Traditional Scholarly Pentecostal view on losing salvation

Posted by Nelson Banuchi in Facebook's Pentecostal Theology Group View the Original Post

Question: What is the traditional and scholarly accepted view, according to Pentecostalism stated teachings, on losing salvation.

For example, is it the traditional Pentecostal view that if a genuine believer, being mature, having been a Christian for many years, and serving faithfully in the Church, is caught in weakness and commits adultery, who afterwards immediately dies, having been given no time to confess of sin, in a car accident, he will go to hell?

Is there today a Pentecostal statement of faith on this subject?

What was the view of the early Asuza Street ministers when Pentecostalism began?

Also, any websites on the subject would be appreciated. Thanks!

43 Comments

  • Reply March 9, 2017

    Varnel Watson

    Stan Wayne Are they sealed by the Holy Spirit upon salvation?

  • Reply March 9, 2017

    Stan Wayne

    I am Arminian so sealing to me means marked and owned and is related to the earnest or downpayment. I do not see it as a seal than cannot be broken like a lock or deadbolt.

  • Reply March 9, 2017

    Paul Hughes

    Depends on the sub-tradition. From reading Wesley, I suspect those of the Wesleyan tradition (of which I am not) are, like Wesley himself, very works-righteousness oriented, and also very dependent upon periodic new influxes of emotion in order to “feel” saved.

  • Reply March 9, 2017

    Paul Hughes

    I try to get my theology from Scripture rather than tradition. My evaluation is, in a nutshell: “You can walk away, or you can drift away.”

    Salvation is dependent on being “in Christ,” because we are dependent on his righteousness, not our own, and also our status as “his Body.” But being “in Christ” is like being under an umbrella — if you step outside, you get wet.

  • Reply March 9, 2017

    Stan Wayne

    Wesleyan Arminians like me view maintained salvation as purely by faith. No works. No emotion. Sola fides. Sola Gratia that is all.

  • Reply March 9, 2017

    Paul Hughes

    If you read Wesley, however, and all his self-doubt, one can only call him “neurotic.” He searched far and wide (Germany, Georgia) looking for “spiritual” religion. In the end, he never really committed to claiming “entire sanctification” for himself, even when he narrowed it down to “intent.”

  • Reply March 9, 2017

    Stan Wayne

    He was a bit neurotic and stupid with women but…

  • Reply March 9, 2017

    Frederic Buford

    I was raised in both Oneness and Classical Pentecostal churches. I was always taught that believers could lose their salvation. However, it was always unclear when salvation was lost. One pastor taught that you lost it the moment you had an impure thought. Others taught that habitual sin caused a loss of salvation. An Assemblies of God pastor told me that salvation could only be lost through apostasy or a complete denial of Christ and that no sin, even if habitual, could result in a loss of salvation. Being that this is a Pentecostal forum, I assume most of the people here believe salvation can be lost. My question is, “If salvation can be lost, what does it take to lose your salvation?”. I’m not asking with an answer in mind. I just want to dialogue on the subject. I’ve been waiting for this conversation to come up.

    • Reply March 9, 2017

      Stan Wayne

      Frederic Buford since salvation is by grace through faith alone it must be an absence of faith.
      Of course, we normally struggle with some level of faith but when a person reaches a point that they can deny Christ’s resurrection or become a Muslim or an atheist they have abandoned the faith. Hebrews 6 explains that it is drastic loss of faith.

    • Reply March 9, 2017

      Joseph Kidwell

      Stan Wayne, that is exactly my position.

    • Reply March 9, 2017

      Stan Wayne

      Bless you – it really is the only biblical position – it is not works but faith that saves and the absence of that damns

    • Reply March 9, 2017

      Joseph Kidwell

      Exactly.

    • Reply March 9, 2017

      Frederic Buford

      Agreed! A book Joseph Kidwell recommended called “Life in the Son” helped me to grasp this point. It helped me find balance.

    • Reply March 10, 2017

      Joseph Kidwell

      “Life In The Son” by Robert Shank is a classic in this area. Robert Shank was a Southern Baptist Theologian teaching at a Southern Baptist Seminary when after much study he came the the conclusion that the doctrine of unconditional eternal security is a false doctrine. The Convention that Shank was affiliated with has never answered the profound Biblical arguments made in the book.

    • Reply March 10, 2017

      Thomas Henry Jr.

      I am Reformed and believe in Eternal Security!

    • Reply March 10, 2017

      Stan Wayne

      Ugh đŸ˜‰

    • Reply March 10, 2017

      Thomas Henry Jr.

      If all you do is believe to be saved, then if you can undo what God did, then you are WORKING and salvation is not by WORKS of any kind. SO if I don’t work to be SAVED, I do not WORK to stay saved. But I do WORK because I am SAVED.

    • Reply March 10, 2017

      Stan Wayne

      No works – to believe or not to believe that is the question – works are a byproduct

    • Reply March 10, 2017

      Stan Wayne

      First principles – Hebrews 6

    • Reply March 10, 2017

      Thomas Henry Jr.

      I understand that, but if it can nullify salvation then there is something more added to salvation besides belief in the finish work. Then it becomes Faith PLUS WORKS. There is no way to explain this away. It is either all of FAITH and a GIFT from GOD, or it is something you can EARN and a WORK.

      WORKS comes out of Salvation. Salvation does not come out of works

    • Reply March 10, 2017

      Stan Wayne

      It is all gift but you can trample the gift underfoot

    • Reply March 10, 2017

      Thomas Henry Jr.

      Then WORKs becomes a dynamic producing salvation.

    • Reply March 10, 2017

      Joseph Kidwell

      Thomas Henry Jr., you are in a different group now. Calvinists are a distinct minority here and unlike the other group, those who believe that unconditional eternal security is false doctrine are not afraid to stand for Biblical truth. A lot of people have gone to hell because they trusted in the false doctrine of unconditional eternal security.

    • Reply March 10, 2017

      Stan Wayne

      Believing or unbelieving has absolutely nothing to do with works – it is an operation of will, intellect and the drawing of the spirit accepted or rejected.

    • Reply March 10, 2017

      Joseph Kidwell

      According to James, the existence if faith is demonstrated by works. This is where Calvinists are confused. They say that if one can lose their salvation then it’s ‘works based’. Where they are mistaken is that if an individual is practicing sin, it’s because of the absence of faith.

    • Reply March 10, 2017

      Thomas Henry Jr.

      No.Calvinist are not confused at all

    • Reply March 10, 2017

      Thomas Henry Jr.

      Bishop Joseph Kidwell being in the minority is not a problem.

  • Reply March 9, 2017

    Frederic Buford

    Joseph Kidwell Thomas Henry Jr.

  • Reply March 9, 2017

    Varnel Watson

    Stan Wayne has shown some strange soteriology here

  • Reply March 9, 2017

    Varnel Watson

    Paul Hughes If you are not Wesleyan are you then Calvinist? After all Panentheism is the Linchpin of Liberal One-World Religion

  • Reply March 10, 2017

    Paul Hughes

    You are just a wild and crazy guy, Troy Day!

  • Reply March 10, 2017

    Paul Hughes

    You will find no Panentheism in my theology.

  • Reply March 10, 2017

    Paul Hughes

    The NT is neither strictly Arminian nor Calvinist nor Wesleyan. All these theologies have their flaws and shortcomings. Worse, people who make them their rule for interpretation are biased thereby.

  • Reply March 10, 2017

    Joseph Kidwell

    Classical Arminian Theology is not my rule for interpretation. However, it is accurate.

  • Reply March 10, 2017

    Paul Hughes

    I have demonstrated in the linked article that Wesley was too much influenced by Neoplatonist Mysticism, though he shied from its observable idiosyncrasies. The base idea of being able to permanently overcome Original Sin and rise above human limitations, in this life, to a superior spiritual level is Neoplatonist in origin. Neoplatonism has unfortunately been manifested within Pentecostalism as “Entire Sanctification” and also “Divine Health.”

    Instead, Paul and John pointed toward a yet future time, at Christ’s Parousia, when we would be “changed” and “be like him.”

    https://biblequestion.wordpress.com/2014/05/27/john-wesley-reluctant-mystic/

    • Reply March 10, 2017

      Dan Irving

      Dangerous doctrine, sir. Without holiness we shall not get to that place you describe; without striving toward perfection of heart, we cannot stand in His holiness. (Ps. 24:3-4) If you have ever read his seminal thesis, A Plain Account of Christian Perfection, I don’t think you would make the charge Wesley was a mystic.

  • Reply March 10, 2017

    Hunter McLain

    The Bible says that adulterers will not inherit The Kingdom of God, if they didn’t Repent they won’t go to Heaven. They could have Repented in their car, of it was genuine they could go to Heaven.

  • Reply March 10, 2017

    Stan Wayne

    I haven’t read the article yet but does it have Wesley referencing or quoting Neoplatonist? I wonder if he just did not just react to Luther and calvinistIc parts of Anglicanism and Presbyterians.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.