Article on "Once Saved, Always Saved!"

[John81]

Firstly, "falling" in scripture doesn't necessarily mean losing your salvation.

Proverbs 24:16 For a just man falleth seven times, and riseth up again: but the wicked shall fall into mischief.



A Christian is not justified by the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ (Ga 2:16), so the "whosoever" Paul is speaking to in Gal 5:4 are not saved people but those whom Christ has become of no effect, they are trusting in their works, therefore they are fallen from grace.



This is supposed to "clearly state" that a Christian can fall from salvation, when there is no salvation mentioned in the verse or the context of the verse? The context is Israel's rebellion and how they reaped what they sowed, the same principle applies to us, but we don't lose our salvation and go to hell for it. The falling here can mean a number of things, falling from fellowship with the Lord, falling into temptation and a snare, etc.



Hebrews was written to "Hebrews" and not the body of Christ, therefore the doctrine in it is for Israel and not the Christian. Some of the doctrine therein compliments Church Age doctrine but not in regards to salvation. There will be a future time when a person CAN lose their salvation, e.g. during the Tribulation if a believer takes the mark of the beast he will lose his salvation and be damned.

So one needs to be very careful trying to apply the salvation passages in Hebrews to the Christian today, they will contradict if you do not rightly divide the scripture and ascertain which group of people are being written to.



There is no record that either of these believers lost their salvation. It's clear they sinned as we are all capable of, and Simon was told to repent, but no loss of salvation is mentioned in any verse.



There were no born again Christians in the context of John 6:66, neither had Jesus yet died on the cross, been buried, and risen from the dead, they were technically still under the Old Testament. So using it as an example of how a Christian can lose his salvation is pointless.



The context of the 1 John passage you quote is "fellowship" with God, not salvation. A Christian is to confess his sins to God in order to stay in fellowship with God, keeping a right heart with God, not in order to stay saved.

Redemption and forgiveness of sins is through the blood of Jesus Christ, not through our confession of sins on a regular basis.

Ephesians 1:7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;
Colossians 1:14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:



I've given these explanations for the benefit of others who are reading this thread.

Coc33, it's apparent to me that you are getting confused between a person falling from fellowship with God and falling from salvation. None of the passages you quote "clearly" show a person losing their salvation, but rather show people who either were never saved to begin with, or people who are saved and fall into sin, the exception being the doctrine to Israel during the Tribulation.

A Christian can fall away from God into sin, which disrupts fellowship between them and the Lord, but this does not result in damnation. It will result in chastisement because he/she is a son of God, and may even result in physical death, but the Bible doesn't teach that a Christian can lose the salvation of their soul, at all.

1 Corinthians 11:30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. 31 For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. 32 But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.

Proverbs 3:11 My son, despise not the chastening of the LORD; neither be weary of his correction: 12 For whom the LORD loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.

Unfortunately there are some not interested in biblical truth, only in stirring the pot for their own amusement or attempting to spread false teachings for whatever reason. Biblical truth has been put forth by yourself and others, no point in casting forth more pearls before those unwilling to accept them.

[heartstrings]

If I am misinterpreting, then please give a "proper" interpretation of these passages.

We can agree that the Bible does not contradict itself. These passages clearly refute OSAS so that would leave only one other possibility and that is that you are misapplying the passages that you use to attempt to prove OSAS.

I will leave it with what I wrote above. The truth is there, believe it or not.

To understand Galatians 5:4. we need to back up to chapter 1. Pay close attention to Galatians 1:6 and 7. Someone was trying to present 'another gospel' to the Galatians and that gospel involved a "works based' justification. Now read Galatians 5:4

1Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

2Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.

3For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.

4Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. Did you catch that? These individuals only had the law for their justification. They weren't even saved by grace.


5For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.

6For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.

7Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth?

8This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you.

9A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.

10I have confidence in you through the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded: but he that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be.

The ten verses above are addressing BOTH saved and lost people. Read it carefully and prayerfully....
#1. those "of you" who are trustng in the "law" for justification. (verse 4)
#2 Those who are justified by faith (verses 5 and 6)
Also, in chapter 1 and in chapter 5 verse 10, it addresses the false teachers who are propagating the works based justification.
There were deceivers in the Galatian church. Because of this, some people were still lost and others who were saved, were being duped into trying to mix grace with works. It is one thing to be ignorant and deceived but another to be willingly ignorant; Anyone who propagates doctrines of works for salvation; such as baptismal regeneration and propagates the lie that one can lose their salvation if they don't do this or that, is one of those preaching 'another gospel' .....Galatians 1:6,7,8 and in Galatians 5:10. Edited January 11, 2011 by heartstrings

[Faith1611]

I am going to take the Bible for what it says. Eternal life, everlasting life, never leave me nor forsake me.

I use this illustration and it has become even more real to me because of my own son.

When we have a child born to us is there anything that can make that child no longer our child.

I have a son who has gone as far away from what he has been taught is right you can say he has done a 180 degree turn from the way he was brought up. He even got to the point he had to be told, "Do not return until you get right."

Is he no longer my son? If he denies me as his father is he no longer my son? If he changes his name, is he no longer my son? If he suffers from so unknown disease, has reaction to some drug, illicit or not, and his brain or reasoning somehow malfunctions, is he no longer my son?

What does that have to do with eternal security? Because that is what it is, eternal security. Once I have become a child of God, I am a child of God. No one, not me, you or anyone else can change that. My son will always be my son and I will be his dad.

Your analogy is false for two reasons:
1- It is unBiblical. Nowhere does the Bible ever make such an argument.
2- Your son could grow up and have nothing to do with you(God forbid). You surely would not have a son. He could become a criminal and be executed for his crimes(God forbid). You would lose your son. By your "logic", NONE CAN EVER BE LOST, because after all, who has made all men? Who is their Creator and hence their Father? Therefore, all are His sons and daughters no matter what they do, and so UNIVERSALISM IS TRUE, if your argument is valid. The fact that your argument leads to universalism proves it is false. God has lost many children, and lamented it-Matthew 23:37-39

[Faith1611]

To understand Galatians 5:4. we need to back up to chapter 1. Pay close attention to Galatians 1:6 and 7. Someone was trying to present 'another gospel' to the Galatians and that gospel involved a "works based' justification. Now read Galatians 5:4

1Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

2Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.

3For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.

4Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. Did you catch that? These individuals only had the law for their justification. They weren't even saved by grace.


5For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.

6For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.

7Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth?

8This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you.

9A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.

10I have confidence in you through the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded: but he that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be.

The ten verses above are addressing BOTH saved and lost people. Read it carefully and prayerfully....
#1. those "of you" who are trustng in the "law" for justification. (verse 4)
#2 Those who are justified by faith (verses 5 and 6)
Also, in chapter 1 and in chapter 5 verse 10, it addresses the false teachers who are propagating the works based justification.
There were deceivers in the Galatian church. Because of this, some people were still lost and others who were saved, were being duped into trying to mix grace with works. It is one thing to be ignorant and deceived but another to be willingly ignorant; Anyone who propagates doctrines of works for salvation; such as baptismal regeneration and propagates the lie that one can lose their salvation if they don't do this or that, is one of those preaching 'another gospel' .....Galatians 1:6,7,8 and in Galatians 5:10.

Absolutely and totally wrong. These people LEFT OFF justification by faith and went back under justification by the law! The whole letter proves Paul is addressing LAPSED BELIEVERS who fell prey to another gospel promoted by heretics. In Chapter three he asks who had bewitched them away from following the truth and that they had RUN WELL, and now were off course. Paul was speaking to believers. The OSAS defender HAS TO SAY he was speaking to unsaved Jews because he desires to save his false doctrine, rather than accept the teaching of Scripture.

Paul had NO REASON to rebuke Law-observing Jews for "going back under" the law they had never left, which is what this defense of OSAS is actually saying! It is utter nonsense. Believers had gone back under the Law and Paul said that they which do that have FALLEN FROM GRACE and that Christ was of no avail, profit or benefit to them. They were cut off from Him. All these things are IMPOSSIBLE of Paul believed OSAS. Since he plainly said them, then he did not believe OSAS. What is troubling is the ease with which defenders of false doctrine will twist the Scriptures to save their errors. Truly this troubles my spirit. Why can't they just admit the truth--that if a believe departs from the faith into heresy of sins of the flesh, it appears he will not fare well on the day of judgment. This is obvious. Edited January 12, 2011 by Faith1611

[HappyChristian]

Your analogy is false for two reasons:
1- It is unBiblical. Nowhere does the Bible ever make such an argument.
2- Your son could grow up and have nothing to do with you(God forbid). You surely would not have a son. He could become a criminal and be executed for his crimes(God forbid). You would lose your son. By your "logic", NONE CAN EVER BE LOST, because after all, who has made all men? Who is their Creator and hence their Father? Therefore, all are His sons and daughters no matter what they do, and so UNIVERSALISM IS TRUE, if your argument is valid. The fact that your argument leads to universalism proves it is false. God has lost many children, and lamented it-Matthew 23:37-39

Fallacious argument here - the Bible clearly teaches that we are not children of God until after salvation. God being our Creator does not automatically make Him our Father. But....when we are born again into His family, we become His children. Just as a child born to a man becomes his son. And remains his son, no matter what that son chooses to do or say. Many children have turned their backs on their parents, and in some cases have even "divorced" them. But that doesn't end sonship. No matter what a child does, that child is still the child of his father. Period. And the same is true with our relationship with God our Heavenly Father. He assures us over and over that salvation is eternal, that we are SEALED by the Holy Spirit...until the day of our redemption, which will not come until after our physical bodies die.

We welcome those who are not IFB to our site. And we are more than willing to answer questions. But we are not going to allow attacks on our biblical beliefs like this to continue. If you have honest questions, that's fine. But those of you who are pushing the heresy that a Christian can lose their salvation need to cease and desist right now.
Thank you.

[Soj]

2- Your son could grow up and have nothing to do with you(God forbid). You surely would not have a son.

That's exactly what happened in the parable of the prodigal son, yet his father still welcomed him as his son with open arms when he returned.

By your "logic", NONE CAN EVER BE LOST, because after all, who has made all men? Who is their Creator and hence their Father? Therefore, all are His sons and daughters no matter what they do, and so UNIVERSALISM IS TRUE, if your argument is valid. The fact that your argument leads to universalism proves it is false. God has lost many children, and lamented it-Matthew 23:37-39

I think Bro. Jim's analogy was right on the money!

By his "logic", NONE CAN EVER BE LOST once they are born again into God's family.

John 1:12-13 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

God may be the Creator of all men, but he is certainly not the Father of all. Jesus said to those Pharisees "ye are of your father the devil" (John 8:44), and in the future judgment there will be some who God "never knew" (Matt 7:23) so they were never his sons.

[Faith1611]

That's exactly what happened in the parable of the prodigal son, yet his father still welcomed him as his son with open arms when he returned.



I think Bro. Jim's analogy was right on the money!

By his "logic", NONE CAN EVER BE LOST once they are born again into God's family.

John 1:12-13 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

God may be the Creator of all men, but he is certainly not the Father of all. Jesus said to those Pharisees "ye are of your father the devil" (John 8:44), and in the future judgment there will be some who God "never knew" (Matt 7:23) so they were never his sons.

Uh, lets see here--Lucifer and the 1/3 that fell were once Elect Angels. They were certainly God's. Paul said all men were "HIS OFFSPRING" in Acts 17. In Ezekiel God said ALL SOULS ARE MINE. In Eccl 12 it says the flesh returns to the earth and the spirit returns to God WHO GAVE IT.

All men are God's offspring. All belong to Him. But many are estranged from Him by sin. Angels and men, IN A STATE OF GRACE, lost that grace and blessed estate. These are facts. OSAS defenders believe sin somehow changed in the New Testament and doesn't separate from God, doesn't destroy spiritual life and grieve away the Spirit of grace. This is foolishness.

[coc333]

Soj,

I have been sitting here attempting to come up with the words to reply to you; not because you have disproved what the Bible clearly teaches which is that one can fall (lose one's salvation) but because of the arguments which you offer. I must say that what you say fits well with denominational doctrine/argument. But, what it doesn't fit with is the Word of God.

You are correct that one is not saved by the law (law here refering to the OT) but the problem you have in making the argument that these individuals are not saved is that one is saved by Grace (Eph 2:8-10) and one can not fall from something one is not on. For example, can I fall from a building which I am not standing on? Of course not. Can I fall from Grace if I have never been in Grace? Of course not. Let's make this simple. 1. A person is saved by Grace (not grace only) as taught in Eph 2:8-10 2. A person can fall from Grace as taught in Gal 5:4 3. Therefore a person who was in Grace and thus saved and fallen from Grace is therefore lost again. If 1 and 2 are true then 3 is certainly true. 1 is true. 2 is true. Therefore the conclusion 3 is true.

As to 1 Cor 10:12, we clearly read in context that the preceeding verses refer back to the Israelites and their murmering and destruction. It also clearly states that these are for our example and states clearly that one can fall. Your attempt to explain away what is clearly taught is not going to work.

I am not even going to dignify your statements on Hebrews with a response. Wow!

No evidence that these lost their salvation? Um....Peter stated that Simon would perish with his money (Peter was inspired and you are not). You state correctly that Simon sinned....what are the wages of sin according to the Word of God? (Rom 6:23) It was spiritual death which Paul wrote about. While I admit that it does not state "Demas lost his salvation," it does state that he departed because he love the present world more. It is reasonable to say that he fell away and thus lost his salvation. Now, I am not saying that one or both did not repent and thus was restored but they did need to repent to be restored.

I grant that John 6:66 occured prior to Christ's DBR and the establishment of the church but then again so did the thief on the cross and unless I am mistaken you would use him to justify the "faith only" doctrine. I know that IFBs do use him.

Once again I am not going to even bother dignifying your response on 1 John with a response.

You should go back and study 1 Cor 11:30 and Prov 3:11. The very passages which you quote disprove your argument.

You have still failed to prove what you can not prove and that is the OSAS doctrine.

[coc333]

Unfortunately there are some not interested in biblical truth, only in stirring the pot for their own amusement or attempting to spread false teachings for whatever reason. Biblical truth has been put forth by yourself and others, no point in casting forth more pearls before those unwilling to accept them.

John, I won't attemt to question your motives as to why you believe in the denominational doctrine which you do. I will question the false doctrine which you hold on to but I do it in love. The truth has been put forth and you are now free to accept it or not.

[coc333]

Fallacious argument here - the Bible clearly teaches that we are not children of God until after salvation. God being our Creator does not automatically make Him our Father. But....when we are born again into His family, we become His children. Just as a child born to a man becomes his son. And remains his son, no matter what that son chooses to do or say. Many children have turned their backs on their parents, and in some cases have even "divorced" them. But that doesn't end sonship. No matter what a child does, that child is still the child of his father. Period. And the same is true with our relationship with God our Heavenly Father. He assures us over and over that salvation is eternal, that we are SEALED by the Holy Spirit...until the day of our redemption, which will not come until after our physical bodies die.

We welcome those who are not IFB to our site. And we are more than willing to answer questions. But we are not going to allow attacks on our biblical beliefs like this to continue. If you have honest questions, that's fine. But those of you who are pushing the heresy that a Christian can lose their salvation need to cease and desist right now.
Thank you.

Ok Happy, you want a question, here are some questions for you.

1. What is your thoughts on the "prodigal" son in Luke 15:11ff?
2. What was his condition before he left? Was he a son then?
3. According to the father (vs 32) what was his condition when he was gone?
4. According to the father (vs 32) what was his condition when he returned?

[Kleptes]

Ok Happy, you want a question, here are some questions for you.

1. What is your thoughts on the "prodigal" son in Luke 15:11ff?
2. What was his condition before he left? Was he a son then?
3. According to the father (vs 32) what was his condition when he was gone?
4. According to the father (vs 32) what was his condition when he returned?

Coc it doesn't surprise me that you have the security of a believer wrong, seeing as how you have the gospel message wrong to begin with.

What was the condition before he left? He was alive.
What was his condition when he was gone? He was dead.
What was his conditon when he returned? He was alive and found.

What is your point now? That son was spiritually lost? That he was no longer the son of that father? That he was spiritually dead? If you think that he was spiritually dead or lost you are mistaken. If you think he was disowned by his father you aremistaken as well. Read it in context.
11And he said, A certain man had two sons:

12And the younger of them said to his father, Father, give me the portion of goods that falleth to me. And he divided unto them his living.

13And not many days after the younger son gathered all together, and took his journey into a far country, and there wasted his substance with riotous living.

14And when he had spent all, there arose a mighty famine in that land; and he began to be in want.

15And he went and joined himself to a citizen of that country; and he sent him into his fields to feed swine.

16And he would fain have filled his belly with the husks that the swine did eat: and no man gave unto him.

17And when he came to himself, he said, How many hired servants of my father's have bread enough and to spare, and I perish with hunger!

18I will arise and go to my father, and will say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee,

19And am no more worthy to be called thy son: make me as one of thy hired servants.

20And he arose, and came to his father. But when he was yet a great way off, his father saw him, and had compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed him.

21And the son said unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in thy sight, and am no more worthy to be called thy son.

22But the father said to his servants, Bring forth the best robe, and put it on him; and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet:

23And bring hither the fatted calf, and kill it; and let us eat, and be merry:

24For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found. And they began to be merry.

25Now his elder son was in the field: and as he came and drew nigh to the house, he heard musick and dancing.

26And he called one of the servants, and asked what these things meant.

27And he said unto him, Thy brother is come; and thy father hath killed the fatted calf, because he hath received him safe and sound.

28And he was angry, and would not go in: therefore came his father out, and intreated him.

29And he answering said to his father, Lo, these many years do I serve thee, neither transgressed I at any time thy commandment: and yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I might make merry with my friends:

30But as soon as this thy son was come, which hath devoured thy living with harlots, thou hast killed for him the fatted calf.

31And he said unto him, Son, thou art ever with me, and all that I have is thine.

32It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found

That son asked for his portion of goods that falleth him right? Hmmmm does that mean the fther gave him his birth certificate and said son you are no longer my child? I don't think so. Whether you like it or not he was still born of that father and is still a son. This then means that his portion isn't salvation. How about him going to a far country and wasting all his substance with riotous living. Does that mean he was literally lost and didn't know where he was? No the man knew full well where he was and if you read he acknowledges his state. According to that father he was lost. Because that father had no clear idea where he was and supposed him dead. That still doesn't mean he wasn't the father's son. If that were the case then why would the father even fret about a child that isn't his? The son for sure realizes that he has a father still, because he even say I will go back to my father. Showing he is still a relative. He heads back home very much alive and there is something else when he is returning home. That father (relative) sees him a far off and has compassion and runs to him and falls on his neck and kisses him. Wow! Sounds like he still acknowledges his son doesn't it? That son wasn't physically dead as the father supposed nor was he physically lost as supposed. But very much alive. Now im not saying our Heavenly Father is that nieve. But it is a perfect picture of a Heavenly Father that loves one of his children, to wait on him and then run to him and receive him back into fellowship. Notice that word "fellowship", that father gave that son a welcome home dinner. That boy never lost his Father and that Father never really lost his son. or he wouldn't have given him a first rate dinner ie the fatted calf, best robe, a ring on his finger, and even shoes! The whole idea is one can fall out of sinc with God and still be his child. It can take sometime for that child to come to his senses as the son in this parable did. Then there is that oh so famous question. What if that son had died in riotous living? It doesn't have anything to do with his relationship to that father. Paul pretty much clears that up with the episode of the son who fornicated with his fathers wife. Paul says to give him over to satan for the destruction of the flesh so that his soul maybe saved in the last day of Jesus Christ. That destruction of the flesh is death. So yes a child can go so far as to physically die in his sins yet still be saved.

1 Corinthians 5:1-7 1It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife.

2And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you.

3For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed,

4In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,

5To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

6Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?

7Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:

8Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

9I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:

10Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.

11But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

12For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?

13But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

Purge out that leaven simply means withdraw fellowship from him.

So the security of the believer is a truth. Eternity means just that eternity.

[Coolhand Luke]

The question is not "Can someone who is saved ever lose their salvation?" The real question is "Where they ever saved to begin with?".
Jesus Christ Himself used terms like eternal and everlasting when teaching about salvation. When can eternity end? When we are born again with this eternal life, how can it ever end?

The bible teaches us that salvation is a gift from God.
Ephesians 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

There are two common ways this gift is viewed. Lets compare the two views.

A very erroneous view is that this gift is something akin to something that can be held and/or maintained.

This view is mostly used by those with Armenian theology; ie, "you can lose your salvation".

This has God giving the gift of salvation like a trophy and a person accepts it. They hold it, perhaps places it on a shelf. They keep it clean, they make sure nothing else is placed on that shelf. They cherish it and take good care of it. It is possible however that if over time they begin to ignore it, they don't keep it cleaned or shined. Clutter begins to build up on the shelf its on, or its just not valued anymore, that Jesus will come and take it back. There are those that don't believe He will take it back, but that the person can throw it away or give it back. Either way at some point, that person has lost their salvation.

The other biblically based view describes this gift as being spirtual in nature. One that cannot be lost. Jesus in reference to salvation talked about "Living water".

John 4:10 Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.
John 4:14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.
15 The woman saith unto him, Sir, give me this water, that I thirst not, neither come hither to draw.

This has God giving the gift of salvation, a cup of living water. The person accepts it by drinking it. This water then becomes as a well of water springing up into everlasting life that causes the person to never thirst. This gift changes the person. It is not something that can be held, or placed on a shelf. It is in you. It will not be taken nor can it be given back.

Also there are two other aspects of salvation. The prophet Jonah and King David by revelation/inspration of God wrote about it.
Jonah
Jonah 2:9 But I will sacrifice unto Thee with the voice of thanksgiving; I will pay that that I have vowed. Salvation is of the LORD.
King David
Psalms 51:12 Restore unto me the joy of Thy salvation; ( also notice it is the joy of salvation not salvation)
Psalms 51:14 Deliver me from bloodguiltness, O God, the God of my salvation:

Primarly it is God's salvation not ours. Jonah 2:9, Psalms 51:12.
Secondarily we can only claim it is our salvation by understanding that it is God's first. Psalms 51:14.

Finally salvation is talked about by the Apostle Paul as adoption. Understanding adoption in Roman law, of which Paul was very knowledgeable, is neccesary. Under Roman law of Paul's day, a father could disnown his natural son/child. However if a man adopted a son/child, he was forbidden by law to ever disown them. This was considered to be very cruel. The Romans knew that a natural child was what a parent got by no choice of their own, The appearance of the child, if they were male of female, or had something wrong with it perhaps was out of their control. Thus, according to Roman law, a naturally born child could be disowned.
However, people adopting a child knew exactly what they were getting, and no one adopted a child unless that specific child was wanted as a family member, so according to law an adopted child could not be disowned. He or she was permanently added to the family. Remember Paul who was a Roman citizen, who preached to Romans, used the term adoption, and we should feel confident that the Holy Spirit lead him to teach adoption. He and the people he taught had a full understanding of Roman law of adoption. Thus when they heard about saved people being adopted, they would have been keenly aware, that they would never be disowned.

Edited January 12, 2011 by Coolhand Luke

[John81]

Fallacious argument here - the Bible clearly teaches that we are not children of God until after salvation. God being our Creator does not automatically make Him our Father. But....when we are born again into His family, we become His children. Just as a child born to a man becomes his son. And remains his son, no matter what that son chooses to do or say. Many children have turned their backs on their parents, and in some cases have even "divorced" them. But that doesn't end sonship. No matter what a child does, that child is still the child of his father. Period. And the same is true with our relationship with God our Heavenly Father. He assures us over and over that salvation is eternal, that we are SEALED by the Holy Spirit...until the day of our redemption, which will not come until after our physical bodies die.

We welcome those who are not IFB to our site. And we are more than willing to answer questions. But we are not going to allow attacks on our biblical beliefs like this to continue. If you have honest questions, that's fine. But those of you who are pushing the heresy that a Christian can lose their salvation need to cease and desist right now.
Thank you.

:amen:

[Bro Jim]

And Thank You

[HappyChristian]

Uh, lets see here--Lucifer and the 1/3 that fell were once Elect Angels. They were certainly God's. Paul said all men were "HIS OFFSPRING" in Acts 17. In Ezekiel God said ALL SOULS ARE MINE. In Eccl 12 it says the flesh returns to the earth and the spirit returns to God WHO GAVE IT.

All men are God's offspring. All belong to Him. But many are estranged from Him by sin. Angels and men, IN A STATE OF GRACE, lost that grace and blessed estate. These are facts. OSAS defenders believe sin somehow changed in the New Testament and doesn't separate from God, doesn't destroy spiritual life and grieve away the Spirit of grace. This is foolishness.

Please re-read my post (or read it for the first time if you haven't yet read it). STOP attacking our beliefs. No-one who has an ounce of knowledge of scripture believes that sin doesn't separate from God. But anyone who reads scripture and BELIEVES WHAT GOD SAYS knows that salvation is eternal.

coc- the prodigal son was about a young man who thought he knew better than his father and went into a riotous life until all of his money was spent. After being in the dregs of life for a while, it hit him that things had been better all along with his father. And so he returned, willing to take the place of a servant rather than a son. But the father, who had been watching for his son all this time (how else would he have known it was his son from a far way off?), proclaimed him as his son, even to the angering of his eldest son. Was that son really physically dead? Of course not. Was the father speaking spiritually? No - in the culture of that day, when a child walked away from the family's teachings (and it's still seen in at least the Muslim and Amish communities) they became as dead. Because the father obviously never gave up hope to see his son again, we know he didn't mean physical death, and we know that the father hoped always that the son would return.

Did the son have to become a baby again in order to again be a son? No - the father proclaimed that he was STILL his son and not a servant by calling for a robe and ring. The POSITION of sonship did not change. The relationship change between the father and the son was one of distance, but not the severing of father/sonhood.

It is much the same as today if someone's child walked away from the family and chose to go into the world. That child would still be a child of those parents, even if the parents mourned him/her as though there were a death. But if that child wakes up and comes home repentant, what joy will fill the home of that family.

In the same way, the child of the Heavenly Father may choose to turn his/her back. We are human and make unspiritual decisions that can lead to backsliding. The relationship change in a backsliding situation is not one of POSITION, but rather one of distance.