Agreement/disagreement With The Pastor

[GraceSaved]

Paid4:  Thank you so much for taking the time and giving me scriptures.  Some of them I have and some I did not.  

 

Can I clarify my understanding of Heb 6:4?  I want to know if I am understanding correctly because this is one of the main passages used in their defense.  They interpret this passage to say once a person is saved, if they fall away, they cannot be saved anymore.  That's it. They had their chance, they fell away.  Too bad.  You crucified Christ again.  Shame on you.

 

First, I want to start in Heb 5:12 and going forward.  I'm going to paraphrase so you can understand if my reasoning, interpretation and logic are in tact.  For when the time they ought to be teachers, they were still needing to be taught the "first principles" and still needed milk and not strong meat.  They were still babes and still "believers" but not progressing in their knowledge. 

 

Now going on to Heb 6 (paraphrasing) leave the principles of milk and go on to meat.  v. 4 they were enlightened, tasted the heavenly gift, partakers of the Holy Ghost, tasted the good word of God and powers of the world to come.  What stands out the most to me is they were partakers of the HG.  Only saved people can be partakers, therefore I conclude Paul is addressing believers.

 

v 6 "If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance"  --- to me this is saying once a person is saved, they don't have to keeping going back to God for salvation if they fall away.  By doing that, it is putting Christ on the cross over and over again putting him to an open shame.  In essence, they are saying Christ's once and for all sacrificial death was not sufficient to cover them anymore because they fell away.  Please save me again.

 

I think Paul is saying look...you are already saved.  Let's move on from those basic principles of salvation (milk) and go on to meat.  Stop trying to get saved again when you already have salvation.

 

v 7 tells us why they need to move on.  Paul uses the analogy of a land that had many showers upon it and good crops come up, and the land experienced God's blessings upon it, but it keeps producing thorns and thistles, the land is of no use.  This not about loss of salvation but of their lack of growth.

 

v 9 But, beloved (still addressing the believer) we want more from you. Things that accompany salvation...not salvation alone.  Then Paul goes on through the chapter and tells them show diligence.  Diligence of what?  The full assurance of hope.

 

So this whole chapter is the assurance of salvation, not the possible loss of it.  If you keep going through the chapter, Paul continues to assure by bringing to their recollection the promise God made to Abraham and that it was an oath, and it is impossible for God to lie.  We have strong consolation, hope and a refuge in that, etc.  You are saved.  Now let's move on.

 

Thank you for letting me test my understanding on you and for being a guinea pig.  :-)       

[Jordan Kurecki]

I don't think I would attend a church that believes you can lose your salvation, I believe this dangerously leads to works salvation.

 

People like this also never tell you how much sin it takes to lose your salvation.

 

There's just so much danger, as if trusting Christ is not enough and that we must add self effort to keep ourselves.

 

What a wicked doctrine from Hell!

 

To me it's clearly no different in principle from what Paul defends from in Galatians, adding the Law to Grace by Faith.

 

If you read Galatians through it clearly demonstrates the principle of Salvation and even Christian living being all by faith and dependence on Christ and not self!

[ThePilgrim]

I think thew biggest danger of the idea that you can lose your salvation is shown in the fact that everyone I have talked to who believes it ( not being God this is just my opinion) commits some sin or other at some time or other after their "conversion".  (Now I am just taking their word that they were "converted".)  Now since they have admittedly sinned since their "conversion" it seems to be by their own words (that if you sin you can lose your salvation), they must have lost their salvation.  But I have never talked to one who believes they have lost their salvation.  (I guess that just means other sinners and not them personally.)

 

Arminians seem to believe the loss of salvations only applies to others and not themselves.  Odd thinking.  Just as strange as an extreme Calvinists who believes only he has been chosen.

 

We all must ask ourselves, "Have I sinned since I claimed Christ as savior?"  

1 John 1:8-10

 

8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

 

9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

 

10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

KJV

 

 

God bless,

Larry

[GraceSaved]

Covenanter:  Are you saying that Lot was not saved?  If so, and I apologize if I misinterpreted your post, but I would have to disagree based on 2 Peter 2.

 

The whole chapter is about false prophets and teachers (having a form of Godliness) living among the truly Godly and their destruction thereof.

 

v 7 And delivered "just" Lot...

 

v 8 "For that "righteous" man (Lot) dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed (disturbed/troubled) his "righteous" soul from day to day with their (not his) unlawful deeds."

 

v 9 The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly (Lot) out of temptations...

 

God destroyed the people who vexed him as an example to those false teachers who should come after and live ungodly even though they profess Godliness.

[paid4]

Now going on to Heb 6 (paraphrasing) leave the principles of milk and go on to meat.  v. 4 they were enlightened, tasted the heavenly gift, partakers of the Holy Ghost, tasted the good word of God and powers of the world to come.  What stands out the most to me is they were partakers of the HG.  Only saved people can be partakers, therefore I conclude Paul is addressing believers.

 

 

v 6 "If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance"  --- to me this is saying once a person is saved, they don't have to keeping going back to God for salvation if they fall away.  

 

 

 

 

 

For them to be enlightened simply means that the gospel has been shared with them. They have tasted and not swallowed or taken in that heavenly gift. Jesus Christ is on their lips but their hearts are far from Him. (Matthey 7:20-23) Being partakers of the Holy Ghost means that they were sharing the work of others (Acts 19:13-15)

 

As far as the renew them again goes, you have to put it into the context of the steps of salvation. Repentance comes to some people but they never accept Jesus. You can hear these people talk about things like; turn the other cheek, new lease on life, turning over a new leaf, starting a new chapter in my life, and things like that. These people may feel different or good for a while but their salvation was hollow and never dependent upon Jesus Christ. Now you can see how that the next time they hear the gospel it's describe as being impossible to get them to repent because to them it didn't work the first time so why try it again. It's all a lack of faith.

 

In all reality we see this a lot in our churches today. People who hear the gospel and have an experience but nothing ever changes because there was no faith or salvation. Sad really.

 

Think on these things and read John 4:10-14 that's the difference between tasting and drinking.

[GraceSaved]

Paid4:  Ok...so the group in v 4 were never truly converted? They were enlightened, tasted, partakers but fell away and rejected Christ, therefore crucifying Him once again through their rejection? So,in a sense, Paul is giving them a warning of possible falling away if we don't go past milk because we wouldn't get the nourishment needed for growth to keep us from falling away and going back to the world or to the law as those in v 4? That's why v 8 says whose end is to be burned?

v 9 is the transition back to the true believer? First a word of warning v 4 and then encouragement? A call from immaturity to maturity?

I'll keep meditating on it.

[Salyan]

Covenantor, Would you mind posting a link to that "Lot, a disgrace to grace" sermon? All I found was "Don't be a Disgrace to Grace" in which the WHOLE MESSAGE is exhorting born again Christians to live right and separate from the world and worldly lusts. The message also speaks of different Jesus's which the world loves, and the righteous Jesus which the world hates. Adrian Rogers preached the Jesus who loved all mankind, gave himself for everyone. He was a Godly, sound Bible preacher and YOU don't like him because he plowed down the row of the Calvinist/reformed. Truly born again saved persons, indwelled with the Holy Ghost, CAN fall into sin so bad that God will KILL them...he chastens his own. Furthermore, YOU are presently in sin yourself not only because you teach false doctrine, but because you are falsely accusing a man of God.

Please post it, thanks.

 

Let's avoid the personal attacks, please and thank you. 

[DaveW]

Let's avoid the personal attacks, please and thank you.

He posts trash and someone points that out and THEY get rebuked?

Really???????

[John81]

I've listened to many sermons from Adrian Rogers and never heard him say anything even remotely like the idea of one being saved and living like the devil. I have heard Charles Stanley say that, but not Adrian Rogers. If he did say that in a sermon I would very much like to hear that sermon for myself.

 

And really, there is no need to bring up Calvinism in every thread or to take shots at one another in every thread.

 

I still love listening to Rogers and have learned much from his sermons over the years but I'm not going to take a jab at someone because they make a claim regarding one of his sermons. I'm content to await a link to the sermon or perhaps a correction if an error has occurred.

[prophet1]

I have been working with a Church of God convert, who is very confused. We struggled and struggled, but he couldn't believe in Eternal Life (OSAS). Come to find out, he was secretly a porn addict. All of his "theology" was because of guilt of unconfessed (and prOBably unforgiven) sin. This was the second time that I struggled long with an apparent disciple, who turned out to be a pervert. One man, who I challenged on his COGIC illogic, recieved Christ, and has been in the ministry now for years. Difference? He wasn't a pervert hiding his sin, pretending to be fine. I am leary now, of those who slap Christ in the face, and say "your sacrifice was not enough, you need my help in keeping me". I'm afraid I'll find a cross-dresser in the closet, or worse.

[John81]

Some folks who don't believe in eternal salvation (security) also don't know the truth of biblical salvation. That's where I always begin with such folks, going over biblical salvation with them to find out if they even understand what that is and if they have been born again or not.

 

Growing up in Methodist Sunday school I never once heard the Gospel. All I got out of all those years was that I had to "be good" to get into heaven and if I wasn't "good enough" I would go to hell. Naturally that left me frightened since there was never given, because there isn't, a definition of just what "good enough" means. To make my fear worse, I was also taught that not only was the devil always around trying to "get me", but God was also looking on just waiting for me to do something wrong so He could punish me.

 

That's what I got out of Methodist Sunday school and that's the baggage I carried with me until I was 18, finally heard the Gospel and was saved.

[AVBibleBeliever]

First of all study the issue that you have a prOBlem with.

Second go to him and him alone. Matthey 18:15

If he is a real pastor then he will have no prOBlem discussing with you the difference of opinion. Whatever the case, use scripture and only scripture as your guide.

Third do all of this with a restoring/growing attitude. Don't accuse the pastor (1 Timothy 5:19) of doing wrong, rather have him show you with scripture why he believes what he believes.

 

Most importantly be in much prayer daily and be very patient. Way too many "church" decisions are made on the spur of the moment giving heed to the devil and lying spirits oftentimes. Never make a spiritual decision in the flesh. That's to say don't let feelings rule over discernment.

 

Keep these things in mind and keep a pure heart and God will lead you in what to do. Always remember that the only one you both will ever have to answer to is God himself. Hebrews 13:17 and Romans 14:11-12

 

I'm going through some of the same stuff you are right now. Praying for you for sure!!

Matthew 18 is if a brother hath SINNED against you then go to him.  Not If you pastor teaches something you disagree with.

 

Remember you, I, we have set our churches up so the pastor is the leader (not Biblical) and basically it is his church.

 

If the teaching is an out right false Doctrine there is no going to him alone it is ALL are to confront him ASAP and if he receives it ok if not.  You all know what is supposed to be done.

 

If he is teaching his Opinion he should have stated it as such.

 

For example I believe that certain babies and children under age will go to hell.  I don't agree that there will be no babies and children under age in hell.  But if the pastor says there will be no babies in hell I wont argue or even bring it up.  I read and understand 1Cor 7:10-14 differently than he 1Cor 78:10-14 ¶ And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:  But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.   But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.   And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.   For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.

 

If you remember when Paul taught and how they assembled and carried out their meetings and preaching our assemblies today are a far cry form that.

[Salyan]

He posts trash and someone points that out and THEY get rebuked?

Really???????

The rebuke was not concerning doctrine, it was for the rudeness of the response. Do you really want this forum to devolve into a doctrinally-accurate bash fest? It's come close in the past. Let's just not start down that route again.

As far as doctrinal issues go, please just remember that the forum at large is not aware of everything the mods may be doing behind the scenes. Rest assured that we are not ignoring your concerns.

And you know, it would be really nice sometime to be able to do my jOB as mod without getting hassled for it. Just sayin'...

[Covenanter]

Covenanter:  Are you saying that Lot was not saved?  If so, and I apologize if I misinterpreted your post, but I would have to disagree based on 2 Peter 2.

 

The whole chapter is about false prophets and teachers (having a form of Godliness) living among the truly Godly and their destruction thereof.

 

v 7 And delivered "just" Lot...

 

v 8 "For that "righteous" man (Lot) dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed (disturbed/troubled) his "righteous" soul from day to day with their (not his) unlawful deeds."

 

v 9 The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly (Lot) out of temptations...

 

God destroyed the people who vexed him as an example to those false teachers who should come after and live ungodly even though they profess Godliness.

You are right. I do believe Lot was saved, and an example of God keeping a man in his integrity even when surrounded by wickedness. Rogers was preaching the call to godly living by believers. The point of citing that sermon was the specific teaching (that I & the Premier Radio presenters considered erroneous) was that Lot's evil lifestyle was a disgrace to grace, and an example of how a saved person can live an evil life & still be saved.

 

Such teaching is widespread, & can lead instead to the conclusion that a saved person can fall away & become lost. Modern evangelism methods, calling for a decision without repentance, & using an admission of guilt instead of repentance in the "salvation prayer" leads to spurious conversion, temporary reformation, & falling away. But that is NOT loss of salvation.

 

A right doctrine of salvation - heart-felt repentance for sin, a living faith in Jesus as Lord & Saviour, evidenced by the fruit of the Holy Spirit. joy & love in prayer, worship & fellowship, etc, will see a lifelong salvation.  

bbbbbbbbbbbb

[AVBibleBeliever]

The rebuke was not concerning doctrine, it was for the rudeness of the response. Do you really want this forum to devolve into a doctrinally-accurate bash fest? It's come close in the past. Let's just not start down that route again.

As far as doctrinal issues go, please just remember that the forum at large is not aware of everything the mods may be doing behind the scenes. Rest assured that we are not ignoring your concerns.

And you know, it would be really nice sometime to be able to do my jOB as mod without getting hassled for it. Just sayin'...

I find DaveW to be rude quite often in his responses, yet he is not always rebuked or rebuked enough. 

 

We must learn a little respectful decorum here or it just doesn't benefit anyone.