of them, I can always trust in an intelligent discussion arising.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Geogeer
Posts: 4,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2015 11:37:18 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/9/2015 10:53:25 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/9/2015 12:31:18 AM, Geogeer wrote:

Culled a bunch o'stuff.

However, Paul says not to become entangled with the yoke of bondage. The word entangled clearly states that it is possible to be re-yoked.

I am willing to concede that he may have meant it is possible to be "re-yoked", but I see no reason to equate sin with loss of salvation. That is not clear to me.

1 John 5:16-17

If anyone sees his brother committing a sin not leading to death, he shall ask and God will for him give life to those who commit sin not leading to death. There is a sin leading to death; I do not say that he should make request for this. All unrighteousness is sin, and there is a sin not leading to death.

This is what the Catholic Church refers to as venial and mortal sin. There are sins that if you die with them on your soul, you will not be damned. And there are sins that if you do die with them on your soul you will be damned - the second death.

So what Paul has been saying here is that by trusting in Jewish ceremonies for salvation instead of the blood of Christ you are committing a mortal sin - because you are believing in a different Gospel.

Then you have denied the power of baptism.

I never considered baptism to be an absolute - sure it is common and accepted, but do you really think salvation would be denied because an individual was unable to get baptized?

Water baptism is the normative means of salvation. However, there are also 2 other types of baptism:

2) Baptism by Martyrdom, also called the "Baptism by blood," refers to the martyrdom of the believer who is killed for his/her faith before he/she had a chance to be baptized.

3) Baptism of Desire applies to those who wishing to be baptized, die before receiving the Sacrament. This desire may have been explicit (fully and clearly expressed) or implicit (implied but not directly expressed.)

However, if you consider that Paul writes in 2 Timothy:

I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith;

I think it is pretty clear that salvation can be lost, and that Paul realizes that love requires effort every day. The perfect Love of God is all demanding upon one to maintain. At the end one is rewarded with the crown of righteousness.

Are faith and salvation synonymous?

No.

If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. And if I give all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I surrender my body to be burned, but do not have love, it profits me nothing. 1 Corinthians 13:2-3

Salvation comes from dying in a state of grace - which is a state of love with God.

Again, I don't think so. One is something you do, and the other is something god does. You are relying on equivocation.

All salvation is an act of grace and a gift from God - somehow I think you misunderstand me. What you have to do is to accept that gift through loving God with all your heart, mind and soul; and to love your neighbour as yourself.
JJ50
Posts: 2,144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2015 11:45:58 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/9/2015 10:50:28 AM, 4runner wrote:
At 6/9/2015 6:34:58 AM, JJ50 wrote:
At 6/8/2015 9:18:06 PM, 4runner wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation? : :

Salvation is for all people, not just Christians.

From what do we require 'saving'? : :

From this old heaven and earth to the new heaven and earth as it is written in the biblical prophecies.

Yeh right! Biblical so called prophecies are load of nonsense with no credibility like much of the Bible!
4runner
Posts: 103
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2015 11:59:52 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/9/2015 11:45:58 AM, JJ50 wrote:
At 6/9/2015 10:50:28 AM, 4runner wrote:
At 6/9/2015 6:34:58 AM, JJ50 wrote:
At 6/8/2015 9:18:06 PM, 4runner wrote:
At 6/8/2015 10:47:45 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/7/2015 9:30:21 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Salvation is not a weak position that hangs on whether or not an individual can muster enough faith for the moment. The saved person is one who has been bought and sealed.

Am I understanding you correctly - are you suggesting salvation is permanent?

I would say that in my opinion, scriptural evidence of permanent salvation is stronger than otherwise.

Do you agree with Roderick when he suggests salvation is permanent, or can a Christian lose their salvation? : :

Salvation is for all people, not just Christians.

From what do we require 'saving'? : :

From this old heaven and earth to the new heaven and earth as it is written in the biblical prophecies.

Yeh right! Biblical so called prophecies are load of nonsense with no credibility like much of the Bible! : :

This is what you believe and I can't change your belief. Only God can change your thoughts.
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,386
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2015 12:06:42 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/8/2015 5:17:09 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/8/2015 12:39:56 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:

I don't assume he was saved (and lost it) or never saved. I was trying to determine what you believe.

Of course I have to question exactly what do you mean by he accepted Jesus at some point? He accepted Jesus to some degree (as one to follow), but that doesn't really address salvation. I know you don't believe in salvation, but I was assuming from your statement "I think it is fair to say he accepted Jesus at some point even if he went to the dark side eventually", that at one point he must've been saved per biblical definition:

Salvation - deliverance from sin and its consequences, believed by Christians to be brought about by faith in Christ.

I'm unclear as to whether you think he was saved from a scriptural standpoint or not. You may just be making counter-points without actual belief, which is fine.

If you're strictly trying to determine what I believe, then I believe he was never saved to begin with.
I would assume Judas acknowledged Jesus for what he claimed to be (assuming the claim was what Christians believe now) or he would not have been a follower...

Many saw Jesus as a charismatic figure who could deliver them from Roman rule. If anyone would be worth following on that basis alone, it wouldn't really matter what that figure claimed to be. If a new quarterback can lead the Raiders to the Superbowl, why not support him all the way, even if he says/thinks he is God.
John 3:7
Parallel Verses
New International Version
You should not be surprised at my saying, 'You must be born again.'


The individual Christ said this to, by the way, was someone who accepted Jesus as well as a good person. So did the rich man who went away saddened by the command to sell his possessions. Christ was accepted, yet these individuals were not saved, at least at the point of their reference.

Yes, but the rich man was not willing to turn away from what was holding him back and follow Jesus - Judas literally followed Jesus for three years!

Judas Iscariot was not rich. He was a thief. A sacrifice to one person is not a sacrifice to another. Judas saw personal empowerment potential in following Jesus. The rich man didn't.
An example,

John 12

12 Six days before the Passover, Jesus came to Bethany, where Lazarus lived, whom Jesus had raised from the dead. 2 Here a dinner was given in Jesus" honor. Martha served, while Lazarus was among those reclining at the table with him. 3 Then Mary took about a pint[a] of pure nard, an expensive perfume; she poured it on Jesus" feet and wiped his feet with her hair. And the house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume.

4 But one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, who was later to betray him, objected, 5 "Why wasn"t this perfume sold and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year"s wages.[b]" 6 He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it.


Why would you assume he didn't have ulterior motives to begin with?

Why would you assume he did? I would point out John was written much later than the synoptic gospels and is much more likely to reflect the embellishment of legend. Judas did a bad thing, and by the time the story had been repeated many thousands of times and written down in the book of John, Judas had turned into a spectacularly awful guy as well. The synoptics tell the story of a guy who did betray Jesus but was remorseful about it, eventually taking his own life over it. John portrays Judas in a different light.
The argument about whether or not the Gospels are accurate is another story.

And of course the problem is that since the idea of being saved is not within your belief, your argument might lead towards more of whether or not Judas was a bad guy, or good guy, good guy turned bad guy....

Are you arguing that Judas was a good guy, turned bad guy? Because if that's the argument, there really is no argument in terms of salvation. He might have been relatively good at the beginning of his discipleship, and got worse as time went on. But that doesn't really have to do with the question of whether or not Judas was ever saved.

Assuming the story is true, we have no way to know if Judas was actually saved, but I assume he would be after leaving his life, casting out demons, healing the sick/lame, (etc) all in the name of Jesus all the while being WITH Jesus.

We don't know what kind of life he left.

And as far as casting out demons, healing the sick:

Matthew 7:21-23New King James Version (NKJV)
I Never Knew You

21 "Not everyone who says to Me, "Lord, Lord," shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, "Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?" 23 And then I will declare to them, "I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!"


The implication here is that these people were never saved. They were never known of Christ.

And as I said, close proximity to Jesus was no guarantee of belief in who He claimed to be. The disciple Thomas was not convinced all that time, witnessing everything, of who Christ was until His reappearing, and placing his finger in His side.

If you can entertain the Bible's reference to divine salvation as real, I look at it this way. Jesus, being the Son of God spoke differently on the matter of salvation than Paul did in a sense because Paul was human, and wasn't able to distinguish (at least not always) who was saved or not. He did have a strong enough conviction that a certain party that left them were never with them to begin with (perhaps not saved Christians), but he never made the bold claims that Jesus did, who being the Son of God, could literally prophesy where one would end up in eternity.

John 13:18
Parallel Verses
New International Version
"I am not referring to all of you; I know those I have chosen. But this is to fulfill this passage of Scripture: 'He who shared my bread has turned against me.'


This had been predicted since the time of King David.

That really has nothing to do with salvation.

Do you really think someone referred to as the son of perdition was saved at some point? That at some point, in spite of prophesy, that Judas (if he died at a particular moment) was Heaven bound?