The Once Saved Always Saved Debate

[Download MP3]

Dr. Brown debates Rev. Bill Lowery on the question of whether a believer can lose his salvation. Is it possible for a true believer to ever fall away? Can someone still claim to be “saved” if they have denied the Lord and now walk in unrepentant sin? Or does that mean the person was never saved in the first place? Join the debate today!

 

Hour 1:

 

Dr. Brown’s Bottom Line: Thank God for salvation. The free gift of salvation. It changes us radically, from darkness to light, from sin to holiness, and from Satan’s kingdom to God’s kingdom!

Hour 2:

 

Dr. Brown’s Bottom Line: The love of God is so wonderful and our Holy God so awesome, that all the days of our lives we should live with gratitude and thanksgiving to Him. We should say, “Lord I want to walk worthy!”

 

SPECIAL OFFER! THIS WEEK ONLY!

DVD Debate with Rabbi Shmuley 

PLUS

A Stealth Agenda and The Jesus Manifesto ( 2 Mini-Books)
For Only $12,  Postage Paid!

 Call 1-800-278-9978 or order online!
Other Resources:

Is Repentance Necessary for Salvation? And, Holiness vs. Legalism

Why Israel’s Preservation and Salvation Should Matter to all Believers

Liberty From Sin, Not Liberty To Sin

VOR ARTICLE BY DR. BROWN

Jesus came to set us free! This is one of the fundamental truths of the gospel, repeated over and again in the New Testament. As expressed by Paul, “It is for freedom that Christ has set us free” (Gal 5:1a). In the words of Jesus himself, “. . […]


Blameless On That Day: Holiness and Love

VOR ARTICLE BY DAVID HARWOOD

Justified believers are urged to pursue holiness. We are promised that the pure in heart shall see God. (Matthew 5:8) We are warned that without holiness no one will see the Lord. (Hebrews 12:14) In the hope of seeing Him as He is we are exhorted to purify […]

How Saved Are We? by Dr. Brown:  This unsettling book challenges us to ask ourselves what kind of born-again experience we have had if it calls for almost no personal sacrifice, produces virtually no separation from the world, and breeds practically no hatred of sin.

 


How to Be Led By The Spirit! [mp3 series]

213 Comments
  1. William, did David Pawson really say the sentences at the beginning of your post? Part of it is in quotes so it makes it seem that you are quoting him. Did he actually say those things?

    I don’t know David Pawson and don’t know if he really says and believes the things that you have in that post.

    But I do want to say that the beliefs and words that you put forth in post # 91 would be largely rejected by most Arminians.

    If you are trying to say that the words and thoughts presented in your post are representative of Arminians then you are sorely mistaken. Because it would be a severe misrepresentation and a bad caricature of our beliefs.

    There is so much of the post that would need to be clarified and revised to make it an accurate reflection of what I believe that I will not even attempt to do so.

    Before you would make an attempt to define what Arminians believe, I would suggest you re-read my earlier comments to see if they come even close to what you have written.

  2. Jonathan, I can guarantee you that Pawson said something like, “Never tell anyone you are saved” and then William butchered the meaning of it. What he would have meant is this: When you are sharing the gospel with a sinner, don’t tell them, “OK, because you prayed this prayer or went through a certain ritual, you are now saved. Congratulations!” Rather, let the Holy Spirit give them assurance of salvation. Don’t we all agree that is the sound and right thing to do?

    But again, a heads up to you and others dealing with William here. Do NOT expect a fair treatment of your points; do NOT expect a response that is true to historic Calvinism in terms of Calvinism’s hallmark preaching of holiness; but do expect to be falsely accused of believing all kinds of crazy things you never believed in your life.

    All that being said, having this archived online for others to see is highly beneficial, and so I encourage further dialog as time permits, especially staying on one simple point and refusing to move on until it is dealt with. That will be quite revealing for sure!

  3. Mike you obliviously haven’t listened to Pawsons teaching ..I have …. I read his book “Once saved always saved is it true”” A book SO legalist that he even states he hesitated to write ….lest some new believers might read it and quit before they got a good start! Here is his 4 step plan to get started on the path (of which NO ONE knows IF they will be successful in “making it”! I have the whole book which is so ambiguous and pompous (english) as to be almost unreadable….will be glad to send you a electronic copy! the four basic steps of initiation (repentance towards God, faith in Jesus, baptism in water and reception of the Spirit) may be spread over hours, days, weeks, months or even years.
    The more important question is whether ‘initiation’, when it is complete, equals ‘salvation’. Are all the initiated regarded as ‘saved’? The answer is surprising.
    Apostolic teaching uses the verb ‘save’ in three tenses: past, present and future. Apparently we have been saved, we are being saved and we will be saved! If anything, the emphasis
    16 Once Saved, Always Saved?
    is on the future (see, for example, Matt. 24:13; Rom. 5:10; 1 Cor. 5:5; 1 Tim. 4:16; Heb. 9:28).
    What do we conclude from this? That salvation is a process which takes time rather than an instant happening. The gospel is about ‘the Way’ of salvation, along which we need to travel to reach our destination.
    In other words, salvation is not yet complete in any of us. The most appropriate description of our present state is that we are ‘being saved’. Pawson P29 Hmmmmmm His statement on the cd I listened to…he states unequivocally… NO one should ever claim salvation until death and until one awakes safely in heaven! Only then may one say I am saved! Which is basely your position Mike..if you believe salvation can be forfeited by sin (of course the mention of sin your mind goes to the sins you have deemed big…murder, adultery, homosexuality, stealing…..and over looks the “little ones”….laying up treasures on earth , disunity with fellow believers in ones local, pride, loving the titles of men, daily sins of omission and commission, not to even mention the thoughts of the heart and eyes…causing even Paul to lament that “in my flesh dwelleth NO GOOD THING ….we all fail so miserly….hence “by the keeping of the law …no flesh shall be saved! I can only imagine on Christmas morning I play the role of the grinch and tell your kids there “gifts” are all conditional on there behavior, as is daddies love and acceptance! ouch The linking of justification with sanctification is one of the problems!
    The difference between Law and Grace The great Scottish preacher, John Colquhoun, said of this distinction:
    To know the difference so as to be able to distinguish aright between the law and the gospel is of the utmost importance to the faith, holiness, and comfort of every true Christian. It will be impossible otherwise for a man so to believe as to ‘be filled with joy and peace in believing.’ If he does not know the difference between the law and the gospel…. he will be apt, especially in the affair of justification, to confound the one with the other. The consequence will be that in his painful experience, bondage will be mixed with liberty of spirit, fear with hope, sorrow with joy, and death with life. If he cannot so distinguish the gospel from the law as to expect all his salvation from the grace of the gospel, and nothing of it from the works of the law; he will easily be induced to connect his own works with the righteousness of Jesus Christ in the affair of his justification. This was the great error of the Judaizing teachers in the churches of Galatia. They mingled the law with the gospel in the business of justification, and thereby they so corrupted the gospel as to alter the very nature of it and make it another gospel.

  4. Here you go guys…you that preach saved once, twice, three times…add infum…Preach lose you salvation and so thy will! Here is your hero of the Arminians Charles Finney: This teaching from this books (I have the whole set 16 I Believe…will sell cheap”

    Here you will like this by Charles Finney; /…..ORIGINAL SIN — We deny that the human constitution is morally depraved, because it is impossible that sin should be a quality of the substance of the soul or body. It is, and must be, a quality of choice or intention, and not of substance. To represent the constitution as sinful, is to represent God, who is the author of the constitution, as the author of sin. What ground is there for the assertion that Adam’s nature became in itself sinful by the fall? This is a groundless, not to say ridiculous, assumption, and an absurdity (Finney’s Systematic Theology, pp. 249,250).
    17 minutes ago · Like

    William Lowery JUSTIFICATION BASED UPON SANCTIFICATION — We see that, if a righteous man forsake his righteousness, and die in his sin, he must sink to hell. Whenever a Christian sins he becomes under condemnation, and must repent and do his first works, or be lost (Ibid., p. 124).Finney
    17 minutes ago · Like

    William Lowery OBEDIENCE — That which the precept demands must be possible to the subject. That which demands a natural impossibility cannot be moral law. To talk of inability to obey moral law is to talk nonsense (Ibid., p. 2).C Finney
    15 minutes ago · Like

    William Lowery ENTIRE SANCTIFICATION — It is self-evident, that entire obedience to God’s law is possible on the ground of natural ability. To deny this, is to deny that a man is able to do as well as he can. The very language of the law is such as to level its claims to the capacity of the subject, however great or small that capacity may be.

    “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength.” Here then it is plain, that all the law demands, is the exercise of whatever strength we have, in the service of God. Now, as entire sanctification consists in perfect obedience to the law of God, and as the law requires nothing more than the right use of whatever strength we have, it is, of course, forever settled, that a state of entire sanctification is attainable in this life, on the ground of natural ability (Ibid., p. 407). CF
    14 minutes ago · Like

    William Lowery THE SECURITY OF THE BELIEVER — It is not intended that saints, or the truly regenerated, cannot fall from grace, and be finally lost, by natural possibility. It must be naturally possible for all moral agents to sin at any time. Saints on earth and in heaven can by natural possibility apostatize and fall, and be lost. Were not this naturally possible, there would be no virtue in perseverance (Ibid., p. 550). Charles Finney champion of MOST evangelicals in the US today!
    11 minutes ago · Like

    William Lowery We could argue that his view of our obedience is an implicit rejection of Christ’s, but he spares us that task when he did it for us by explicitly denying that justification rests on the obedience of Christ. In his closing argument of this his only lecture dedicated to justification Finney tells us:

    They (the reformers) must have a justification while yet at least in some degree of sin. This must be brought about by imputed righteousness. The intellect revolts at a justification in sin. So a scheme is devised to divert the eye of the law and the lawgiver from the sinner to his substitute, who has perfectly obeyed the law. But in order to make out the possibility of his (Jesus’) obedience being imputed to them, it must be assumed that He (JESUS) owed no obedience for Himself; which a greater absurdity cannot be conceived.[25] Finney

  5. William Lowery,
    The contortion of the Word “Law” by SO MANY is ridiculous – there is the Law of Moses of works righteousness, but there is ALSO a Law of Faith under the Gospel! This “Law” is such that if it is transgressed, it can render someone “DISQUALIFIED”…

    2 TI 2:5
    An athlete is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules.

    1 COR 9:24-27
    But I discipline my body and keep it under control, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified.

    Hmm… I guess Paul was preaching a heretical Gospel, since he was talking about rules, and being disqualified if you don’t adhere to them, right William? Surely! (sarcasm)

  6. William Lowery,
    As far as being justified by faith – Paul says “if we LIVE in the spirit, let us also WALK in the Spirit”: those who are merely ALIVE in the Spirit, but don’t WALK in the Spirit will not inherit the Kingdom of God; that portion of the Spirit of Grace which they have will be STRIPPED AWAY FROM THEM AT THE RETURN OF CHRIST [Matthew 25:26]!

    You’re saying EXACTLY what that wicked lazy servant would say – you’re giving back to Christ nothing more than what He gave; but He wants to receive a HARVEST, not just a mouth saying, “I believe in Jesus”.

    Living in the Spirit (through faith) isn’t enough; WALKING in the Spirit was the REASON God made us born again.

  7. Bill, feel free to send me an electronic copy of Pawson’s book. So, on your end, do you tell someone if they prayed with you or did something in response to your message, “Hey, you’re saved, and you can never lose your salvation?” Or do you preach what Paul preached? “First to those in Damascus, then to those in Jerusalem and in all Judea, and to the Gentiles also, I preached that they should repent and turn to God and prove their repentance by their deeds.” (Acts 26:20) To bad you weren’t around in Paul’s day to set him straight too!

  8. Mike, I have never told anyone in my life they are saved, have emphasized always even after prayer….prayer doesn’t save, walking the aisle doesn’t save…ONLY Jesus saves and He alone can give you the assurance of the new birth Rom 8:15-16 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
    Rom 8:16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are (not we are on the way to being) the children of God:!
    I have told a lot of people they weren’t saved….for IF they were they won’t be asking me! Mike you just love all those scriptures on “works”. and planting seeds of doubt (as Pawson) in people casting aspersion on Gods faithfulness or His power to lead, guide, protect, keep, make a way of escape, give the believer power over all the power of the enemy (so negative).make us MORE that conquers…..is that the way you raise your children ( you had better be careful…or you will end up losers)….counsel your wife.(if you don’t please me I’ll divorce you….! Check this out! http://www.jesussaidfollowme.org/CalvinismArminianism.htm

  9. Michael and all on here,let me set the record a bit straighter on David Pawson’s soteriology (salvation-ology).

    If you said to David ‘ Are you saved’ he would reply ‘No’ ; if you asked him ‘Are you born again’ he would say ‘Yes’.

    Reason being,when David says he is not saved,he is refering to the present tense aspect of salvation ; he is saying he is not yet perfect,not yet completely saved from every single sin.

    (Please get David on your radio show soon Michael,he is now 82. Different men bring different expertise to the table : Michael,you bring a rich knowledge of Israel,perhaps the Body’s best denounciation of Replacement Theology,together with the biblical declaration that Israel’s salvation paves the way for Messiah’s return ; Frank Viola is well aware of the counterproductive nature of clerical pastorhood,and also calls for authentic one-anotherness (familyhood) between brothers and sisters in Messiah ; and David calls the Western contingent of the Body back to truly trinitarian evangelism (plus the need for weighty yet digestible Bible teaching).Please get David on the show to hammer out truly trinitarian,three-tense slvation-ology. (I think the edification would not be a one-way street if you got to know him – I think your view on the Second Covenant is slightly more accurate than David’s at points.)

    It is really good to see this thread building,and yes,becoming a profitable resource in itself for this matter – one and all,do consider putting this thread in your favorites ; do also see and hear the free resouces I put in the first post.

    David did a six-part video presentation of his book THE NORMAL CHRISTIAN BIRTH,which is free to watch. The sixth part is a lovely summary of his three-tense,trinitarian view on salvation (a view that is the most God-honoring I have yet to hear).

    Do watch all six parts ; but at least part six.

    http://davidpawson.org/resources/series/the-normal-christian-birth

  10. William, if your quotes about Finney are correct, then it would appear that I am not in agreement with everything that he believed.

    But what you are attempting to do is know in debate as an ad hominem fallacy. You are attempting to say that simply because this or that person held to Belief A that is proven to be wrong that since they also held to Belief B, that Belief B is automatically wrong. You are also seem to be saying that in order for someone to hold to Belief B, that we must also hold to Belief A, simply because another person that held to Belief B also held to Belief A.

    None of that is automatically true and does not prove your point.

    There was discussion earlier in the discussion thread about Calvin and whether or not he did certain negative things. But whether he did or not did not have any bearing on whether other things he believed were true.

    The focus to determine whether or not a doctrine is correct has to be on what the Scripture actually says. So please stop focusing on this or that person and refer directly to Scripture texts (preferably quoted directly) to make your point.

  11. .SALVATION IS OF THE LORD…Jonah 2:9
    The sovereignty of God is not a secondary doctrine that is relegated to an obscure corner in the Bible. Rather, this truth is the very bedrock doctrine of all Scripture. This is the Mount Everest of biblical teaching, the towering truth that transcends all theology. From its opening verse, the Bible asserts in no uncertain terms that God is and that God reigns. In other words, He is God—not merely in name, but in full reality. God does as He pleases, when He pleases, where He pleases, how He pleases, and with whom He pleases in saving undeserving sinners. All other doctrines of the Christian faith must be brought into alignment with this keystone truth.

    The sovereignty of God is the free exercise of His supreme authority in executing and administrating His eternal purposes. God must be sovereign if He is to be truly God. A god who is not sovereign is not God at all. Such is an imposter, an idol, a mere caricature formed in man’s fallen imagination. A god who is less than fully sovereign is not worthy of our worship, much less our witness. But the Bible proclaims for all to hear that “the Lord reigns” (Ps. 93:1). God is exactly who Scripture declares He is. He is the sovereign Lord of heaven and earth, whose supreme authority is over all. This is the main premise of Scripture.

    Nowhere is God’s sovereignty more clearly demonstrated than in His salvation of the lost. God is free to bestow His saving mercy on whom He pleases. God says, “I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy” (Ex. 33:19b; Rom. 9:15). He is not obligated to extend His grace to any undeserving sinner. If He were to choose to save none, He would remain perfectly just. He might determine to save a few and still be absolutely holy. Or He could choose to save all. But God is sovereign, and that means He is entirely free to bestow His grace however He will—whether on none, few, or all.

    From beginning to end, salvation is of God and, ultimately, for God. The apostle Paul writes, “From him and through him and to him are all things” (Rom. 11:36). In this comprehensive verse, God is declared to be the divine source, the determinative means, and the designated end of all things. This is most true in salvation. According to this text, every aspect of the operation of saving grace is God-initiated, God-directed, and God-glorifying. Every dimension of salvation is from Him, through Him, and to Him. This is to say, salvation originates from His sovereign will, proceeds through His sovereign activity, and leads to His sovereign glory.

    From beginning to end, salvation is of God and, ultimately, for God…; yes, Salvation is of the Lord…! by Steven Lawson This is REALLY what you all are resisting!

  12. William, in post #108 you said, “Mike you just love all those scriptures on “works”. and planting seeds of doubt (as Pawson) in people casting aspersion on Gods faithfulness or His power to lead, guide, protect, keep, make a way of escape, give the believer power over all the power of the enemy (so negative).”

    Could you explain what you meant by that? Are there certain Scriptures we should NOT love or not want to use? 2 Tim 3:16 says, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness”.

    So we can’t just wish away Scriptures we don’t like and pretend they are not there. You could say the interpretation of a certain Scripture that Dr. Brown or others are using is incorrect, but then you would have to show (from the text of the verse) why that interpretation is wrong and what the correct interpretation would be.

    Every time you have listed a verse that I believe you have interpreted improperly, I have tried to tackle the verse head-on. Yet myself and others have listed quite a few verses that we believe speak directly against the thoughts you are conveying. There has been very few of these verses that you have dealt with in a head-on manner, showing from the text of the Scripture what you believe the proper interpretation to be.

    Here are some Scriptures that seem go against once saved always saved: Matt 5:13 (salt losing it’s savor), Matt 24:12 (the love of many will wax cold), Luke 9:62 (putting your hand to the plow and then looking back), Gal 1:6 (they were so soon removed from Him that called them), 1 Cor 15:2 (unless you have believed in vain), 1 Tim 4:1 (some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits), 1 Tim 6:20-21 (some have strayed concerning the faith), 2 Tim 2:18 (they overthrow the faith of some), Heb 3:12 (lest there be an evil heart of unbelief in departing from God), Heb 12:15 (lest any man fail of the grace of God), Rev 3:1-6 (were once alive but now dead), Rev 3:14-22 (the lukewarm church that God will spit out).

    If they do not contradict once saved always saved, what exactly do they mean?

  13. William, no one in this discussion is claiming that God is not sovereign or that salvation is not from God. We believe fully that the Lord reigns and that He will be gracious and show mercy to whom He wills.

    But the manner that He has sovereignly chosen to use to show mercy is prescribed in Scripture.

    And again, here is what the Scripture says on the subject. Acts 16: 30-31, “And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.” Acts 2:37-38, “Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” Joshua 24:15 ” And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.”

  14. 1 Cor. 1:17-31, “For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect. For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.” Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness, but to those who are CALLED, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men. For you see your CALLING, brethren, that not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are CALLED. But God has CHOSEN the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty; and the base things of the world and the things which are despised God has chosen, and the things which are not, to bring to nothing the things that are, that no flesh should glory in His presence. But of Him you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God– and righteousness and sanctification and redemption– that, as it is written, “He who glories, let him glory in the Lord.” ……… Paul states in Rom. 6:14…” for you are not under law but under grace.” He also makes it clear in Gal. 5:18 “if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.” The previous verses state “so that you do not do the things that you wish.” The Law is not given to the Christian as the standard to live by, but to show the unbeliever how below the standard we do live, as Paul states in 1 Tim.1:9 The Law is for the unrighteous.

    Paul states the LAW is Not of Faith. The ministry of the law working in a Christian cannot please God, for it is not of faith yet , “The man who does them shall live by them.” Gal. 3:12

    In the dispensation of grace, “the law is not of faith.” Today faith and law are mutually exclusive. In Israel’s dispensation of law,… faith and law were equally beneficial, one needed both (Rom. 10:5-6, 10).without faith the requirements of the law would not be acceptable. This is why The Lord said that he rejected their sacrifices because it was not mixed with faith. Under law, faith is necessary. Under grace, the OT law is prohibited. So today, “the law is not of faith.” And Paul states without faith, it is impossible to please God (Heb. 11:6). So if the Law is not of faith what do we live by? For a member of the Body ….sins by putting himself under the requirements of the law. Remember Paul said in Rom. 14:23 “whatever is not of faith is sin.” ( he used the example of food to represent this concept). Why is it in every religion of the world man has a deep longing to know his maker but he attempts to go to God his own way and not come the way God has ordained and declared to the whole world. Why do people look to their own works instead of accepting Gods grace? Its easier to look at ones self obedience to gauge how they are doing spiritually than to REST in Christ’s work for them. If we stop trying to live it in our own strength and let Christ live it through us by the power of the Holy Spirit, we can see the results of the new life. We will understand it is all by grace. Which is found by Jesus suffering and death on the cross. The cross is HIDDEN to those who think they are wise. It is foolishness to those who are perishing but to us who are saved by faith we know it is the power of God. The cross became Gods highway to himself. As Jesus said I am the way the truth and the life no one comes to father except by me. But it was a certain way. It is not just following him as a good example. Someone who has a greater set of ethics and morals. Nor is following him as a wonderful teacher or the greatest prophet, or a miracle maker.
    It is going through the cross (and the one who died on it) for ones relationship to be restored to God. Exactly where Jesus pointed to and where all the apostles pointed too as well. BUT [Israel] being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted to the righteousness of God. For ‘ Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. Rom. 10:3-4 For Moses writes about the righteousness which is. of the law… but the righteousness of faith speaks in this way… with the heart one believes to righteousness. Rom. 10:5-6,

    Charles Spurgeon “There is no point upon which men make greater mistakes than upon the relation which exists between the law and the gospel. Some men put the law instead of the gospel: others put the gospel instead of the law; some modify the law and the gospel, and preach neither law nor gospel (MIX): and others entirely abrogate the law, by bringing in the gospel. Many there are who think that the law is the gospel, and who teach that men by good works of benevolence, honesty, righteousness, and sobriety, may be saved. Such men do err. On the other hand, many teach that the gospel is a law; that it has certain commands in it, by obedience to which, men are meritoriously saved, such men err from the truth, and understand it not. A certain class maintain that the law and the gospel are MIXED, and that partly by observance of the law, and partly by God’s grace, men are saved. These men understand not the truth, and are false teachers. … The coming of the law is explained in regard to its objects: “Moreover the law entered that the offense might abound.” Then comes the mission of the gospel: “But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.” The law came through Moses grace came by Jesus Christ. The law is synonymous of Moses……. Grace is synonymous to Christ…. Our relation to Christ is by his death and resurrection in the new covenant. The law is of the old creation from another dispensation. We are made into a new creature prepared for a new heavens and earth. No law or act of obedience can help us to prepare, it has to be grace. We obey him because we love him and He FIRST loved us….we don’t like to hurt the ones we love. The times that we are disobedient are summed up by loving something else instead of him. He accepts us not based on our performance, but based on His call and His performance in our stead!

    God let Moses see the promise land from the Mt. top, we can see the promises by faith in his word. The law killed Moses because of his disobedience, only once did Moses misrepresent God to the people… by striking the rock twice in anger. (Num.20:7-12). All of that generation of Israel that came out of Egypt except 2 failed to entered the promised land. Only 2 who had a different spirit (had faith) entered. The old creation could not enter the promised land, only the new. They could nor enter the land under the law (being disobedient) so everyone had to die. But Cable and Joshua ..they entered it under faith.
    If one continues to look to the law for their guidance, then true successful Christian living cannot really occur. Practicing law keeping …. runs the risk of consciously or unconsciously thinking one has obtained or is keeping salvation by the works of the law. But it actually is that… which separates one from Christ, as Paul said falling from of the grace of God (Galatians 5:4). Pulling verses out of context and then trying to us them to disprove the “whole plan of God” for our times (time of the Gentiles) is more that foolish! Ask your self……is it (salvations plan)……by works ….OR… FAITH? Is it of GOD…OR…is it of MAN? THAT IS THE QUESTION FOR ALL TIMES…..FAITH OR…UNBELIEF!

  15. “Today faith and law are mutually exclusive.”
    Total replacement theology: the Son CANNOT replace the Father, and the Spirit CANNOT replace the Son. Beyond dangerous: heresy.
    You’re not the first to take Galatians and erase the rest of the Bible; so declare Paul as your savior and see if GOD agrees.
    In Him, Ron M.

  16. William, you seem to have misunderstood what I said in my comment.

    I asked for a head-on treatment of the Scriptures I listed where you did not only disagree with the way I was interpreting them but to show what you believed the proper interpretation to be.

    You have not clarified if there were Scriptures we should not love and should not use.

    You also have not explained what the proper interpretation of the following verses are. We must keep in mind that the Bible does not contradict itself. So there is a proper interpretation of these verses that is in perfect harmony with the rest of Scripture. You say I am taking them out of context but have not said what the proper context is.

    I am still giving you the opportunity.

    Here are the verses again: Matt 5:13 (salt losing it’s savor), Matt 24:12 (the love of many will wax cold), Luke 9:62 (putting your hand to the plow and then looking back), Gal 1:6 (they were so soon removed from Him that called them), 1 Cor 15:2 (unless you have believed in vain), 1 Tim 4:1 (some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits), 1 Tim 6:20-21 (some have strayed concerning the faith), 2 Tim 2:18 (they overthrow the faith of some), Heb 3:12 (lest there be an evil heart of unbelief in departing from God), Heb 12:15 (lest any man fail of the grace of God), Rev 3:1-6 (were once alive but now dead), Rev 3:14-22 (the lukewarm church that God will spit out).

    If they do not contradict once saved always saved, what exactly do they mean?

  17. A little over a decade ago, I couldn’t post on the internet as a Messianic Christian (Law still valid) without being attacked; so the ‘harmony’ of Scripture are for those willing to try and look at the Bible as a whole. Keep in mind that there is @ an 1800 year history of the Jews having been replaced permanently as the ‘gospel’; and this was the predominant doctrine in most denominations until very recently.
    In Him, Ron M.

  18. Jonathan I WILL give you an answer to your verses….why do you continue to ignore the questions I raise! Check this out from a friend; And we also know that salvation is not a contract……….”For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.”
    [Hebrews 9:16]…..Salvation is of the Lord.”—Jonah 2:9……..From C.H. Spurgeon’s
    Salvation is the work of God. It is He alone who quickens the soul “dead in trespasses and sins,” and it is He also who maintains the soul in its spiritual life. He is both “Alpha and Omega.” “Salvation is of the Lord.” If I am prayerful, God makes me prayerful; if I have graces, they are God’s gifts to me; if I hold on in a consistent life, it is because He upholds me with His hand. I do nothing whatever towards my own preservation, except what God Himself first does in me. Whatever I have, all my goodness is of the Lord alone. Wherein I sin, that is my own; but wherein I act rightly, that is of God, wholly and completely. If I have repulsed a spiritual enemy, the Lord’s strength nerved my arm. Do I live before men a consecrated life? It is not I, but Christ who liveth in me. Am I sanctified? I did not cleanse myself: God’s Holy Spirit sanctifies me. Am I weaned from the world? I am weaned by God’s chastisements sanctified to my good. Do I grow in knowledge? The great Instructor teaches me. All my jewels were fashioned by heavenly art. I find in God all that I want; but I find in myself nothing but sin and misery. “He only is my rock and my salvation.” Do I feed on the Word? That Word would be no food for me unless the Lord made it food for my soul, and helped me to feed upon it. Do I live on the manna which comes down from heaven? What is that manna but Jesus Christ himself incarnate, whose body and whose blood I eat and drink? Am I continually receiving fresh increase of strength? Where do I gather my might? My help cometh from heaven’s hills: without Jesus I can do nothing. As a branch cannot bring forth fruit except it abide in the vine, no more can I, except I abide in Him. What Jonah learned in the great deep, let me learn this morning in my closet: “Salvation is of the Lord.”

  19. Matt5:13 But if the salt have lost its savour, wherewith shall it be salted?
    The “savour” here supposed that it may be lost, cannot mean the savour of grace, or true grace itself, which cannot be lost, being an incorruptible seed; Look at the context of the whole chapter..He is warning the disciples to be diligent to press on and eventually receive a full reward. While we are saved sovereignly be the Lord’s grace…he sets a race before us to be ran (if we are wise allowing Him to lead and empower us) He leaves us here upon the earth that we may be partakers in the building of Hie Body (Church) that we might lay up treasures in heaven….and because He loves us to experience a life and that more abundant….thou some are allowed the glory of suffering for His sake! Some will squander there God given opportunities and be saved but as by fire!
    Matt 24:12 This might be true of such, who were real believers in Christ; who might fall under great temptations, through the prevalence of iniquity; But it does not say their love shall be lost, but wax cold. I wonder if the works/righteousness doctrine which has gained the dominance in the last175 years, could have contributed to the sad results we are witnessing today!
    Luke 9:62 is not fit for the kingdom of God:
    that is, to preach the kingdom of God, as in (Luke 9:60) . He cannot serve God and mammon, his own interest, and the interest of Christ; he cannot rightly perform the work of the ministry, whilst his thoughts and time are taken up in the affairs of the world. This not a salvation scripture, rather a disciple verse!
    Gal1:6 The apostle now enters on the subject matter of this epistle, and immediately tells the reason for it, which is to reprove the Galatians for their instability in the Gospel; and, if possible, to reclaim them, who were removing from the simplicity of it; and which was very surprising to the apostle, who had entertained a good opinion of them, looked upon them as persons called by the grace of God, well established in the doctrines of the Gospel, and in no danger of being carried away with the error of the false teachers whom he says had come in to spy out their liberty and try to bring them back into the bondage of law keeping (using his meeting in Jerusalem with the elders as an object lesson) Chap5:1-10 Stand fast in the liberty…v13 only use not your liberty of the flesh……the writer vehemently defends the doctrine of free grace and grace alone…the very issue we are debating here! He has confidence (v10)they will be none otherwise minded!
    1 Corinthians 15:2 By which also ye are saved…. It (the Gospel) was the means of their salvation, and had been made the power of God unto salvation to them. Salvation is inseparably connected with true faith in Christ as a Saviour, and with a hearty belief of his resurrection from the dead, which is the earnest and pledge of the resurrection of the saints; and because of the certainty of it in the promise of God, through the obedience and death of Christ, and in the faith and hope of believers, which are sure and certain things, they are said to be saved ALREADY. To which the apostle puts in the following provisos and exceptions; the one is,….if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you;
    or rather, “if ye hold fast, or retain”; that is, by faith, the doctrine preached to you, and received by you, particularly the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead; for the salvation that is connected with it does NOT depend upon the strength of the memory, but upon the truth and steadfastness of faith: it is the man that perseveres in the faith and doctrine (SAVED BY GRACE) of Christ that shall be saved; and everyone that has truly believed in Christ, and cordially embraced his Gospel, shall hold on, and out to the end; though the faith of nominal (FAKE) believers may be overthrown by such men, as Hymenaeus and Philetus, who asserted, that the resurrection was past already; but not the faith of real believers, because the foundation on which they are built stands sure, and the Lord has perfect knowledge of them, and will keep and save them. (2) The other exception is,unless ye have believed in vain:
    True faith can not be in vain; for that is the faith of God’s elect, the gift of his grace, the operation of his Spirit; Christ is the author and finisher of it, and will never suffer it to fail; it will certainly issue in everlasting salvation:…… but as the word may be heard in vain, so it is with those who are compared to the wayside, and to the thorny and rocky ground; and as the Gospel of the grace of God ..may be received in vain; so a mere historical faith may be in vain; this a man MAY have,…. and not HAVE the grace of God, and so be nothing; with this he may believe for a while, and then drop it: and since each of these two exceptions might possibly be the case of some in this church, the apostle puts in these exceptions, in order to awaken the attention of them ALL to this important doctrine he was reminding them of unless “ye have believed in vain” You have to believe in the right thing, ie. doctrine, the Doctrine of Christ…salvation thru His shed Blood and unmerited favor by faith He gives as a gift! NOT THRU ANY PAST, PRESENT, OR FUTURE…. MERIT OF MAN: Gill
    1Tim4:1 that in the latter times some should depart from the faith;
    that is, from the doctrine of faith, notwithstanding it is indisputably the great mystery of godliness, as it is called in the latter part of the preceding chapter; for from the true grace of faith there can be no final and total apostasy, such as is here designed; for that can never be lost. It is of an incorruptible nature, and therefore more precious than gold that perishes; Christ is the author and finisher of it; his prevalent mediation is concerned for it; it is a gift of special grace, and is without repentance; it springs from electing grace, and is secured by it; and between that and salvation there is an inseparable connection; it may indeed decline, be very low, and lie dormant, as to its acts and exercise, but not be lost: there is a temporary faith, and a persuasion of truth, or a mere assent to it, which may be departed from, but not that faith which works by love: here it intends a profession of faith, which being made, should be dropped by some; or rather the doctrine of faith, which some would embrace, and then err concerning, or entirely quit, and wholly apostatize from. And they are said to be some, and these many, as they are elsewhere represented, though not all; for the elect cannot be finally and totally deceived; the foundation of election stands sure amidst the greatest apostasy; and there are always a few names that are not defiled with corrupt principles and practices; Christ always had some witnesses for the truth in the darkest times: and now this defection was to be “in the latter times”; either of the apostolic age, which John, the last of the apostles, lived to see; and therefore he calls it the last time, or hour, in which were many antichrists, (1 John 2:18) . And indeed in the Apostle Paul’s time the mystery of iniquity began to work, which brought on this general defection; though here it has regard to some later times under the Gospel dispensation; to the time when the man of sin, and the son of perdition, was revealed, and when all the world wondered after the beast: and indeed, such will be the degeneracy in the last days of all, that when the son of man comes, as the grace, so the doctrine of faith will be scarcely to be found in the world: the means by which this apostasy will obtain and prevail will be through men’s Gill It is getting late , will answer the others later….!

  20. YESHUA MESSIAH IS BOTH LAW AND SPIRIT! Why has this been so greatly opposed?
    Paul of Tarsus kept Christianity from becoming a lowly subset of Orthodox Judaism and the Traditions of Men (“synagogue of Satan”); BUT there quickly sprung up a Gentile Roman hierarchy (‘deeds and doctrine of the Nicolaitans”) that hated the Law; for what? For their own law and authority. So my Salvation is not preconditioned on following Jewish dietary law or bowing to the current Pope; I think we agree on this.
    Where we disagree is Paul’s contention that the Law has been REPLACED by the Spirit; and if you look closely, you will see that James, John, and Peter also opposed this doctrine. I say that Paul eventually backed off from his ‘separation’ dogma found in Galatians, and returned to a ‘inclusion’ doctrine (eg Romans, Ephesians, Timothy); while still opposing the ‘Judaisers’ after the Jerusalem Council agreement, especially in his Gentile missionary realm.
    Spirit without Law has no foundation; because the Word is Found in the Father (I’m not talking about statutes and ordinances). So for you to say that anyone who ‘obeys the Law’ (that came from the Father the same as the Spirit came from the Father) is the whore of Babylon, I contend is ridiculous; and that you are greatly deceived. I think you have made Paul your god, and that is heresy.
    In Jesus’ love and name, Ron David Metcalf

  21. The triumph of Christ is complete, irreversible, immutable. This is where Paul rests his case in his triumphant Romans 8 passage. He entertains no fears for “things present, nor things to come” (verse 38), because he remembers what has happened in the past (verse 34). And when he had occasion to exhort the immature Christian communities whom he found lapsing into such “fleshly” things as quarreling, lying, or sloth, he saluted them as saints (1 Corinthians 1:2). With words fresh from glory, he took them by the ears and reminded them what had happened in the Gospel and that by faith they were sharers in all that Christ had done and suffered. Yes, he told these faulty, fumbling, stumbling believers that they were dead (Colossians 3:3; Romans 6:6), risen (Ephesians 2:1-6) and free (Romans 7:4). Having shown them what they were, he showed how their un-Christlike behavior was inconsistent with their privileged position. The factious Corinthians had to be reminded of the Gospel. The apostle wrote to them: “Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the Gospel which I preached unto you, which also you have received, and wherein you stand; by which also you are saved, if you keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless you have believed in vain” (1 Corinthians 15:1, 2).

    The epistles of Paul were written to encourage spiritual growth (sanctification) in people who were already believers. This point is very significant. Yet how did the apostle go about to promote such growth in grace? Every epistle was a mighty call to remember the Gospel and how believers are justified through faith alone in God’s redemptive action in Jesus Christ. Every Pauline epistle, therefore, is an immutable testimony that the church can make progress in sanctification only in proportion to its grasp of justification. Each epistle is a call to remember. The church, even in Heaven, where the worship of the Lamb is central, is never led away from the first blessing to look for a “second blessing.” Christ earned all the benefits of salvation for his people, and the first and greatest of these is justification.
    Trinity Foundation

  22. William Lowery,
    Are you kidding? It is Romans 8 that can disproves OSAS almost more than any other chapter – Paul, speaking to saved believers, says IF they live for the flesh, they will die; but IF for the Spirit, they will live [Ro 8:13].

    This is the same concept of eternal life as being a “harvest” of sowing to the Spirit, [Galatians 6:7].

  23. William, you wrote in post # 120, “Jonathan I WILL give you an answer to your verses….why do you continue to ignore the questions I raise!” Exactly which specific questions did you raise?

    You also bring up Hebrews 9:16 but I’m not exactly sure what point you are trying to raise with this particular Scripture. Please explain.

    I have already spoken about Jonah 2:9 “But I will sacrifice to you with the voice of thanksgiving; I will pay that that I have vowed. Salvation is of the LORD.” in post # 115.

    I am not interested in getting into the words of Spurgeon or Finney or Pawson or any other man. You will notice that I have not included a single quote except for Scripture. There are men who have studied the Bible and have knowledge of what it says. But in the end they are fallible men. So I am most concerned about the words of Scripture and that is all I have quoted. I would ask that you do the same when conversing with me.

  24. In response to Matt 5:13 you say, “The “savour” here supposed that it may be lost, cannot mean the savour of grace, or true grace itself, which cannot be lost, being an incorruptible seed;” Yet we see in the parable of the sower that the seed (while it is quite true that it is incorruptible) can be trampled and eaten by birds, can be killed by lack of a root in the ground, or can be choked out even after taking root and starting to produce fruit. So while the seed itself is incorruptible, the fields which represent the hearts of men are not incorruptible. So your premise here is incorrect.

    You say, “ Look at the context of the whole chapter..He is warning the disciples to be diligent to press on and eventually receive a full reward.” And I do look at the context of the whole chapter. After He warns about the salt losing its savour and exorts to shine our light before men, he starts teaching about righteousness and warning that “except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.” (Matt 5:20).

    You say, “While we are saved sovereignly be the Lord’s grace…he sets a race before us to be ran”. And 1 Corinthians 9:24-27 says, “Know ye not that they which run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize? So run, that ye may obtain. And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible. I therefore so run, not as uncertainly; so fight I, not as one that beateth the air: I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.” So Paul speaks of the urgency of running in a way as to obtain the prize while the last verse speaks of the possibility of coming up short. Yes, it is true as you say “(if we are wise allowing Him to lead and empower us)” but there are also the foolish, such as the foolish virgins who once had their lamps lit but let them go out and missed the wedding feast.

    You say about Matt 24:12 “This might be true of such, who were real believers in Christ; who might fall under great temptations, through the prevalence of iniquity; But it does not say their love shall be lost, but wax cold. I wonder if the works/righteousness doctrine which has gained the dominance in the last175 years, could have contributed to the sad results we are witnessing today!” Yet you have apparently missed the context of the verse. Why will love grow cold? The verse specifically says that it is because of lawlessness that the love of many will grow cold in the first place. So it would seem that it is a lack of people taking to heart a message of repentance and holy living that led to their love growing cold in the first place; quite the opposite of what you are trying to say. And look at the next verse, “But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.” If it was impossible for someone not to endure to the end, why would Jesus have said that?

    As for Luke 9:62, I disagree with you that it is only talking about preaching the kingdom, but given the context, I will concede that it is a possible valid interpretation.

    You say “Gal1:6 The apostle now enters on the subject matter of this epistle, and immediately tells the reason for it, which is to reprove the Galatians for their instability in the Gospel; and, if possible, to reclaim them, who were removing from the simplicity of it”. I would agree, so how could they have been removed from the Gospel? In John 15, Jesus speaks about what will happen when a person is removed from the vine. Paul does not want that to happen to the Galatians. But this only proves that someone can be removed, does it not?

    And it bears pointing out that Galatians 5 is not put into context without a proper understanding of the whole chapter. The end of the chapter cannot be divorced from the rest of it.

    In response to 1 Corinthians 15 you say “It (the Gospel) was the means of their salvation, and had been made the power of God unto salvation to them. “ And I don’t disagree with that, but the issue is that Paul implies that there is the possibility that they can believe in the Gospel in vain. He indicates in verse 1 that they received the Gospel that he preached and were currently standing in it. So we are not talking about false or fake converts here or else Paul was wrong. (I do not deny that there are false or fake converts. But Paul indicates that is not the case here.) Yet Paul indicated that was not enough. They must hold onto the message. They must keep it in memory or their belief would be in vain. You bring up the parable of the sower. But keep in mind that the thorny soil had seed that started producing fruit. So if the seed was producing fruit in the soil, it was not a false belief but rather a belief that had been lost and choked out.

    Your response to 1 Timothy 4:1 is basically a long and rambling response where you qualify the verse in a manner that the text itself does not qualify and explain why the Scripture itself cannot mean what it says. The Scripture does not say that these people would depart from the church or depart from the sheepfold. We know that there are fake converts who will depart from among us who were not really a part of us in the first place. But this Scripture is not referring to them. It says these particular people would depart from the faith. You can’t depart from the faith if you didn’t have it in the first place. These are the believers who were connected to the vine and then cut off (John 15) and were producing fruit in the thorny soil but then “becometh unfruitful” (Mark 4:19).

    So I can accept your response on Luke 9:62. But as I have shown, your responses are not adequate to show how the rest of the verses do not contradict once saved, always saved.

  25. Isn’t it amazing to see how every exhortation in Scripture, every call to holiness and obedience, is basically written off by our friend Bill as irrelevant — and worse still, mixing law with grace?! I guess Peter didn’t get it either:

    “His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence, by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire. For this very reason, make every effort to supplement your faith with virtue, and virtue with knowledge, and knowledge with self-control, and self-control with steadfastness, and steadfastness with godliness, and godliness with brotherly affection, and brotherly affection with love. For if these qualities are yours and are increasing, they keep you from being ineffective or unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. For whoever lacks these qualities is so nearsighted that he is blind, having forgotten that he was cleansed from his former sins. Therefore, brothers, be all the more diligent to make your calling and election sure, for if you practice these qualities you will never fall. For in this way there will be richly provided for you an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Therefore I intend always to remind you of these qualities, though you know them and are established in the truth that you have. (2 Pet 1:3-12 ESV)

  26. Ron, you are treading on dangerous ground! The words of Scripture are inspired by God. And that includes Paul’s writings. Scripture does not contradict Scripture. A proper understanding and interpretation of Scripture will bear out that all of Scripture is in perfect harmony. This includes Galatians.

    I will again repeat the same question to you that I asked of William. Are there certain Scriptures we should NOT love or not want to use? 2 Tim 3:16 says, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness”.
    So we can’t just wish away Scriptures we don’t like and pretend they are not there. You could say the interpretation of a certain Scripture that William or others are using is incorrect, but then you would have to show (from the text of the verse) why that interpretation is wrong and what the correct interpretation would be.

    The moment we start cutting out verses of Scripture we don’t like, that is heresy.

  27. William & Jonathan,
    okay, since you insist…
    Start with Gal.3:10, referring to Deut. 27:26.
    The Covenant of Moab was an addendum to the Sinai Covenant, related to the later blessings and curses of Shechem (‘the shoulder’) between Mt. Ebal (evil) and Mt. Gerizim, which I’ve covered extensively in long studies over many years (far too much for here). But these specific curses by no means imply that every minor statute and ordinance are God-ordained; see Ezek. 20:25,26. In fact, the specific curses of Dt. 27 to which “all” refers is not that hard to follow; so I would say, yes, you can confirm all of this particular set. Let me counter with, ok, if you love GOD and love your neighbor, does that make you a bondslave to ‘all the Law’? Should I hate God and neighbor to not be bound by law?
    Gal. 5:12: is Paul’s crude joke worthy of the apostle? First Paul argues Abraham’s faith, then he contradicts himself by calling circumcision ‘the law’, when it was ‘the sign of the covenant’ between Abraham and GOD!
    How about Paul’s ‘list’ in Gal. 5:19-21? If you do these things, you can’t inherit the kingdom; is this not ‘law’? I’ve given you three examples, without even approaching the ‘Hagar’ argument; so give me your best apologetics of why Paul is inerrant. BTW, Paul rejects the ‘inerrancy doctrine’ himself when he says, “this is me speaking, and not the Spirit…” Bibliolatry is heresy: when Sennacherib speaks, it is not Truth!
    In Him, Ron M.

  28. That you refuse to address the “One sacrifice” whereby believers are “perfected forever….i assume you have no answer because it doesn’t fit in your works/righteousness theory!
    Hebrews 10 that when the Lord Jesus Christ came into the world and offered Himself without spot to God, the effect of His sacrifice was eternal. Verse 14 makes this clear: “For by one offering He hath perfected FOR EVER them that are sanctified.” Perfected for how long? “Oh,” says somebody, “as long as they are faithful.” No, that is not what it says. “He hath perfected for ever.” Why? Because the sacrifice is all-efficacious.

    I am sure you guys that deny the doctrine of the eternal security of the believer do not realize that in so doing you are putting a slight upon the finished work of Christ, you are reducing the sacrifice of Christ practically to the level of the offerings of bulls and goats in the Old Testament dispensation. I am sure you don’t mean to do that, for surly you love the Lord just as truly as I trust and love Him, and surly you do not want to dishonor Him. As Mike has stated several times you are afraid that this doctrine will lead people to be careless about their lives, and therefore the stress on the possibility of a man losing his salvation after he has once been justified by faith. But you do not pursue that to its logical conclusion; Can’t you see that it is a practical denial of the finished work of our Lord Jesus. We are saved eternally because the sacrifice of Christ abides.

    When I came to Jesus in 1966 and put my trust in Him, not only were all my sins up to the day of my conversion forgiven, but all my sins were put away for eternity. When a young Christian, I was taught something like this(A/Gs): I thought when I was converted that all my sins, from the time of my accountability up to that night when I put my trust in the Lord Jesus, those sins were put away, and now God had given me a new start, and if I could only keep the record clean to the end of my life, I would get to heaven; but if I did not keep it clean, I ceased to be a Christian and I had to get converted all over again. Every time this happened the past was under the blood, but I had to keep the record clean for the future. I have come to see what a God-dishonoring view of the atonement of Christ that is! If only those of my sins that were committed up to the moment of my conversion were put away by the atoning blood of Jesus, what possible way would there be by which sins I have confessed after that could be dealt with? The only ground on which God could forgive sin is that Jesus settled all upon the cross, and when I trust Him (with the GIFT of faith HE GAVE me), all that He has done goes down to my account. You really are straining at nats and swallowing camels! What about the LAMB? I guess …..as your faith is…. so be it unto you! Trust your self-efforts to keep you holy enough, righteous enough, obedient enough (none of you have defined HOW MUCH IS ENOUGH)…….I’ll seek FIRST HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS…and HE has promised me …to ADD ALL THINGS whatsoever I am in need of!! Matt 6:33

  29. William, thanks for your testimony; now we can begin.
    I don’t disagree with Yeshua Messiah as One Sacrifice, nor does Dr. Brown, nor do most of the people blogging on these threads.
    The Messianic Message, in a nutshell, returns to the beliefs of the First Church, the Jerusalem Church, that Paul endorses in (primarily) Romans and Ephesians; now compare to how Jesus exhorts us to “Return to our First Love” in what the Spirit says to he Church of Ephesus in Revelation 2. I grew up Southern Baptist; meaning 90% Paul preached every Sunday; but was commissioned by GOD by Ezekiel 34 when I rededicated myself to the LORD just prior to 1990. I can’t say 100% that the book of James (Jacob) is the official reply to Galatians; but put them side-by-side, and you see a formal debate.
    Our disagreement is not about Jesus of Nazareth; we agree 100%; it is about the theology of “finished work” v “continuing work”. Can I “enter GOD’s rest” and “prove my faith by my works” at the same time? My answer is yes, this is entirely possible! In a very real way, this is not “working on the Sabbath” to me, for it is my Joy to continually mine the treasures of GOD!
    In Him, Ron M.

  30. Ron, what you are proposing is nothing short of heretical. Please think carefully about what you are saying. I view what William is saying as dangerous. But I believe what you are saying is quite more so!

    I will give you some links to ponder. But I want to say outright that I vehemently reject what you are saying.

    2 Tim 3:16 “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness”.

    2 Pet 1:15-21 “Moreover I will endeavour that ye may be able after my decease to have these things always in remembrance. For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount. We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.”

    And notice that Peter specifically defends the words of Paul:

    2 Peter 3:15-17 “And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.”

    The fact that Paul specifically makes a point to tell you when he is giving advice that he did not specifically hear from God only strengthens the fact that we are to take anything else that is said as being inspired directly from God.

    If we are to say that there are certain writers or books of the Bible that are not inerrant, then how would we know which are and which aren’t? What would be the good of studying the Bible at all? If the words of Scripture are not true then we may as well chuck it and not pay any attention to it whatsoever. But that is not the case. We can trust the words of Scripture, even if there are Scriptures we may not understand, we don’t write it off. We pray that God will give us the wisdom to understand what it means.

    I am very worried about you. I will pray for you.

    http://reknew.org/2010/03/ezekiel-2025-26-and-the-condesending-god/

    http://lavistachurchofchrist.org/LVanswers/2006/03-22.htm

    http://carm.org/paul-inspired-speaking-not-god

    http://bible.org/seriespage/bible-inerrant-word-god

  31. Jonathan,
    it is clearly evident in both Acts and Galatians that Paul had a disagreement with the Jerusalem Church. The traditional position is that Paul unequivocally won, putting the “so-called pillars” in their subordinate place. Is this your “harmony of Scripture”? I can give you at least 20 references that GOD will NEVER forsake Israel (you are fully capable of finding them yourself); but again, the traditional “Gentile” position still in place by majority opinion is that Israel has been replaced!
    So to maintain your “unity”, you must contend that Paul is the Final Word concerning the Bible; which I contend is heresy, because it makes Paul god instead of Jesus of Nazareth (eg Matt. 5:17-20). Peter had been rebuked by Yeshua Messiah; Paul’s rebuke would have meant little to him; he could walk above the debate. Paul’s mission was to the Gentiles, with a few agreed-upon instructions; the Corinthians quickly gave him a lesson in “lawless” freedom. Jesus of Nazareth was Transfigured with Moses and Elijah present; to say that Paul’s theology is better is heresy. I know you aren’t used to this; but I have been debating it for over 20 years. Count how many times Jesus refers to the Father in the Gospels; then explain how you can dismiss this to maintain “harmony”.
    In Him, Ron M.

  32. William, in response to post # 132, just as you have confused the incorruptible seed with the corruptible ground in the parable of the sower, you have confused the state of the “one sacrifice” (of Hebrews 10) which is finished and eternal and the state of the corporate body of believers that are being sanctified with the state of an individual believer.

    As the saying goes: ”A text without a context is a pretext for a prooftext”

    And this instance is no exception. If verse 14 really meant what you are proclaiming it to mean, then it would contradict the last half of the chapter. We know that the Scripture does not contradict itself if taken in proper context.

    So what does verse 14 mean? If we look at the verse, who exactly is the “one offering” perfecting forever? The Scripture say it is “those who are being sanctified.” So if an individual know longer places himself in the group of those who are being sanctified, they will not be perfected forever. It is a group of people who are being perfected forever, it is not an individual who receives the guarantee. And the guarantee made to the group is not invalidated if an individual fails to remain in that group.

    And John 15 as well as Galatians 1:6, Hebrews 3:12 and others clearly show that this is not speaking about an individual unless they remain in the vine.

    This does not mean that Christ’s sacrifice is ineffectual or has failed in any way. It only means that the sacrifice has to be applied in the exact manner that God tells us to. Just as the sacrifice Passover lamb that represented Christ had no effect if it was not a lamb without blemish that had it’s blood applied to the doorpost, we cannot be presumptuous enough to believe that Christ’s sacrifice can be applied in any manner other than the way that His Word has proscribed.

    Verse 22 encourages us not to waver because He is faithful. If we fail to heed that, it is not Christ who is unfaithful; it is us.

    As I have shown in post # 127, your interpretations of the verses I asked about fail to accurately deal with the verses. The verses properly interpreted refute your interpretation of Hebrews 10.

  33. Ron,

    You seem to be unaware of the difference between a Biblical narrative of events and a Biblical teaching.

    There can be people who say things within a narrative of events as recorded by Scripture that are not correct. Exhibit A: Satan speaks to different people and his lies are recorded in Scripture. Exhibit B: (which you already provided) the conversation of Sennacherib. But a Biblical teaching where the author is teaching the words given to Him by God is not an instance where errors occur.

    And the fact that replacement theology is an error does not in any way mean the words of Scripture are in error. It means that the interpretations of men about the words of Scripture that have been inspired by God are in error.

    The fact that you do not understand how Jesus’ and Paul’s words can be understood in harmony does not mean that they are not in harmony.

    I am not placing Paul above Jesus. I am saying that the words of all the writers were inspired by Him. So Jesus is not subordinate to Paul, it is the other way around. But the writings of Paul are completely true.

    I do not understand the point you are trying to make with your last statement.

    But you have not addressed the words from Scripture that I provided in my last post. Or do you believe that those words are another example of errant teaching in Scripture?

  34. Are Billy Graham or Jack Hayford’s words ‘inspired’, or ‘inerrant’? Paul’s epistles were not declared ‘inerrant’ until the Council of Nicea in 325 AD. But, by Jesus’ words, the least apostle is greater in the Kingdom of GOD than the greatest prophet; yet teaching the Commandments makes an apostle even greater (Matt. 5:19)! Not many would say that Peter or John were inerrant; so what makes Paul inerrant? I understand that you are talking about Scripture; but by making every verse too-holy-to-touch, aren’t you doing the same thing the Pharisees did: looking at the ‘letter’ instead of the ‘heart’? What is the alternative? On one hand; spirit without law; on the other: Bibliolatry. Is there a third? Follow Jesus of Nazareth, as He said; not Paul, not Moses.
    In Him, Ron M.

  35. Ron,

    I’m with others here in sounding a clear warning to you about not seeing the entire NT equally as God’s Word. Peter himself recognized Paul’s writings as Scripture (2 Pet 3:15-16). What you call “bibliolatry” I call gospel truth. And how do you even know what Jesus said unless His followers accurately recorded His message and wrote it down for us?

  36. “entire NT equally”.
    Let’s start with 1 Timothy 2:11,12.
    Either Joyce Meyer and the A of G are going to land in the pit for what they are doing, or else this is Paul’s advice and not really “Scripture” (the Greek being “graphos”= “writing”, but translated “scripture” consistently.) I’m not even going to get into the hard stuff now; let’s begin easy.
    See The Scripture Principle by Clark H. Pinnock, Harper and Row, 1984; over 200 pages where I won’t even give a synopsis, for to do so would water down all the examples it cites. This was the first book I was confronted with when I returned to the LORD; given to me by a pastor who was having an affair with an elder’s wife, who eventually had a child by him.
    This didn’t deter me a bit; I made a vow to go to the end with Jesus no matter what.
    The Jerusalem Church deferred to Paul’s missionary endeavor, leaving him alone; but never submitted to him, unless you can prove to me otherwise. Therefore, the discussion is still open as to Paul in Galatians v Jacob in James; Martin Luther did not close the record.
    In Him, Ron M.

  37. Ron, I don’t know much about Clark H. Pinnock, but it seems that he not only hold to an unorthodox view of Scripture but also holds to open theism and annihilationism. Regardless, there have been several Scriptures provided by myself and Dr. Brown along with statements about the subject and also several questions have been asked by both of us.

    If these are not addressed, there is no point continuing the conversation about this topic.

  38. Also, I’m not exactly sure why you shared the intimate details of the person who recommended this book to you. This in and of itself does not refute the book. But your choice of references about the recommendation of this book seem a little less than stellar. If we are to judge by the fruit, as Jesus said, it’s not promising. But then again, maybe Jesus didn’t really say it. After all, we only have the writings of men who could have been writing errors about what Jesus actually said, correct?

  39. One other note: Ron has made clear that he rejects certain portions of God’s Word as being God’s Word, and he can invite others to engage him on that topic elsewhere. We’ll keep the focus here on OSAS, as per our policy to stay on the topic of the thread.

  40. I wish to make one more statement before I am ‘cut off’.
    Pinnock is a “conservative Baptist evangelical” who gives a very even-handed discussion. But he also doesn’t run from discrepancies. Coming back from 20 years of backsliding, this was meant to shake my recommitment; but it didn’t.
    Let me define my terms specifically:
    Bibliolatry allows us to equate Paul of Tarsus with Jesus of Nazareth, something we would not dare do with any other human being. Identifying and dismissing this heresy allows us to return to a healthy understanding of Scripture:
    for GOD will not allow Himself to be placed in Isaiah’s level plain, except as Fellow-sufferer and Savior of the world (to whomsoever is willing).
    Thank you for allowing me to participate in this discussion.
    In Jesus’ love and name, Ron David Metcalf

  41. My study of key passages in the Hebrew Bible and NT have made me conclude that the past tense does not save, but the participle (the present continuous tense). To put it simply:

    There is NOTHING you can do (once) to save yourself,
    but there IS something you can BE DOING to be saved.

    To be continually placing your faith in God, to be serving Him, loving Him, walking on His narrow path.

    “For God thus loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever goes on believing in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. John 3:16”

    Just look up all the salvation verses in the Hebrew and the Greek and notice how often the participle is being used.

  42. Ron,

    I’m glad you returned to the Lord, but there were obviously some hiccups along the way that got you to a partial understanding of the truth, and that deeply concerns me. You are also misunderstanding or misrepresenting what we believe when we speak of the inspiration of the Scriptures, and remember, if the apostles weren’t inspired in what they wrote, then you have no way of even knowing what Jesus actually said.

    In any case, no one is cutting you off here, but we only allow comments that are on the subject matter of the thread, so if you can find a relevant thread somewhere on this site, by all means invite others to join you there.

    I do pray that you will go back to the Lord and ask Him for insight and help so you can be properly grounded in the truth of God and the God of truth.

  43. I’m not trying to get the final word; but you aren’t allowing my defense.
    By declaring Paul infallible, you are compromising your Messianic position; and causing yourself trouble as to enforcing women not speaking, hair and dress codes, and other ‘lists’ (ie for leadership) that Paul clearly put in place. This has nothing to so with the gospel record or Revelation whatsoever.
    In Him, Ron M.

  44. Ron, you can’t start with a pet doctrine or pet doctrines and then determine from them which Scripture you will accept. It is possible that your acceptance of those Scriptures would mean changing your positions on those doctrines. Or it could be that you don’t have a proper view of the interpretation of those Scriptures and they may not be saying what you believe them to be saying. Either way, your starting point for determining what should and should not be viewed as Scripture based on your pre-supposed doctrine is not healthy and leads to cultism. As Dr. Brown has repeatedly said. If we can’t be sure of the Scriptures written by Paul, why should we be sure of the Scriptures written by any of the others?

Leave Your Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*