Does this scripture refute OSAS? [Updated]

[aiki]

I never said works save at all. I said a faith that produces works saves.

This is a distinction without a difference as far as I can see. If faith that produces works saves a person, then it stands to reason that faith that doesn't produce works doesn't save a person. What is the key element in being saved then? Works. It seems evident to me, then, that you are saying (though, in a roundabout way) that works save a person.

Your saying that a Christian is saved regardless of whether or not they bear fruit and abide in Christ which is contradictory to John 15:2, John 15:6, James 2:14, and Matthew 25:42-43.

Again, Scripture is very clear that works do not save. (Ephesians 2:8-9; 2 Timothy 1:9; Titus 3:5) Now, if a person has saving faith in the Gospel, corresponding good works are inevitable. But works being inevitable does not make them necessary. It is inevitable that if a man has bought a fully-functioning lawnmower in order to mow his lawn, and his lawn needs mowing, that he will use the mower to cut the lawn. But it is not necessary to the man's possession of the lawnmower that he use it. He could stow it in his garage and never use the lawnmower and still be the possessor of it. In the same way, a man who has been saved by faith in Christ will inevitably do good works (as James says). But the inevitability of good works does not make them necessary. A man can be in possession of salvation, he can be saved, and not act in accord with this fact. He might be spiritually ignorant, the victim of false or watery teaching, isolated from the support and nurturing of the Body, caught powerfully in an addiction and so not evidence in his life the good works typical of a saved person. But he could still be well-and-truly saved because, in part, the inevitability of good works as a consequence of his salvation does not equal their being necessary to his salvation.

John 15:2 does not, as I already explained, teach that works are necessary to one's salvation. Neither does John 15:6, for reasons I've already given.

James 2:14 expresses the inevitability of good works arising from a saving faith but does not go so far as to say that those works have salvific power. That would put James in direct contradiction to Paul's explicit and repeated denial of such a thing.

Matthew 25:42-43 certainly makes the case for the connection between loving others and loving Christ. As I've pointed out, the First and Great Commandment is the ground out of which the Second springs. This is, I think, what Christ is emphasizing. Those who failed to love others did so because they did not love him. In doing so, they reveal, their lack of true spiritual regeneration. Just as good deeds manifest from genuine salvation, a lack of such deeds manifest from a life yet to experience the second birth.

You also say a Christian might not produce fruit but Jesus said anyone who abides in Me WILL produce MUCH fruit.

But Jesus doesn't say one abiding in him will always bear fruit, nor does he say they will immediately bear fruit. Working from the vine-branch analogy, it is evident that a branch must grow and strengthen before it can bear fruit. This takes time - time during which no fruit appears. Is the branch not, then, abiding in the vine? Of course not. Paul wrote to "branches in the vine" who were carnal babes in Christ (1 Corinthians 3:1-3). Although they were petty, bickering and selfish, guilty of gross sexual sin, he still regarded them as fellow members of God's family. They weren't "bearing fruit" of a sort he could commend, but that didn't mean they weren't saved.

Anyone who does not abide will be cut off from the vine (Jesus) thrown away to wither then thrown into the fire to be burned.

Anyone who is not abiding in the Vine is not in the Vine, that is, they aren't saved. They cannot be cut off of the Vine to which they weren't attached!

You claim the fig in tree Luke 13 doesn’t get chopped down but we don’t know that.

As far as the parable is concerned, we do. In fact, as I pointed out, the tree had been given a reprieve despite it not having borne fruit for a long time. This rather confounds your idea about works and salvation, it seems to me, if you want to use the parable to defend such a view.

Of course, the parable isn't actually about Christians but about national Israel.

Your attempting to twist the scriptures to fit your beliefs.

No sir, you are.

What is the point of the parable if all fig trees (Christians) will bear fruit?

The parable isn't fundamentally about Christians.

"Many meanings are given to this parable, and divines may abound in them; the sense which our Lord designed to convey by it appears to be the following:—

1. A person, τις, God Almighty.
2. Had a fig tree, the Jewish Church...

(Adam Clarke, A Commentary and Critical Notes.)

"fig tree -- Israel, as the visible witness of God in the world..."

(Jamieson, Fawcett and Brown, A Commentary: Critical, Experimental, and Practical on the Old and New Testaments.)

"This parable is to be taken in connection with what goes before, and with our Saviour's calling the Jewish nation to repentance. It was spoken to illustrate the dealings of God with them, and their own wickedness under all his kindness, and we may understand the different parts of the parable as designed to represent—"

(Albert Barnes, Barnes' Notes on the New Testament.)

Just like you also failed to explain why Jesus warns His 11 faithful apostles of the consequences of not abiding if they are incapable of failing to abide.

You don't accept the explanation I've offered, but that has no bearing on whether or not I actually offered an explanation of John 15:1-6 which I did. You're conflating failing to persuade you of my view of the passage with failing to offer any explanation at all on the passage. I may not have accomplished the former but I certainly accomplished the latter.

Your explanation dodged this question and was in error by saying not all Christians will bear fruit contradicting John 15:5.

So far, you're the one dodging things. You have not actually directly dealt with showing why my points and perspective are in error except to throw out a bunch of verses/passages that you think contradict my views (which they don't) and then make a series of counter assertions. This isn't an effective rebuttal of my views.

As for John 15:5, see above.

You quoted John 6:44 to which I would reply John 12:32, 1 Timothy 2:3-4, and 2 Peter 3:9. John 6:44 does not say that all men will not be drawn to Him.

??? Not all men are drawn to Christ. He even says this:

Matthew 7:14
14 Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.

My point, though, concerning John 6:44 was that God draws men to Christ, they don't come to him on their own. This the verse makes crystal clear.

To say this would be a contradiction of John 12:32. God desires all men to repent and be saved and Jesus will call all men to repentance. Only those who accept and abide will receive salvation. It’s interesting that you quoted Romans 12:3 since it actually supports my position.

None of this actually addresses my point(s).

“For I say, through the grace that was given me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but so to think as to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to each man a measure of faith.”

And what is the message in 2 Timothy 2:25? Not to be quarrelsome but instead to be patient with those who are in opposition because God may grant them repentance and knowledge of truth at a later time.

Again, you appear to have entirely missed my points. Where does the faith to believe come from? Romans 12:3 tells us it comes from God. Where does repentance come from? 2 Timothy 2:25 tells us it is given to people by God. So, God draws people to Christ; He gives them the faith to believe; and He grants them repentance. As I said, your salvation was God's doing, not your own. That was my point.

About John 15:2 your definition is incorrect.

No, it's not. See my last post.

The branch is attached to the vine so the correct definition pertaining to something that is attached to anything is take off or remove what is attached.

??? This is nonsensical. As I pointed out, it was the practice of vinedressers of Christ's time to lift up non-fruiting branches of vines onto trellises, not cut them off. As well, the most common usage of airo in the NT is "take up" not "take away." What's more, the root meaning of airo is "lift up," not "cut off." All of these things make a very strong cumulative case for airo being rendered "take/lift up."

So far you haven’t produced anything that is scriptural.

Oh, yes I have. Now, you don't want to accept my view which is fine. But it is sheer nonsense to say my points, therefore, aren't scriptural. All these sorts of statements do is make you seem, well, irrational and incapable of thoughtful discourse.

 

[marineimaging]

That statement needs to be qualified.

"And we all know a Christian would never, Blaspheme the Holy Spirit which resides within them"

Mark 3:28-30: "Truly I tell you, all sins and blasphemes will be forgiven for the sons of men. But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, but is guilty of an eternal sin. He said this because they [the Pharisees] were saying, 'He has an evil spirit'."

Not to so much qualify my statement but as a matter of discussion, I said that the only thing a saved person could do to lose their salvation...

I mean, if a person is not saved can they blaspheme against the Holy Spirit since the Holy Spirit has not been made known to them? Isn't it true that they must accept Jesus as Lord and Savior, repent of their sins, and then receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit to know the Holy Spirit? The thing about that (at least, logically) is that the person who has not been saved cannot know the Holy Spirit to blaspheme the Holy Spirit, therefore it must be a saved person. Right?

 

[BNR32FAN]

This is a distinction without a difference as far as I can see. If faith that produces works saves a person, then it stands to reason that faith that doesn't produce works doesn't save a person. What is the key element in being saved then? Works. It seems evident to me, then, that you are saying (though, in a roundabout way) that works save a person.

have you even read James 2:14? This is exactly what James is talking about. Faith without works is not a saving FAITH. Can THAT FAITH save him? The type of faith that does not produce works. He doesn’t say can those works save him.

But Jesus doesn't say one abiding in him will always bear fruit, nor does he say they will immediately bear fruit. Working from the vine-branch analogy, it is evident that a branch must grow and strengthen before it can bear fruit. This takes time - time during which no fruit appears. Is the branch not, then, abiding in the vine? Of course not. Paul wrote to "branches in the vine" who were carnal babes in Christ (1 Corinthians 3:1-3). Although they were petty, bickering and selfish, guilty of gross sexual sin, he still regarded them as fellow members of God's family. They weren't "bearing fruit" of a sort he could commend, but that didn't mean they weren't saved.

And God is patient long suffering desiring that all should repent and be saved but if they do not bear fruit they will not receive salvation.

Anyone who is not abiding in the Vine is not in the Vine, that is, they aren't saved. They cannot be cut off of the Vine to which they weren't attached!

Let’s take a closer look shall we.

“Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit, He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit.”
‭‭John‬ ‭15:2‬

Jesus is referring to branches that are “in Christ”

You don't accept the explanation I've offered, but that has no bearing on whether or not I actually offered an explanation of John 15:1-6 which I did. You're conflating failing to persuade you of my view of the passage with failing to offer any explanation at all on the passage. I may not have accomplished the former but I certainly accomplished the latter.

You mean this explanation?

Christ said what he did to his disciples having not yet died for their sins and the Holy Spirit not yet come to indwell them. Essentially, Jesus was telling his disciples that they would need to be born again, baptized into him by the Holy Spirit, and so made to abide in him. Without this happening, they would not be able to bear fruit as he wanted them to. Without a second spiritual birth, they would not be "in the Vine," nourished and enabled by him to bear spiritual fruit.

Jesus doesn’t mention any of that in the entire chapter. So I don’t know where you come up with this. The fact is that Jesus was warning His 11 faithful apostles of the consequences of failing to abide and bear fruit. Your just pulling out a bunch of garbage to cover up what He actually said because it destroys eternal security and salvation by faith without works. Where does Jesus mention the Holy Spirit or being born again in this message? They had already produced fruit without the indwelling of the Holy Spirit stated in John 15:3. They have been pruned or cleansed because they have produced fruit stated in John 15:2. Notice I’m just quoting the scriptures and your always adding commentary that is not even discussed in the entire chapter. The apostles didn’t need the Holy Spirit while Jesus was with them because they already had guidance from Jesus Himself. Jesus kept them and guarded them. John 17:12

 

[JIMINZ]

Mark 3:28-30: "Truly I tell you, all sins and blasphemes will be forgiven for the sons of men. But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, but is guilty of an eternal sin. He said this because they [the Pharisees] were saying, 'He has an evil spirit'."

Not to so much qualify my statement but as a matter of discussion, I said that the only thing a saved person could do to lose their salvation...

I mean, if a person is not saved can they blaspheme against the Holy Spirit since the Holy Spirit has not been made known to them? Isn't it true that they must accept Jesus as Lord and Savior, repent of their sins, and then receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit to know the Holy Spirit? The thing about that (at least, logically) is that the person who has not been saved cannot know the Holy Spirit to blaspheme the Holy Spirit, therefore it must be a saved person. Right?

Wrong.
The Pharisees were not saved and Blaspheming the Holy Spirit is exactly what they were doing.

My point was that a Born Again Christian would never do such a thing because it would be like the Holy Spirit Blaspheming Himself.

Although I do agree with you, "the only thing a saved person could do to lose their salvation" would be to Blaspheme the Holy Spirit.

 

[JIMINZ]

You mentioned I would grow exponentially if I heeded your explanation so I reminded you that your advice works both ways doesn't it? I suggest that if you are not familiar with the Greek language it would do you some good to at least get acquainted with it. Romans 8:13 is a 1st class conditional sentence in the Greek. These types of sentence denote simple cause and effect; i.e. if this happens then this is the result. These types of sentences are formed by the qualifier "if." If you live according to the flesh (protasis) then you will die (apodosis). Paul is stating a cause and effect qualified by the "if." Paul is stating that if the protasis/condition is true, then the apodosis/consequence is true. Thus he warns If you (brethren) live according to the flesh then you will die BUT IF you (brethren) live according to the Spirit you will live. If indicates possibility - not certainty. If indicates a believer can choose IF he will live according to the flesh OR IF he will live according to the Spirit. The believer has a choice. The unbeliever has no such choice. This verse being a 1st class conditional sentence indicates that if a believer lives according to the flesh, then he will indeed die.

To make it simple for you, I answered the question 3 times, you just wont accept the answer.

You don't answer my posts, you just keep reiterating what you began with which is wrong.

End of discussion...... right?

 

[Oldmantook]

To make it simple for you, I answered the question 3 times, you just wont accept the answer.

You don't answer my posts, you just keep reiterating what you began with which is wrong.

End of discussion...... right?

If you wish to quit discussing that's your choice. I could go on with more evidence. Do you deny that the Rom 8:13 is a 1st Class conditional sentence in the Greek? If so, do you deny that this type of sentence construction in the Greek assumes for the sake of argument that if the protasis is true, then the apodosis is also true? The answer you supplied only serves to highlight your lack of understanding of the Greek which leads to your misinterpretation. You wrote:
....he was using the Un_believer as the example of who they (Believers) were and what they (Believers) had come from, (DEATH) into life.
Your above statement is an impossibility as evidenced by the verb tense used by Paul. The verse states if you live according to the flesh you will die.... The Greek word for "live" is the word "zēte" which is a PRESENT TENSE verb. The Greek present tense denotes ongoing action therefore zēte is more accurately translated as "LIVING." Thus the verse properly reads "If you are living according to the flesh, you will die..." which directly contradicts your notion that this is an example of who they (believers) WERE. The present tense indicates ARE; NOT WERE. Paul is not using unbelievers as an example of who these believers were because he is warning if you (believers) ARE LIVING according to the flesh, you will die.
The NASB has the accurate translation:
"for if you are living according to the flesh, you must die; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live."
Understand now?

 

[BNR32FAN]

Mark 3:28-30: "Truly I tell you, all sins and blasphemes will be forgiven for the sons of men. But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, but is guilty of an eternal sin. He said this because they [the Pharisees] were saying, 'He has an evil spirit'."

Not to so much qualify my statement but as a matter of discussion, I said that the only thing a saved person could do to lose their salvation...

I mean, if a person is not saved can they blaspheme against the Holy Spirit since the Holy Spirit has not been made known to them? Isn't it true that they must accept Jesus as Lord and Savior, repent of their sins, and then receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit to know the Holy Spirit? The thing about that (at least, logically) is that the person who has not been saved cannot know the Holy Spirit to blaspheme the Holy Spirit, therefore it must be a saved person. Right?

I’ve always thought that blaspheming the Holy Spirit was to never accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior but the point you make is very compelling and reasonable.

 

[BNR32FAN]

We’re they blaspheming the Holy Spirit or Jesus?

 

[aiki]

And God is patient long suffering desiring that all should repent and be saved but if they do not bear fruit they will not receive salvation.

If you must "bear fruit" in order to be saved, you are earning your salvation. This is works-salvation which Scripture rules out.

I wrote:

"Anyone who is not abiding in the Vine is not in the Vine, that is, they aren't saved. They cannot be cut off of the Vine to which they weren't attached!"

You replied:

"Let’s take a closer look shall we.

“Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit, He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit.”
‭‭John‬ ‭15:2‬

Jesus is referring to branches that are “in Christ” "

Since my comment above was discussing verse 6, not verse 2, your "closer look" is completely off target. In verse 6, Christ does not say, "If any man who is abiding me ceases to abide in me, he is cast forth as a branch, etc..." No, a closer look reveals he says only "If any man abide not in me..." So verse 2 refers to "branches" in the "Vine" while verse 6 refers to anyone not a "branch in the Vine." It is apparent, then, that verse 6 stands in contrast to verse 2 in its subject.

Jesus doesn’t mention any of that in the entire chapter.

Had Jesus already died for the sins of the whole world in chapter 15 of John's Gospel? No, that doesn't happen until chapter 19. Had the Holy Spirit already come at Pentecost when Jesus said what he did in chapter 15? No, that event was some distance off in the future. So, the disciples were not yet, then, born-again, baptized into Christ by the Spirit and thus made alive in Christ spiritually. Did Christ have to mention these things as a preface to his words in chapter 15 in order for them to be true and to have a bearing on what he was saying? Obviously not.

The fact is that Jesus was warning His 11 faithful apostles of the consequences of failing to abide and bear fruit.

Jesus was explaining to them the necessity of being born-again (aka - abiding in him), yes. The indwelling Spirit (called the Spirit of Christ by Paul - Romans 8:9-11) was going to be the means of their spiritual fruitfulness once Jesus had accomplished his work at Calvary and ascended to heaven.

Your just pulling out a bunch of garbage to cover up what He actually said because it destroys eternal security and salvation by faith without works.

You've offered nothing, really, to counter the things I've pointed out. You certainly haven't shown that the fact that Jesus had not yet died at Calvary and the Spirit was not yet come at Pentecost didn't have a bearing on his words in the first six verses of chapter 15. I get that you haven't thought through the passage as much as I have, but that doesn't justify calling my view "a bunch of garbage." Such a remark says more about you and the weakness of your position than it does anything about mine.

Where does Jesus mention the Holy Spirit or being born again in this message?

Jesus had only just spoken of the Holy Spirit in chapter 14, explaining that the Spirit would come to his disciples as a divine Helper, dwelling within them and teaching and reminding them of Christ's words. Speaking of his coming crucifixion, Jesus had also told the disciples in chapter 14 that he would "go away," that the world would "see him no more," that he "would go to the Father." These comments about the Holy Spirit and his atoning death serve as part of the larger context of Jesus' words in the first part of chapter 15, qualifying and clarifying them. But you would know this if you had properly studied the John 15:1-6 passage more carefully.

They had already produced fruit without the indwelling of the Holy Spirit stated in John 15:3. They have been pruned or cleansed because they have produced fruit stared in John 15:2.

John 15:2-3
2 Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit He prunes, that it may bear more fruit.
3 You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you.

Verse 3 says not one thing about the disciples having already borne fruit. It says only that the words Christ had spoken to them had "cleansed" them. How is this bearing fruit? They merely listened to Christ's words. He cleansed them; they did nothing.

Verse 2 doesn't say anything about the disciples having produced fruit, either. Nothing.

Notice I’m just quoting the scriptures and your always adding commentary that is not even discussed in the entire chapter.

??? But you aren't "just quoting the scriptures"! You just gave your own spin on John 15:2-3, adding your own meaning to what Christ said! As for my "adding commentary," I'm offering explanation of my understanding of the verses in question. That's what happens in a discussion/debate about Scripture.

The apostles didn’t need the Holy Spirit while Jesus was with them because they already had guidance from Jesus Himself.

Obviously. But after he ascended to the right hand of the Father, they would need the Spirit who would baptize them into Christ and be the power source of their Christian living.

 

[marineimaging]

I’ve always thought that blaspheming the Holy Spirit was to never accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior but the point you make is very compelling and reasonable.

Roger that..., and further to the conversation, a lost person is already lost for eternity until and unless they confess and repent. But, if they have heard the Word and denied the Word then they are denying the Holy Spirit already and there is no salvation in them so their status of lost is still lost, and that "lost" is eternal for all intents and purposes. They are already blaspheming the Holy Spirit. But the ETERNAL loss spoken of comes when a saved person who knows the Holy Spirit then blaspheme's so at that point their soul is lost to salvation forever. That said, according to some a saved person who has received the Holy Spirit cannot blaspheme against itself therefore, cannot blaspheme and that would seem to indicate OSAS. Right? (P.S. My works for the Lord are out of love and adoration for our savior, not to insure my salvation because I cannot ever do enough or be good enough to equal or exceed that which is Holy. If I could I would be equal to Jesus and that is not going to happen. Therefore I must rely on the Grace of God, that being Jesus the Christ in order to be saved. He and ONLY He is enough and His sacrifice was sufficient and in that statement, "It is finished" it was complete and holy. Not what I have done or can do, but what He already did.)

 

[BNR32FAN]

Since my comment above was discussing verse 6, not verse 2, your "closer look" is completely off target. In verse 6, Christ does not say, "If any man who is abiding me ceases to abide in me, he is cast forth as a branch, etc..." No, a closer look reveals he says only "If any man abide not in me..." So verse 2 refers to "branches" in the "Vine" while verse 6 refers to anyone not a "branch in the Vine." It is apparent, then, that verse 6 stands in contrast to verse 2 in its subject.

The apostles produced fruit which is why they were cleansed or pruned by the father. They were currently abiding in Christ and yet Jesus still felt it was necessary to say to them “Abide (remain) in Me”. You are saying those who are currently abiding cannot stop abiding which means that Jesus is telling them to do something of which they have no control over. That they are incapable of failing to abide. The word abide means to remain. Remaining is not a one time act or event it is a continuous action. If someone ceases to abide they are not remaining in Christ. What did you think abide means?

Verse 6 applies to ANYONE, that does not exclude branches that are attached to the vine. It literally means any person.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Roger that..., and further to the conversation, a lost person is already lost for eternity until and unless they confess and repent. But, if they have heard the Word and denied the Word then they are denying the Holy Spirit already and there is no salvation in them so their status of lost is still lost, and that "lost" is eternal for all intents and purposes. They are already blaspheming the Holy Spirit. But the ETERNAL loss spoken of comes when a saved person who knows the Holy Spirit then blaspheme's so at that point their soul is lost to salvation forever. That said, according to some a saved person who has received the Holy Spirit cannot blaspheme against itself therefore, cannot blaspheme and that would seem to indicate OSAS. Right? (P.S. My works for the Lord are out of love and adoration for our savior, not to insure my salvation because I cannot ever do enough or be good enough to equal or exceed that which is Holy. If I could I would be equal to Jesus and that is not going to happen. Therefore I must rely on the Grace of God, that being Jesus the Christ in order to be saved. He and ONLY He is enough and His sacrifice was sufficient and in that statement, "It is finished" it was complete and holy. Not what I have done or can do, but what He already did.)

Amen to that brother

 

[BNR32FAN]

Jesus was explaining to them the necessity of being born-again (aka - abiding in him), yes. The indwelling Spirit (called the Spirit of Christ by Paul - Romans 8:9-11) was going to be the means of their spiritual fruitfulness once Jesus had accomplished his work at Calvary and ascended to heaven.

Your not making any sense. You just said being born again is abiding (remaining) in Christ. The apostles have already produced fruit which they cannot do unless they are abiding in Christ.

“Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit, He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit. You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you. Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me.”
‭‭John‬ ‭15:2-4‬ ‭NASB‬‬

The apostles are pruned or cleansed katharós because they produced fruit by abiding in Christ. They cannot bear fruit of themselves unless they abide in the vine.

 

[aiki]

The apostles produced fruit which is why they were cleansed or pruned by the father. They were currently abiding in Christ and yet Jesus still felt it was necessary to say to them “Abide (remain) in Me”.

And this is because, despite the things they had done as his disciples, they were not yet abiding in Christ (a spiritual event/condition) which could only happen after his death and resurrection and after the arrival of the Spirit at Pentecost to baptize believers into him. The abiding of which Jesus is speaking in John 15:1-6 is the born-again state, the state of spiritual regeneration obtained by a saving faith in Christ and by the consequent indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

You are saying those who are currently abiding cannot stop abiding which means that Jesus is telling them to do something of which they have no control over.

??? When one is born-again by God's saving work in them, they are forever His and no man can snatch them out of His hand. They can't even snatch themselves out of His hand. "No man" is a very universal phrase, you see.

By coming to abide in Christ, the disciples would be spiritually fruitful. If they did not abide in Christ, if they did not come to be saved, they would be "cast forth as a branch and withered," that is, they would not be spiritually regenerated and fruitful followers of Christ. I'm not sure why this is controversial to you except that it makes your use of John 15:1-6 as a proof-text for your saved-and-lost, works-salvation doctrine useless.

That they are incapable of failing to abide. The word abide means to remain. Remaining is not a one time act or event it is a continuous action. If someone ceases to abide they are not remaining in Christ. What did you think abide means?

It means to "remain," yes, or "continue in." But we see what Jesus really meant by "abide" in the vine-branch analogy he used. Does a branch immediately grow to full size and become fruitful? No. It must, over time, become a mature, fruiting branch. So abiding does not mean instantaneous fruitfulness. Does the branch produce itself? Did it decide one day to sprout out of the vine? No. A branch is an outgrowth of the vine; it has no independence from the vine but relies upon it for its very existence. Abiding, then, does not happen as a consequence of the effort of the branch. Do branches quiver and strain to hold onto the vine, to stay connected? No. The branch is a natural outgrowth of the vine, growing and producing fruit naturally, without strain or effort. All it does is receive the life-giving sap of the vine by which it grows strong and fruitful. When I think of what it means to abide in Christ, these are the things I understand to characterize abiding.

Verse 6 applies to ANYONE, that does not exclude branches that are attached to the vine. It literally means any person.

Verse 6 only speaks of those who are not abiding in Christ. You must stretch and twist the verse to make it apply to everyone, saved and unsaved.

Your not making any sense. You just said being born again is abiding (remaining) in Christ. The apostles have already produced fruit which they cannot do unless they are abiding in Christ.

It isn't that I'm not making any sense, but that you are, apparently, out of your depth of understanding. Jesus, as I pointed out, was speaking of a future need his disciples would have in John 15:1-6 once he had left them to return to the Father as he had just said he would in chapter 14. Like everyone else, the disciples would have to be born-again by the Spirit and thus come to abide in Christ. This is essentially what Jesus is telling them in John 15:1-6.

Being in Christ, abiding in him, is a spiritual thing, accomplished by the Holy Spirit indwelling a person. While the Spirit came upon the disciples at times prior to Christ's ascension, empowering them to do miracles and cast out demons, the Spirit did not dwell within them as he would do at Pentecost and thereafter. We know this because it was upon the disciples first of all that he came, which indicates very clearly that prior to that moment, they were without the Spirit's indwelling presence. Obviously, he would not have had to come upon them at Pentecost were he already within them. And if the Spirit was not already dwelling within them, they were not abiding in Christ.

 

[JIMINZ]

Spiritual death is the consequence of Christians who live according to the flesh and engage in a lifestyle of habitual sin.

Can a Christian live according to the flesh and engage in a lifestyle of habitual sin, repent and by so doing restore him?

 

[JIMINZ]

While some who fall away were never believers in the first place, it does not negate the reality that others who fall away were indeed true believers.

Where is that reality spoken of, or is it something else which you believe because it is only logical to do so?

 

[Oldmantook]

Can a Christian live according to the flesh and engage in a lifestyle of habitual sin, repent and by so doing restore him?

Yes. The prodigal lived in habitual sin, repented, returned to his father and was restored/forgiven. He became DEAD but was made alive AGAIN.

 

[JIMINZ]

This passage that you quote no where refers to sin as sin does separate us from God. Paul just a few verses earlier gives the brethren this stern warning: For if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live. Rom 8:13
Spiritual death is the consequence of Christians who live according to the flesh and engage in a lifestyle of habitual sin.

Are you able to bolster your belief of implied loss of Salvation it with anything other than Rom. 8:13?

 

[JIMINZ]

Yes. The prodigal lived in habitual sin, repented, returned to his father and was restored/forgiven. He became DEAD but was made alive AGAIN.

Really?

Heb 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
Heb 6:5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
Heb 6:6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

Heb 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
Heb 10:27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
Heb 10:28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
Heb 10:29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

 

[Oldmantook]

Where is that reality spoken of, or is it something else which you believe because it is only logical to do so?

1 Jn 2:19 They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.
John identifies a specific group of persons who appeared at first to belong to us but "did not really belong to us." They appeared to be believers but in reality were not. This verse is often used as a proof text to demonstrate that all those who depart were never believers in the first place however that is a logical fallacy commonly referred to as overgeneralizing. While it is indeed true in some cases, it cannot be overgeneralized to include all cases as others who are indeed believers, can forfeit their salvation as Rom 8:13 warns against but to which we disagree.