Once saved can we lose our salvation??

[David777]

Valid posts?

MorningStar you are making claims that are not supported by the sources you mention.

I would not have a problem with your posts if you were not attempting to rip the letters of Paul out of the Bible.

Your claims are not supported by the sources your quote.

The canonicity of our Bible is watertight, it survived the onslaught
of centuries of scholarly attacks.

Who are you MorningStar and what is the motivation for derailing this thread.

 

[El Hombre viejo]

MorningStar made the claim regarding non Pauline authorship.

MorningStar claimed Pauline authorship was in question by scholars.

All I did was show MorningStar that what he claimed was not true.

I do not rely on scholar's opinions myself El Hombre viejo.

My opinion is not the subject of these posts.

MorningStar's opinion is the subject that I am addressing.

I believe the New and Old Testaments are God breathed.

Understood David It was just a caution to all

 

[MorningStar]

MorningStar this about sums up your position.

"Even if just one person has reasonable evidence that brings any writings in question...then they ARE in question. I think if any "rational" person saw evidence suggesting it was not valid, and supporting evidence to back it up, then any "rational" person would consider it in question....and the fact is, they have indeed long been in question by scholars."

Scholars for centuries have been arguing with one another.
That's what scholars do MorningStar.

I showed you that seven of Paul's letters were not in question.

You cannot hold onto the claim that Paul was not the author of seven of his important doctrinal letters. You can accept Pauline theology
MorningStar there are no barriers now.

Scholarship over a long period of time has exonerated seven of Paul's
letters, they were written by Paul. They are not in question as you tried to infer.

I have already dealt with Origen of Alexandria and your erroneous claim. Origen of Alexandria was discussing Hebrews, this letter
is not included in Paul's letters. Why did you mention Origen of Alexandria?

I just told you why I mentioned Origen. And now you obviously overlook the other scholars I mentioned? Why is that?

David, until you have researched this topic fully, you're just wasting our time. I suggest researching non-biased sources, meaning, both Christian and non-Christian (ie Judaic and secular) scholars/sources.

The unfortunate fact is, many Christian sources limit their material to other Christian sources, in many cases, whereas a non-biased scholar utilizes a broad spectrum of evidence...not just Christian sources, or not just non-Christian sources. Hence, I look at both, and hence why I understand there are no Pauline letters that have never been in question. (Ever heard of Judaism and wonder why they don't accept Jesus?) This is the only intellectually honest path to finding out the full range of information.

But, to help you along, you might want to start with reading Apollonius, as you clearly have been avoiding that topic. You would also do yourself justice to research what is widely known as the 'New Perspective' on Paul within the Jewish framework, as well as the Christian framework. I say this because if you are so unaware of the many scholars that support this perspective of Paul's writings not being authentic, then you are behind the times of modern apologetics of Pauline writings. So, please, for sake of brevity, research these things, then we can continue. Otherwise, we're just spinning our wheels.

 

[MorningStar]

MorningStar you are making claims that are not supported by the sources you mention.

No, the fact is, I gave you names of scholars and concepts that you simply fail to mention or research.

I would not have a problem with your posts if you were not attempting to rip the letters of Paul out of the Bible.

No, I am not a professional scholar by trade, those are not my doings, but the scholars themselves. I agree with some, and disagree with others. Perhaps if you actually researched the people I mentioned, you would gain a bit more insight to Pauline apologetics.

The canonicity of our Bible is watertight, it survived the onslaught of centuries of scholarly attacks.

Clearly, you are mistaken. You do realize the bible has been re-translated, added to, and adapted literally hundreds of times and by multiple sources right?

Who are you MorningStar and what is the motivation for derailing this thread.

Once again, why are you making this a personal thing David? I'm not trying to derail this thread, so your assumptions and accusations are unwarranted. However, if you wish to discuss these things like an adult...without personal attacks...then by all means, start a new thread and we will work it out.

 

[Christ4Ever]

LOL, that is completely false. Perhaps you should read other (non-biased) scholars and sources and you will clearly see there is no concrete agreement on who wrote the bible as a whole tome.

Well, I can certainly see how you would come to that conclusion brother, but as for me, and as I have stated herein before, my personal relationship with Jesus is my own. I have proof internal to myself, and I feel no need to attempt to prove it to others because if held to those standards, then they would not be considered as proof, but only opinion.

But to answer your question straightforwardly, I feel some of the scripture is indeed doctored in the new versions/translations. In fact, this is a PROVEN fact that they have been changed by multiple sources over multiple dates. As an example, the concept of a fire and brimstone type hell was NEVER in the original Hebrew...therefore, all subsequent translations that ADDED this concocted type of hell are strictly erroneous as they contradict what the ORIGINAL Hebrew stated. So, are THOSE additions God inspired, or made man? Clearly they are man-made if the translations do not match the original source text. So, we must use our best, personal judgement on what is real deal God inspired original scripture and what might be fabricated by man.

So, in my personal opinion, as Christians we have to "personally" decide what constitutes proof...to us...in order to base our personal conclusion about God. My salvation is not dependent on what others think, it is only dependent on what God thinks. However, just because I cannot prove my conclusions to others through experimentation and repeatability as what the scientific method requires, it doesn't mean I am forced to forgo my personal conclusions. That's the beauty of faith, and God's personal connection to our personal situations.

If that is the case this should be real easy for you, please just ask that spirit of god that you communicate with one question and if you would answer it as well. "Does he confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh?" "Do you confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh?"

So answer please, in the name of Christ Jesus, answer.

 

[gdemoss]

Do you confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh?"

I most certainly do! Oh wait, you weren't asking me.

 

[MorningStar]

If that is the case this should be real easy for you, please just ask that spirit of god that you communicate with one question and if you would answer it as well. "Does he confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh?" "Do you confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh?"

So answer please, in the name of Christ Jesus, answer.

I've clearly stated yes, I do, and that I am a Christian. Just because I question the validity of Paul doesn't mean I question the historicity of Jesus. So what's your point? Are you going to make this a personal thing instead of a decent discussion? Now if you want to make some constructive points relevant to the discussion, then fine, but as a Christian, I do not have to answer to you, or your opinion, but only to God.

So what is it with people here trying to 'validate' other Christians?? Who are we to judge other people in their 'personal' faith? Is our faith and personal relationship not ultimately a personal thing with Jesus and Jesus only? Be Christ like and not haters.

Therefore, I just don't understand the point. Are you going to completely dismiss a conversation with someone (like BCR8TVE for example) just because they didn't claim to be Christian?? I too once thought like that until I realized it was a fascist move in trying to shut out other people's opinions that differed from mine, so I hope you will do the Christ like thing, and be more open minded as well. Jesus didn't only talk to his followers, and I think that's about the best example we can follow. Agreed?

So let's get on with the discussion with something of actual relevance and stop the pointless personal attacks.

 

[gdemoss]

so I hope you will do the Christ like thing, and be more open minded as well.

Christ was very close minded. Antichrist is open minded.

 

[MorningStar]

Regarding what David777 said about getting off topic, while the Paul discussion part of this thread is actually quite relevant to the to the OT, in order not to confuse the topics I can create a separate thread. I was waiting on a response from David777 if he wants to continue, but if others want to join in, then I'll create it and we can continue now.

 

[MorningStar]

Christ was very close minded. Antichrist is open minded.

Semantics...Christ spoke quite openly of tolerance. Ever hear of the Sermon on the Mount? The proof is in the pudding. The Anti-Christ is specifically a prominent world leader who is only against Christ (obviously by very definition)...so in my opinion, its the Antic-Christ thats pretty close minded in focus.

Are you now going to claim Christ only spoke to his followers?

 

[RJ]

And so I assume you would just drop everything and follow if a man you never knew came up to you on the bus and said he had just seen Jesus, and then started giving you commandments?? That's EXACTLY what cults do to gain gullible followers.

Are you aware that these type claims are made all the time, and have yet to be proven? There is not a shred of evidence to even prove Paul was a real person at all.

I see that happen with crazy TV evangelists all the time, and they are almost ALWAYS proven to be charlatans or insanely hypocritical....Ted Haggard comes to mind as a perfect example.

Once again, if you look at the contrast between what Jesus actually taught, and what Paul "said"....its amazingly different, and even contradictory in some cases. In fact, almost every major creed that Christians follow actually came from Paul, and not Christ. The Pauline teachings have long been in question with some major scholars and have been considered to be contradictory, just as other books of the bible were left out for the same reason.

I also think the Noah/flood story was completely metaphorical. Is that really a big deal? lol

Those things just do not make logical sense to me and I also know that as long as I believe in Christ, then all is well.

Once again, if you look at the contrast between what Jesus actually taught, and what Paul "said"....its amazingly different, and even contradictory in some cases. In fact, almost every major creed that Christians follow actually came from Paul, and not Christ. The Pauline teachings have long been in question with some major scholars and have been considered to be contradictory, just as other books of the bible were left out for the same reason.
Would please provide scripture to support this claim?

 

[MorningStar]

Once again, if you look at the contrast between what Jesus actually taught, and what Paul "said"....its amazingly different, and even contradictory in some cases. In fact, almost every major creed that Christians follow actually came from Paul, and not Christ. The Pauline teachings have long been in question with some major scholars and have been considered to be contradictory, just as other books of the bible were left out for the same reason.
Would please provide scripture to support this claim?

Certainly, although we should perhaps move this discussion to a separate thread so we're not accused of hijacking the OT. Agreed?

If so, which category would be best to start in? Bible study hall?

 

[gdemoss]

Semantics...Christ spoke quite openly of tolerance. Ever hear of the Sermon on the Mount? The proof is in the pudding.

Where? I don't see a message about tolerance at all. I see a message about not being evil and ending up being judged like the ones who are doing evil. His message wasn't about accepting or tolerating error but absorbing the sin of those around you. Jesus' call was to turn away from sin and toward God the Father by following him. Jesus in no way tolerated false ideas of men about God.

You have shown yourself to a very intelligent person and that causes me to be wary of you as God has chosen the base things of this world not the wise. Your quick quips that slap others in the face as you cut them with your words are not very tolerant either. I still haven't seen anything that shows Paul being different in his teachings from Christ as you claim he was. The only thing I have seen is you speaking about so called scholars, which the bible warns me against seeking out as that which is highly esteemed among men is an abomination unto God. God is closed minded and so is his Son. It is his way or the highway and you must not get it and teach it wrong or you do not enter into the kingdom of God as that is called heresy and is covered in Galatians chapter 5.

We are called to love one another as Christ loved us. That means that we are to combat all heresy and wash one another in the water of the world that we may all be presented together unto Christ being blameless and spotless. Suffering ourselves to be resisting sin even unto blood if necessary for the Lords sake.

Jesus has been recorded speaking to a number of people who were not his followers but his message was always the same. Repent and believe or die in your sin. To the those who were not Jews he called them dogs to their face. Those who humbled themselves before him were rewarded. I wonder who this Jesus is that you are talking about. Where does one find out about him?

In Christ,

Gary

 

[MorningStar]

Where? I don't see a message about tolerance at all. I see a message about not being evil and ending up being judged like the ones who are doing evil. His message wasn't about accepting or tolerating error but absorbing the sin of those around you. Jesus' call was to turn away from sin and toward God the Father by following him. Jesus in no way tolerated false ideas of men about God.

You have shown yourself to a very intelligent person and that causes me to be wary of you as God has chosen the base things of this world not the wise. Your quick quips that slap others in the face as you cut them with your words are not very tolerant either. I still haven't seen anything that shows Paul being different in his teachings from Christ as you claim he was. The only thing I have seen is you speaking about so called scholars, which the bible warns me against seeking out as that which is highly esteemed among men is an abomination unto God. God is closed minded and so is his Son. It is his way or the highway and you must not get it and teach it wrong or you do not enter into the kingdom of God as that is called heresy and is covered in Galatians chapter 5.

We are called to love one another as Christ loved us. That means that we are to combat all heresy and wash one another in the water of the world that we may all be presented together unto Christ being blameless and spotless. Suffering ourselves to be resisting sin even unto blood if necessary for the Lords sake.

Jesus has been recorded speaking to a number of people who were not his followers but his message was always the same. Repent and believe or die in your sin. To the those who were not Jews he called them dogs to their face. Those who humbled themselves before him were rewarded. I wonder who this Jesus is that you are talking about. Where does one find out about him?

In Christ,

Gary

Come on now....do you really think I would bring up Paul contradicting Jesus if it wasn't actually in the bible?? This really isn't a new topic guys...a simple theological search for 'Paul contradicts Jesus' would answer your questions. The differences between what Paul taught and what Jesus taught are legion. Its been discussed within Christianity for as long as Christianity has been around.

Are you aware that Jesus never specifically mentions Paul in writing? Nor does Mark, which is perhaps even more bizarre. Pretty much everything that gave Paul validity was, well, Paul himself in claims that are pretty far fetched when contrasted to what Jesus actually taught.

Paul even contradicts Jesus on how we are saved, how to judge, etc.. This is not new news guys.

 

[MorningStar]

Ok, the topic has been moved to a new thread...

Bible Study Hall...The Concepts of 'Paulism' vs. The Teachings Of Christ.

See you there if you want to continue the discussion

 

[Christ4Ever]

I've clearly stated yes, I do, and that I am a Christian. Just because I question the validity of Paul doesn't mean I question the historicity of Jesus. So what's your point? Are you going to make this a personal thing instead of a decent discussion? Now if you want to make some constructive points relevant to the discussion, then fine, but as a Christian, I do not have to answer to you, or your opinion, but only to God.

So what is it with people here trying to 'validate' other Christians?? Who are we to judge other people in their 'personal' faith? Is our faith and personal relationship not ultimately a personal thing with Jesus and Jesus only? Be Christ like and not haters.

Therefore, I just don't understand the point. Are you going to completely dismiss a conversation with someone (like BCR8TVE for example) just because they didn't claim to be Christian?? I too once thought like that until I realized it was a fascist move in trying to shut out other people's opinions that differed from mine, so I hope you will do the Christ like thing, and be more open minded as well. Jesus didn't only talk to his followers, and I think that's about the best example we can follow. Agreed?

So let's get on with the discussion with something of actual relevance and stop the pointless personal attacks.

Actually, I was not asking whether you were a Christian or not. I question the spiritual state and relationship you state to have. Stating that it’s personal doesn’t mean that it should not be scrutinized. Won’t you agree that deceit is a threat to all Christians, and that at times it is necessary to validate one another in order to know if this is so? Not meant to be insulting, but neither are you. Correct? I’m sure you’re not since, I’m not assuming that your comment about “Be Christ like and not haters.” Was not meaning that I was one of those “haters”, but rather a general comment of those who are, who make themselves known by their words and actions to be so. Questions for the most part don’t have to be agreeable, or lack personal opinion. Most happen to be that way unless care is taken that they are done in a sincere desire to know the truth, coupled with the ability to express themselves with words. I do have that sincere desire, but that is my opinion and one you might not share with me on this particular point in time.

Hopefully the above clarified my point for you. As to your suggestion that I’ve been dismissive of someone conversation (like BCR8TVE for example) because he’s not a Christian, requires evidence on your part. If this is even your opinion, it would still require instances where this is so. Pray tell what those instances were, please.

To the next “pointless personal attack” made by you. I didn’t realize that by not accepting a persons’ position it was considered shutting them out. I don’t accept your position in its entirety but I’m not shutting you out, just like Jesus who listened to the other persons’ statements, then corrected them gently if truly a seeker, and not so gently if looking to just confuse the issue did. In following Jesus’ example He knew who He was dealing with. He could see to their heart on all issues. However, I don’t have that ability, and yet I am open to other people’s opinions (like yours), but when they’re misguided, should I not attempt to help them? As you do in your own posts?

Had to add your “pointless personal attack” reference to show you the ability words can have on a person, especially if they profess to be a brother in Christ. Rather graphic way of responding to an honest inquiry to you. That particular response to me reflected your feelings on the question I asked as being irrelevant and intended to hurt. It was my attempt to be as straight forward and honest in presenting a question to be asked of those that one might deem as possible being "a sheep in wolfs clothing". To you it might be insulting, but scripturally it is a valid one to use when one is concerned in the area in question.

 

[MorningStar]

Actually, I was not asking whether you were a Christian or not. I question the spiritual state and relationship you state to have. Stating that it’s personal doesn’t mean that it should not be scrutinized. Won’t you agree that deceit is a threat to all Christians, and that at times it is necessary to validate one another in order to know if this is so? Not meant to be insulting, but neither are you. Correct? I’m sure you’re not since, I’m not assuming that your comment about “Be Christ like and not haters.” Was not meaning that I was one of those “haters”, but rather a general comment of those who are, who make themselves known by their words and actions to be so. Questions for the most part don’t have to be agreeable, or lack personal opinion. Most happen to be that way unless care is taken that they are done in a sincere desire to know the truth, coupled with the ability to express themselves with words. I do have that sincere desire, but that is my opinion and one you might not share with me on this particular point in time.

Hopefully the above clarified my point for you. As to your suggestion that I’ve been dismissive of someone conversation (like BCR8TVE for example) because he’s not a Christian, requires evidence on your part. If this is even your opinion, it would still require instances where this is so. Pray tell what those instances were, please.

To the next “pointless personal attack” made by you. I didn’t realize that by not accepting a persons’ position it was considered shutting them out. I don’t accept your position in its entirety but I’m not shutting you out, just like Jesus who listened to the other persons’ statements, then corrected them gently if truly a seeker, and not so gently if looking to just confuse the issue did. In following Jesus’ example He knew who He was dealing with. He could see to their heart on all issues. However, I don’t have that ability, and yet I am open to other people’s opinions (like yours), but when they’re misguided, should I not attempt to help them? As you do in your own posts?

Had to add your “pointless personal attack” reference to show you the ability words can have on a person, especially if they profess to be a brother in Christ. Rather graphic way of responding to an honest inquiry to you. That particular response to me reflected your feelings on the question I asked as being irrelevant and intended to hurt. It was my attempt to be as straight forward and honest in presenting a question to be asked of those that one might deem as possible being "a sheep in wolfs clothing". To you it might be insulting, but scripturally it is a valid one to use when one is concerned in the area in question.

Well, perhaps I misunderstood your motive and if I did, I apologize. I would agree that its a duty to try to help those that might be misguided. However, when that help comes with personal attacks its not going to be effective and it seems I see many Christians attacking others here simply because they don't look at scripture the same way...its just mindless and not very Christlike in my opinion. I didn't say you, personally, had dissed BCR8IVE, as it was just a hypothetical example. I guess I'm a bit sensitive to that type of fascism of closing other people's opinions off. We're all trying to grow together here.

In my personal case, people attack me for making valid points about scripture, simply because they are not aware of those topics...such as Paul having a different and even contradictory teaching than what Jesus had. Its a fact that can be SEEN in scripture and makes valid points about the Christian doctrine....yet people act like its 'my' doing.

Ever feel like you're being attacked for telling the truth? Its very, very frustrating.

God Bless

 

[TouchTestimony]

aaaarrrgghhhhh!!! no, don't ask why..

 

[Rev T.S.Perkins]

good question..salvation is there for the asking weather we ask for it or not ..its always available..however once salvation has been applied you can walk away from it and abandon it...BUT YOU WILL BE THE MOST MISERABLE of men or women with out it in your life

 

[Beans]

Absolutely Perkins. I agree.

I think a lot of people are going to be in for a big surprise on J Day, especially those who believe that God is going to ignore the sins they've committed since being saved.
I think understanding that God may have a preportionate system of punishment could take a lot of the sting out of that realization.

Anyway, I think a lot of the punishment for walking away from God will be (as Perkins implies) in the bad fruit the backslider experiences in this life!

Peace. Beans