Jump to content
Online Baptist

Is it possible to renounce salvation?


Recommended Posts

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Every believer from Adam, to Abel, to Enoch, Noah, Abraham etc. was saved by grace through faith. Jesus is the Word who spoke the Worlds into existence, He is the I Am who spoke to Moses from the burning bush, he is the Son of God who walked with the three Hebrew children in the fiery furnace, He is the "My Lord" whose enemies the Psalmist David declared would, sit at his footstool. He is the first and the last, the Alpha and Omega. He is "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world". Old Testament beleivers look forward To the cross whereas WE look backward to it. He was ALREADY slain from the foundation of the world, the Bible says, but He was slain physically at the cross ca 2000 years ago. The day that Peter declare "thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God" he was already a believer. The Bible says in John chapter 1 "even to them that believe on his name". Believers were calling on "his name" way back in Genesis 4.


Don't know if I believe this "grace before the cross" salvation of the OT saints. My bible reads LAW then GRACE. WORKS then FAITH. I can not find one instance, not one where the name of Jesus is mentioned in the OT so how could they call on His name when they didn't know it. He was slain before the foundation of the world because God lives outside/inside and is time. He was only slain in the flesh some 2000 yrs ago and it's the "slain in the SINLESS FLESH" that makes it a acceptable sacrifice to God.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 122
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

1 John 3:2 (KJV) Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. Hum

Both Calvinism and Arminianism are heresy! Calvinism teaches that if a person walks away from the faith and rejects Christianity they were not saved to begin with and Arminianism teaches that if a per

Have you believed on the Lord Jesus Christ to save your wicked soul from God's judgement in Hell and, been indwelled with the Holy Spirit? If so, you cannot be lost: ever. Please read the following ve

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

At least 120 years before the flood, Noah, by faith, found 'grace' in the eyes of the Lord. You can read about him in Hebrews 11. Even today, those who are unsaved are under the law.


Agreed and I think I know where Heb 11 is. And yes I am aware that the unsaved now are under the law. But what if Noah decided to stop building the Ark? He would have drowned with the rest of them but would he be in heaven? I am assured that no matter what my sin after salvation is I will still be seated with Christ in heaven as I am already seated in heavenly places with Christ. Were any of the great men of faith ASSURED salvation regardless of there actions after there initial act of faith that placed them in Heb 11? Unless of course these great men had a different covenant with God than the rest of their family and mankind.

Was Noah assured ETERNAL salvation because he built the ark? Then why was he the first to build a sacrificial alter? Was Abraham assured ETERNAL salvation because he was prepared to sacrifice his son?
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

If Peter, or anyone else, could be saved with eternal life as we know it before the death, burial, resurrection, ascension, and the day of Pentecost, then the church of the body began before Pentecost? And Romans 10:9,10 did not apply to those people?


I agree, Jesus started his church much earlier than Pentecost, yet there's many that believes it was not started till the day of Pentecost..

Ac 2:47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

Seems difficult to add to something on the day of Pentecost when it has not been started.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist


Don't know if I believe this "grace before the cross" salvation of the OT saints. My bible reads LAW then GRACE. WORKS then FAITH. I can not find one instance, not one where the name of Jesus is mentioned in the OT so how could they call on His name when they didn't know it. He was slain before the foundation of the world because God lives outside/inside and is time. He was only slain in the flesh some 2000 yrs ago and it's the "slain in the SINLESS FLESH" that makes it a acceptable sacrifice to God.


Remember, in order to be saved by the law, one had to keep the whole law, just breaking one single law, would make a person lost, & Jesus was the only one ever, able to keep the whole law. So being as no one else could keep the whole law, they could not be saved by keeping the law.

Perhaps you think the animal sacrifices saved them, no, it was grace, remember, it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

Heb 10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

No, they believed forward to the promised sacrifice on cross, while we look back to the promise of the cross.


Ro 4:1 ¶ What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?
Ro 4:2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.
Ro 4:3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
Ro 4:4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.

Its by grace only that a lost soul can be saved, no matter, what time period they live in.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I am not denying that grace was part of it. But do you believe that the OT saints had eternal security? Were they eternally saved once off and unable to lose it? Or was it a works based salvation that needed continual sanctification by obeying the law and doing the sacrifices?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I refuse to use the term "eternal security". It is not found in the Bible. I use eternal life, everlasting life. I think eternal security is a degradation of God's Word. The common thread in eternal life and everlasting life is life, not security.

Their being in the resurrection of the just is definitely based on their believing, and their works following suit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I refuse to use the term "eternal security". It is not found in the Bible. I use eternal life, everlasting life. I think eternal security is a degradation of God's Word. The common thread in eternal life and everlasting life is life, not security.

Their being in the resurrection of the just is definitely based on their believing, and their works following suit.


I did a exact word search and looked up "Jesus loves you" and "Jesus saves" and would you guess it - it's not found in the bible but we use it all the time. Would you call these a degradation of God's Word and refuse to say them? Or is this a case of throwing the baby out with the bath water? Typical of most IFB's to find something and stick to it like a tick on a dog. The term "eternal security" means just that - secure in the eternal grace of God who has given us eternal life through the blood of His son Jesus Christ. Rapture is another term not found in the bible - do you refuse that too?
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I refuse to use the term "eternal security". It is not found in the Bible. I use eternal life, everlasting life. I think eternal security is a degradation of God's Word. The common thread in eternal life and everlasting life is life, not security.

Their being in the resurrection of the just is definitely based on their believing, and their works following suit.



John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

The moment I first "believeth'ed" some twenty six years ago, according to Jesus, at that time I had the promise of "shall not come into condemnation".
So, my salvation does not depend on MY faithfulness to keep believing; it depends on the faithfulness and trustworthiness of the One who made the promise.

25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.

....and I, who was dead in trespasses abd sins, heard he voice of God through the power of His Holy Ghost and His Word and was QUICKENED......."quickened" means "made alive". Look at that verse 5:24 again now...it says I passed from death unto life. Salvation depends on the power of God, not us. Then look at that phrase in 5;24 which says "hath eternal life", that means I "hath" it right now......it means I posses it....today, even 26 years later. Edited by heartstrings
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I refuse to use the term "eternal security". It is not found in the Bible. I use eternal life, everlasting life. I think eternal security is a degradation of God's Word. The common thread in eternal life and everlasting life is life, not security.

Their being in the resurrection of the just is definitely based on their believing, and their works following suit.


Playing with words, some get too caught up it that. Or maybe they don't understand.


Joh 3:15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Joh 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

My friend, those verses, along with those that teach the Holy Spirit seals, teaches the security of the believer, or eternal security.

The world rapture is not in the bible either.


1Th 4:13 ¶ But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.
1Th 4:14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
1Th 4:15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
1Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
1Th 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
1Th 4:18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

But it can be called the rapture, & it will not change the meaning of theses verse.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I didn't realize that my taking a stand on what God's Word actually says would be so contentious.

I believe God would actually use the words He wanted used in His Word. It is the same problem Roman Catholics have, as well as Pentecostals, and others. It is why new 'versions' are sought after. Not content with God's doctrine (or non-doctrine, as the case may be), some seek to add to, subtract from, alter, change, and otherwise assume their thoughts are better than Gods.

These remarks are not meant to incite or offend. They are, however, written so other brothers and sisters may consider whether or not to go by the words of God as put down in scripture, or words of man.

Heartstrings:
I have no problem with eternal life. Those are the words God used. God's words are good enough for me.

2Tim215:
No, I don't use rapture either. I use terms like coming and gathering together.



If, and I repeat IF, someone is going to support KJV (or any other version) ONLY, it would appear logical that the ONLY words and terms they would use would be in that version. If words and terms are used which are not found in the version they use, are they not, in fact, using a different version, whether written or verbal?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Let us say I am an unbeliever (which some of you may well believe now), and someone is witnessing to me...

They tell me about eternal security. I say 'Show me'. They show me all those wonderful verses in God's word that Jerry shared. I say, 'But I don't see eternal security. Where is that? Can you show me those words?' They can't.

The same can be said for rapture. And trinity. And many others.

I am not quibbling over small things. This is not playing with words, or semantics. When we are talking about God's words, giving doctrine to people, should not we use God's words?

As for your Grandfather, Standing Firm...I am not suggesting in our speech we only use words found in the scriptures. I think I would just call him Grandfather.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members

Ephesians 1:13-14 clearly shows eternal security. We are sealed UNTIL the day of redemption.

If we are not eternally secure, then Ephesians 1:13-14 is a lie.

Ephesians 1:13-14 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

So, while the exact phrase "eternal security" is not found in the Bible, the doctrine most certainly is.

Edited by Standing Firm In Christ
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

"Grandfather" is not found in God's Word either. What should I call my dad's dad?


Right, plus, God will never have no grand children, only children, but Jesus has brothers & sisters, & its wonderful to have Him for your Brother.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I didn't realize that my taking a stand on what God's Word actually says would be so contentious.

I believe God would actually use the words He wanted used in His Word. It is the same problem Roman Catholics have, as well as Pentecostals, and others. It is why new 'versions' are sought after. Not content with God's doctrine (or non-doctrine, as the case may be), some seek to add to, subtract from, alter, change, and otherwise assume their thoughts are better than Gods.

These remarks are not meant to incite or offend. They are, however, written so other brothers and sisters may consider whether or not to go by the words of God as put down in scripture, or words of man.

Heartstrings:
I have no problem with eternal life. Those are the words God used. God's words are good enough for me.

2Tim215:
No, I don't use rapture either. I use terms like coming and gathering together.



If, and I repeat IF, someone is going to support KJV (or any other version) ONLY, it would appear logical that the ONLY words and terms they would use would be in that version. If words and terms are used which are not found in the version they use, are they not, in fact, using a different version, whether written or verbal?


These terms were used way before the MV's were written, so it has nothing to do with MV's.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Let us say I am an unbeliever (which some of you may well believe now), and someone is witnessing to me...

They tell me about eternal security. I say 'Show me'. They show me all those wonderful verses in God's word that Jerry shared. I say, 'But I don't see eternal security. Where is that? Can you show me those words?' They can't.

The same can be said for rapture. And trinity. And many others.

I am not quibbling over small things. This is not playing with words, or semantics. When we are talking about God's words, giving doctrine to people, should not we use God's words?

As for your Grandfather, Standing Firm...I am not suggesting in our speech we only use words found in the scriptures. I think I would just call him Grandfather.


Your quibbling, whether you know it or not.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members

Is it possible to renounce salvation?

"I NEVER KNEW YOU", DEPART FROM ME, YE THAT WORK INIQUITY")

How is God going to say that truthfully, if He once knew some of these before they "renounced"?
Maybe the ones He knew and then later 'didn't know' come sometime after those He never knew? ROFL
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member

Yes you can renounce it but it doesn't matter. You are still going to heaven. He'll deny us reigning with him but he won't deny us as his flesh and bone.

2 Tim.2:11-13

[11] It is a faithful saying: For if we be dead with him, we shall also live with him:
[12] If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us:
[13] If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.

Edited by Wilchbla
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Yes you can renounce it but it doesn't matter. You are still going to heaven. He'll deny us reigning with him but he won't deny us as his flesh and bone.

2 Tim.2:11-13

[11] It is a faithful saying: For if we be dead with him, we shall also live with him:
[12] If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us:
[13] If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.


Well said!
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...
  • Members

Yes you can renounce it but it doesn't matter. You are still going to heaven. He'll deny us reigning with him but he won't deny us as his flesh and bone.

2 Tim.2:11-13

[11] It is a faithful saying: For if we be dead with him, we shall also live with him:
[12] If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us:
[13] If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.


I'm not new to the idea of eternal security, but let me get this straight. Are you saying that if a person genuinely professes faith in Christ, yet at some later point renounces, or de-converts, that person is still actually saved? What I understand you to be saying is this person is still saved and will go to heaven, but that person's status in heaven is less than it would otherwise be. Am I understanding you correctly? I'm not in any way attempting to argue...I honestly want to be sure I understand what you are saying.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

I'm not new to the idea of eternal security, but let me get this straight. Are you saying that if a person genuinely professes faith in Christ, yet at some later point renounces, or de-converts, that person is still actually saved? What I understand you to be saying is this person is still saved and will go to heaven, but that person's status in heaven is less than it would otherwise be. Am I understanding you correctly? I'm not in any way attempting to argue...I honestly want to be sure I understand what you are saying.


What does the passage of scripture say? If we believe not he abides faithful. He cannot deny himself. If we are flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone then we are part of him. If he was to deny us in essence he'd be denying himself. The gifts and calling of God is without repentance.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Joh 3:15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

What does the verse say?

One says believer & have eternal life.

The other one says believe & have everlasting life.

If you could in any manner lose it, denounce it, it would not be eternal life, everlasting life.

So why not just believe what the Bible says?

And in this verse.

Joh 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

And once again, why not believe what the verses says? He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life! again, if it could in any manner be lost, it would not be everlasting life.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Are you saying that if a person genuinely professes faith in Christ, yet at some later point renounces, or de-converts, that person is still actually saved?


They were likely never born again scripturally in the first place.

See Hebrews 6:4-6

For further reading:

http://www.baptistchallenge.org/challenge/02dectbc.pdf
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member

I lost the post, but to the gentleman who espoused that Christians can reach a point of sinless perfection (what Nazarenes call the "second blessing"" but does not believe in eternal security may ask this.
First, let me restate your position and then I'll follow up with the question: You believe that a person can reach a position of sinless perfection subsequent to salvation; nevertheless at any point after this state of sinless perfection they can backslide and lose their salvation.
Now the question is, if you can attain a state of sinless perfection: HOW COULD YOU EVER BACKSLIDE?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

To answer the OP, there are many good arguments in here in defense of eternal security which I think adequately answered the question. Just to add one more. 2 Timonty 2:13 "If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself." The context of course, is that whether one believes or not, his belief or unbelief has no bearing on the faithfulness of Christ. And since Christ is unchangable, then this verse would still apply to the believer that even after his salvation, if at some point he became discouraged and possibly even angry at God, his unbelief at that moment would not change the status of his salvation. Now if he continued in a perpetual state of denouncement and unbelief, I would have to question whether the person was saved in the first place because John makes it clear that "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:...." I John 2:19. Since it is God that works in us both to WILL and to DO (Phil 2:13), the will and drive that you have is the evidence of a genuine salvation (Eph 2:10, John 15:5), and the John also makes it clear that a child of God does not continue to practice in perpetual disobedience to Him (I John 3:6). A believer is never comfortable with sin. Whom God loves He chastens (Rev 3:19) and if you are living in sin and are never chastised, you are not a child of God (Heb 12:8)
So when askng a question about a person denouncing their faith, it would be necessary to view their salvation in context with the above expositions of Scripture.
On a side note: one thing that I find fascinating among critics of the Baptist position of eternal security is that they say we give them a license to sin, and then turn around and call us legalists for preaching too hard about sin LOL

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, 2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. 3 And this will we do, if God permit. 4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, 5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, 6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
Heb 6:1-6 (KJV) As it says, it is impossible to loose your salvation.

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: 28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. 29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. 30 I and my Father are one. 31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
John 10:27-31 (KJV) NOTE: they wanted to stone him........ Yes; eternal life and never perish seems easy to understand.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

And then will I profess unto them, I once knew you : depart from me, ye that work iniquity?? No, it says...

And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. Matthew 7:23

If He knew you at one time but you later renounced, "I never knew you" would be a lie.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 7 years later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 44 Guests (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

×
×
  • Create New...