| Author | Message | ||
| Krista Registered user Username: Krista Post Number: 40 Registered: 8-2004 |
I appreciate all the posts! I agree with Dennis and the seed parable makes a lot of sense. I'm curious too: if anyone does have Bible verses saying a person lost their salvation, then how do we explain that? Thanks!  | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 122 Registered: 10-2004 |
Colleen, I can't stand that phrase "plan of salvaiton" either. It's probably because it's from Ellen. The phrase just automatically makes me uncomfortable. Valerie, of course Lucifer and the angels did not have "salvation." What had they been saved from??? 4drian, I don't see that text as talking about losing one's salvation. The beginning of it already just said, "If we died with Him, we WILL live with Him"! Your last arugment could be turned right back on you. Do you think that we never will have eternal security? Do you think that even in heaven/new earth we could choose to sin someday? Then what would happen to us? Would Jesus die again?!?! Or do you believe that someday our "freedom of choice" will be taken away?? Jeremy | ||
| Sabra Registered user Username: Sabra Post Number: 266 Registered: 10-2001 |
I have a hard time attributing all that "remaining" and "enduring" to salvation. Either it's a FREE gift, or it's not. I guess you could give it back if you wanted but if you truly believe why would you? Believe there is in the sense of "believing in a person" like you tell your kids, "I believe in you" Doesn't mean you believe they exist, but you are putting your faith in them, you are trusting in them, you are believing in them, willing to lay your life down for them, ya know? Paul called the Corinthians saints and rebuked them for their behavior, didnt say they weren't saved, told them to grow up! We have different rewards for different behavior here and I think "Pray that you be made worthy to escape the coming tribulation." says what it means. If we aren't worthy we wont get out of here but we will be saved "as through the fire" (of the trib)if we endure to the end. There's just a lot we don't know for sure, praise God, He does! | ||
| 4drian Registered user Username: 4drian Post Number: 11 Registered: 11-2004 |
He He,... Sorry about using SDA terminology. I will probably never be completely rid of it. But thankfully, I don't think I'm using it in the same way as most SDAs would. Jeremy, Based on the facts that God allowed Lucifer to sin and later allowed Adam to sin, and the fact that He does not appear to have changed His mind, (which by the way, I don't think God does) I really do believe that we will continue to have our freedom for all of eternity. Now, it sure would be silly for us, knowing what we know now, to choose to sin again after we are made perfect. Now in some of my beliefs there are remnants of SDA teachings, but those remnants I have made my own. They do not come from any particular doctrine or creed but rather from my personal reading of God's word. Of course others will read the same bible and disagree with me, but such is the nature of imperfect man. We will never be able to understand the whole truth of God's word until we are with Him again. -Adrian (vlad) | ||
| 4drian Registered user Username: 4drian Post Number: 12 Registered: 11-2004 |
Now the more I read these posts on the salvation issue the more I start to see a pattern of misunderstanding. Basically hereís what I see, and let me know if Iím wrong. We seem to have two different definitions of being saved: 1. Anyone who accepts the Lord Jesus as his/her savior and, at least for a time, is a follower of Jesus Christ. This includes those seeds that are sown, they grow and flourish for a time, but because they do not take roots, they eventually wilt. 2. Only those people who accept Christ as their savior and remain in Christ for all future. In fact, anyone who does not remain in Christ was by definition not truly in Christ to begin with. This includes only those seeds who take root, flourish, and stay strong until the time of the harvest. Do you see how we are really getting at the same thing? The people here who believe in Once Saved Always Saved do not believe that they are now free to live a life of sin. In fact, they have defined the word Saved in such a strict manner so as to not allow for this heresy. Now the people who believe that once you are saved you can still fall out of grace, believe this because we have a looser definition of the word saved. I believe I am saved because I accepted Jesus as my personal savior and invited him into my heart. Now if later on in life, I fall away from the Lord, I will no longer be saved by my definition. By the other definition, however, I was never saved to begin with. So either way I would end up lost. -Adrian (vlad) | ||
| Tracey Registered user Username: Tracey Post Number: 82 Registered: 9-2004 |
I had this conversation with C. What I explained to him was that the parable of the prodigal son return to his father. The essence of it is that the father never rejected the child. The child left the loving father. But the love of the Father was always waiting with open arms and that there was a rejoicing when he returned and that he returned before it was too late (dead). Salvation is the love of God expressed with hugs for me. God can't take his hug back that he gave me. However, I can choose NOT to receive anymore hugs to my own detriment. I don't believe He ever rejects us i.e. takes back salvation. But He does expect something in return for his hugs and that's faithfulness for his love. | ||
| Susan_2 Registered user Username: Susan_2 Post Number: 1126 Registered: 11-2002 |
I have a question on this very topic. I am assuming the saved issue is pertaining to those who profess Christianity. How about the folks who once were true Christians but have since rejected Christianity. An example would be people who once were true Christians, at least in their own hearts and understnding of Christanity, but have since converted to some other religion, such as Hare Krishna, Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, etc.? | ||
| 4drian Registered user Username: 4drian Post Number: 13 Registered: 11-2004 |
Susan, In my opinion, they were once true Christians, as you described, but now because they have chosen to reject God's salvation (not because the Lord took it away) they are not longer saved. The other opinion you will find on this board is that they were never true Christians to begin with and therefore never had salvation. Basically, Anyone who rejects Christ was never in Christ in the first place; he/she was just pretending or going through the motions. Whichever one of these theories you ascribe to, the result is the same in the end. ...anyway, that's what I've gotten out of this whole thread and by going back and re-listening to some of Pastor Mark's sermons. I hope it's close to what people are saying but I'm sure I'll be corrected if I'm wrong. -Adrian (vlad) | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 123 Registered: 10-2004 |
Adrian, Actually, there is a big difference in beliefs here, not just a difference in wording. I believe (and so does Pastor Mark) that we can know that we are saved and that we will be in heaven. You believe that we can know that we are saved, but we still might end up in hell. You seem to see "saved" as (currently) "safe". I see saved as "saved from death, sin, and hell" (meaning permanently). Jeremy | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 228 Registered: 4-2000 |
Susan, We really don't know who is a "true" Christian. There are many professional-like impostors. There are many humanistic reasons why people choose to live a lie--a double life. As human beings, we can make an educated guess by looking at externals. Some even perform great and honorable things in the name of God but they are unknown by the Savior (see Matt. 7:22-23). As we former Adventists are painfully aware, even cultic organizations do many good and honorable things. Satan has truly filled this world with impostors or pretenders of every description. Regarding such extreme departures as becoming a Hare Krishna, Sikh, Hindu, et cetera, I would agree with the Apostle John when he said, "They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us" (1 John 2:29 NASU). The more one meditates and reflects on the nature of God's unconditional love, the more absurd it sounds when someone begins talking about losing it. Why would God take away something He offers unconditionally? It makes no sense at all. No one can snatch us from His hand. He remains faithful to the faithless. Where sin abounds, grace superabounds. Anything less would be less than unconditional. The salvation spoken of by Jesus and Paul takes place at one moment in time yet seals the believer for all time. This faith moves the Judge not only to forgive and pardon the sinner, but to adopt him into His own family as well. More is at stake than assurance. The very gospel itself comes under attack when the eternal security of the believer is questioned. Placing the responsiblity for maintaining salvation on the believer is adding works to grace. Salvation would no longer be a gift. It would become a trade--our faithfulness for His faithfulness. I have never met a Christian who had lost his salvation. However, I have met plenty who had lost their assurance. The assurance of our salvation is vital to our spiritual lives. Without it our growth is retarded and we are assailed with crippling doubts. No true believer ever loses his salvation. To be sure, Christians fall at times seriously and radically, but never fully and finally. We persevere, not because of our strength but because of God's grace that preserves us. His grace still amazes me, Dennis J. Fischer | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 766 Registered: 3-2004 |
Last night I received an e-mail from a cousin near Lake Tahoe. She is SDA and I had written to her that I am no longer SDA and I told her why. In her writing she told me of a recent incident that involves a minister of the Assembly of God church who became an SDA. Now I do not want to judge any one, but could that be an example of a person who was not really with God, seeing as he turned away from God. My cousin told me to go to the amazing facts site and write a letter to D. Batchelor and ask his help with my beliefs. That I will not do. I did not tell her that I had written to the site and asked why they still believe in EGW as she is a false prophet. I never received an answer. This cousin is in her 70's and been an SDA all her life. Of course she did not marry an SDA. I do not know this cousin very well as I have not seen her for years and I mean about 40 years. So I pray for her and ask every one to pray for her also. I told her I would not debate religion, but I would tell her why I believe the way I do and I will do that. Thank God I do not have to turn to another person to study the Bible. God and the Holy Spirit teach me and I am very thankful for that. He is so awesome. Diana | ||
| 4drian Registered user Username: 4drian Post Number: 15 Registered: 11-2004 |
Jeremy and Dennis, I really don't think you understand that our beliefs really are very close together. You use different terms that make you feel more secure but then as soon as someone falls from grace, you just prop up your theory by saying that the person in question wasn't saved anyway. I don't mean to be mean but let me give you a more realistic example. If you Jeremy, fell from God's grace, than Dennis would immediately say that you weren't saved to begin with; so as far as the end result we are both saying exactly the same thing. Not only does the bible warn Christians over and over and over again that we should remain in God's grace, but the examples of people who have fallen from grace are found throughout the bible as well as all around us. You automatically assume that every Christian who has fallen from grace is a liar and an impostor. I cannot agree with this claim and I don't see how you can make it so flippantly. As far as the love of God, I would go along with your theory but then I would have to say that God did not love Adam. If God loved Adam and yet He gave Adam freedom, than I think He does the same for us. Yes, that does put some responsibility on us, but it is not a responsibility of works. As long as you have Christ in your heart, you may sin over and over (in fact you will sin), but Christ will be with you, he will work with you, and he will guide you. However, if you decide that you no longer need Christ and you no longer want His salvation, then He will not force you into salvation. We are all God's children and he loves all of us. His salvation is free for all of us, but He does not force it upon us. Let me say this again because I have said it before but from what Dennis wrote, I'm not sure I got across what I wanted to: God never takes salvation away from us. He offers it freely and once we choose it, and invite Him into our lives, it is ours. It is free to us. God never takes salvation away from us, but if we want to renounce it, than we are free to do so. In such a case God will continue to extend His hand to us so that whenever we come to our senses, we can take told of His hand again. I have written many posts about the subject of Christians having the same freedom of choice that Adam and Lucifer had. I would like to hear what some of you have to say about it. At least if you answer me, you can get me to quit coming back to the same idea in all of my posts. As for myself, I believe I am saved and have no intention of renouncing God. I love God and I love what he is doing in my life. I have seen things change in my life that I know that I would not have had the courage, or even the ability, to do on my own. I think that the vast majority of people who truly accept God into their hearts will be saved. This is because when we invite Christ into our lives we are changed. I have seen this in my own life and I cannot imagine anything but a life in Christ. However, I know that the first human, who God created in His own image renounced God. I cannot understand why Adam, who was perfect, would choose to sin, but I know that Adam did sin and then he repented and was saved again through Christ in the same way that I am saved through Christ. Though I would never choose to renounce Christ, I know the choice is there. Again, if we were not indented to retain our freedom than there would have been no need for Christ's death on the cross. There is no need for God to make a game of choice if choice really doesn't exist. Finally, I have spoken bluntly, but only to get my point across. I mean no offense to anyone and I think of all of you as my brothers and sisters in Christ. -God loves all of us and His salvation is completely free of charge, -Adrian (vlad) | ||
| 4drian Registered user Username: 4drian Post Number: 16 Registered: 11-2004 |
Flying Lady, Your post just gave me an idea for an interesting project for all of us. I know who Doug Batchelor is but I don't know a lot about him personally so I cannot guess if this would work on him... but here's my idea: We should find a SDA preacher that appears to be a sincere person. Than one of us would write to him and ask for explanation of certain Adventist doctrines. Once we have him engaged in an email conversation, we would start a thread and all pitch in with information to see if we can get this pastor to think about Evangelical Christian doctrine with a more open mind. I've noticed that in most cases, even the pastors are encouraged to study Adventism with eyes wide shut; meaning that they are given reasons why other Christian churches are wrong but those reasons are often filled with fallices and misinterpretation; so a lot of pastors only know Adventism and a lot of half-truths about the rest of Christianity. They are not encouraged to study Christianity on their own because then they may end up like Pastor Mike or Pastor Greg. Anyway, this was just a crazy idea that came to me so I'm posting it before I think better of it. -Adrian (vlad) | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 229 Registered: 4-2000 |
FALLING FROM GRACE Unfortunately, for many people "falling from grace" is synonymous with losing salvation. This perception is theologically faulty. The three-word phrase "fallen from grace" appears only once in Scripture; specifically, Galatians 5:4. Indeed, those who seek to become justified by the law have "fallen from grace." This text was never intended to be lifted from its theological context. The book of Galatians finds Paul defending himself and the gospel of Christ from a group of "teachers" who arrived in Galatia sometime after he left. The group, commonly referred to as the Judaizers, proclaimed a gospel different from Paul's. Their distorted gospel centered on the importance of circumcision. Paul's letter indicates that the Judaizers were successful in persuading some gentile believers to be circumcised to ensure their salvation (see Gal. 5:2). The series of events broke the apostle's heart (see Gal. 4:18-20). He was under the impression that the people of Galatia were solid in their understanding of the gospel. To hear that they were so easily led astray was a real blow to Paul. To begin with, the Judaizers believed in salvation by works. They, like Seventh-day Adventism, insisted on combining their faith with works in order to gain eternal life. Furthermore, the Judaizers continued to adhere to portions of the law as a code of ethics (i.e., observing special days, dietary guidelines, etc.). For the Judaizers, circumcision was one of their favorite topics. Again, they were similar to contemporary Adventists that major in sabbathing today. It is interesting to note that both groups developed an emphasis of that portion of the Torah that appealed to them most. Both groups made their views into a salvational issue--thereby opposing the gospel of Jesus Christ. So, what has all this to do with falling from grace? Within the context of this great debate Paul makes his statement concerning FALLING FROM GRACE. Please take note. Paul's primary concern was not that the Galatian believers were drifting off into some sort of gross immortality. His fear was not that they were consciously abandoning God. That was not the point of contention. In one sense, the opposite is true. They were about to adopt a form of religion that restricted their freedom even further! They were in danger of committing themselves to a way of life that would demand more in the way of works. He warned, "It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery" (Gal. 5:1). Interestingly enough, this verse serves as the introduction to the passage including the expression under discussion. To fall from grace, then,is to abandon the salvation by grace model for justification and to adopt the salvation by works model. Paul was not threatening them with the loss of salvation, but a loss of freedom. Importantly, he didn't say they were falling from salvation. His concern was that they were falling away from God's system of grace, which in turn would lead them right back into the frustration of living under the law. Falling from grace has absolutely nothing to do with falling into sin. It has more to do with falling into error. You may fall from grace, but you will NEVER fall from salvation. That is for certain. How do I know? For one thing, the same man who warned one group against falling from grace assured another group of the unalterability of their salvation as follows: "But in all these things we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Romans 8:37-39). I don't think Paul left anything out. If he did, it certainly wasn't intentional. If you have put your faith in Christ as your Savior, NOTHING can separate you from the love of Christ. And you can't get more secure than that! In awe of His grace, Dennis J. Fischer | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 86 Registered: 7-2004 |
Dennis like you I remain amazed and awed by His grace. Thanks for your posts. I came across something that was posted today on another board that I thought was worth copying here. GRACE Versus LAW Grace Says: óSalvation is a gift (Eph 2:8-9; John 10:28; Rom 6:23) Law Says: óSalvation requires a payment by the individual Grace Says: óDemerit cannot result in salvationís being denied (Rom 5:8) Law Says: óDemerit can result in denial of salvation Garce Says: óPersonal merit cannot result in salvation (Gal 5:6; 3:22) Law Says: óPersonal merit can result in salvation Grace Says: óGrace-plus-nothing (Gal 4:9) Law Says: óGrace plus merit Grace Says: óStarts with what Christ has done (Heb 7:16) Law Says: óStarts with what the individual must do Grace Says: óOnly believe (in Gospels over 115 times) Law Says: óBelieve plusÖ Grace Says: óReceive, and then do... Law Says: óDo to receive Grace Says: óContrasted to debt (Rom 4:4, (Rom 11:6), law (Gal 5:14) Law Says: óConsistent with debt, works, and law | ||
| 4drian Registered user Username: 4drian Post Number: 19 Registered: 11-2004 |
Thanks Ric, I like what you posted. I fully agree that Salvation is a gift of Grace through Christ. It requires no payment. My problem with the Once Saved Always Saved (OSAS) theory is more philosophical than it is practical. In practicality, my belief is almost identical to the OSAS theory. I believe that once we are saved, it is almost impossible for us to want to renounce our salvation. But from a philosophical standpoint I cannot believe that it is completely impossible because in that case, sin could not have existed in the first place. I have many posts on this issue above and no one wants to talk to me about it... oh well. -Adrian (vlad) | ||
| 4drian Registered user Username: 4drian Post Number: 20 Registered: 11-2004 |
Here's what Pastor Mark has to say on the subject: -------------------------------------------------- ...As for once saved always saved, i am closer to that position than I am to the Arminian position that our salvation is on again, off again based on our performance. The whole issue gets down to semantics. Once saved always saved people will tll you if someone walks away from God they never really knew Him. I do not have time right now to do the whole study, but Jesus does say that no one can pluck us out of His hand. If we are His, we are secure. 1 John 5:10-13 tells us we can know we have eternal life. Jesus in Matthew 24 talks about the enemy trying to deceive the world, even the elect, but it includes the phrase, If that were possible. Heb 6:6 talks about turning away from the Lord and there being no more sacrifice for sin. But Paul says in 1 Cor 5:15 the holy Spirit is our guarantee! 1:22 we are sealed by the Spirit. The truth is, our Salvation is such an awesome gift that we will find it very difficult to turn away. The Spirit will not allow it if we truly have come to the Lord. We will definately miss the joy of our salvation if we turn away. But God has his ways of bringing his children back. On the other hand it is essential that we not give in to teaching that makes our salvation insecure based on days that are good or bad. We belong to the Lord. While there may be some that can walk away from that, we have few examples of that in the scripture. Demas is the only one that might be such a case, but we do not know about he rest of his life. But we do not want to take our salvation lightly. It cost the life of Jesus Himself. We will all face him at the rewards bench (bema seat judgment) and will receive rewards or loss even if we are saved. Adrian, I wouold not get too caught up in the semantics. Just seek the Lord and trust His promises that He will never leave you nor fosake you. You are secure in Him. he will not let you go back. Just don't take his grace lightly. Always persue your walk with the Lord with all your heart so you can experience the fullness of the Spirit and not miss any of the great things He has planned. Hope this helps. -------------------------------------------------- I think he's basicaly in the same boat I'm in. In paragraph 2 he says the exact same thing I've said in quite a few of my posts. -Adrian (vlad) | ||
| 4drian Registered user Username: 4drian Post Number: 21 Registered: 11-2004 |
OOps sorry... I meant to say Pastor Greg Taylor NOT Pastor Mark. (Pastor Mark, we have already established above, believes in Once Saved Always Saved) Truly sorry about that. -Adrian (vlad) | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 61 Registered: 7-2004 |
I cannot tell you the exact text, I'm sure someone on here can quote it if it needs to be directly quoted, but there was a post-resurrection reference to the disciples about how none of them were lost except for the one that had been meant for perdition from the very beginning. When you carefully read about Judas you can see that he joined up with the band of Jesus Followers because he liked to be noticed with them--he was convinced that Jesus was going to set up an earthly kingdom and he wanted to be a part of that. Being a Christ follower didn't really sink into his bones, however, and that is what made him vulnerable in the end. Somehow, in all that time spent intimately with the Savior, his spirit did not connect with the Spirit of Jesus. I think of Judas as being the typical Sunday Christian who went to church all his life because that was family tradition, or because his friends did it, and so forth. (For those of you still wrestling with the day of worship issue you can use the term Sabbath Christian.) The rest of the week the thought of God hardly ever clouds his mind. When he goes to church he makes sure to look and speak correctly, but it's all a learned response, sort of like, "When in Rome, do as the Romans do." None of us can really look past the surface of some of these people. These things are spiritually perceived, and as long as the walk and talk fills the bill for us, most of us don't even bother to question motive. I take comfort in some of the promises that have been quoted above, about the fact that we cannot be snatched out of the hand of Jesus. I'm not presumptiously sinning because I've had my sins washed away, but grateful that if I do sin, those sins have already been paid for and cleansed away. He loves in a manner that no human can fathom, He's traded His precious blood for my faith in its power to save--utterly amazing! Belva | ||
| Dane Registered user Username: Dane Post Number: 72 Registered: 4-2004 |
Adrian, Thanks for sharing Gregg's comments. That is basically where I have been for years. And maybe it is partially semantics, but I see it as different from the traditional OSAS. I believe that God will not take away our free will. And that is what I see happening under traditional OSAS. Dane |
