In this episode Trent debates Ryan at NeedGod.net on the question of whether Christians can lose their salvation.

Ryan’s channel:  @NeedGodnet 

To support this channel: https://www.patreon.com/counseloftrent

[NEW] Counsel of Trent merch: https://shop.catholic.com/apologists-alley/trent-horn-resources/

Be sure to keep up with our socials!

https://www.tiktok.com/@counseloftrent

https://www.twitter.com/counseloftrent

https://www.instagram.com/counseloftrentpodcast 

Transcript:

Trent Horn (00:00:03):

Hello everyone. Welcome to the Council of Trent. Today we are hosting a debate between myself and Ryan from needgod.net. The debate resolution is does the Bible teach that a Christian can lose his salvation despite continuing to have his trust in Christ to save him? Here’s the format of the debate. We’re each going to have 15-minute opening statements, then a 10-minute first rebuttal, four-minute second rebuttal, 15 minutes of cross-examination each, and then a five-minute closing statement from each of us. So before we get started, Ryan, welcome to the Council of Trent.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (00:00:36):

Thank you so much. Great to be here.

Trent Horn (00:00:39):

Absolutely. So we’ve gone back and forth a little bit in videos about each other, but this is the first time we’ve been able to engage each other directly. So I’m looking forward to this debate. So since I’m taking the affirmative position, I will be going first and I shall begin.

Trent’s Opening Statement

All right. So in today’s debate, I’m going to show the Bible teaches that a Christian can forsake his salvation despite continuing to trust in Christ to save him. I’ll show that Ryan’s position is unbiblical, unhistorical, and unworkable. First, Ryan’s position is unbiblical. Jesus says in John 15: two and six, “Every branch in me that does not bear fruit, he takes away. If anyone does not abide in me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up and they gather them and cast them into the fire and they are burned. These branches do not represent false believers because Jesus speaks of the damned as those who do not abide or remain in him.

(00:01:32):

He’s talking about true believers that at some point fail to remain connected to him and are damned as a result. Jesus even warns people who claim they will be saved because they call on his name or trusted him but engaged in grave sin. He says in Matthew 7:21, “Not everyone who says to me, Lord Lord shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my father who is in heaven. And in Matthew 10:22, he who endures to the end will be saved. Not merely he who trusts in Christ. John 3:36 even says, He who does not obey the son shall not see life, but the wrath of God rests upon him. Saying, I trust in Christ while be saved is like saying I trust my wife so our marriage is healthy. Your wife won’t leave you, but if you commit adultery, you have left her with your actions, even if you claim fidelity with your words.

(00:02:21):

And likewise, Christ will never leave us, but we’re free to forsake him through our actions, even if we claim fidelity with our words. Other abstolic authors make this same point. First John two: four through five says, He who says I know him but disobeys his commandments is a liar and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word in him truly love for God is perfected. By this, we may be sure that we are in him. Paul writes in Titus 1:16, “They profess to know God, but they deny him by their deeds. They are detestable, disobedient, unfit for any good deed.” Once again, you can trust in Christ but deny Christ through evil deeds. Paul also says in 2nd Timothy 2:11- 13, “If we endure, we shall also reign with him. If we deny him, he also will deny us. If we are faithless, he remains faithful.

(00:03:13):

Notice the we in both clauses. It refers to true believers and while God never fails in what he promises, he allows us to freely reject him. Jesus’ parable about the unforgiving servant also clearly shows salvation can be lost through grave sin. Matthew 18, Jesus tells the story of the servant who is mercifully forgiven by the king in a large matter, but refused to forgive his fellow servant in a much smaller matter. The king threw the servant in jail and Jesus told his audience, so also my heavenly father will do to every one of you if you do not forgive your brother from your heart. In Matthew 6:15, Jesus makes the teaching even planer. But if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your father forgive your trespasses. Notice that the servant’s debt is first forgiven by the king and then when he refuses to forgive his fellow servant, the king revokes his forgiveness.

(00:04:05):

We can be forgiven by God and then become unforgiven, losing our salvation possibly permanently if we don’t repent of our sin and return to God. St. Paul clearly teaches salvation is dependent on us not forsaking it and describes it in conditional terms. He says in Colossians one that God wants to present us as “irreproachable before him, provided that you continue in the faith stable and steadfast, not shifting from the hope of the gospel which you heard.” In one Corinthians 15: two, Paul speaks to the gospel quote, “By which you are saved if you hold it fast unless you believed in vain.” In one Corinthians nine, Paul says, while athletes compete for a perishable crown, he competes for an imperishable crown. He says in one Corinthians 9:27, “I pomel my body and subdue it. Lest after preaching to others, I myself should be disqualified.” Now, Ryan says this verse refers to Paul being disqualified from apostolic ministry or heavenly rewards, not salvation, but this does not explain the passage.

(00:05:08):

First, the word rendered disqualified is Adokimos, which Paul uses another context to refer to the Gentiles God gave up to sin, Romans 1:28, or false teachers who oppose the gospel in two Timothy three: eight. The Adokimos are not merely subpar Christians. Second, Paul never refers to Stefanos, the athlete’s crown as an earthly or heavenly reward for believers. Apostolic ministry was not rewarded to someone like a crown. Paul uses the word three other times. Twice, he uses it to refer to believers themselves as a metaphorical crown or reward for the apostles who served Christ and evangelized them. But that’s not the meaning here because Ryan would agree Paul’s sin would not affect the salvation of those who merely heard his preaching. Instead, the meaning is the same as in two Timothy four where Paul says, “I have finished the race. I have kept the faith. Henceforth, there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge will award to me on that day and not only to me, but also to all who have loved disappearing.

(00:06:13):

Notice Paul does not treat salvation as something automatic for anyone who ever trusted in Christ. It is only for those who kept the faith, who finished the race. And this crown is not a reward for good servants. It’s given to all who enter into heaven. Paul is saying in one Corinthians, he worried about being disqualified from the crown of salvation, which shows salvation can be forsaken. In Romans chapter 11, Paul describes the Gentiles as branches that were grafted under the ancient olive tree of Israel. He says in verse 22, “Behold then the kindness and severity of our God to those who fell severity, but to you, God’s kindness. If you continue in his kindness, otherwise you also will be cut off. You can only cut off or take away something that was attached in the first place, or in this case, true believers who later separated themselves from Christ.

(00:07:07):

This corresponds to what Paul told the Galatians that they were in Galatians five four severed from Christ. You who are seeking to be justified by law, you have fallen from grace. Now, Ryan might say these people didn’t trust in Christ but chose circumcision and so they don’t count as true believers. But our debate prompt is a person can lose his salvation even if he continues to trust in Christ, not trust in Christ alone. The Galatians probably trusted in Christ, but they also trusted in circumcision to save them along with it and that heresy damned them in spite of anything they believed about Jesus. If Ryan says that we’re saved if we trust in Christ, even if we will still sin, then that must apply to all of our sins, even heresy, as long as the person trusts in Christ, according to his view. Second, Paul clearly says they fell from grace.

(00:07:58):

Only true believers have saving grace. So this passage shows a person can be a true Christian who trusts in Christ and then forsake salvation through grave on repentance sin. What do we find in the letter to the Hebrews? The author says, For we have become partakers of Christ if we hold fast the beginning of our assurance firm until the end, Hebrews 3:14. He also said in Hebrews 10:26- 27, “For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a terrifying expectation of judgment and the fury of fire will consume the adversaries.” Hebrews 10:10 and Hebrews 10:14 teach that Christ’s sacrifice is once for all never repeated and perfect. But notice what we learn in verses 26 to 27. After receiving knowledge of that truth, if a Christian continues to sin, Christ’s perfect sacrifice no longer remains for him.

(00:08:53):

The author of Hebrews then compares the punishments for those who broke the old covenant with the punishments for those who break the new covenant. He says, “Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much severe punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the son of God? And as regarded as unclean, the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified and has insulted the spirit of grace. Now, the only punishment worse than physical death is eternal death. So the author of Hebrews is warning his readers they face eternal death if they fail to hold fast our confidence firm to the end. And we know this warning applies to true believers, not false believers, because it talks about a man who had been sanctified by the blood of the covenant, the blood of Christ, and only true believers are sanctified by that.

(00:09:45):

My second argument is that Ryan’s position is unhistorical. No saint, church father, ecclesial writer, or any notable Christian held this view for the first 1500 years of church history. Instead, they believed a Christian could forsake his salvation through grave sin, even if he claimed to trust in Christ. In the second century, Saint Urenas said, those who do not obey him being disinherited by him have ceased to be his sons, wherefore they cannot receive his inheritance. In the third century, Syprian said, let not Christ be forsaken so that the loss of salvation and an eternal home should be feared. The fourth century apostolic constitutions say, He who sins after his baptism, unless he repent and forsake his sins shall be condemned to hellfire. And in the fifth century, Augustine said, if being already regenerate and justified, a believer relapses of his own will into an evil life.

(00:10:38):

Assuredly, he cannot say, I have not received. Because of his own free choice to evil, he has lost the grace of God that he had received. And I could go on and on with many more citations. Protestant scholars agree eternal security, this doctrine Ryan’s defending is absent from church history before the reformation. The 20th century Calvinist author, Lorraine Bettner says of the church fathers that they of course taught that salvation was through Christ, yet they assumed that man had full power to accept or reject the gospel. Peter Littleback, president of Westminster Seminary says, “The evidence is clear eternal security was not a doctrine that was carefully considered by the uninspired founding fathers of our Christian tradition. If Ryan’s position were correct, it would be a lot like Mormonism or the claim that the true gospel was lost after the death of the apostles and had to be restored over a thousand years later.

(00:11:29):

So what’s more likely? The gospel was lost for 1500 years or Ryan has simply misunderstood scripture. My final argument is that Ryan’s view is unworkable. Our experience as Christians shows salvation can be lost. If you can be saved as long as you trust in Christ, then you end up with a cheap grace theology, which says that a woman like Sophie Rain, the most famous OnlyFans provider in the world who makes content while saying she trusts in Christ to forgive her sins will still go to heaven. She recently said in an interview,” I know I make mistakes every day like everyone sins and you know we are God and her. Tight, you know, he’s got me. If anything fails, he’s got me. Now does Ryan think that the world’s most famous only fans pornographer will be saved because she says that she trusts in Christ to forgive her of her sins?

(00:12:22):

Now Ryan rejects the doctrine of mortal sin so he can’t draw a line between minor habitual sins that will not disprove true saving faith and major habitual sins that would disprove that you have true faith. So it can’t be the number of sins that shows if someone truly trusts in Christ because James three: two says we all stumble in many ways. If someone tells one small lie every month, does that mean that he was never saved in the first place? Well, if that were true, almost everybody would fail that standard and not be saved and it can’t be the gravity of the sin either that shows you don’t truly trust in Christ. Would every instance of masturbation upon viewing pornography mean you were never saved in the first place? You had to be resaved, rebaptized all over again? All right, well, maybe it’s habitual grave sins, but once again, where do you draw the line?

(00:13:12):

Does masturbating the pornography prove you were never saved? If you succumb to temptation once a year, how about once a month, once a week, once a day, once an hour? You have to draw the line somewhere and Ryan cannot do that, which makes his system totally unworkable. Either it’s cheap grace and everybody goes to heaven regardless of what sins they commit, or it’s anxious and erotic, and you never know if you’re truly saved in the first place. And what about belief? Ryan says, as long as you keep trusting in Christ, you will go to heaven. Imagine someone who trusts in Christ as the Godman. He believes Jesus is fully God, fully human. He trusts in Christ for his salvation and he lives a godly life and he follows virtue that we would recommend. Will that person still go to heaven? You would think so, but imagine that he’s a oneness Pentecostal.

(00:14:02):

Oh, well then he denies the doctrine of the Trinity. He thinks that God is one person who exists in three modes at different times, Father at sometimes, son at other spirit at other times. So Ryan has a dilemma here. If he says that person is not saved and won’t go to heaven, then trusting in Christ alone fully God and fully man is the God man is not enough to save you. You have to also believe a bunch of other doctrines like the Trinity. And if that person is saved, well then you’re not really a Christian anymore and theology just collapses under Ryan’s argument. Instead, the true gospel gives us peace that we can know if we are presently in a state of friendship with God and through God’s grace, we can be obedient to him. And this true mode of theology, the true faith that’s been given to us can let us know if we have foolishly forsaken the grace of God so that through God’s actual grace, even if we reject his sanctifying grace, God can still lead us to return to him and be restored in a saving relationship with him, provided that we don’t believe in the false doctrine that we can never lose our salvation in the first place.

(00:15:08):

So the view that I’m defending, it offers peace. It faithfully reflects the Bible. It doesn’t claim the gospel was lost for 1,500 years and it’s completely workable. It’s not unworkable as the examples I’ve previously given. Ryan’s view can’t do any of that and so it should be rejected in today’s debate. So that is my opening statement.

Ryan’s Opening Statement

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (00:15:27):

Well, good evening everyone. Let me be clear from the very start what this debate is not about. This debate is not about apostasy. It’s not about someone who stops believing or becomes an atheist. This debate is laser focused on one question. Does the Bible teach that a Christian can lose his salvation despite continuing to have his trust in Jesus to save him? And notice this is not what do theologians or church fathers or Pope say, but what does the Bible say on this topic? Because of this narrow focus, the burdens of proof are very clear tonight. To prove my case, I only need to show that the Bible teaches that a person who is presently believing in Jesus is justified before God because if someone is justified, they cannot be lost at the same time. For Trent to win his side, he needs to show that scripture consistently teaches that a person who is presently justified by faith in Christ can lose their salvation despite continuing to trust in Christ for salvation.

(00:16:24):

Any passage he brings up that describes someone who has abandoned the faith or stop believing is simply not relevant to tonight’s debate. I would say that transposition doesn’t come from the Bible, but from the 16th century Council of Trent, which said, “The received grace of justification is lost not only by infidelity, whereby even faith itself is lost, but also by any other mortal sin, whatever, though in this case, faith be not lost. Notice what Rome John Mchley teaches here. You can keep your faith. You can continue to believe in Jesus, but if you commit a mortal sin, you completely lose your justification. Trusting in Jesus is not just mental ascent. It’s a conviction in the heart and assurance that you’re going to heaven because of what Christ has accomplished and not for any other reason like your good works. It’s placing your entire confidence on Christ, not in your obedience to law or good deeds.

(00:17:21):

In John 6:47, Jesus says, Truly, truly I say to you whoever believes has eternal life. Notice the present tense Greek verbistuo here, which believes Jesus is promising that the one who continues to believe in him has present tense eternal life. According to Trent Horn, if a believer willfully misses Sunday mass without a necessary reason and they instead choose to go on Monday instead, but even though they still trust in Jesus, they have lost their salvation. If they died in that state, Trent would say they would go to hell. Yet Jesus says, if you believe, you have eternal life. So both can’t be true. Trent’s position cannot be true if John 6:47 exists in the Bible. And this is not just some isolated verse. John 6:40 says, This is the will of my Father that everyone who looks on the son and believes in him should have eternal life and I will raise him up on the last day.

(00:18:16):

Notice the word everyone here. The same category of people that look on the sun and believe are the same category of the people that Jesus will raise up on the last day. This is a promise. It doesn’t say might raise or could raise. It says I will raise. So how can a person who continues to believe in Jesus lose their salvation over missing even one Sunday of church? That’s not biblical and Jesus stresses the same point elsewhere. In John six, he says, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me shall not hunger. Whoever believes in me shall never thirst. In John five, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment but has passed from death to life. John 3:18, whoever believes in him is not condemned. What about the most famous verse in the Bible?

(00:19:09):

John 3:16. Whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. John 11, whoever believes in me though he die yet shall he live and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. John 20:31. These are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. In all these passages, Jesus links belief directly to the possession of eternal life. He says, “You’re believing? You’re not condemned. So as long as these verses are in the Bible, Trent’s position cannot be true. And scripture does not redefine believing to mean someone who won’t ever commit a mortal sin or fail to do certain good actions. Now it’s the same word pesture that’s used in Romans four: five. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness.

(00:20:05):

So Trent can’t smuggle good works like church going, good behavior into what it means to believe since Paul says it’s the ungodly whom God is justifying. Not the godly, not the one who works, but the one who doesn’t work but believes. Now, yes, we should do good works. Good works are very important, but they’re just not … We do them as a result of being saved, but they don’t keep us saved. As Hebrews 4:10 says here, whoever has entered God’s rest has also rested from his works as God did from his. That doesn’t sound like our works are keeping our salvation, does it? More than that, Jesus also promises to keep those who trust in him. In John 10, Jesus says, My sheep hear my voice and I know them and they follow me. I give them eternal life and they will never perish and no one will snatch them out of my hand.

(00:21:00):

Very clear passage. Yet Trent will say no one will snatch them out of Jesus’ hand but they can walk away, but they haven’t walked away if they’re still believing, which is the thesis of this debate. And secondly, Trent’s ignoring the middle phrase, and they will never perish. That clearly means that they don’t lose salvation. And thirdly, if someone is a sheep, they won’t listen to the voice of a stranger. That’s what John 10: five says. So clearly they won’t listen to the evil one to forfeit their salvation if that were even possible. Now in Trent’s book, he says there are five things that a person must not freely choose to fail to do, otherwise your salvation is lost and they are one, attend mass on Sundays and holy days of obligation. Two, receive the Eucharist at least once a year. Three, confess your mortal sins at least once a year.

(00:21:56):

Four, observe days of fasting and abstinence and five, support the church’s needs. So that’s like giving money to the Catholic church. These five precepts are described in the catechism as the very minimum obligations that someone must do. So according to Trent Horn, keeping your salvation depends on continuing to perform obligatory good acts. Now let’s compare that to the Bible. Peter says in Acts 10, “To him, all the prophets bear witness that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name. So according to Peter, if someone believes they receive forgiveness of sins, that would even include someone who continues to believe but freely chooses to eat meat on Fridays during lent contrary to precept number four. They still have forgiveness according to the Apostle Peter. Trent’s view is clearly a performance view of salvation. If you can lose your salvation because you freely chose to not fast on Ash Wednesday, that doesn’t sound like a gospel of grace.

(00:23:00):

Or if you don’t provide for the material needs of the Catholic church, which is number five, precep five, no salvation for you. That doesn’t sound like a free gift. It’s like if I said,” Here’s $20, it’s a free gift, but you can only keep it if you continue to perform obligatory good actions that I tell you to do. So you’ve got to turn up at my house every Monday morning at 9:00 AM and sweep my driveway. And if you don’t, I’ll take the $20 off you. Is that $20 really a gift? Not at all. It’s a performance based contract. We know that the Bible teaches in Romans 6:23 that the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus, our Lord. So therefore salvation cannot be how Trent has described it to be. Otherwise, it’s not a free gift. So should we do good actions?

(00:23:50):

Yes, definitely. We should go to church. We should avoid sin, but not as a condition to keep salvation, but instead simply out of love and gratitude to God for what he’s done to save us. That’s what makes salvation the way the Bible presents so much better to how then Trent presents it because it rests entirely on the work of Jesus and not on the work that we do as a Christian. We’ve looked at the words of Jesus and Peter. Now let’s look at the words of Paul. In Acts 16:30, Paul was asked the question, “What must I do to be saved?” The most important question in the world. And his response was simply, “Believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved.” This verse doesn’t just say it’s necessary to believe in Jesus. This verse shows it’s sufficient. It’s enough to believe in Jesus to be saved.

(00:24:41):

So if Trent is thinking, but more is required, he’s now disagreeing with the apostle. And the moment you believe God locks in your inheritance with a guarantee, who’s the guarantee? The Holy Spirit. Notice the order in Ephesians 1:13 and 14. You heard, you believed and you were sealed with the Holy Spirit. Paul calls the Holy Spirit the guarantee. And the Greek word is Arabon, which means a deposit, a non-refundable down payment. A deposit on a house is the promise to the bank that you’re going to pay off the rest. And if you don’t, you lose your deposit. So God is giving us the Holy Spirit as his promise that he will definitely give a believer the inheritance of heaven. And if God doesn’t keep his promise, God would lose his deposit, the Holy Spirit, which is clearly impossible. So it confirms a believer cannot be lost.

(00:25:39):

Now in Romans 8:30, Paul makes this interesting line when he says, “Those whom he justified, he also glorified. Notice the literary structure where 100% of those in on category move into the next. Every single person who is justified is also glorified. There is no subcategory of people who were justified but then failed to perform an obligatory good act and therefore were not glorified. If a justified believer could lose their justification and end up in hell, Paul could not state as a blanket fact that those whom God justified, he also glorified. And because this chain is unbroken, Paul asks in Romans 8:33, who shall bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies. Who’s to condemn? If a person is trusting in Christ, God has justified them. So no charge can stick against someone whom the judge has already justified, already pronounced not guilty.

(00:26:41):

Plus, he says God is actively interceding for them so no condemnation’s possible. Then Paul concludes this magnificent passage in Romans eight with these words. “For I am sure that neither death nor life nor angels nor rulers nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. This could not be any more exhaustive. Now, Trent has argued in his book that sin is noticeably absent from this list, but this objection falls short under closer examination for these three reasons. First, Paul already addressed the issue of sin just five verses earlier in verses 33 and 34, where he says,” Who shall bring any charge against God’s elect? “It is God who justifies. Who is to condemn? A charge is an accusation of sin and condemnation is the penalty of sin.

(00:27:42):

Paul has already established that no sin can bring a successful charge of condemnation against a believer. Second, Paul states that neither things present nor things to come can separate us. So any future failure on our part is by definition a thing to come. And third reason, Paul seals the argument by saying that nothing in all creation can separate us. Are we not part of creation? If nothing in all creation can separate us from God’s love, then we cannot even separate ourselves because we wouldn’t want to anyway. If you are a believer in Christ, you’re still trusting in him, you are securely held. Would the good shepherd abandon his sheep? Let them go walk off a cliff. No. Even if the sheep is going astray, the shepherd uses his rod and his staff to pull them back. If he didn’t, the shepherd is being negligent, but that’s not our good shepherd.

(00:28:43):

He’ll never do such a thing. As Jude one says,” We are beloved in God the Father and kept for Jesus Christ. “Or even as Hebrews 7:25 says that Jesus saves us to the uttermost. That doesn’t sound like he’s going to lose us since he always lives to make a decession for us. This is beautiful. So whether we look at the words of Jesus or any of the apostles, the testimony of scripture is unified. The one who continues to trust in Christ has eternal life, has been forgiven, has been sealed and cannot be lost. Transposition in this debate just is not biblical. Thank you for listening.

Trent’s First Rebuttal

Trent Horn (00:29:30):

All right, a few things. This debate is not about Catholicism. It’s not in the debate prompt. The position that I’m defending could be defended by any other Protestant and there are many Protestants who believe salvation can be lost through grave sin, even if you continue to trust in Christ. So I’m not going to defend the church’s teachings on this or the precepts of the church. I will say that Ryan misquoted the five precepts. The fifth precept is not the faithful need to provide to the church. It’s listed under that precept as advice in the catechism Paragraph 2043, and it doesn’t say about giving money. It says the duty of providing for the material needs of the church each according to his abilities, but it’s not one of the five listed precepts. But as I said, this isn’t about Catholicism. My position could be defended by many, many different Protestants who hold in my view.

(00:30:17):

So it’s not about not eating meat on Friday or Ash Wednesday damning you. My question to Ryan would be, what if someone claims to trust in Christ and they chronically look at pornography or they post bikini pictures online like Sophie Rain does that they know men will pleasure themselves to, but say they’d still trust in Christ. Will those people be saved? That’s the question I’m more interested in him answering. It’s also not about receiving justification. I agree. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says that we are justified neither by faith nor works that there is nothing that we can do to merit the initial grace of justification. It’s something that we just receive. So there are many Protestants who would agree with Ryan that yeah, of course we’re justified by faith alone. They would agree with them on that. They would say through faith, we are justified, but this isn’t about attaining initial justification.

(00:31:04):

It’s about forsaking justification through grave sin. That’s what we’re talking about here in the Bible is very clear on that. And the verses that Ryan gave simply don’t prove what he thinks they prove. So let me go through some of them. Hebrews 4:10, whoever enters God’s rest, ceases from his labors as God did from his. We’ll read the very next verse right after that. Let us therefore strive to enter that rest, that no one fall by the same sort of disobedience. That doesn’t sound like you can’t lose your salvation. John 10:27- 28, “My sheep hear my voice. The air here is that Ryan assumes just being a sheep means someone will always believe and follow Christ.” The verse teaches the opposite. You can tell who is a sheep and who isn’t by those who believe and follow Jesus. Those are the ones who are the sheep, the ones who continually not just believe but follow him.

(00:31:51):

Also, we see this verse believe that Ryan has greatly evacuated its meaning. Pisteo, the Greek term has been shown by scholars to include not just trust in someone, not just belief in them doing something for you, but loyalty and faithfulness. The BDAG lexicon says pistos means faithful, dependable, trustworthy, loyal. Lidell Scott Jones, Greek English lexicon says that pisteo refers to trust, confidence, good faith, faithfulness, or pledge. And this has been summarized in Matthew Bates’ 2017 book, Salvation by Allegiance Alone. So we can see that, yeah, if you translate pisteo as a very shallow form of faith that Ryan’s defending, you get his view, but the richer view and understanding pisteo based on ancient Roman and Greek sources to know what the word fully means, as well as going through biblical lexicons, it includes allegiance, faithfulness to the person that you’re following. And by grave sin, you can choose to not be faithful anymore.

(00:32:49):

He quoted Acts 16:30. He said, “Well, Paul just said, believe in the Lord Jesus and you’ll be saved.” That’s not what Paul said. Ryan didn’t read the rest of it. “Believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved. You and your household. “They spoke the word of the Lord to him, to all who were in his house. He took them the same hour of the night, washed their wounds and he was baptized at once with all his family as well. So we see the intimate connection of baptism there with believing. But just because saying,” Oh, believe and then that’s it. “That doesn’t follow from the other things that a Christian must refrain from doing to not forsake the free gift that is given to them through belief. Adam and Eve, their friendship with God was a free gift they did not earn, but they were still free to reject that gift and Christians can do the same.

(00:33:35):

Ryan also quoted Ephesians 1:13- 14,” We’ve received the Holy Spirit as a guarantee of our inheritance as a first down payment. “Right. God won’t default on the inheritance that he has provided to us in heaven. He’s good for the money. He’s good for the eternal life and he has shown that to us. But scripture never says possession of the Holy Spirit or being sealed by the Holy Spirit is something that means a person could never fall away or never commit grave sin. Later in Ephesians and Ephesians 4:30, Paul warns Christians to not grieve the spirit that’s possible to grieve it. And he warns them in Ephesians five: five that immoral and impure men have no inheritance in Christ. So yeah, God provides our inheritance. There’s nothing that we have to do to earn it. It’s not like you have to do a certain number of arbitrary good works like giving to the poor a certain amount of money or something like that, but it’s just that there are specific behaviors incompatible with the Christian life that if someone were to persist in these grave evils, even if they claimed trust in Christ, if they were immoral or impure men, as Paul says in Ephesians five: five, they would not have their inheritance.

(00:34:42):

Romans 8:30 that Ryan cited there, those who were justified were glorified. Paul is talking about corporate. He’s comparing the body of believers to those who are not the elect. That’s corporate salvation. He’s not talking about every individual because that’s just not true to say, oh, all those who are justified were glorified. Well, Ryan and I have not been glorified yet. So this is not talking about individuals. It’s a view of the corporate view of salvation. And as I showed in Romans 11:22, Paul is very clear, there can be people who can be grafted into the tree, into the body of believers who can be cut off because they don’t continue in God’s kindness. Who can bring a charge against God’s elect? No one, but the judge is able to hand out a judgment whenever he sees fit. In Romans 8:38- 39, I said,” Yes, sin is not mentioned there.

(00:35:29):

Sin can separate us from God. “Now, Ryan says,” Well, yeah, sin is mentioned in there because it says any present things or future things cannot separate us from the love of God. “But this proves too much to Ryan’s position because Ryan admits if someone becomes an apostate and loses faith that they will not be saved. But if he reads Paul literally to say any future failings, any future thing will not separate us from the love of God. Well, future apostasy is a future thing. So either Ryan has to admit that it’s not strictly literal and sin can separate us from God or he has to contradict his position and say,” Well, yeah, no future thing and separate us from love of God and future apostasy is a future thing. So you’d have to give up his position and say that apostates will go to heaven.

(00:36:16):

“And I don’t think he’s prepared to do that. Hebrews 7:25,” Jesus saves the other most. Yeah, of course God will not abandon us. Jesus has the power to save us. There is nothing in Jesus to prevent him from saving us. And yes, it is God’s will for us for Jesus to raise to life everyone who believes in him. But here’s the thing about God’s will. It’s not always something that’s definite. There’s God’s active will and his passive will. So what other things are God’s will? Well, it’s God’s will that you and I do not sin. It’s God’s will that you and I do not sin. He doesn’t will for us to sin. He wills that we not sin. Will we sin? Yeah, because that’s not a part of God’s act of will. It’s his passive will. It’s what God desires, but he still allows the contrary to happen because he values us having the greater good of free will, for example.

(00:37:06):

Or scripture is clear in one Timothy two: four that God desires the salvation of all people, of all men. It’s God’s will that all will be saved, but not everyone will be saved. So yes, it’s God’s will that those who believe in Jesus will be raised up on the last day, but that doesn’t mean all of them will if they choose to forsake Christ. So we’ve seen what understanding about Pisteo, about faith and faithfulness. The passages that Ryan cites from John chapter six do not show that someone who merely trusts in Christ will be saved because they use Bistea where they use the Greek word believe, but within that is the concept of faithfulness. And also just having eternal life, Ryan has misunderstood this, that he quotes John 6:47. “This is what he has promised us eternal life.” The mistake here, he treats eternal as an adverb describing the believer’s possession of life, not as an adjective describing the life given to the believer.

(00:38:02):

The Baptist scholar, Dale Moody even says, “The heir is thinking this means the Christian eternally has life.” Rather, as he says, it is the life that is eternal, not one’s possession of it. Yeah. When you believe and you’re united to Christ, you have eternal life, but Moody goes on to say, “Eternal life is the life of God in Christ, the son of God, and this life is lost when one departs from Christ.” So yeah, Jesus will not cast us out, as he says in John chapter six, but that doesn’t mean that we are not free to leave. However, even if we do foolishly leave, God always draws us back to him. But to summarize what I said in my opening statement that I want Ryan to answer here, it’s unbiblical. I provided several clear examples describing true Christians committing grave sin and then losing salvation as a result.

(00:38:51):

Warnings about true Christians losing salvation because of grave sin. And Ryan can’t win the debate tonight unless he explains away those passages that are very clear. Also, he wants us to say that the Bible teaches this, right? Well, how does Ryan explain that for the majority of church history, nobody thought that the Bible taught this. Nobody thought that. And he believes this is part of the gospel. So does he think the gospel was lost for 1500 years? That sounds like something a Mormon would say. And as I said, it’s totally unworkable. I want Ryan to define what sins can a believer commit and still be saved and what sins can they not commit and he’s going to be unable to do that. All right, that was my first rebuttal. Ryan, whenever you’re ready, you will have 10 minutes for yourself.

Ryan’s First Rebuttal

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (00:39:38):

Thank you, Trent, for your rebuttal. Remember what Trent must do in this debate. He must consistently show that scripture teaches that a person who is presently justified by faith in Christ can lose their salvation despite continuing to have their trust in Christ for salvation. Any passage that he brings up that talks about a loss of faith, something like that is not relevant to this debate. And that’s exactly what Trent did. Did you notice in his opening statement, he says things like if Colossians 1:22 and 23, when it says, “If indeed you continue in the faith, that’s not relevant to this debate.” This is assuming this person is continuing in the faith. He brought up two Timothy four: seven, “I’ve kept the faith.” I agree that’s already under the debate thesis. Now, first of all, he mentioned John 50 when it talks about the vine, the branches and every branch in me.

(00:40:32):

If it doesn’t bear fruit, we’ll be cast off, we cut off or taken up. And we see that what this is referring to would be in terms of in Christ, you can be associated with Jesus, be part of him, but not everyone who’s part of Jesus, like visibly, even amongst the 12 would be necessarily genuine. We see that there are the true among the false, the wheat and the tears, you might say. And so not everyone who is in Christ in that visible sense would be really in Christ. And so therefore, how do you know? Well, by their actions, their actions, evidence, whether they are belonging to him. But even if I was to grant for the sake of argument that this was somehow talking about true believers who were in him, I can see that this is a warning that is conceivable in the mind of a true believer, but not probabilistically going to happen because the sheep hear his voice, they follow him.

(00:41:30):

God sustains us to the end as one Corinthians one: eight says. And so these are very real want. Bible has a lot of warnings. Don’t abandon the faith, which is not what we’re talking about today, but it does talk about that we should control our body. He brought up one Corinthians 9:27, “I’ve got to control my body, otherwise I’ll be disqualified.” Now I think the context is clearly talking about rewards and ministry there, but even if I’m just to grant for the sake of argument transposition that he’s talking about disqualify from salvation, the answer is simply this is a conceivable warning that’s in the mind, a conceivable danger in the mind of the believer. If I don’t control my body, I would be disqualified. And what does that do? That causes the true believer to endure in the faith. It keeps them disciplined, under control, those sort of things.

(00:42:22):

Think of it like this, the difference. Let’s say you manufactured some cleaning chemicals and you sold it to five customers with a big warning on the box, “Don’t drink, this is poison. It’s going to harm you permanently.” Now that is perceivable in the mind of anyone who reads that, “Oh, if I drink that, that’s going to cause me permanent harm.” But that doesn’t mean that any of those five customers are actually going to drink the poison and therefore be harmed from it. It’s a real warning, but the warning deters all five customers from doing that and that’s what these warning passages are. These warning passages are real warnings that keep the true believer, the sheep from either abandoning the faith or not controlling his body. And so therefore none of these passages support Trent’s view in this debate. Now he mentioned the one who endures to the end are we saved.

(00:43:11):

Matthew 10, I agree. We got to endure in faith to the end. So that’s not supporting his position. John 3:36, “He who does not obey the Son.” Now the first part of that verse that’s interesting, it says, “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life.” Has already told us how to have eternal life, believe. And then the opposite, whoever does not obey the son shall not see life. So in that context, clearly the obey is in terms of obeying the call of believing in Jesus, which is what John three has been about as John 3:16, “Whoever believes shall not perish but have eternal life.” But again, even if I was to grant Trent’s view that this is somehow, if you don’t obey, you’re not going to see life. It’s a conceivable warning doesn’t mean it’s a probabilistic warning that’s actually going to happen, whether it be 1% or 99% happening.

(00:43:58):

No, God keeps us to the end as we saw in Jude one, which I don’t believe Trent responded to in his rebuttal. Now in Titus 1:15, he brought that up. They profess to know God, but they deny him by their deeds. Right. They profess. We’re not talking about people who profess. The debate topic, Trent says these people actually trust in Christ. They are trusting in Christ. They have salvation and they still trust. So this is not someone who just professes to know. He says, “If we deny him, he’ll deny us.” Again, that doesn’t sound like someone continuing to trust in Jesus. He brought up the unforgiving servant in Matthew 18 and he’s saying that the debt got reinstated there. Again, this can be a conceivable warning, not a probabilistic warning. So that doesn’t support his case. Plus it doesn’t even fit his theology if he’s saying that because even under a trans view, if you do a mortal sin, it’s not like original sin and all your past sins are reinstated to your account as Thomas Aquinas said.

(00:44:54):

Instead, it’s just subsequent sins that are counted to your account, not the original. So that wouldn’t support transposition. He mentioned one Corinthians 15, if you hold fast the gospel. Again, Trent, that’s what the debate thesis assumes. So notice how none of these verses he’s brought up has actually supported his case in this. He brought up Romans 11:22, provided you continue in his kindness, provided you continuous. What does that mean? Continuing to trust, which is what the debate thesis assumes. And he contrasts in verse 23 to say that even they, so talking about the ones that have been, the Jewish people have been cut off, if they do not continue in their unbelief will be grafted in. So it’s about continuing in faith. It’s not about whether you do mortal sins or not. He brought up Galatians five: four falling from grace and he said that they were trusting in circumcision for salvation.

(00:45:49):

Well, our debate thesis is that these people are trusting in Christ. Now he said, “Oh, not Christ alone.” But hold up. If you think you’re going to be justified by your circumcision, you’re not trusting in Christ. You cannot meaningfully say you trust in Christ in a real saving way, which is what the debate thesis assumes if you’re trusting in your circumcision to save you. In fact, that’s what Paul says in Galatians five: three, that you’re seeking to be justified by the law. So what is their trust in? The law to save them, not Christ. He said he quoted Hebrews 3:14, “If we hold our original confidence firm to the end, that debate thesis assumes that. ” And because God sheeped do, God keeps us. He sustains us to the end. He brought up Hebrews 10:26 that if we keep on sinning deliberately after coming to the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins.

(00:46:41):

And we see that the context there of that sin is talking about the sin of apostasy, giving up on the faith, which I’ve made clear this is not what this debate is about. Because if you look at verse 23 and the verses around there, it says, “Let us hold fast our confession, hold onto our faith in Jesus.” And verse 26 is saying, “Because if you don’t, what happens? You’re lost. You end up in hell, eternal suffering.” So that’s again, a conceivable warning in the mind of a believer, but not one that’s ever going to happen to one of Jesus’ sheep because he keeps us. And guess what? What happens? The sheep don’t listen to the voice of a stranger. We don’t listen to the voice of strange, so we are held. Now he’s brought up, he said historically he quoted a look, no saint or church father held this view.

(00:47:26):

Trent, look at the debate thesis. This debate thesis about what does the Bible say? And I think he’s had to go to this because he cannot support his position from the Bible. I really think that’s the reason. And no, I do not think that the gospel was lost for a certain amount of years. I think God has always got a remnant in every generation as Romans 11: five says, so to at the present time, there’s a remnant chosen by grace. Elijah thought he was the only guy, but there was actually 7,000 men who had not bowed the knee toball back in his day. And so that in every generation, God has those sheep who belong to him. Even if I don’t know all their names, none of us know all their names, but the Lord does. Now, his last point was salvation’s unworkable. He says it might lead to a cheap grace if you can’t lose your salvation if God’s sustaining you.

(00:48:12):

But Trent just doesn’t understand that God not only loves us enough to justify us, he loves us enough to sanctify us to make us more and more like him. Romans 8:29 says that God is conforming us into the image of his s. He’s making us more like him day by day. And so therefore, if Trent points to a person like, “Oh, what about this only fans lady?” Doesn’t sound like, even in that interview, I saw a bit of that as well. It doesn’t sound like she’s trusting in Christ alone for a salvation. She just said, “Oh, God’s forgiving. God’s all forgiving.” That doesn’t sound like someone trusting in Christ alone. And so is it unworkable? No, it’s not unworkable. The reason why we know that we are saved is because one, we can look to Christ and we can know who our confidence is in.

(00:48:55):

As Paul says in two Timothy 1:12, “I know whom I believe and I am convinced that he’s able to guard unto that day what has been entrusted to me. ” He said, “Oh, what if someone trusts in Christ but becomes a one is Pentecostal?” That’s not trusting in Christ. When we talk about trusting in Christ, we’re talking about the real Christ, not the Muslim Christ, not the one is Pentecostal Christ, but the Christ as described in scripture. And remember, he wants to ask me, “Hey, look, do you think this person saved or not saved?” I’m not the judge of someone else’s salvation. The Lord is the judge. So don’t make me the judge, but I can just point people to scripture and say, “Put your trust in Christ and he’ll keep you to the end.”

Trent Horn (00:49:36):

Thank you, Ryan for that. All right, now we’re going to go to the second rebuttals. And so these are going to be four minutes long.

Trent’s Second Rebuttal

So Ryan said, “Don’t make him the judge.” Well, it’s his theological system and I still want to get answers from him and I don’t think he’s willing to give those answers. If somebody says, “I fully trust in Christ for my salvation, even though I sin, well, I want to know from Ryan what sins are still permissible. Can they look at pornography once a year, once a month? What if they look once a week, say, well, I trust in Christ even though I sin.” And they look at it every day and they engage in that. Or they say, “I fully trust in Christ even though maybe I don’t always do the right thing,” and they post the bikini pictures online for guys to look at.

(00:50:24):

I’m not asking Ryan to judge a particular real person. I’m saying, “Here is a hypothetical person. We can know he’s already said one hypothetical and apostate will not be saved. I want him to answer these other ones and you’re going to see he’s not going to be able to do that. ” All right, his strategy for trying to rebut the clear teachings of scriptures I’ve given is basically twofold that if a warning does not talk about a specific immoral act, he says, “Oh, well, this is just talking about apostasy.” Even when it’s not mentioning apostasy, when it says keep the faith, oh, well, that just means trusting in Christ. That’s begging the question. He’s reading his own narrow theology into the text when keeping the faith could mean many things, that if a person chooses to engage in grave immorality, they could have not kept the faith even if they say that they trust in Christ.

(00:51:13):

So he tries to say, “Oh, well, these warnings, they’re only talking about apostates. Even when apostasy isn’t mentioned, that’s begging the question.” But even when it does talk about specific things, Hebrews talks about sinning deliberately. John 3:36 talks about not obeying the So just about belief, belief would be repeated. It’s about obedience two Timothy 2:12- 13, publicly denying Christ to other people like Peter did in the garden, not forgiving people. That’s what Jesus says in the parable, the unforgiving servant. So we have plenty examples of specific sins that are not apostasy, that if someone persists in, they’ll lose salvation. So it can’t just be about apostasy. So what’s Ryan’s answer to those? He says, “Oh, well, it’s an impossible hypothetical that yeah, there’s a warning and he compares it to drinking bleach. Like, hey, if you drink this bleach, you’re going to die.” And you read the warning and you say, “Oh, I better not drink the bleach then so I’m not going to do that.

(00:52:08):

” Newsflash, that’s my position. That’s my position is that just as if you drank the bleach, you would die. So the warning tells you not to do it so you don’t do it. If you persist in grave sin, you will lose salvation so you see the warning in scripture and by being empowered by the Holy Spirit, you choose to do that. Where we disagree is that Ryan thinks that this is automatically the case for everyone who trusts in Christ that they will never give an a temptation and persist in grave evil. Whereas I believe a person can freely choose to reject God at their own peril and so they should pray and seek after God to not do that. And so he would say, “Well, these are just, they’re hypothetical warnings for things. They’re impossible hypotheticals.” All right, well, can he give us another example in scripture of a warning given to believers about something that can’t possibly happen, which in this case, it’s someone who truly trusts in Christ, then losing their salvation and going to hell.

(00:53:04):

That’s an impossible hypothetical for Ryan, but I believe that the warnings in scripture are not a waste of our time. They’re warnings about things that really could happen. Someone who says, Lord, Lord, who trusts in Christ, but then disobeys Christ, who sins deliberately, as Hebrews 10 says, who disobeys Christ, as John 3:36 says. And when finally the part about the one is Pentecostal, he says trust in Christ. Well, what do you mean by Christ? Well, then now it becomes more about larger theology, about the Trinity because the Pentecostal could say, “Yeah, he’s fully God and fully man.” Or we could go even more. Can someone be saved if they believe that scripture has errors in it? And so they deny certain things in scripture, maybe even the virgin birth that still trust in Christ, hopefully we’ll get those answers. And Ryan, you’re up for your second rebuttal.

Ryan’s Second Rebuttal

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (00:53:53):

Thank you, Trent. Now, I noticed in his rebuttal, he tried to redefine words, redefining what the word believe pistewo means in Greek. I think what he’s confusing is the adjective pistos with the noun pistas and the verb pistuo. If you look at the Greek lexicon, it says that pistou means to think to be true, to be persuaded of, to credit, to place confidence in. Even Bdag says it’s to consider something to be true and therefore worthy of one’s trust, believe. And we even see the word faith having a similar meaning. And whenever the word faith, Pistis is used in regards to salvation, it’s always meaning faith. It’s never meaning faithfulness. Now we see that Trent made the statement that I’m assuming keep the faith as you’re talking about keeping the faith like trusting in Jesus when I think the burden of proof is upon him to substantiate that keeping the faith, or if indeed you continue in the faith that it is more than just trusting in Jesus, that is somehow keeping a certain moral behavior.

(00:54:58):

That is trans view. You have to keep a certain moral behavior in order to keep your salvation. And if you do that, well, then all glory goes to you because you managed to be, in essence, good enough. So the difference between one person going to have two believers, right? Two people of genuine trust in Christ, one going to heaven, one going to hell on Trent’s view is one was a better person, a more moral person than the other. That sounds like salvation by performance, not salvation by grace, as the Bible says, because even Romans 11: six says that if it’s by grace, it’s no longer on the basis of works. So he has the burden of proof to substantiate that these passages are talking about more than just continuing believing. Now, he responded to my answer about the warning passages. Trent, my view, I don’t think these are hypotheticals.

(00:55:45):

I don’t think these are empty warnings. I think these are real genuine warnings. They are conceivable dangers in the mind of a believer, just not probabilistic ones, not ones where the person will actually go ahead and do it because the Lord who loves us, he’s a good shepherd. He makes the sheep stay in the fold. He’s got his rod and his staff and there is discipline. If a Christian is going wayward, Hebrews 12 makes a very clear point that the Lord disciplines the ones that he loves. I don’t think the Lord abandons us. I think he grows us. That’s where his workmanship as Ephesians 2:10 says, “We’re his workmanship and he who began that good work in us will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ.” So no, the warnings are not a waste of time. And he actually made the admission, the warning makes the person not do the action.

(00:56:35):

That’s my position. God uses these warning passages to keep them believing. And so I believe that Jesus keeps his sheep. He sustains us all the way to the end and we will not be lost. And so I think Trent, he asked about, he wants to ask to get my opinion on, what about this person who’s doing this sin and this regularity? Trent, I believe the words of Jesus, that anyone who believes is eternal life, but I also believe the God who saved us is the one who’s conforming every believer to be more and more like Jesus. And ultimately God knows a person’s heart and whether they truly believe. I don’t know someone else’s heart at the end of the day. I’m not the judge. And so we cannot conflate my ability to know if someone else is saved with them actually being saved. I can simply go based on God’s word.

(00:57:21):

Even the Apostle Paul regularly struggled with sin when he says, “I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing.” And yet God was growing him. God was using him mightily. And so for Christians, it might be three steps forward, two steps back, but God will keep us to the end. I think this truth is what it means when Jesus has come to me and I’ll give you rest. It doesn’t sound like rest if your salvation can be lost in the matter of a second because you did a sin.

Trent Horn (00:57:51):

That is the end of our openings and rebuttals. Now we are going to go into cross-examination. So I will begin. First, each of us will have 15 minutes for cross-examination.

Trent’s Cross Examination

All right. Ryan, just to be clear, when I reference the church fathers and things like that, I’m trying to figure out what the Bible teaches. So I’m looking to see how have people understood the Bible in the history of the church. So can you name any individual from the 2nd to the 15th century who understood the Bible teaching salvation can’t be lost as you believe? Can you name any person who held that view?

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (00:58:30):

That’s not what I’m debating here in this debate. I’m debating what does the Bible say.

Trent Horn (00:58:36):

Right. I’m just asking. So are there other people alive right now who agree with you on this topic?

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (00:58:42):

Yeah, there’s plenty of people. And I think in every generation, there are people. Even if I don’t know the names of the people today who believe everything that I’m believing, but there are.

Trent Horn (00:58:50):

There are people today whose names you do know who agree with you.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (00:58:53):

Sure.

Trent Horn (00:58:54):

In terms of

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (00:58:54):

People I personally know. Yeah.

Trent Horn (00:58:56):

And even- Or not personally, you know their names, you know their public position.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (00:58:59):

Okay. Yes.

Trent Horn (00:59:01):

But there is no such person like that from the 2nd to the 15th century that you can name who agrees to their position.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (00:59:07):

No, I do not grant that.

Trent Horn (00:59:08):

Okay. What are their names? What are their names?

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (00:59:11):

But that’s not something, but that’s not what I’m come prepared for this debate for. I’m not here to debate what does church father say this or church father over there say. It’s what

Trent Horn (00:59:19):

Does that scripture

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (00:59:21):

Say on this topic?

Trent Horn (00:59:21):

You can’t name anyone.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (00:59:24):

Just like this, even if you can’t define what a derivative is, for example, if someone hasn’t studied mathematics, it doesn’t mean derivatives don’t exist.

Trent Horn (00:59:31):

They

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (00:59:31):

Are still a real concept.

Trent Horn (00:59:32):

You’re hoping they exist?

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (00:59:34):

No, it’s not my hoping. I’ve heard different people who actually go dive into this and they named, but in this debate, I know this is not what the debate’s about. And so this is actually distraction from the actual

Trent Horn (00:59:44):

Topic. Okay. So the answer is no, you can’t name anyone. I’m going to move on then. Because focus on the topic. So we’re going to move on. All right. Okay. So you believe then as long as the person trusts in Christ to be saved, they trust in Christ for their salvation, They will be saved and they will also sin. They will commit sins. Is that correct?

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:00:08):

Yeah. If somebody trusts in Jesus, they will not be perfect. As one John one: eight says. If anyone says they’re without sin, they actually deceive themselves and the truth is not in them.

Trent Horn (01:00:17):

Okay. Let me give you an analogy. I would like some answers on some examples. I think it’s fair to ask for that because for example, if someone says he trusts in Christ but then declares himself to be an atheist. For this debate, we are both agreeing that person will not be saved. So you can make a judgment in that hypothetical, correct?

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:00:39):

Sure.

Trent Horn (01:00:40):

Okay. Yeah, some

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:00:41):

Things that are inconsistent in that way.

Trent Horn (01:00:43):

Okay. So we can make judgements about some hypothetical situations, correct?

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:00:48):

Because that’s explicitly opposite to what trusting Christ would be.

Trent Horn (01:00:53):

Okay. All right. So let’s say someone says they trust in Christ, they strive to follow Christ and they drive on the road and they get really every now and they get annoyed by bicyclists. I get annoyed by bicyles when they hog the road. And once a year they lose their temper and then they yell at the guy on the bike and they drive off and they say, “Oh, I’m sorry for that, Lord.” And then they continue on. Will that person still go to heaven if that’s their behavior?

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:01:25):

So you said that they actually trust in Christ, not just they say they trust-

Trent Horn (01:01:28):

Yeah, they say they trust in Christ, but they give in in a moment, they get really angry and they yell at the bicyclist and then they drive off and that happens to them about once a year.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:01:38):

Okay. Now you said they say they trust in Christ, but not everyone who says they trust in Christ these

Trent Horn (01:01:42):

Actions- They trust. And fine. They objectively say, “Lord, I trust in you for my salvation. Even though I’m a sinner, I’m not perfect. I’m sorry. I yelled and I yelled at that guy.” Well, they trust in Christ. Well, about once a year they lose their patience, they yell at the guy on the bike. Will they go to heaven?

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:01:59):

I think if the key condition of being saved is that they actually genuinely have saving faith in Christ, then they would be saved. And so any sort of hypothetical you’re going to give, whether it be anger on the road or swearing or other things, if they trust in Christ, God will save them, but God has given them eternal life, but he’ll also discipline them for their sin too if he wants to.

Trent Horn (01:02:19):

Okay. I’ll just modify the hypothetical just a little bit. They genuinely trust in Christ for salvation. About once a year when they drive by the bicyclist, they lose their patience, then they swerve their car over, they knock the guy over and a lot of those bicylists get killed. So over the course of their life, they’ve killed maybe a dozen bicyclists, but they genuinely trust in Christ and they desire salvation and they give in this moment of impatience, but instead of yelling, they just turn the wheel a little bit. But they genuinely trust in Christ with their salvation saying, “Hey, I’m not perfect, but I trust in you. ” Will that person go to heaven?

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:02:54):

If they are genuinely trusting in Christ, if they’re one of his sheep, Jesus says that they have eternal life. And so I trust the words of Jesus, but again, he will discipline them if he wants to for that sin and grow them in holiness.

Trent Horn (01:03:05):

Okay. So serial killers will go to heaven, but they’ll just get a little discipline beforehand.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:03:13):

Well, because heaven’s not for good people. It is for forgiven people. Even the Apostle Paul was a murderer. David was a murderer and an adulterer, and yet he had eternal

Trent Horn (01:03:21):

Life. Did the Apostle Paul murder anyone after his conversion?

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:03:25):

No, we don’t have any record of him ever doing that.

Trent Horn (01:03:27):

Okay. So you’re saying someone who after they become a Christian, if they genuinely trust in Christ, even if they murder a dozen people, as long as they continue to trust in Christ, they could continue this pattern, they’ll go to heaven.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:03:40):

But you might be this hypothetical may be something that will never actually happen in the life of a true believer. I don’t know, because this is not a hypothetical scripture actually gives. So all I’m saying, if someone’s trusting Christ, they are saved. So any extra things you add on, if they meet the condition of trust in Christ, they are saved, but therefore what flows from that is obedience. They seek to be obedient from that point on.

Trent Horn (01:04:02):

Okay. There are not even just hypothetical, I’m not even talking about Sophie Rain, the example I gave before. There are people who claim to be true Christians, okay? They claim to trust in Christ and they think that even if it’s sinful, it’s not even that bad, they post bikini pictures online, not even nudity. They post bikini pictures online for guys to look at. They make money on, but they say, “I’m a Christian. I trust in Jesus for my salvation. I’m not perfect, but maybe this isn’t the greatest thing, but there’s people who do way worse and they’ll be saved. They genuinely trust in Christ and they post bikini pictures on only fans. Can they still go to heaven and they habitually and continually do this?

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:04:44):

So again, not a hypothetical that the Bible gives us, but I think we do see in a biblical example with Peter where he has his trust in Christ and yet he does such a terrible thing of denying Christ three times and yet the Lord did not abandon him. The Lord with his rodent stuff brought him back. And so I would say that the Lord will discipline those that he loves, even a person in that scenario.

Trent Horn (01:05:03):

Did Peter continually deny Christ after Jesus’ resurrection and make money off of it?

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:05:10):

Well, we do se that he denied it not just once, but it was multiple times. But then yeah, as I said, I think a Christian has a change of heart. We have a love for the Lord and if because we have a love for the Lord, it motivates us to be obedient and God grows us. This is not some sort of thing we just live any way you want. No, how we want to live is different as Christians. We want to be holy and sanctified.

Trent Horn (01:05:30):

Okay. But you’re saying as long as someone … Your position is this, as long as someone trusts in Christ for his salvation, there is no sin he commits either gravity or number of sins that would prevent him from entering heaven. That’s your position, correct?

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:05:49):

I’d say a true believer may fall radically, but they’ll never fall finally or totally because the Holy Spirit who dwells within them is going to discipline them, bring them to repentance exactly like what God did with David when he committed adultery.

Trent Horn (01:06:04):

No, that’s not the question I asked. So setting aside the sin of apostasy, your position is if someone trusts in Christ for their salvation, there is no number or kind of sins that would prevent them from being saved except for apostasy.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:06:19):

Right. If somebody is trusting in Jesus, they will be saved as Christ said and therefore God will grow them and you’ll see them live differently compared to when before they’re a Christian.

Trent Horn (01:06:28):

Okay. But they will still sin.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:06:31):

Yeah. Paul said that. I keep on doing stuff I know I shouldn’t do.

Trent Horn (01:06:33):

Okay. But you reject the idea that there are mortal and venial sins.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:06:39):

Correct. I don’t see that as a biblical distinction that some sins make you lose your salvation. No.

Trent Horn (01:06:43):

Okay. So even though people trust in Christ, they will still sin and you cannot give me a classification of sins that they won’t habitually commit because you don’t believe there are mortal and venial sins. You just believe there are sins and you’ve already agreed that someone, if they trust in Christ, there is no number or kind of sins that they can commit that would prevent them from entering heaven except for apostasis.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:07:07):

Right, because I just have to go with what scripture says. And scripture doesn’t give these sort of hypotheticals, but it does say that we are beloved in God, the Father and kept for Jesus and He will ensure that we become more sanctified as time goes on. We conformed the image of Jesus.

Trent Horn (01:07:22):

Let me try another example then. If a married Christian couple habitually engages in anal intercourse for pleasure or as a way to contracept, would they still go to heaven if they say they trust in Christ and they engage in the sin of sodomy?

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:07:39):

This again is another hypothetical the Bible does not give me, so I cannot make a statement on that. I would just say that the Lord keeps those that belong to him. And if someone is trusting in Jesus, not only are they justified, they are sanctified and increasingly so you can call that progressive sanctification that will occur in that person’s life.

Trent Horn (01:07:58):

Do you think though that a married Christian couple engaging in anal intercourse, do you believe that’s the sin of sodomy? It’s sinful.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:08:07):

I’m not making a comment on whether that is right or wrong in the context of marriage. I think that would be something that would need to be studied in terms of what does the Bible say on that topic, but it doesn’t specifically mention that in … Yeah, there’s no example exactly in scripture of that scenario you just raised. So that would be something maybe for another time, but that’s not what this debate’s specifically about.

Trent Horn (01:08:33):

Okay. So you’re not willing to say that all acts of sodomy are sinful?

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:08:39):

Well, I think the Bible mentions in one Corinthians six that those who practice homosexuality-

Trent Horn (01:08:44):

I said sodomy, not homosexuality.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:08:48):

Yeah. Well, I think I would have to go with scripture. The word sodomy itself, you don’t find in most Bible translations-

Trent Horn (01:08:55):

By Sodomy, I mean anal or oral intercourse.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:08:59):

Yeah. Again, that’s not really what this debate is about, is about whether this particular thing

Trent Horn (01:09:03):

Is since or not. Well, here’s the thing it is about that because it’s about whether you can lose your salvation through grave sin, and these are very common grave sins. So I’m getting your opinion on these common grave sins.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:09:13):

But that’s only if we are presuming that these particular things that you’ve got in some sort of list, these are the grave ones, these that are not grave ones. I would say whatever scripture says is sinful is sinful, but I don’t think those sins cut off a true believer from Christ because he loves us and keeps us.

Trent Horn (01:09:29):

Alrighty. I have another one here. Here’s another hypothetical or well, here’s this. Let me ask you a question and get your position right. So in order to be saved, you have to trust in Christ alone and nothing else to be saved, correct? Yes. Okay. Now here’s an example of a Christian. Suppose he says this, “I could commit this grave sin, but I am choosing not to because I don’t want to offend the God I love and reject his gift of salvation.” So here’s a person who says, “I trust in Christ,” but they say this, this is their thinking. “I could commit this grave sin, but I’m choosing not to because I don’t want to offend the God I love and I don’t want to reject his gift of salvation. “Now my question for you is, is that person trusting in Christ alone to be saved?

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:10:23):

Potentially. It depends what they mean by that second phrase. So if they are saying in terms of it’s a conceivable warning, as I mentioned within my rebuttals, that if I did just let it all go kind of think, then it wouldn’t lead me to just reject Christ. If they can conceive of that, that might be the very means that God wise to keep them. But what I think when I say trusting Christ alone, I think that I don’t trust in my actions, my good deeds or my good behavior to get me to heaven. I just trust in what Jesus has done for me on the cross to get me to heaven.

Trent Horn (01:10:54):

Okay. So what if someone said this, ” I trust that I will go to heaven because I believe that Christ died for me and I have faith in Jesus’ death and because I have chosen to not persist in grave sin until the end of my life, now will that person go to heaven?

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:11:16):

“That’s a good question. I think sometimes people put their trust in multiple things. So sometimes people say,” Look, it’s not just Jesus getting me to heaven. It’s also my good behavior. I haven’t done this sin or that sin. “Well, then it sounds like to me that they’re probably trusting not fully in Jesus thinking,” Jesus, you’re not enough. My obedience made up the difference. “And I’d say that’s not really trusting in Jesus then.

Trent Horn (01:11:40):

So in that situation, if someone says,” I will go to heaven because I have not rejected salvation or I’m going to put it this way also, because through the grace of God, I have chosen to not reject salvation by persisting in grave sin. “Would you say that that person is trusting in themselves partly and not in Christ alone?

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:12:08):

Right. So obviously this is a hypothetical. We’re not talking about an actual person here and it depend on what they mean by their words. So just put that caveat there. I would say that if they’re saying in their heart,” I have salvation not just because of Christ, but because I have kept a certain level of morality not persisted in grave sin, therefore I’m saying compared to the other person over here who they did some more sins than I did, I would say that their trust is not fully in Jesus and so it gives them a reason to boast if part of the reason they’re going to heaven is their obedience.

Trent Horn (01:12:42):

Okay. So if somebody says that they believe they will go to heaven because through the grace of God, they have been obedient to God. So would you say then that that person is not trusting Christ alone and so they will not be saved?

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:12:56):

Just depends what they mean by their obedience to God. So if they’re meaning just simply, I’ve responded in faith to the gospel, like trusting in Jesus, then okay, I get what you’re meaning because the Bible can use faith and obedience in that sense and disobedience is disbelief like in Hebrews, Hebrews chapter three, verse 18. But if they’re meaning, I’m going to heaven because I’ve obeyed a certain amount of laws, then therefore their trust is in themselves, giving them a reason to boast, and therefore I do not believe they’ll be saved.

Trent Horn (01:13:24):

All right That concludes my period of cross-examination and now Ryan, you will have 15 minutes for cross-examination.

Ryan’s Cross Examination

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:13:33):

Okay. Trent, is it possible for a Christian to commit a mortal sin despite still believing in Jesus for salvation?

Trent Horn (01:13:43):

Yes, it’s possible because Paul says, Jesus says the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak. We still have temptations to sin and we can choose to reject God because of that.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:13:55):

Okay. Now regarding this statement, “Jesus is promising that everyone who continues to see and continues to believe in him will have eternal life and be raised up on the last day.” Do you agree with that?

Trent Horn (01:14:07):

Yeah. Someone who continues to see Jesus to believe in him, but believe is not simply a trust in Jesus’ actions per se. It is about being united to that person. It’s about being faithful to that person that you don’t truly … I would say this, that you can say you believe in Jesus, but if you have grave evil actions, I would say you don’t really believe in him anymore, the full meaning of what believe is, just like a man could say he loves his wife, but if he cheats on his wife, he can say he loves her, but he really doesn’t.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:14:44):

Yeah, but love and believing is different. But you admitted the first question that if you commit a mortal sin, you can still be believing in Jesus for salvation. That’s what you’ve already agreed with and you agreed that if someone continues to believe in Jesus, they’ll have eternal life then therefore a person in mortal sin who continues to believe in Jesus must have eternal life, correct?

Trent Horn (01:15:07):

No, because you’re equivocating on the word believe. The word believe can have just a wide variety of meanings to it. James is very clear- So when I asked you- I asked you that. I cannot answer the question because you’ve used the word believe in two different senses. It can have a broad meaning and it can have a very narrow meaning about ascenting the propositions, placing trust. We have to read all of scripture within its context and not just isolate to one particular passage versus another.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:15:37):

Right. But in the debate premise, when it talks about trusting in Jesus, it seems to speak about a real living, genuine faith or trust because they have salvation by that trust. So this is not some sort of demonic faith, would you agree?

Trent Horn (01:15:52):

Well, it’s not mere intellectual ascent, but the debate proposition was trusting in Christ and in this in different passages, the word believe the verb pisteo is used. And I would say pisteo cannot be reduced merely to the narrow or shallow view of trusting in Christ as you’ve presented it, of just hoping in him to save you or something like that.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:16:17):

But if the word believing has this extra meaning of faithfulness, then what would be the word for believing if there is no word for believing then in the Bible?

Trent Horn (01:16:26):

It would be based on context, similar to how the word love in English has many different meanings to it based on the context in which it is used.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:16:36):

Right. And so when Jesus speaks about believing in Jesus, does that not speak about having confidence in him, trust in him and what he has done for you?

Trent Horn (01:16:49):

Yeah, but I would say that the passages that talk about those who believe in Jesus shall see eternal life, that believe is more than just a trust in Jesus’ action. It’s also about obedience or allegiance. So I would say the word believe, you want to equate the word believe in these passages to trust. I equate the word believe with allegiance. And so if you’re allowed to equate it with trust, I can equate it with my own word.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:17:14):

Okay. But you’d have to show that. And in John A, doesn’t he say to those who had believed in him that … And those very people who had some sort of kind of faith, maybe seemed to be superficial, who later on got to go to kill him in that very chapter, that’s how John’s using believe, at least in that context, that it’s a trust in or confidence in.

Trent Horn (01:17:42):

Which verse are you referring to?

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:17:46):

Those 30-

Trent Horn (01:17:46):

I am running time to get to the next question. John 8:30. That’s fine.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:17:51):

But let’s move on to the next question. So can you name a single person in scripture who is condemned to hell while still trusting in Jesus for salvation?

Trent Horn (01:18:01):

While still trusting in Jesus for their salvation Well, I know that the problem here is that the phrase trusting in Jesus for your salvation is an incredibly modern phrase. In fact, the only person I’ve heard use it is you. So it’s not unsurprising I wouldn’t find that description of someone in scripture.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:18:24):

Okay. So just to be clear then the biblical text, the position you hold to, there’s not one biblical example of someone that would support your case in this debate.

Trent Horn (01:18:36):

Well, I know that Paul talks about people by name, Hymnas and Alexander, those who made shipwrecks of their faith and there’s nothing in there to say that they merely did that by apostasy. So a case could be made that there it’s referring to some kind of grave evils, disobedience, antagonism to the apostles or something like that.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:18:57):

But nor does the text show that those guys continue to have genuine saving faith in Christ and nor that they had salvation and lost it. Would you agree?

Trent Horn (01:19:08):

Okay. Well, it depends what you mean by trust in Christ, but as I said, that particular phrase that you’re giving, it’s a very modern one. I can see how it would not be found in scripture. Yeah. Well, yeah, it’s a debate thesis, but you can debate and have a proposition that is foreign to scripture. What you believe about salvation is foreign to what the Bible teaches. And I’ve shown that with many Bible passages that talk about actual Christians who can lose their salvation and be cut off from Christ. So even if they’re not named … So here’s how I would answer your question. Even if they are not named, there are people the Bible talks about like in Romans 11:22, who are united to Christ, they are cut off or John 15, they do not remain-

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:19:52):

I do have to cut you off there because we have already talked about the warning passages in rebuttal, but I want to ask you my next question and that is in Romans chapter five, verse nine, it says, “Since therefore we’ve now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God.” So what does verse nine say there will much more happen to those who are justified by his blood?

Trent Horn (01:20:15):

Let me bring that up to have the … I thought you were talking about Romans five one here at first Romans five.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:20:22):

Five: nine.

Trent Horn (01:20:24):

Right. Since therefore we are now justified by his blood much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God that yeah, there is a hope that we can look forward to to our future salvation. It’s not something that is just precarious. There is a hope that we can have. We have God’s grace to assist us. However, you are arguing it’s an absolute guarantee for people who trust in Christ and my position is that it is not absolute. It is possible for some people to fall away, but for many others, they will endure to the end through the grace of God.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:20:57):

So we have now been justified by his blood, so that’s happened in the past. Then therefore much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. Isn’t it saying if X, then definitely why?

Trent Horn (01:21:11):

Yeah, no, it doesn’t say the word definitely in there, that it’s describing the ordinary course of salvation for … Well, yeah, it’s describing the ordinary course of salvation for believers. However, when we are going through the passage and we’re talking about this in Romans 13:11, Paul says salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed. So there’s a difference between- Well, hold on. How much more we have to understand that initial salvation, that is a very good thing we’re justified in the blood of Christ, but that is still different than final salvation when we are glorified and when it is impossible for us to lose our salvation. So Paul can speak about future salvation in greater terms in this way without saying that it’s automatic for everyone whoever believes.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:22:01):

So the much more phrase is also used then in verse 10 when it says, “If while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his son much more that now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life.” So when it says much more, is it not saying that this will happen to those who have been reconciled to God by the death of his son?

Trent Horn (01:22:27):

No, because he’s saying here, this is a greater thing that is going to happen to us, that we’re going to be saved, and this is a term that Protestants use all the time. They’ll say, “Well, in initial justification, we’re saved from the penalty of sin, but in final justification, we’re saved from the power of sin or from the effects of it that our final and full salvation where we’re completely freed from all the effects of sin, not just the legal aspects, that doesn’t take place until the end of life. And that corresponds to what Paul says in his second letter to Timothy where he differs from first Corinthians. He has much more confidence in his salvation because he’s near the actual end of this

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:23:04):

Life. Yeah, he’s got a few morequestions I really want to ask you, so I want to get to these. So the question is, is it easy or hard to know if the sin you’ve committed was a mortal sin?

Trent Horn (01:23:15):

Is it easy or hard? It would depend on the particular sin that you are discerning.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:23:21):

So you’re saying it’s tricky, would you say?

Trent Horn (01:23:25):

I would say that just in your case, if I asked you, is it easy or hard-

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:23:30):

Is it tricky in your case? Not in my case. In your case, is it tricky?

Trent Horn (01:23:34):

Okay. You can keep interrupting or I can answer the question if you would like.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:23:37):

Well, I’m just saying not in my case that

Trent Horn (01:23:39):

You can ask your time. I’m offering an analogy. So your case

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:23:42):

Is a tricky.

Trent Horn (01:23:42):

So determining whether a sin is mortal or venial, so categorizing something theologically would be similar to cataloging, well, is this trust in Christ, is it true faith or false faith? There could be gray areas where a person’s not sure, maybe they’re immature, maybe they’re young, maybe they’re 12 or 13 or they’re 10 years old or seven years old. Do they have true trust in Christ? Are they not mature enough yet? There may be gray areas. Then there’s cases where it’s abundantly clear and a vowed atheist does not have trust in Christ and someone who’s in all respects godly and believes us does. So my point with the trust in Christ example is there’ll be gray areas and then there’s very clear yes and very clear no, similar with mortal sin. There’s going to be gray areas, but then there’s very clear. So for example, the guy who if you persist in watching pornography every single … I’ll go even beyond that.

(01:24:34):

You produce pornography every day. I just claim to trust in Christ. You are not saved. I

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:24:39):

Have my time here. Just want

Trent Horn (01:24:40):

To

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:24:40):

Interrupt you with my time. Or if

Trent Horn (01:24:42):

You murder people

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:24:42):

Every dynashmayer has noted the difficulty of evaluating yourself in regards to the three criteria of mortal sin. He said, “You don’t always know how much you consented to a certain action and how much various factors kind of played into that. ” So my question is, if it’s indeed tricky to evaluate if your action was mortal sin or not, as Joeheshmeyer said, then doesn’t that create a lot of confusion and uncertainty in a Catholic’s mind about whether they are currently in a state of grace

Trent Horn (01:25:11):

No more than any other theological system except for cheap grace, which I’m not sure, it sounds like that’s your position where you could commit any sin except for apostasy and go to heaven. So that’s not a confusing system, but it is a damnedable, terrible system.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:25:27):

I believe God sanctifies us, but how does that constant uncertainty square with when scripture says we can draw near to God in full assurance of faith or as one John 5:13 says, “I write these things to you who believe that you may know that you have eternal life.”

Trent Horn (01:25:46):

Right. The problem there is though when you go back to one John that you see, he gives different conditions to know that you can have eternity. First John 5:13, when he talks about those who believe that’s an incidental identification, he could have written the verse grammatically to say that to those of you in Asia minor, you can know that you have eternal life because of the other prerequisites given in the letter. So like when he talks about that we are united to Christ if we’re obedient to him in one John two, for example, it says, “If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you’ll abide in the Son of the Father.” Or one John 2:17, “He who does the will of God, who does the will of God abides forever.” Let me

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:26:30):

Give you a scenario. I’ll give you a scenario. Let’s say if a believer this Sunday chose to stay home, to read their Bible, pray and mow their elderly neighbor’s lawn with full knowledge and deliberate consent and they have no emergency preventing them from attending mass, have they committed a mortal sin?

Trent Horn (01:26:48):

Yeah. So I will answer the question, but I will preface it by saying that this isn’t about Catholicism. Even if Catholicism were false, your position would still be false because there are Protestants who think you can skip church and it’s not a sin, but would agree that marital couples engaging in sodomy, pornographers, serial bicycle murders, they’re going to hell. So it’s irrelevant. Even if I submitted to that, it’s irrelevant to the other things that show your position’s false. Try and answer the question. Number two, I will answer, yeah, that if the God of the universe comes down on the day of the Lord, the one day God has given us to worship him, to be on the altar for me to receive as the lamb of God and calls me to worship him in the body of Christ. And I say, Jesus, you’re not that important to me.

(01:27:33):

I know you want me to be here. I know you want me to receive you. No, thanks. I don’t want to do that. Yeah, you have turned your back from our Lord. Absolutely.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:27:41):

Thank you, Francine. Going to church is very good, but do you agree that the Bible does not teach that if a person misses a single Sunday, but let’s say they regularly go to Monday mass instead, so they’re still getting the body there, that the Bible does not say that if they miss a single Sunday, they lose their salvation.

Trent Horn (01:28:02):

Well, I don’t believe in soul scriptura. So I don’t think that every … Because for example, you can’t tell me that a married couple engaging in anal sex is bad, even though clearly- You agree that the Bible does not teach that,

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:28:15):

Correct?

Trent Horn (01:28:15):

And I would like to finish. I reject your premise that all immoral acts must be explicitly described in the Bible because if you hold to that premise, you will allow crazy immoral acts. And I think that’s the fruit of how this particular form of Protestantism has caused grave harm in the body of Christ.

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:28:31):

So the Bible doesn’t teach that then.

Trent Horn (01:28:33):

Okay. So that is the end of cross-examination and then I guess I will have a five-minute closing statement.

Trent’s Closing Statement

All right. So I’m grateful for Ryan’s willingness to take part in this debate because this is a really important issue. This is so crucial because my mission at the Council of Trent is I want all of those who are the furthest away from Christ. I want to save the most number of people who are the furthest away from Jesus Christ. That has always been my heart here at the Council of Trent. That’s why my very first book was called Answering Atheism, theologically the furthest you could be away from Christ. My second book was Persuasive Pro-Life. I wanted to save people from the sin of abortion that’s from the sin of murder, from sin that can cut you off from your child and then cut you off from God.

(01:29:22):

So that’s why I care so much about this. But my concern is that this theology that Ryan articulates, that he admitted this in the debate that if you trust in Christ, if you say, “I trust in Christ to save me, ” he agreed there is no number or kind of sin except for apostasy that would result in you not going to heaven. And this makes sense because Ryan will do a double face here. He’ll try to tell you, “Oh, well, look, this view, it has peace and security.” You don’t always have to worry about what kind of … Is this a mortal sin? Is this a venial sin? I don’t have to worry about those kinds of things. Look, you don’t have You have to always be neurotic about the sins that you commit because guess what? Even though we’re saved, we are still sinners and Christ saves us.

(01:30:07):

And that sounds very appealing. That sounds very appealing to people. But then notice when you ask, okay, so these minor sins, gossip or lies or losing your patient, yeah, sure, sure. You are still saved. You don’t have to trust in yourself. But then when I bring up examples like the sin of sodomy or producing pornography, viewing pornography every day, every hour, murder, murdering one person a year for the rest of your life. As long as someone says they have a trust in Christ, Ryan’s position can’t possibly show that some of these sins, if he were to say, “Well, these sins show you don’t genuinely trust.” He can’t do that with his position. He’s got to permit all of them except for apostasy. And we see this, we see people who are only fans, producers, people who view pornography, people engage in heinous evils and say, “Well, I trust in Christ and not everybody’s perfect and neither am I.

(01:31:01):

And they will go to heaven and they will understand our Lord’s warning in Matthew 7:21. Not everyone who says to me, Lord, Lord, so until the kingdom of heaven. Ryan also tried to say, well, you don’t see specific examples of people engaging in grave sin permanently losing their salvation. Well, here’s the kicker. I gave several examples of people who were truly saved. So whether or not, because Ryan would say that apostasy cannot happen to a truly saved person, but I gave clear examples that were not addressed. Like Hebrews 10:28 through 29, Romans 11:22, Galatians five: four. So even looking at Romans 11:22 in Hebrews 10:28- 29, as well as the example that I gave with Paul, but in those examples, it’s clear. It talks about people setting aside just, well, the people who lose salvation, their apostates in scripture. But Ryan would say that an apostate was never saved to begin with.

(01:31:56):

But I gave clear examples. In Hebrews 10, Romans 11 would be two great examples as well as Galatians five because it says they fell from grace. Whether they fell because of apostasy or grave sin doesn’t matter. If I can show a person who was truly saved loses salvation, Ryan’s position collapsed. And I showed that with Galatians five, Romans 11, Hebrews 10, and many of the other passages that I cited. And he said, “Well, what does it matter about church history or the church fathers or anyone like that? ” Well, I think it matters because as I said before, he’s hoping there were people throughout church history who believed what he believes, but even named heretics in the church did not believe this. It’s a radical novel interpretation and would God allow the church, the vast majority of believers all throughout history for 15 centuries for the vast majority of them to be ignorant of this saving truth because most of them, they went to confession.

(01:32:58):

They went to baptism. They received the Eucharist. Ryan’s view would condemn the great saints for history, St. Thomas Aquinas, Saint Augustine. He would say that they trusted in themselves. And Ryan’s view even perversely says that if you choose to say, “I’m not going to sin because I don’t want to be disobedient and go to hell under his view, that’s trusting in yourself and you will go to hell. So I would encourage you who are watching this debate to reject this false view of eternal security and seek after our Lord to be truly obedient to Tim, knowing that I am saved not of my own works, but through the grace of God working through me to cooperate with his Philippians 212 through 13 says, work out your salvation and fear and trembling as God works in you. ” And Ryan, you have five minutes for your closing statement.

Ryan’s Closing Statement

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:33:41):

Thank you, Trent, for this very interesting debate. It’s been great. What a stark difference you’ve heard tonight between the gospel of grace and the Catholic system of sacramental survival. Notice in the debate, Trent had to redefine what believing and faith meant against what the Greek lexicons say. It’s a sneaky tactic what he did because if transposition was true, you’d have all the Bible translation, at least some of the Bible translations translating believe as faithfulness. You don’t. And so that’s a good way you can know that if they ever say, “Oh, believe or faith means faithfulness,” why don’t the translations say that? Not even Catholic translations translate those verbs as faithfulness. Even John Chris Austin said, “After all, this is what faith really is when we trust in the power of the one promising.” That sounds like what I’ve been talking about what faith is, not Trent’s definition.

(01:34:33):

And he misrepresented my position in the closing statement just then. I think sin is serious. He calls sins minor. I think all sins are very serious. All sins are offense against a holy God. Not saying all sins are the same, but all sins are very serious. But I think Trent downplays sin rather than our position. I think we should live in holiness, flee from sin. I just don’t make my salvation contingent on my obedience. Notice that he couldn’t give a single person in the Bible who went to hell while still trusting in Jesus. That’s transposition in the debate and he couldn’t cite a single biblical example. He’s failed then to do what the debate Task needed to do. And he also admitted that he could not supply anywhere in the Bible where you lose salvation for missing one Sunday of church. If you go to church on Monday, instead he said, “That’s not good enough.

(01:35:19):

It’s got to be Sunday.” That’s not what the Bible teaches. Church fathers, again, not the focus of the debate. I could quote more church fathers, but that’s not the focus. I tried to focus on the debate topic, which was scripture. So what makes Christianity so different from all the other religions is that all the other religions in the world are performance based. They say that God will only accept you into heaven if you pray enough times, do a pilgrimage, don’t do these sins. And that kind of religion robs God of the glory because if you got into heaven, it was based on you, not solely based on God. And that’s what we heard from Trent tonight. If you managed to avoid mortal sin successfully, do the five precepts abstain during lent from different foods, which is not biblical command specifically to have to do that.

(01:36:05):

And if you went to the priest and confession, waited in line to do that, well then whew, you did it. Sacramental survival, you made it into heaven. And so your salvation wasn’t really based just on God’s work. It was based on your work giving you a reason to boast. It’s what Galatians five: one describes as a yoke of slavery. What’s the yoke of slavery? Thinking that God will only accept you if you follow a particular set of rules. That’s burdensome. That’s a chore. That’s not grace, which means undeserved or unmerited favor. That would precisely be merited favor. Plus, what’s the greatest commandment? To love God with your whole heart, soul, mind, and strength and to love your neighbor as yourself is the second. Honestly, ask yourself, have you done that? Let’s say you walked out of confession thinking, “Oh, I’ve got my sins forgiven now.” And you drive back home and you get mad on the road as Trent was talking about earlier on.

(01:36:56):

Have you just loved your neighbor right there? No. And so if these are the two greatest commandments out of all of them, this would clearly be a grave sin and you’d then have to turn right back again and go back to church, back to confession. But by the time you get there, confession’s over and the next one is four days away. So now you live in fear between now and the next four days knowing that if you die, it’s probably going to be hell for eternity because you can’t even know if you’ve got perfect contrition, Catholic answers admits that leaving you in a state of uncertainty, not knowing fear. That doesn’t sound like perfect love cast out fear, does it? But I’ve got some good news for you, friends. There’s no need to wait 30 minutes in line for confession anymore to get your sins forgiven and rinse and repeat continually.

(01:37:41):

First, come to the end of yourself. Realize the gravity of your sin. Realize that you can’t bear the yoke of the Catholic church places around your neck, see your utter helplessness and then you’ll see the cross makes sense. You’ll see Christ is your only hope of being saved. Every drop of punishment that you deserve was taken by Jesus on the cross if you’d believe past, present, and that includes future ones. So future ones are paid for. They can’t condemn you, can they? And so with no more punishment left, where is the only place you could end up? Heaven. That’s available to you if only you’d trust in Christ alone for your salvation and not your good deeds. Otherwise, you pay for your own sins in hell. And once you believe this, it’ll bring you peace, joy, and assurance. And as one John 5:13 says, “You can know you have eternal life.” This is the freedom that God’s called you to and this won’t make you lawless.

(01:38:32):

It’s going to change your behavior for the better as God conforms you more and more into his image. Thank you for listening.

Trent Horn (01:38:42):

All right. Thank you all for watching. Ryan, thank you for taking part in this debate. It’s

Ryan (NeedGod.net) (01:38:48):

Been fun.

Trent Horn (01:38:50):

We’ll have a link to your channel below and thank you all for checking us out. Yeah, thank you guys and I hope that you all have a very blessed day.