Dake Bible Discussion Board ⇒ Did Peter lose his salvation?

[Justaned]

The word "clean" is the same word used for pure in the following.

Matthew 5:8 (KJV)
8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.

By the evidence of Scripture then Peter would see God which requires salvation.

So purity of heart is an alternate to salvation? How many ways is there to God? Jesus said He was the door and we must pass through Him. I always believed that required his crucifixion and our belief in Jesus as the Son of God that provided the only path to salvation

Be that as it may

You are now saying you know Peter also lost that salvation. Even though God said no man knows the heart of man.
But you do.
And that he got back again God says no man knows the heart of man.

Then you also say the Hebrews 6 and Hebrews 10 is wrong that it is talking of something far more complicated than just being saved and losing your salvation.

And you will ignore 1 John 3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

So you have 4 witnesses against you but you say I'm warping scripture or ignoring scripture to make my point.

Purity of heart is the product of salvation - would you agree? Can you have purity of heart without salvation?

You said you believe that Peter had a clean/pure heart but without being saved. I can't see how that is possible.

I think it takes salvation to have a pure heart. I think what we are talking about here with Peter is the exception rather than the rule. I don't see Peter saved I see him declared clean by Christ to do the work Christ required at the time. I believe after Jesus died on the cross Peter along with the others were saved in the upper room and went on to minister to the world.
Again not being God and not being able to see man's heart none of is can know. However we do know what scripture says and it clearly states that if we are in Christ we will not intentionally sin and if one that is in Christ intentionally sins there is no salvation for them because there no longer remains a sacrifice to pay for their sin.

Not hard just scripture and reading what it says. I don't like to play what if games or opinion games and that is what we are playing here with Peter and judging what we are not able to judge another man's salvation or the lack thereof.

[Reuben]

I think it takes salvation to have a pure heart.

Then we do not have to assume anything but allow Scripture to speak for itself. So, when Jesus said that Peter was clean then we can believe what it says - he was clean/saved since both are inseparable.

[Justaned]

I think it takes salvation to have a pure heart.

Then we do not have to assume anything but allow Scripture to speak for itself. So, when Jesus said that Peter was clean then we can believe what it says - he was clean/saved since both are inseparable.

No Jesus cleansed his heart but that does not mean Peter had salvation as we know it. You keep using exceptions and trying to paint the rest of scripture with a broad brush dipped in those exceptions.

[branham1965]

WHAT HE IS TRYING TO SAY HERE IS NOTHING BUT THE UNVARNISHED DEVIL AS DAD HAGIN USED TO SAY.
ITS RUBBISH.

You see now Ed has put himself in a situation were he is arguing with the bible due to his misunderstanding of scripture.

[Reuben]

I think it takes salvation to have a pure heart.

Then we do not have to assume anything but allow Scripture to speak for itself. So, when Jesus said that Peter was clean then we can believe what it says - he was clean/saved since both are inseparable.

No Jesus cleansed his heart but that does not mean Peter had salvation as we know it. You keep using exceptions and trying to paint the rest of scripture with a broad brush dipped in those exceptions.

You said it takes salvation to have a pure heart. But, you are also saying that Peter was clean/pure in heart without being saved.

[branham1965]

were the disciples all saved as Revered Dake affirms???

IN LUKE 10 JESUS TOLD THE 70 DISCIPLES IN THE LIMITED COMMISSION.......I SAW SATAN AS LIGHTNING FALL FROM HEAVEN!!!!glory to God!!!!!HE GAVE THEM POWER OVER THE DEVILS IN HIS NAME.BUT JESUS SAID REJOICE THAT YOUR NAMES ARE WRITTEN WRITTEN WRITTEN..........IN HEAVEN.

[branham1965]

Pastor,
i think that he did. but he repented and was restored.

They all ran like rabbits.all scattered like sheep.they must have hid away.

but not poor Peter .he followed Him ...at a distance.then the failure

i love Saint Peter the best of all the Apostles.

Saint John was at the Cross with Jesus' mother.

Did Peter lose his salvation when he cursed and denied the Lord Jesus -- yes or no?

[Justaned]

I think it takes salvation to have a pure heart.

Then we do not have to assume anything but allow Scripture to speak for itself. So, when Jesus said that Peter was clean then we can believe what it says - he was clean/saved since both are inseparable.

No Jesus cleansed his heart but that does not mean Peter had salvation as we know it. You keep using exceptions and trying to paint the rest of scripture with a broad brush dipped in those exceptions.

You said it takes salvation to have a pure heart. But, you are also saying that Peter was clean/pure in heart without being saved.

I'm saying today after the cross to have a pure heart it requires Jesus to come in and clean it. The only way that happens to day is through the salvation process.

Peter's case is different in that Jesus was there interacting with Peter, commissioning him if you will to serve Him before the cross. It would not do to have a person with an unclean heart serving Jesus now would it. So I believe Jesus went ahead and cleaned Peter's heart for service.

But I don't see Peter being saved, since salvation requires the price of sin to be paid. If the same thing happened today I would say yes Peter was saved because the price for his sin was already paid at the cross.

In any case we are splitting hairs the whole process surrounding Peter is the exception and not the rule so to use one of 12 very special people (disciples) of God normal relationship with humanity is absurd. None of us can say without a doubt Peter was saved and when nor can we say if he actually lost that salvation if he in fact had it, nor can we point to a place and time.

All we have is scripture which clearly says if a Christian willfully and/or deliberately sins they can not repent and be saved because there no longer remains a sacrifice under which their sins are paid. Now we can to defend our own personal theology by appending all kinds of conditions, if's and's or's and but's but unless we want to change scripture and not take it literally we must accept what it says.

[Justaned]

were the disciples all saved as Revered Dake affirms???

IN LUKE 10 JESUS TOLD THE 70 DISCIPLES IN THE LIMITED COMMISSION.......I SAW SATAN AS LIGHTNING FALL FROM HEAVEN!!!!glory to God!!!!!HE GAVE THEM POWER OVER THE DEVILS IN HIS NAME.BUT JESUS SAID REJOICE THAT YOUR NAMES ARE WRITTEN WRITTEN WRITTEN..........IN HEAVEN.

Again it that is a special situation in a special place with special people that God would require much of. What we don't know, was Peter's name ever stricken from that book and had to be rewritten in.

[bibleman]

were the disciples all saved as Revered Dake affirms???

IN LUKE 10 JESUS TOLD THE 70 DISCIPLES IN THE LIMITED COMMISSION.......I SAW SATAN AS LIGHTNING FALL FROM HEAVEN!!!!glory to God!!!!!HE GAVE THEM POWER OVER THE DEVILS IN HIS NAME.BUT JESUS SAID REJOICE THAT YOUR NAMES ARE WRITTEN WRITTEN WRITTEN..........IN HEAVEN.

Again it that is a special situation in a special place with special people that God would require much of. What we don't know, was Peter's name ever stricken from that book and had to be rewritten in.

YES, Unless you believe Jesus lied when He said if you deny me I will deny you!

Is that what you believe - that Jesus lied?