Knowing for sure one is going to heaven

[KingsGambit]

1) You think we must earn salvation.

No I don't.

[Paprika]

Salvation, like justification/judgment, has past, present and future tenses; the three are distinct and conflation can only result in confusion and error.

[One Bad Pig]

One Bad Pig believes in salvation by works.

I believe in salvation by grace, through faith. However, faith without works is dead:

Source: James 2:14-17 NKJV

¹⁴ What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? ¹⁵ If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, ¹⁶ and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? ¹⁷ Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.

© Copyright Original Source

I agree with St. James. Do you?

Do you really think he would agree with the theory that it is difficult to lose salvation? SeanD sure didn't make it sound very difficult to lose. My point is that you can potentially read the Bible to teach that salvation is impossible to lose, or that it is fairly easy to lose. To claim that it is possible, but extremely difficult, seems like a terribly unrealistic view. It is a view based more on philosophy ("How can God take away my freedom to prevent me from going to hell if I really want to?") as opposed to scripture.

I believe salvation, once gained, is impossible to lose. On the other hand, salvation is a process which is not complete until at least our deaths, and it is quite possible to stop before the end is attained. One of the weaknesses of the English language is its lack of ability to succinctly express the Greek perfect tense, in which salvation tends to be stated in the scriptures.

[phat8594]

I must agree. The two choices are not mutually exclusive, and the issue of having eternal life (which is what the answers address) is different from the issue of knowing whether you have it (which is what the question asks about).

Exactly. It seems that the poll is trying to set up the two as mutually exclusive, yet they don't have to be. And as you stated, the answers don't seem to address the question.


Per

[The Remonstrant]

I find 1 Peter 1:5 to be quite fitting here:

[B]y God's power [you/we] are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. (ESV)

It's a case of both/and. Salvation is ultimately of the Lord, but he requires continued faith in him in order to attain final salvation.

[37818]

Those who endure to the end shall be saved, which is indicative that enduring is not guaranteed.

That is an interpretation. Not one I hold.

". . . if any man love God, the same is known of him." -- 1 Corinthians 8:3.

" . . . every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God." -- 1 John 4:7.
"[love] . . . endureth all things." -- 1 Corinthians 13:7.

[KingsGambit]

That is an interpretation. Not one I hold.

". . . if any man love God, the same is known of him." -- 1 Corinthians 8:3.

" . . . every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God." -- 1 John 4:7.
"[love] . . . endureth all things." -- 1 Corinthians 13:7.

I don't see how these verses negate the principle Sean is implying.

[37818]

I don't think God gives out "get out of hell free" cards.

Source: Phil 2:12-13 NKJV

¹² Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; ¹³ for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure.

© Copyright Original Source

It is a matter of, again, interpretation. Emphasis to be noted.

[37818]

I don't see how these verses negate the principle Sean is implying.

It is by the love of God that we can love and so endure. As I hold the view God does the keeping. The disagreement is a matter of interpretation, is it not?

[37818]

I must agree. The two choices are not mutually exclusive, and the issue of having eternal life (which is what the answers address) is different from the issue of knowing whether you have it (which is what the question asks about).

So it is some interprent the latter disallows God doing the keeping.

[37818]

I believe in salvation by grace, through faith. However, faith without works is dead:

Source: James 2:14-17 NKJV

¹⁴ What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? ¹⁵ If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, ¹⁶ and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? ¹⁷ Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.

© Copyright Original Source

I agree with St. James. Do you?

I believe salvation, once gained, is impossible to lose. On the other hand, salvation is a process which is not complete until at least our deaths, and it is quite possible to stop before the end is attained. One of the weaknesses of the English language is its lack of ability to succinctly express the Greek perfect tense, in which salvation tends to be stated in the scriptures.

Salvation is a current possession. "For by grace you have been saved, . . ." -- Ephesians 2:8. NKJV And "For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them." v.10

And the works James gave an example of (Genesis 22:) took place years later after the cited promise (Genesis 15:6).

[KingsGambit]

It is by the love of God that we can love and so endure. As I hold the view God does the keeping. The disagreement is a matter of interpretation, is it not?

So does this interpretation mean that God simply did not keep people who initially profess faith but walk away?

[37818]

So does this interpretation mean that God simply did not keep people who initially profess faith but walk away?

How do you interpret "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would [no doubt] have continued with us: but [they went out], that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us," and context?

[KingsGambit]

How do you interpret "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would [no doubt] have continued with us: but [they went out], that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us," and context?

This would appear to say that in effect, only those who were truly in Christ persevered. (And I have posted elsewhere that I personally find this to be the single most difficult verse for Arminianism.)

[phat8594]

How do you interpret "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would [no doubt] have continued with us: but [they went out], that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us," and context?

First off, the context of this verse is not dealing with salvation, but with antichrists / false teachers.


Secondly, all this basically shows is at the time of the leaving, 'they were not of us'. It doesn't tell you about their state of fellowship prior to leaving (and this is even assuming that they even had 'genuine' fellowhip with the apostles)

So to reiterate:

Context shows that this verse is not dealing with salvation, but antichrists...and it only talks about their state of fellowship at the time of leaving. (this of course makes much more sense given the cultural and textual context of 1 John as a whole...i.e. false teachers, and antichrists are in view - not soteriology).


Remember:

'A text without a context is a pretext to make the text say whatever you want'