SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
See Opportunities to Serve with SermonIndex
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Once Saved...Always Saved???

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 Next Page )


Forrest, The ORIGINAL quote from Ormly did not have a comma. That was added in after the fact.

It was a comment that had no place here to begin with. But has continued to show Ormly's attitide towards those he feels are babies accusing them of being hateful, prideful etc, etc. I was playing his words back to him

.... but why are you now throwing stones?

If you read both my replys back to Ormly with His quote, it had NO comma.

Have a nice day!
Katy :-)

 2007/7/13 6:48


Here is a wonderful story that the Church can gleen many truths. The Body of Christ as the different tribes of Israel have different functions and offices, yet ONE. Israel had become weak through sin and mixing with false idols and this brought in and allowed the opressor to begin to rule over them.

We fight the Good Fight through the Word of God, not our fleshly fist fights. In the end, Sisera and his camp (flesh) were defeated. Yet, are some very revealing comments said about each Tribe in their readiness to defend or hide.
Judges 5:3Hear, O ye kings; give ear, O ye princes; I, even I, will sing unto the LORD; I will sing praise to the LORD God of Israel.

4LORD, when thou wentest out of Seir, when thou marchedst out of the field of Edom, the earth trembled, and the heavens dropped, the clouds also dropped water.

5The mountains melted from before the LORD, even that Sinai from before the LORD God of Israel.

6In the days of Shamgar the son of Anath, in the days of Jael, the highways were unoccupied, and the travellers walked through byways.

7The inhabitants of the villages ceased, they ceased in Israel, until that I Deborah arose, that I arose a mother in Israel.

8They chose new gods; then was war in the gates: was there a shield or spear seen among forty thousand in Israel?

9My heart is toward the governors of Israel, that offered themselves willingly among the people. Bless ye the LORD.

10Speak, ye that ride on white asses, ye that sit in judgment, and walk by the way.

11They that are delivered from the noise of archers in the places of drawing water, there shall they rehearse the righteous acts of the LORD, even the righteous acts toward the inhabitants of his villages in Israel: then shall the people of the LORD go down to the gates.

12Awake, awake, Deborah: awake, awake, utter a song: arise, Barak, and lead thy captivity captive, thou son of Abinoam.

13Then he made him that remaineth have dominion over the nobles among the people: the LORD made me have dominion over the mighty.

14Out of Ephraim was there a root of them against Amalek; after thee, Benjamin, among thy people; out of Machir came down governors, and out of Zebulun they that handle the pen of the writer.

15And the princes of Issachar were with Deborah; even Issachar, and also Barak: he was sent on foot into the valley. For the divisions of Reuben there were great thoughts of heart.

16Why abodest thou among the sheepfolds, to hear the bleatings of the flocks? For the divisions of Reuben there were great searchings of heart.

17Gilead abode beyond Jordan: and why did Dan remain in ships? Asher continued on the sea shore, and abode in his breaches.

18Zebulun and Naphtali were a people that jeoparded their lives unto the death in the high places of the field.

19The kings came and fought, then fought the kings of Canaan in Taanach by the waters of Megiddo; they took no gain of money.

20They fought from heaven; the stars in their courses fought against Sisera.

21The river of Kishon swept them away, that ancient river, the river Kishon. O my soul, thou hast trodden down strength.

22Then were the horsehoofs broken by the means of the pransings, the pransings of their mighty ones.

23Curse ye Meroz, said the angel of the LORD, curse ye bitterly the inhabitants thereof; because they came not to the help of the LORD, to the help of the LORD against the mighty.

24Blessed above women shall Jael the wife of Heber the Kenite be, blessed shall she be above women in the tent.

25He asked water, and she gave him milk; she brought forth butter in a lordly dish.

26She put her hand to the nail, and her right hand to the workmen's hammer; and with the hammer she smote Sisera, she smote off his head, when she had pierced and stricken through his temples.

27At her feet he bowed, he fell, he lay down: at her feet he bowed, he fell: where he bowed, there he fell down dead.

28The mother of Sisera looked out at a window, and cried through the lattice, Why is his chariot so long in coming? why tarry the wheels of his chariots?

29Her wise ladies answered her, yea, she returned answer to herself,

30Have they not sped? have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two; to Sisera a prey of divers colours, a prey of divers colours of needlework, of divers colours of needlework on both sides, meet for the necks of them that take the spoil?

31So let all thine enemies perish, O LORD: but let them that love him be as the sun when he goeth forth in his might. And the land had rest forty years

 2007/7/13 7:08



Katy-did wrote:
Forrest, The ORIGINAL quote from Ormly did not have a comma. That was added in after the fact.

It was a comment that had no place here to begin with. But has continued to show Ormly's attitide towards those he feels are babies accusing them of being hateful, prideful etc, etc. I was playing his words back to him

.... but why are you now throwing stones?

If you read both my replys back to Ormly with His quote, it had NO comma.

Have a nice day!
Katy :-)

Knowing the context and seeing the absence of a comma, you deliberately siezed upon the opportunity to ridicule and mis-represent another's words. That's quite a love you reveal, Katy girl. That's of Satan, but I believe your willful blindness prevents you from seeing that as well as much other truth you willfully distort as a result.
Never mind your "wonderful stories" -- You are in trouble and are likewise blind to that, as well. So bring on your insults but know that you are rebuked of the Lord.

 2007/7/13 7:18


Jeff, I do love what you said here.

Grace abounds in these who have followed Him since Abel.

It would seem that Grace abounds in ALL of those who are killed and murdered, and slandered, for believing, preaching and abiding in His so wonderful doctrine of GRACE that cannot be separated from the Blood of Jesus, beginning with Able's sacrifice signifying he placed his faith in this Grace...Jesus Christ...full of Grace and Truth. Paul in Galatians has so completely stood for Grace against all opposition, in the end being beheaded. He said, I KEPT the FAITH (Of Grace + Nothing) I have finished my course, and NOW there is laid up for me a crown, and not to me only but those who.....also stand fast in Grace + nothing, not allowing any leaven or compromise.

Thank you for that post Jeff. Great catch there!

With love in Christ Jesus

It is quite obvious all through scripture.

 2007/7/13 8:32


Jeff, I do so love these verses.

Titus 2:11
For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,

Titus 3:7
That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

WOW! Amazing Grace how sweet the sound!


 2007/7/13 9:12

Joined: 2007/2/9
Posts: 640
Southern California

 Re: Once Saved...Always Saved??? Revisited


Katy-did wrote:
Forrest, The ORIGINAL quote from Ormly did not have a comma. That was added in after the fact.

Even without a comma, one can tell what was meant, if there was not the heart to find fault, and use it against another.

It was a comment that had no place here to begin with. But has continued to show Ormly's attitide towards those he feels are babies accusing them of being hateful, prideful etc, etc. I was playing his words back to him

I have no difficulty with your disputing Ormly, or any other, if you do it without rashness, or anger.

I have only seen the quote as it is, with the comma, and the words as they are. As for the accusations of hateful and prideful, those were directed at you, and I understand your decision to be just as plain in your feelings toward him.

But quoting anyone or anything out of context is even more divisive that the accusations that have flown freely between you and others. And even if there had been no comma when you first read the statement under dispute, there was no need to make such an issue of it.

.... but why are you now throwing stones?

I am telling only what I see. and I have that right. To claim that I am judging you, and not your behavior, is incorrect.

I have been dismayed by your behavior, and by your statements, your previous behavior in post after post, and said nothing. You spoke for yourself, and revealed your heart.

If you read both my replys back to Ormly with His quote, it had NO comma.

Have a nice day!
Katy :-)

One can read it plainly without the comma.

But regardless, you will not stay on point, so I am off this thread.

Blessings to all,


Forrest Anderson

 2007/7/13 15:44Profile

Joined: 2005/2/24
Posts: 3350



UniqueWebRev wrote:
Ormly can be is done on purpose to bring out the true hearts of others, and their incompletely proved positions, so that he may present the full scriptures, or the opposing argument..

There are numerous statements that seem designed to excuse unloving or reckless words in such exchanges. Perhaps you have encountered - or used - some of them yourself. Admittedly I have far too often said such things in the past to justify my calloused comments. They appear to be reasonable and wise comments meant to take the sting out of what has been or is about to be said. The following are representative.

"Don't take it personally."

"I've got to speak and defend the truth."

"Iron sharpens iron, you know."

Starting with the last statement, let's explore these claims a bit.

It is true that "iron sharpens iron": Pr 27.17 states, "Iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another" (NASB). The question is whether this is true in every exchange between people or only in certain ones. It is not difficult to think of interactions in the Old Testament wherein the result was not necessarily beneficial to both. David's confrontation with Goliath seems to have been a sharpening experience for the former but not so much the latter (1 Sam 17). The meeting of Samuel and Agag (1 Sam 15.32-33) also comes to mind. In the New Testament, Peter's rebuke of Ananias and Sapphira seemed to be somewhat "dulling" for the deceitful couple.

Advice and commands to the contrary are also found in Scripture. Though there are many verses from the same book, i.e., Proverbs, that could be adduced, the following will suffice to dispel the universal application of 27.17:

"A fool does not delight in understanding, But only in revealing his own mind." - Pr 18.2
"When a wise man has a controversy with a foolish man, The foolish man either rages or laughs, and there is no rest." - Pr 29.9

Please understand that I am not accusing anyone of being a fool but am only seeking to demonstrate that there are some interactions that do not result in a mutual benefit. Iron can sharpen iron but, as anyone who has ever sharpened a knife knows, if it is not done properly iron can actually dull iron. So slapping Pr 27.17 on an argument does not prove that all such discussions are profitable.

Second, it is also true that Christians need to speak and defend the truth. The admonitions are hard to miss, especially in the New Testament. It is no less clear, however, that Christians are called to take the high road and to do the right thing in the right way. Perhaps the most obvious and sufficient statements come from Paul:

"As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming; "but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ, "from whom the whole body, being fitted and held together by what every joint supplies, according to the proper working of each individual part, causes the growth of the body for the building up of itself in love." - Eph 4.14-16
"Let your speech always be with grace, as though seasoned with salt, so that you will know how you should respond to each person." - Col 4.16

"We urge you, brethren, admonish the unruly, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient with everyone." - 1 Th 5.14

Even with the "unruly" we are commanded to be "patient." So our discussions and disagreements are limited by behavior that is loving, gracious, and patient.

Finally, there is my personal favorite: "Don't take it personally." If I understand this correctly, it means that I should not have an emotional reaction to an attack on my belief system but should instead process it cognitively and dispassionately, perhaps even stoically. The problem is that this is not possible: all thought has an affective component to it. The question is whether or not we are aware of the emotional valence or not.

LeDoux and Goleman argue that it is basically impossible to have conscious thought without there being an emotional component attached to it, but that the opposite is not true. All thoughts have emotions connected to them to some degree. Emotions are basic to the brain and are either consciously or unconsciously operative in any thoughts - and therefore conversations - we might have.

Fear, in fact, might be the most basic dimension of our mind - perhaps this is why Jesus so frequently told His disciples to "Fear not"? When something is said or communicated to us, it is impossible not to respond emotionally at some level. We are far better off being aware of what that emotional reaction is than to convince ourselves that we are not emotionally involved or moved by something that is said. Emotions will push us from behind if we are not aware of how they are influencing our thoughts and subsequent behaviors.

We need to keep this in mind, therefore, when we speak or write to others. How we say things is no less important than what we say. As the body of Christ, we have a wealth of knowledge and resources that any one of us - or even any single church or denomination - lacks individually. If we are to benefit from those resources, however, we must be diligent to obey 1 Cor 16.14: "Let all that you do be done in love."

All of us are prone to be suspicious of those who are "not like us" theologically; when such messages are couched in angry, disrespectful, or condescending tones it is especially difficult not to shoot the messenger and ignore the message.


 2007/7/13 20:09Profile

Joined: 2007/6/14
Posts: 562
Indiana, US


dear brothers and sisters,

not to break up the name calling and arguing :-) , but i had a thought that i wanted to throw at you guys.

here it is. can you give me 1 example of a person in the Bible who "lost their salvation" and then was "reconverted"??

i was trying to think through the NT and think of a person who would have done that. all the examples of people that others say "fell away and lost their salvation", i don't know of any of them if they "got saved again".

i have a buddy that believes that one can "lose their salvation", but he believes that one who has done that can never come back to a knowledge of the truth. that their consciences have been seared with a hot iron and it would be impossible to bring him them back to repentance (hebrews 6 according to his interpretation). although i don't totally agree with my friend, i think that he is a lot more consistant than many friends i have that believe that you can "lose salvation", get "reconverted", "lose salvation again", and get "reconverted again".

just a thought i wanted to share with you guys. scan through the NT and see if there is an individual person who you believe has done that.

ps. i am not trying to be sarcastic with the quotation marks, i am just trying to use the terminology that is normally used. thanks.

 2007/7/13 20:20Profile

Joined: 2005/11/2
Posts: 3708


This is by Albert Barns commentary, It agrees with how in studying this portion of scripture in having the ability of loosing my salvation inspire me to aggressively seek every avenue available to see if that is what this Heb 6 is saying. I could only keep saying it is impossible, It is impossible, then by the previous and following scriptures I realized that if it were possible then Christ would be lost forever and so would I be lost forever. The preponderance of other scripture that I could not loose Christ took over and I realized it was speaking of It being Impossible for this to happen to a born again Christ-one. For it is no longer I who live but Christ who lives in me, and He will never forsake Himself. I am assured of Him and Him never leaving me by His birth in me.

Then I read this from Albert Barns which confirmed what The Holy Spirit had taught me and all I new about the Love and Salvation of God, It is true and I am saved not by my works but by His and I can rest in Gods Love that I am His and He will never leave me and will always forgive me and always keep dealing with me in bringing me to the Conformity of His Son.

What a relief and a peace, now I could concentrate on the Christ in me and the Holy Spirit power of teaching me who This New life that is in me and what He is doing and has done and will do to focus on making me a son of God prepared for My Father's House.

By Albert Barnes: Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible
Heb 6:6
Verse 6. If they shall fall away. Literally, "and having fallen away." "There is no if in the Greek in this place--' having fallen away.'" Dr. J. P. Wilson. It is not an affirmation that any had actually fallen away, or that, in fact, they would do it; but the statement is, that on the supposition that they had fallen away, it would be impossible to renew them again. It is the same as supposing a case which, in fact, might never occur:--as if we should say, "had a man fallen down a precipice, it would be impossible to save him;" or, "had the child fallen into the stream, he would certainly have been drowned." But though this literally means "having fallen away," yet the sense, in the connexion in which it stands, is not improperly expressed by our common translation. The Syriac has given a version Which is remarkable, not as a correct translation, but as showing what was the prevailing belief in the time in which it was made, (probably the first or second century,) in regard to the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints. "For it is impossible that they who have been baptized, and who have tasted the gift which is from heaven, and have received the spirit of holiness, and have tasted the good word of God, and the power of the coming age, should again sin, so that they should be renewed again to repentance, and again crucify the Son of God, and put him to ignominy." The word rendered "fall away" means, properly, "to fall near by any one;" "to fall in with, or meet;" and thus to fall aside from, to swerve or deviate from; and here means undoubtedly to apostatize from, and implies an entire renunciation of Christianity, or a going back to a state of Judaism, heathenism, or sin. The Greek word occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. It is material to remark here, that the apostle does not say that any true Christian ever had fallen away. He makes a statement of what would occur on the supposition that such a thing should happen -but a statement may be made of what would occur on the supposition that a certain thing should take place, and yet it be morally certain that the event never would happen. It would be easy to suppose what would happen if the ocean should overflow a continent, or if the sun should cease to rise, and still there be entire certainty that such an event never would occur.
To renew them again. Implying that they had been before renewed, or had been true Christians. The word again"--palin --supposes this; and this passage, therefore, confirms the considerations suggested above, showing that they were true Christians who were referred to. They had once repented, but it would be impossible to bring them to this state again. The declaration, of course, is to be read in connexion with the first clause of Heb 6:4, "It is impossible to renew again to repentance those who once were true Christians, should they fall away." I know of no declaration more unambiguous than this. It is a positive declaration. It is not that it would be very difficult to do it; or that it would be impossible for man to do it, though it might be done by God; it is an unequivocal and absolute declaration that it would be utterly impracticable that it should be done by any one, or by any means; and this, I have no doubt, is the meaning of the apostle. Should a Christian fall from grace, he must perish. HE NEVER COULD BE SAVED The reason of this the apostle immediately, adds.

Seeing. This word is not in the Greek, though the sense is expressed. The Greek literally is, "having again crucified to themselves the Son of God." The reason here given is, that the crime would be so great, and they would so effectually exclude themselves from the only plan of salvation, that they could not be saved. There is but one way of salvation. Having tried that, and then renounced it, how could they then be saved? The case is like that of a drowning man. If there was but one plank by which he could be saved, and he should get on that, and then push it away and plunge into the deep, he must die. Or if there was but one rope by which the shore could be reached from a wreck, and he should cut that and cast it off, he must die. Or if a man were sick, and there was but one kind of medicine that could possibly restore him, and he should deliberately dash that away, he must die. So in religion. There is but one way of salvation. If a man deliberately rejects that, he must perish.

They crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh. Our translators have rendered this as if the Greek were-- anastaurountaV palin-- crucify again, and so it is rendered by Chrysostom, by Tindal, Coverdale, Beza, Luther, and others. But this is not properly the meaning of the Greek. The word anastaurow is an intensive word, and is employed instead of the usual word "to crucify," only to denote emphasis. It means that such an act of apostasy would be equivalent to crucifying him in an aggravated manner. Of course this is to be taken figuratively. It could not be literally true that they would thus crucify the Redeemer. The meaning is, that their conduct would be as if they had crucified him; it would bear a strong resemblance to the act by which the Lord Jesus was publicly rejected and condemned to die. The act of crucifying the Son of God was the great crime which outpeers any other deed of human guilt. Yet the apostle says, that should they who had been true Christians fall away, and reject him, they would be guilty of a similar crime. It would be a public and solemn act of rejecting him. It would show that if they had been there they would have joined in the cry, "Crucify him, crucify him!" The intensity and aggravation of such a crime perhaps the apostle meant to indicate by the intensive or emphatic ana in the anastaurountaV. Such an act would render their salvation impossible, because

(1.) the crime would be aggravated beyond that of those who rejected him and put him to death--for they knew not what they did; and

(2.) because it would be a rejection of the only possible plan of salvation, after they had had experience of its power and known its efficacy. The phrase "to themselves," Tindal renders, "as concerning themselves." Others, "as far as in them lies," or as far as they have ability to do. Others, "to their own heart." Probably Grotius has suggested the true sense. "They do it for themselves. They make the act their own. It is as if they did it themselves; and they are to be regarded as having done the deed." So we make the act of another our own when we authorize it beforehand, or approve of it after it is done.

And put him to an open shame. Make him a public example; or hold him up as worthy of death on the cross. See the same word explained in Cmt. on Mt 1:19, in the phrase, "make her a public example." The word occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. Their apostasy and rejection of the Saviour would be like holding him up publicly as deserving the infamy and ignominy of the cross. A great part of the crime attending the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus, consisted in exhibiting him to the passing multitude as deserving the death of a malefactor. Of that sin they would partake who should reject him, for they would thus show that they regarded his religion as an imposture, and would, in a public manner, hold him up as worthy only of rejection and contempt. Such, it seems to me, is the fair meaning of this much-disputed passage--a passage which Would never have given so much perplexity if it had not been supposed that the obvious interpretation would interfere with some prevalent articles of theology. The passage proves that if true Christians should apostatize, it would be impossible to renew and save them. If then it should be asked whether I believe that any true Christian ever did, or ever will fall from grace, and wholly lose his religion, I would answer unhesitatingly, No. Comp. Cmt. on Joh 10:27. If then it be asked what was the use of a warning like this, I answer,

(1.) It would show the great sin of apostasy from God if it were to occur. It is proper to state the greatness of an act of sin, though it might never occur, in order to show how it would be regarded by God.

(2.) Such a statement might be one of the most effectual means of preserving from apostasy. To state that a fall from a precipice would cause certain death, would be one of the most certain means of preserving one from falling; to affirm that arsenic would be certainly fatal, is one of the most effectual means of preventing its being taken; to know that fire certainly destroys, is one of the most sure checks from the danger. Thousands have been preserved from going over the Falls of Niagara by knowing that there would be no possibility of escape; and so effectual has been this knowledge, that it has preserved all from such a catastrophe, except the very few who have gone over by accident. So in religion. The knowledge that apostasy would be fatal, and there could be no hope of being saved should it once occur, would be a more effectual preventive of the danger than all the other means that could be used. If a man believed that it would be an easy matter to be restored again, should he apostatize, he would feel little solicitude in regard to it; and it has occurred, in fact, that they who suppose that this may occur, have manifested little of the care to walk in the paths of strict religion, which should have been evinced.

(3.) It may be added, that the means used by God to preserve his people from apostasy have been entirely effectual. There is no evidence that one has ever fallen away who was a true Christian, Comp. Joh 10:27-28, and 1Jo 2:19; and to the end of the world it will be true, that the means which he uses to keep his people from apostasy will not in a single instance fail.

{*} "seeing" "Since"
{+} "afresh" "again"

And by another special mentor that God has sent me who is Warren Litzman, in his assurance that is what I am seeing and knowing afresh that I am save By God and He is true, making me true also by the Son that is in me. In Christ who is my life and all that I am or ever will be, by His Life whom God has made my all in all:

It is Impossible to loose Him: Phillip


 2007/7/14 1:26Profile


Ormly can be is done on purpose to bring out the true hearts of others, and their incompletely proved positions, so that he may present the full scriptures, or the opposing argument..

UniqueWebRev wrote:


Forrest, May I ask you to find 2 or three scriptures to back up your position on your statement. Or is this just more extra Biblical nonsense in defending bad behavior?

Are you saying you NEVER get frustrated? Is that your TRUE heart when you do? Do you know Paul said, we are NOT to provoke one another...said parents are not to provoke their children.

Forrest, when a Christian is walking in the Spirit, (do you know what the fruit of the spirit is?) Do you see any of those that would *PURPOSELY WITH MALICE AND FORTHOUGHT* provoke someone? When you read 1 Corinthians 13, do you see anything there that would *PURPOSELY WITH MALICE AND FORTHOUGHT* provoke someone? Do you see anywhere Paul instructs us to do this?

Is this the weapons of YOUR purposely, with malice and forethought provoke?

It's a sin, plain and simple. Now you call evil good and good evil? The Word of God Only is the weapons of our warfare.

I am deeply grateful for your comment here, and hope others, as I have, will be warned this is how the opposition fights. But, This is not in the Bible or How God has called us to fight. He said Fight the Good fight of faith.

Thank you, thank you, thank you, Forrest for giving away Ormly's trade secret and his motives behind his words and actions. I will forever keep this in mind when dealing with the Orlmy's of the world.
God Bless, and thank you again for that insight.

Love in Christ


 2007/7/14 6:04

Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy