Has anyone fallen from grace?

[shnarkle]

If we can "fall from grace", isn't Christ's intercession ineffective?

The word "elect" means chosen of God. If God makes this choice, can Satan negate it, by working through a rebellious heart? How? How can one of the elect rebel after being saved by God's grace? Isn't the idea of regeneration based upon the converted heart by God?

Once God has chosen one of his elect, can Satan's accusation persuade God to hand them over to Satan? If so, then what power is there in Christ's death and resurrection? Have Christ's intercessory prayers on behalf of the elect become ineffective now that he has taken his place at the right hand of the Father? What is the likihood that God will not listen to his son? Does the father not trust the judgment of his son?

If the regenerate man has the power to condemn themselves, then they can overcome the election of God, and the intercession of Christ. Satan can appeal to one's autonomy the same way he appealed to Adam and Eve in order that one may condemn themselves. Therefore Christ's intercession fails to accomplish anything.

Therefore Christians can have no confidence in their own prayers. If autonomous man can overcome Christ's prayers, then hasn't Satan defeated Christ? Hasn't Satan has defeated the power of prayer?

[postroad]

[Replying to post 25 by amortalman]

How many antichrists in heaven?

1 John 2:18-19 New International Version (NIV)

Warnings Against Denying the Son
18 Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour. 19 They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.

There is such a close connection between 1 John 2:18-19 and Hebrews 6: 4-6 that I have to assume that you view those mentioned in Hebrews were never truly saved, to begin with, is that accurate?

I don't quite know what you're getting at by simply quoting 1 John 2:18-19. Are you claiming that the 1 John verses negate Romans 8:30? Just looking for clarity here.

The texts indicate that they were believed to have been saved at some point.

Those who left would certainly have been brought into fellowship through the authority and baptism by the Apostles themselves.

The baptism of Spirit was given at the laying on of hands of these individuals.

Either they were giving a counterfeit Holy Spirit or the Holy Spirit could be rejected after having been received.

Both options are very problematic for Christianity.

[amortalman]

[Replying to post 1 by shnarkle]

I agree with your view on this, shnarkle. But what I find most interesting, and confusing, is that the so-called God-breathed scriptures leave much confusion on this subject. Fundamentalists believe one can lose his salvation (and they have their scriptures to support it), while the Baptists and others believe that "once saved, always saved" and they, also can argue a pretty good case for their belief. So, why did God allow such confusion on this important teaching? Could it be that the scriptures are not God-breathed or even edited by God? Could it be that there is no God outside the cranium of mankind?

Let's put your argument another way. Some scientists present arguments for their interpretation of the evidence while others present different arguments for their different interpretations of the evidence. They're both quite compelling arguments. Could it be that they're both wrong?

Absolutely. But the point is there shouldn't even be any disagreements on such a monumental subject. Could not the God who determined the seasons and set the speed of light at 186,282 miles per second also see to it that his holy words were clearly understood?

Could it be that this confusion from the evidence is pointing out that what we are studying shouldn't be studied in the first place?

I couldn't have said it better myself. Let's move on from ancient fables and spend our time, talents, and resources on things that will make this one life we have count for something worthwhile.

[amortalman]

[Replying to post 25 by amortalman]

How many antichrists in heaven?

1 John 2:18-19 New International Version (NIV)

Warnings Against Denying the Son
18 Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour. 19 They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.

There is such a close connection between 1 John 2:18-19 and Hebrews 6: 4-6 that I have to assume that you view those mentioned in Hebrews were never truly saved, to begin with, is that accurate?

I don't quite know what you're getting at by simply quoting 1 John 2:18-19. Are you claiming that the 1 John verses negate Romans 8:30? Just looking for clarity here.

The texts indicate that they were believed to have been saved at some point.

Those who left would certainly have been brought into fellowship through the authority and baptism by the Apostles themselves.

The baptism of Spirit was given at the laying on of hands of these individuals.

Either they were giving a counterfeit Holy Spirit or the Holy Spirit could be rejected after having been received.

Both options are very problematic for Christianity.

There is one other option given by U.S. Southern Baptists and that is that they came very close to salvation without actually obtaining it. They "tasted" rather than consumed. You might say they courted Christ but walked away from the marriage.

But all this shows what I've said many times. There should not be dissenting interpretations among sincere students of the Bible. Almighty God could have done a much better job of editing his book. Dare we entertain the idea that this confusing book is strictly the work of men? I think truth demands it.

[postroad]

[Replying to post 33 by amortalman]

Most certainly it is entirely the work of man. I simply cross examine everything in order to implications of the texts.

[shnarkle]

Let's put your argument another way. Some scientists present arguments for their interpretation of the evidence while others present different arguments for their different interpretations of the evidence. They're both quite compelling arguments. Could it be that they're both wrong?

Absolutely. But the point is there shouldn't even be any disagreements on such a monumental subject.

Of course there should be. If no one disagreed, they would all be saved, or damned. That's clearly not God's plan. He chooses who he will have mercy on and those that will remain damned.

Could not the God who determined the seasons and set the speed of light at 186,282 miles per second also see to it that his holy words were clearly understood?

Of course, but it isn't for everyone. Christ points this simple fact out when he is asked why he speaks in parables. He points out that it isn't given for the rest to understand.

Could it be that this confusion from the evidence is pointing out that what we are studying shouldn't be studied in the first place?

I couldn't have said it better myself. Let's move on from ancient fables and spend our time, talents, and resources on things that will make this one life we have count for something worthwhile.

Well said. I also couldn't agree more. There is no point in children attempting to understand trigonometry when they have no capacity for addition or subtraction. By the same token, there is no point in endeavoring to understand parables or the entire bible when one is convinced that it is foolishness. The texts point this out as well.

It is rare to encounter a Christian that is familiar with the finer points of Hinduism or Buddhism, which is why one rarely finds one participating in their rituals.

[postroad]

[Replying to post 35 by shnarkle]

Isnt it obvious that Christianity hasn't reached a consensus on what the texts mean?

[shnarkle]

[Replying to post 35 by shnarkle]

Isnt it obvious that Christianity hasn't reached a consensus on what the texts mean?

It doesn't matter what the consensus is. The truth is all that matters, especially to those who discover it. Those who don't get it, probably aren't adapted to get it. This would be the "survival of the fittest" perspective. Those who aren't supposed to get it aren't appointed to get it. This is the doctrine of election. These are two perspectives that say effectively the same thing. There is no consensus necessary in either perspective.

[postroad]

[Replying to post 37 by shnarkle]

As it's impossible for everyone claiming belief to be correct am I to understand that most Christians are hell bound?

Could you describe what type of beliefs are anathema to God?

[shnarkle]

[Replying to post 38 by postroad]

As it\'s impossible for everyone claiming belief to be correct am I to understand that most Christians are hell bound?

People can make whatever claims they please, it makes no difference to God. Those who are hell bound are those who are not part of that systemic process by which they may bear fruit. (See Matthew 7:15-29)

Could you describe what type of beliefs are anathema to God?

I suppose I could, but I see no point in bothering with it.

[postroad]

[Replying to post 39 by shnarkle]

Ok. I'm sure they all believe they're saved though? Is a skeptic in any worse position in eternity than any of these lost believers in name only?