Dake Bible Discussion Board ⇒ Did Peter lose his salvation?

[Rocky]

STOP!
Before this goes any further let me say if I said Peter was saved or wasn't saved without making it clear that I was talking about salvation as we know it, that is after the cross I misspoke.

What I meant to say was Peters spiritual state whatever it was, was unique to the Peter and the situation. It is not the normative it was not based at the time on sacrifice that was not yet made.

Hebrew 10 very clearly states the is no repentance since there no longer remains a sacrifice. That is pivotal to this discussion. At the time of Peters denial the sacrifice had not yet been completed nor was he depending on it for his salvation.

Ed but what do you do with other scriptures that does not line up with your understanding of these verses?

I don't see any verses that do not line up with my understanding. That seems to be more your problem than mine.
It is your theology that has people being Saved then being unsaved, then being saved, then being unsaved.
I guess they are not only born again but born again over and over and over. And apparently the new creation that is created upon their rebirth is so short lived that they are back into sin and need to be reborn again.

Sorry I just don't see Christians getting saved, unsaved, saved, unsaved. Nor do I see people being reborn, cut off, reborn, cut off, reborn, cut off. Nor do I see God's new creations going from a walk of holiness to a walk of damnation, being reborn to a walk of holiness and back to a walk of damnation.
Nor do I see God adopting us, disinheriting us, adopting us, disinheriting us. Even a corrupt human would not do that their child yet that is how you believe our Heavenly Father treats some of his adopted.
No I don't have problems with other scriptures but you do.

lol Ed are we flirting with OSAS here? Maybe you should take a break from your MacArthur study Bible for a little while. Try a DARB Oh and Catholics believe in being Born again more than once as well

[Reuben]

lol Ed are we flirting with OSAS here? Maybe you should take a break from your MacArthur study Bible for a little while. Try a DARB Oh and Catholics believe in being Born again more than once as well

I can't seem to get a lock on his actual view of Peter. At first I thought he didn't think he was saved, then he said he did believe he was but not like us, then he seemed to backtrack and say he was clean but I said he was saved, leading me to believe he doesn't believe Peter was saved again. Having trouble following him around. I would like to get to the denial by Peter but we have to know what he believes about Peter to begin with.

[Justaned]

Reuben
Going for the pound of flesh are we.
I said I misspoke if I left you with the impression that Peter wasn't saved. My intent was to say at the timePeter was not saved as we are today by dependence on the work of the Cross. His salvation was exceptional wrought by Christ's word not by any sacrifice on the cross. Therefore that salvation is an exception and should not be used as an example of what is normal today. When Peter denied Jesus he was not throwing the sacrifice of Christ into the mud because that sacrifice had not yet occurred. Also there was a change in Peter he did not have the Holy Spirit to convict him at the time that he did later where he refused to deny Christ. Again all that took place in Peter is not normative todays Christian, no sacrifice, no resurrection, no ascension, no Holy Spirit infilling.

So we can't use Peter as a typical example of being saved, having sinned and being saved again. Pick an example after the cross where we know the person has based his salvation on the cross and has the presence of the Holy Spirit and Christ within him. Born again so to speak, a new creation.

So now you do believe Peter was saved. However, not born-again or a new creation? This is what you believe about Peter? If that is true then a person could be saved but not born-again or a new creature?

You said:

Peter was not saved as we are today by dependence on the work of the Cross.

How was he saved - by what means?

Jesus proclaimed his heart was pure and you said that made him saved. You tell me.
You certainly can't claim he was filled with the Holy Spirit or was depending on the cross to pay for his sins since neither had occurred yet.

I only echo what Jesus plainly stated. He said (not me) that Peter was clean/pure. Jesus said (not me) that Peter's name was written in Heaven. So, was he saved or not?

His heart was pure/clean. Did he have the price for his sin paid? NO!. Did he have the Holy Spirit? No! Could he realize the victory of death? No.
His heart was pure/clean and his name was written in the book. But was he saved as we are talking of a person being saved, reborn, a new creation and then sin? NO he was not.

[Justaned]

STOP!
Before this goes any further let me say if I said Peter was saved or wasn't saved without making it clear that I was talking about salvation as we know it, that is after the cross I misspoke.

What I meant to say was Peters spiritual state whatever it was, was unique to the Peter and the situation. It is not the normative it was not based at the time on sacrifice that was not yet made.

Hebrew 10 very clearly states the is no repentance since there no longer remains a sacrifice. That is pivotal to this discussion. At the time of Peters denial the sacrifice had not yet been completed nor was he depending on it for his salvation.

Ed but what do you do with other scriptures that does not line up with your understanding of these verses?

I don't see any verses that do not line up with my understanding. That seems to be more your problem than mine.
It is your theology that has people being Saved then being unsaved, then being saved, then being unsaved.
I guess they are not only born again but born again over and over and over. And apparently the new creation that is created upon their rebirth is so short lived that they are back into sin and need to be reborn again.

Sorry I just don't see Christians getting saved, unsaved, saved, unsaved. Nor do I see people being reborn, cut off, reborn, cut off, reborn, cut off. Nor do I see God's new creations going from a walk of holiness to a walk of damnation, being reborn to a walk of holiness and back to a walk of damnation.
Nor do I see God adopting us, disinheriting us, adopting us, disinheriting us. Even a corrupt human would not do that their child yet that is how you believe our Heavenly Father treats some of his adopted.
No I don't have problems with other scriptures but you do.

lol Ed are we flirting with OSAS here? Maybe you should take a break from your MacArthur study Bible for a little while. Try a DARB Oh and Catholics believe in being Born again more than once as well

at it again

"Marx and Engels never tried to refute their opponents with argument. They insulted, ridiculed, derided, slandered, and traduced them, and in the use of these methods their followers are not less expert. Their polemic is directed never against the argument of the opponent, but always against his person."

[Justaned]

lol Ed are we flirting with OSAS here? Maybe you should take a break from your MacArthur study Bible for a little while. Try a DARB Oh and Catholics believe in being Born again more than once as well

I can't seem to get a lock on his actual view of Peter. At first I thought he didn't think he was saved, then he said he did believe he was but not like us, then he seemed to backtrack and say he was clean but I said he was saved, leading me to believe he doesn't believe Peter was saved again. Having trouble following him around. I would like to get to the denial by Peter but we have to know what he believes about Peter to begin with.

Reuben surely you aren't saying Peter was saved as someone is today. Where they are reborn into new creations, have been given victory over death and have the Holy Spirit breathed into them as Jesus did Peter after this incident.
We are talking of two different things and you know it so don't act so confused. Peter's heart was made clean because he was commissioned by God to serve Jesus. Jesus after the resurrection completed Peter's salvation when he breathed on them and said received the Holy Spirit.

[Reuben]

His heart was pure/clean and his name was written in the book. But was he saved as we are talking of a person being saved, reborn, a new creation and then sin? NO he was not.

So, there was a separate salvation experience for Peter then? He had a clean/pure heart without having a new nature - born-again experience? His name was in the book, but he was placed on the role bypassing how we must get there?

[Reuben]

I revisited an earlier post I had written.

The following clarifies Peter was saved and no Scripture indicates that he spent ten days in an upper room being saved but rather was waiting on the endument of power from on high for service.

John 6:68-69 (KJV)
68 Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.
69 And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.

John 13:10 (KJV)
10 Jesus saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye are clean, but not all.

John 15:3 (KJV)
3 Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.

John 17:6 (KJV)
6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.

Notice that Peter's name was written in Heaven at the time of this statement:
Luke 10:20 (KJV)
20 Notwithstanding in this rejoice not, that the spirits are subject unto you; but rather rejoice, because your names are written in heaven.

What could be more clearer than the above verse.

John 17:14-16 (KJV)
14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.
16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.

Is this clear enough in John 17:14-16? Again, not my opinions, just Scripture speaking for itself.

I look over the Scriptures above and see no difference in what he experienced and I have experienced. Such as: I'm not a part of this world, my name is written in Heaven, I'm keeping his Word, my heart is clean/pure, I am sure the Jesus is the Christ - the son of the living God, and I believe that the words Jesus spoke are the words of eternal life. So, I share the same as Peter.

[Justaned]

His heart was pure/clean and his name was written in the book. But was he saved as we are talking of a person being saved, reborn, a new creation and then sin? NO he was not.

So, there was a separate salvation experience for Peter then? He had a clean/pure heart without having a new nature - born-again experience? His name was in the book, but he was placed on the role bypassing how we must get there?

Yes it was a separate experience, first the Holy Spirit was not yet given so there was no wooing of the Spirit. Peter was not depending on the work of the cross for his salvation, first he tried to resist the cross and secondly the work on the cross had not yet occurred. Peter was not free of the bonds of death, if he had died in the garden he would have gone to Abraham's bosom to await the Messiah to lead him to heaven. If you or I die today we go directly into the presence of Son of God who stands at the right hand of the God. Peter did not yet receive the Holy Spirit that Jesus breathed on them and told them to receive, therefore he did not have the strength given us by the Holy Spirit. None of the disciples talked of being born again, being made new creations. In fact we see the old Peter many times right up to the cross. Resisting Jesus going to cross, cutting the ear from the scribe, cursing in his denial. That is not the fruit manifested by a rebirth and becoming a new creation.
So yes indeed it was separate especially in reference to this discussion on losing salvation, regaining it, losing it, regaining it, losing it, regaining it.

[Reuben]

In fact we see the old Peter many times right up to the cross. Resisting Jesus going to cross, cutting the ear from the scribe, cursing in his denial. That is not the fruit manifested by a rebirth and becoming a new creation.

That theory doesn't hold up either because I see Peter after the cross heading back into Law in Galatians and needing rebuked. So, I would say that's not the fruit either.

[Reuben]

Luke 24:49 (KJV)
49 And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.

Jesus sent them to Jerusalem to be endued with power for service - makes no mention of going and being saved as you had earlier eluded.