This should end the discussion about easy grace and OSAS!

brotherjerry said:

Yea but Zach, we have shown you where what you believe the Bible to say does not match up with what we think it says..and we use other verses to explain and support our position. You have not. You have done nothing but regurgitate the same verses over and over again. You have not explained to us how you feel those verses mean what you claim they mean, we obviously get a different meaning out of those same verses and have shown you that.

So if you can expand upon what you have posted before and provide further insight into that, then it would be helpful. Ad hominem attacks about us not being spiritual and such is not Christlike and not what the Bible teaches how we should act.

Click to expand...

I'm not referring to Zach or to anyone in particular.

But I'm reminded of the verse that goes like this:

"Wonderful things in the Bible I see,
Especially what's put there by you and by me!"

ZacharyB said:

How be if I send you an NT and you can read ...
how Jesus treated some of the people He encountered?
Meanwhile, back at the ranch ...
der are many many "believers" who fail to understand all kinds of spiritual Truths!

Click to expand...

How about this Zach...why don't you read your Bible and tell me how did Jesus treat those that He felt were 'unbelievers'?
You are claiming people that do not agree with you as unbelievers.

Jesus once climbed into a boat and went across the Sea of Galilee to meet one man who was possessed. He freed that man and then climbed back into the boat and went back across the sea. Christ goes out of His way to be compassionate.

Why is it though that you never try to explain the verses you bring out? You rely on a man made doctrine that a person has to be special in order to read and understand. The Bible does not say this. And when asked how do you reconcile your doctrine with other verses in the Bible that explain something different you don't attempt to explain how you reconcile those, you attack the person who asked you the question.

See most of the proponents of eternal security can take the verses you have brought to the table and show you what they actually meant in context of how they were spoken, and how they fit with the other verses in the Bible to show a doctrine of eternal security. Proponents of the conditional security however, are never able to reconcile those verses, they fail to accept that the verses they use when shown in the light of the rest of the Bible (New and Old Testament) do not support a doctrine of conditional security.

So when you can put your big boy britches on and have a civil discussion of the doctrines and treat others with respect and courtesy, then you will no longer be a clanging cymbal...because maybe you will have learned to love your neighbor.

ToBeLoved said:

So what part of the Bible specifically talks about this regeneration process?

Click to expand...

Are you still denying faith is a gift from God?

-57 said:

"Nobody, except maybe yourself.".....You know, you're not allowed to add stuff to the bible. Where does the bible teach you can snatch yourself out of Gods hand? A chapter and verse would be nice.

Click to expand...

But neither are we allowed bend concepts out of shape.

To respect what it means to "snatch", one must concede that it does not cover the possibility that a believer may elect to fall away. Consider the phrase "X snatched Y out of God's hand". I suggest that the very meaning of the concept "to snatch out of the hand" restricts the subject (X) from being the same as the object (Y). In short, it is conceptually incorrect to speak of "snatching yourself" out of anything.

Bottom line: This particular Bible text only rules out the possibility that external agents can dislodge you from God's graces; the text does not rule out the possibility that one can still elect to fall away oneself.

ZacharyB said:

This always is FG2's response to Scripture verses he just can't handle.
Believe me guys, you're wasting your time showing him Scriptures!

Click to expand...

One thing I learned a long time ago is not to base doctrine off of one verse in the bible. The Eph. verse is an example. You can read that verse several ways as demonstrated on this forum. When the bible is looked at as a whole it is rather obvious regeneration is required prior to faith. Those verses were presented by several people and FG2's response was simply ad-hoc in nature. The closest one can come is that regeneration and faith happen at exactly the same point in time.

expos4ever said:

But neither are we allowed bend concepts out of shape.

To respect what it means to "snatch", one must concede that it does not cover the possibility that a believer may elect to fall away. Consider the phrase "X snatched Y out of God's hand". I suggest that the very meaning of the concept "to snatch out of the hand" restricts the subject (X) from being the same as the object (Y). In short, it is conceptually incorrect to speak of "snatching yourself" out of anything.

Bottom line: This particular Bible text only rules out the possibility that external agents can dislodge you from God's graces; the text does not rule out the possibility that one can still elect to fall away oneself.

Click to expand...

Can you show me a verse in the bible that supports what you have said? All you have done is presented an argument based solely on your own feelings.

-57 said:

Are you still denying faith is a gift from God?

Click to expand...

Can you not answer the question?

I'd rather you not change the subject and just answer the question. Thanks.

ToBeLoved said:

Can you not answer the question?

I'd rather you not change the subject and just answer the question. Thanks.

Click to expand...

Perhaps you can ak the question again. Your question or lack of answer was in response to a question that you failed to answer.
But, to set things straight, please rephrase, reask your question as I would love to answer it.

-57 said:

Perhaps you can ak the question again. Your question or lack of answer was in response to a question that you failed to answer.
But, to set things straight, please rephrase, reask your question as I would love to answer it.

Click to expand...

I asked what part of the bible specifically talks about a regeneration process that includes receiving faith AFTER regeneration.

-57 said:

Can you show me a verse in the bible that supports what you have said? All you have done is presented an argument based solely on your own feelings.

Click to expand...

The Bible does not provide a specification about how the English language and its concepts function. The point is that, for whatever reason, the translators decided to use the word "snatch".

And as per my argument, to say "no one can snatch them out of God's hand" does not address the possibility that the individual himself or herself cannot "jump out" of God's hand on their own volition.

This is about the meaning of concepts.

Let me ask this question.
Would you say Jesus always does the will of the father?
Assuming you'll say 'yes', Jesus always does the will of the father'. because it says so in (John 8:29) "And He who sent Me is with Me; He has not left Me alone, for I always do the things that are pleasing to Him."
Then you would also have to agree with (John 6:39) "And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I LOSE NOTHING' but raise it up on the last day."

If Jesus lost anyone that the father has given him, then he would not be doing the will of the father. And if one elected to fall away, he would still be losing them. Eg) if I took my kids to the mall and they decided to just take off (2 and 4 yr olds do that) then I would have lost my kids at the mall. My wife would say "you lost our kids!!!!" I couldn't reply " no I didn't lose them, they took off on there own".

expos4ever said:

The Bible does not provide a specification about how the English language and its concepts function. The point is that, for whatever reason, the translators decided to use the word "snatch".

And as per my argument, to say "no one can snatch them out of God's hand" does not address the possibility that the individual himself or herself cannot "jump out" of God's hand on their own volition.

This is about the meaning of concepts.

Click to expand...

But your concept mirrors the old TV Show "Kung-Fu" where David Carradine was supposed to snatch the pebble from the Master's hand. So the Master is sitting there with his palm open. The game is to move faster than the Master so that you get the pebble before the Master closes his hand.

This concept is not supported in the Bible. This concept leaves the possibility that something could be faster than God and could snatch it, if it was just fast enough. But what we see in the Bible is that God protects us.
Psalm 46:1 God is our refuge and strength
Psalm 121:8 The Lord will guard your going out and coming in...
1 Peter 1:5 who are protected by the power of God...
1 Thessalonians 5:23 May the God of peace Himself sanctify you entirely; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved complete...
Psalm 121:3 He will not allow your foot to slip; He who keeps you will not slumber.
1 Corinthians 10:13 ...and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able...
2 Thessalonians 3:3 But the Lord is faithful. He will establish you and guard you against the evil one.
Psalm 57:1 ... For my soul takes refuge in You; and in the shadow of Your wings.
Psalm 91:4 He will cover you with His pinions, and under His wings you may seek refuge; His faithfulness is a shield and bulwark.

There are many more verses that express an image that God's protection is a covering. So when we think of snatching out of God's hands we have to change our concept to one where God has His hands covering us like you would when you used to catch firefly's and hold them in your hand. Just as the firefly could not escape, neither can you.

But let me caveat that last sentence...Those that truly belong to Jesus, do not want to escape.

brotherjerry said:

But your concept mirrors the old TV Show "Kung-Fu" where David Carradine was supposed to snatch the pebble from the Master's hand. So the Master is sitting there with his palm open. The game is to move faster than the Master so that you get the pebble before the Master closes his hand.

This concept is not supported in the Bible. This concept leaves the possibility that something could be faster than God and could snatch it, if it was just fast enough. But what we see in the Bible is that God protects us.
Psalm 46:1 God is our refuge and strength
Psalm 121:8 The Lord will guard your going out and coming in...
1 Peter 1:5 who are protected by the power of God...
1 Thessalonians 5:23 May the God of peace Himself sanctify you entirely; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved complete...
Psalm 121:3 He will not allow your foot to slip; He who keeps you will not slumber.
1 Corinthians 10:13 ...and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able...
2 Thessalonians 3:3 But the Lord is faithful. He will establish you and guard you against the evil one.
Psalm 57:1 ... For my soul takes refuge in You; and in the shadow of Your wings.
Psalm 91:4 He will cover you with His pinions, and under His wings you may seek refuge; His faithfulness is a shield and bulwark.

There are many more verses that express an image that God's protection is a covering. So when we think of snatching out of God's hands we have to change our concept to one where God has His hands covering us like you would when you used to catch firefly's and hold them in your hand. Just as the firefly could not escape, neither can you.

But let me caveat that last sentence...Those that truly belong to Jesus, do not want to escape.

Click to expand...

I love Psalm 46; we have a Psalm 46 quote displayed in our house.

ToBeLoved said:

I asked what part of the bible specifically talks about a regeneration process that includes receiving faith AFTER regeneration.

Click to expand...

We can start with Eph 2:1.....And you were dead in the trespasses and sins.
Another word for regeneration is rebirth, related to the biblical phrase “born again.”

I think this is a true statement...."No man has the power to raise himself from spiritual death. Divine assistance is necessary."
I understand salvation is a monergistic work produced singly, by one person. That person is God.

If we believe that faith precedes regeneration, which is a a synergistic work that requires cooperation between man and God then we are in error. One cannot have faith unless first one is brought to spiritual life from spirtual death.
The theology of synergistic work tells us first we have "faith" then God grants us regeneration.

God must act first. John 6:65 tells us "65 And He was saying, "For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father."
If you back up to John 6:63 we read that ...."It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.

John 1:12 and onwards tells us......12But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God

Flesh is no help at all. The unregenerate can't have faith. Faith is an actions of man...which is given by God...that a now-alive sinner does in response to regeneration as presented in the gospel.

Now do I have a verse that specifically says..."and regeneration proceeds faith"? No. But I also don't have a verse that says flat out God is a Trinity.....Yet, the bible expresses both positions. I must ask you, do you have a verse that specifically says faith proceeds regeneration? That answer is also no.

brotherjerry said:

But your concept mirrors the old TV Show "Kung-Fu" where David Carradine was supposed to snatch the pebble from the Master's hand. So the Master is sitting there with his palm open. The game is to move faster than the Master so that you get the pebble before the Master closes his hand.

This concept is not supported in the Bible.

Click to expand...

This is not the point. The concept of "snatch" means what it means apart from the Bible - it is a concept associated with the English language. Unless there is clear evidence that this particular concept - to snatch - has been used in a way that sustains the interpretation "to snatch yourself", then we need to honour the concept.

brotherjerry said:

But what we see in the Bible is that God protects us.
Psalm 46:1 God is our refuge and strength
Psalm 121:8 The Lord will guard your going out and coming in...
1 Peter 1:5 who are protected by the power of God...
1 Thessalonians 5:23 May the God of peace Himself sanctify you entirely; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved complete...
Psalm 121:3 He will not allow your foot to slip; He who keeps you will not slumber.
1 Corinthians 10:13 ...and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able...
2 Thessalonians 3:3 But the Lord is faithful. He will establish you and guard you against the evil one.
Psalm 57:1 ... For my soul takes refuge in You; and in the shadow of Your wings.
Psalm 91:4 He will cover you with His pinions, and under His wings you may seek refuge; His faithfulness is a shield and bulwark.

Click to expand...

None of this in any ways speaks to the possibility that one can choose to walk away from one's faith.

brotherjerry said:

There are many more verses that express an image that God's protection is a covering. So when we think of snatching out of God's hands we have to change our concept to one where God has His hands covering us like you would when you used to catch firefly's and hold them in your hand. Just as the firefly could not escape, neither can you.

Click to expand...

I don't think this is a valid argument for a variety of reasons. But this is one of those cases where to counterargue would require a rather complex lengthy argument about the nature of language, images, and contexts. And I am not prepared to invest the time to do that. If I had to express my objection briefly it would be this: the concept of snatching is, I suggest, never used in the English language to denote an action carried out in respect to oneself; so while context has its relevance in informing how we interpret certain concept, there is simply not enough "elasticity" in the concept of "snatching" for your argument to work.

I said this:
"I don't see any connection between my comment and your response. I noted from Scripture that salvation (being made alive) is through faith. Proving that faith (belief in the gospel) precedes regeneration. Which you've not refuted."

-57 said:

It's been refuted several times by several people.

Click to expand...

If that is true, please cite at least the post #. Or let those who supposedly did so step forward with their argument, because I don't believe the claim and don't remember anyone refuting my view of Eph 2;5 and 8.

Just for the record, you must have been quite the dead soul. That is having the ability to be spiritually dead yet believe in the gospel....despite the verses that inform us it does't work that way.

Click to expand...

There are NO verses that say what is being claimed. And I proved that from Eph 2:5 and 8, which have NOT been refuted.

...arn't you glad your belief in the order of salvation doesn't matter concerning out salvation?

Click to expand...

I'm glad that I understand that I am saved on the basis of faith in Jesus Christ, who does all the saving, in spite of me. I am also glad that I understand the Scriptural order of things; belief, followed by salvation, eternal life and regeneration.

-57 said:

God giving us the ability to believe is a gift. Believing is simply using the gift.

Click to expand...

Then everyone has that so-called gift. Which the Bible doesn't even mention. I wonder how come?

God created man with an intellect with which to discern right from wrong. And make choices based on that discernment. Rom 2:14,15.

ToBeLoved said:

No I am here. She is not the sole survivor.

Click to expand...

Hey, hey, I'm no "she".

I said this:
"So, to prove your view, please exegete each one of them to show that they MEAN what you claim."

ZacharyB said:

This always is FG2's response to Scripture verses he just can't handle.

Click to expand...

No, it's my response to anyone claiming to SAY what they think the Scriptures MEAN. I'm always willing and able to handle such requests, but it seems no one takes me up on that.

Believe me guys, you're wasting your time showing him Scriptures!

Click to expand...

The real waste would be trying to defend any view that does NOT line up with Scripture.

ZacharyB said:

Don't know if you're talking to me or not.

Click to expand...

Yeah, he was. Indicated by the presence of one of your quotes in his post.

IMO, cases don't need to be proven!

Click to expand...

Well then. Neither do I have to prove anything.

Either a guy believes a Scripture verse, or he doesn't
(in the context of the entire NT, of course).

Click to expand...

It's not at all quite that simple. That's why it's important to be able to prove that a verse means what it says.

But, this often requires some spiritual discernment, revelation even.
Fleshly understanding just won't cut it.
IMO, any kind of a deep spiritual Truth only comes via spiritual revelation.

Click to expand...

Is this some thinly disguised boast that none of your opponents have this so-called 'spiritual revelation'?? That's just a cheap shot.