The following refers to 2 Peter 2:20-22
"How could they have been escaped the pollutions of this world and not been saved?"
Come ON Michael, have you never been surround by a group of TRUE Christians? They're so loving and wonderful. You know them by how much they love. They escaped the pollutions of this world by spending time with wonderful people who loved them and accepted them for who they are. Probably fed them and clothed them and gave them a place to stay and visited with them and didn't make the do work while they were learning or whatever.
That part of the verse does not describe escaping the drudgery and hardships of everyday life – it describes the pollution of sin, the routine falling to temptations. It is these pollutions that these false teachers had escaped. How could they have done so if not saved?
"How could they have known Jesus without being saved?"
The Christians told them ALLL about Jesus.
No the verse did not say that they just knew of Him - they knew Him as in:
John 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
How could they KNOW Christ and not be saved?
"How could they be righteous and not be saved?"
There is none righteous, no not one.
Yet the verse calls them righteous. That means they must have had the righteousness of Jesus infused into them through accepting Him as their savior.
How could they do that without being saved?
"How could they end up worse than when they started if they we never saved?"
Now they have heard the gospel and rejected it. Now they have heard right from wrong and chose wrong. The Scriptures say "he who is without the law is judged without the law" no they heard the law and they'll be judged by it.
So it is worse off to have heard the Gospel and rejected it than to have not heard it? How is that possible? If they heard it and rejected it are they not able to change their mind? Is that not a better position to be in than to have never even heard the Gospel?
NO! This being worse off afterwards referes to being unsaved, followed by saved, followed by being unsaved again and not having a chance to be resaved.
Heb 6:6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
"What is worse then never being saved?"
Having to be judged by the law that you rejected!
No, what is worse is being saved and then losing that salvation with no way to regain it. At least if you were never saved you still have a chance to be saved.
That's my guess based on the promises that Christ will never leave us or forsake us, and that neither height nor depth nor this or that can separate us from the love of Christ, and that The Father promised Christ He wouldn't lose any of the ones He has given him. So, in essense, I'm pretty sure they weren't saved.
Thank you for your best guess but it just doesn't seem to be a proper interpretation of what this verse says.
So, what I see happening with you is that this scripture that is specifically for people of fraudulent nature, is keeping you from being confident that the Lord will never leave you or forsake you.
But it is not just this scripture alone. There are many others plus the idea that salvation is a process, it is a race to be run, that we must endure, that we must work out our salvation, that works as well as faith must be used to accept the gift (and where works are they can cease). I understand that to be consistent those who espouse faith alone must espouse once saved always saved but that only makes it clearer to me that we can lose our salvation.
Author