Can you lose your salvation

Dr. Jack

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2019
839
120
63
Pennsylvania
✟26,705.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Because of the sheer length of the errors in these posts, I do not have time to reply. But I can repeat verses that you don't address, and/or address wrongly as well as provide several logical reasons for apostacy in the church logically speaking. Now I would ask that since you have lots of time, that you do bullet points and adress each section. As this will cause you to truly read and ponder the material.


This is the topic that was recently brought up...


do you believe someone who has unbelief that turns them away from God is by definition (never saved?)

as in this verse:
Heb 3:12 " See to it, brothers, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God."

if yes, you would be correct in believing what the verse says.

Then why is he warning believers not to have unbelief with turns away from God?

----------------------


The parable of the sewer makes sense if you have a belief in apostacy: Matthew 12 verse 21 and 22 talk about receiving the word with joy, but not getting rooted. They were saved, they were a living plant, yet it perished because it lacked roots. Some fell among thorns, and the weeds choked them. Meaning that they cared more about the world than about God and left the faith. verses 8, 23. In contrast the true convert bears fruit, some sixty, some 100 fold.


The parable of the sewer talks about gospel seeds falling on ground:


“Some fell on stony places, where they did not have much earth; and they immediately sprang up because they had no depth of earth.

Mat 13:6


“But when the sun was up they were scorched, and because they had no root they withered away.

Mat 13:7


“And some fell among thorns, and the thorns sprang up and choked them.

Mat 13:8


“But others fell on good ground and yielded a crop: some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.

Mat 13:9


“He who has ears to hear, let him hear!”


Mat 13:18

--------------

and part three:

When we become saved, we desire to be holy, that is all that verse is saying in 1 john 3:9. The way I know that it's not talking about free will, is that we still sin, even though it says we won't sin. Do you sin? Do you look with lust at another woman? Do you see a picture of victoria secret, when going through the mall, and stare a little too long? Don't worry I am not judging. I am just saying that we still sin, even though the verse says we won't. So it's not talking about free will. It's talking about sanctification which is a cooperation where we slowly give our will up for His will in our lives. We never fully give it up, but this is a weakness we have. If we could fully give up our free will, we would have no sin, or flesh. But we do have a sinful flesh still. So in conclusion it helps to know the greek there, it is I believe talking about "present continual sin." Something that we do regularly, that we have not repented of. inappropriate contentography is a great one to enter here. 80 percent of christian males are addicted to inappropriate content. Yet that verse says we will not continue in sin. So why are we continuing in sin? I believe that someone addicted to inappropriate content, does it, repents of it, does it again, repents of it. They are not continuing in it, because they are repenting all the while. They don't have victory over the sin, but they are not continually sinning. Now if ever a person starts to shrug off the shame of that sin, and decides to stop repenting of it, then there is a red flag. That sin gains a foothold. And as the Bible says, a little leaven leavens the whole loaf. That small singular sin grows and grows in the heart. Slowly it consumes the entire marriage, and a divorce is filed. Then the person still does not repent, and this issue plagues the next marriage. and a third and a fourth, all because the singular sin. That sin has caused death. Now also sin can deceive, say that sin becomes so fun and alluring that we no longer are ashamed of it, but we start to embrace and celebrate it. Jesus becomes a bitter topic to us. Who does that Jesus think He is to forbid such extasy? He must not want me to have fun, and by the way the Bible has a lot of contradiction anyway. I am not sure I believe in Jesus anymore. I have forfeited my salvation and the love of my life, all for a fantasy woman I can never have. This is the deception that sin can have in our lives. That is why we must repent of all known sin, and never give them a foot hold. And even pray to God that He reveal sin in our lives. God gave us the perfect prayer "deliver us not into temptation." Because God knew that victory was available. But we must ask for it.

------------


I had the hardest time in the past with the logistics of apostacy. I believed OSAS. Once saved always saved. Until someone gave me a message by Jon courson on Hebrews 6. In 1997 I listened to it. I dove into the Greek all night. He was correct. There was nothing in the Greek that could save my view of OSAS. I was forever changed. See I got saved in a Calvinistic church and that is why I believed OSAS, not because of the Bible. See article below, this is a congressional candidate that says he is a pedophile. Now if this guy was saved at your church, led to Christ by you, so you knew it was genuine. Repented of sex outside of marriage when he was saved. Prayed regularly and evangelized for over ten years Converting sinners. Did a small group bible study. Later had a family, and became a pastor of a non denomination. But still had a problem with kiddy inappropriate content. This small sin, leavened the whole loaf. He llost his marriage and his pastoriate, he molested his kids, the judge gave custody to the wife so he could never see his kids. He started a website, "pedophiles who believe in Jesus." He started a new church in san franscisco of pedophiles in castro district, he wrote a book to promote christian pedophilia. You would assume he was never saved because of your theological bias, because no christian would do such a thing. Yet it happens every day. An evangelist that travelled with Billy Graham rejected the faith after decades of being saved. Anyway back to the other guy..... But "things that accompany salvation" were in his life. He sprouted and brought many into the kingdom. Hundreds of genuine repentant converts. Yet he had a small addictive sin that leavened the whole loaf. He was addicted to child inappropriate contentography, and rather than dealing with it, getting counseling and accountability partners he decided to open a church of christian pedophiles. Now i know you would normally believe he was never save but because you led him to christ, and seen him evangelize for ten years, you knew he understood and accepted Jesus and the gospel fully. But sin leavened the whole loaf. It was not that his sin was unforgivable l, it was that he no longer was ashamed of his sin, became proud of it, taught it publically. That one sin caused him to doubt his faith and the accuracy of the bible. Why would Jesus forbid him from loving a child in this way? He starts to hate Jesus, and loathe christianity, again all because of one sin. Note the themes doubting drifting, departing, all critical subsection headings of hebrews chapters 1-5 leading up to apostacy of hebrews chapter 6.That is a sign of an unregenerate. Here is the article. This story is not far fetched: Congressional Candidate In Virginia Admits He’s A Pedophile


-----------------


Ok so here you have catholic priests raping children. Ok, I am not saying they are apostates, as there may be some type of bondage to sin here, and addiction of sort. But if there is no shame, and if the pope says that it is ok, and good, then you have a problem. I didn't read the whole article, but I presume they are saying if a priest has a problem that they can get help and they don't lose their job right away. I would question that ethic personally, I would think that they should not be around children at all. In california if you are a predator, you have it on your record and you are actually on a sexual predator map in the city. You cannot get a job around children, and I don't think you can live a quarter mile from any parks or schools. and I agree with all of that stuff. So I am a bit saddened over the pope's view of this. Why should the unsaved be protecting our kids more than the church?


U.N. Report: Vatican Policies Allowed Priests To Rape Children
I'll tell you what, I did a somewhat detailed exegesis on the text in question. I challenge you to directly refute what I have stated.

Please don't give me an article written by someone else. You presented this great resume of all the studies you have done, and even written, but now resort to an article written by another ...

That isn't debating, that is shoving me off without a single direct answer to anything I have presented.

Furthermore, you directly stated that apostacy was spoken of in verse one; and you now have nothing to defend that claim but the works of another man.

Are you actually qualified to have the debate YOU CHALLENGED ME to, or can you only direct me to the words of another?

Under your name (gradyII) it reads, "logical debater - for better: or for worse)

I would say this qualifies for "worse".

You tell me "Because of the sheer length of the errors in these posts, I do not have time to reply"; yet you ramble on in you answers that have NOTHING to do with the text in question.

I'm sorry, but I have broken down you response, and absolutely refuted it using the Word of God.

You have two choices, Step up to the plate and actually participate in the debate YOU CHALLENGED ME TO, with YOUR OWN WORDS; or simply step down and admit you are not as qualified in this as your RESUME proclaims you to be.

Again THESE are YOUR OWN WORDS:

Post #81
Just so you know I went to bible college, studied from the top seminaries in the country, started a journal of soteriology, and had dozens of articles about salvation. I had the best soteriological journals of my perspective that i could find out of anyone in thatbtype of perspective. I was humble believe me, not! All of that to say, man's institutions and myself following the top systematic theology, was wrong. I was self decieved. If anyone should understand salvation soteriology, I should have. I taught evangelism 101, 102 in a mega church, and wrote an evagelism manual. Again all of this to say I was entirely wrong on salvation. So I apologize if I don't really respect your "years of study". It almost entirely revolves around who or what you studied during that time. And since I don't know many or any popular theologians who adhere to the biblical model of apostacy, I doubt you studied the right teachers. You may say you studied the Bible without aid. And that's good, but sometimes in the controversial passages like hebrews 6, most if not all people resort to commentaries. So I am sure you are no different. So yes, I meant pride, because you are sure you are correct and I am 99 percent sure you are not. Because I made the same mistakes as you did, when I was calvinist. So people can get puffed up over what they know, as a badge of honor, and i have been there too. The bible says "knowledge puffs up". But that should be an indicator that you are not trusting in God, and are learning the wrong stuff. True knowledge brings humility and power. Anyway read hebrews 6:4 and tell me what you think it says, and we can start there.
 
Upvote 0

Dr. Jack

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2019
839
120
63
Pennsylvania
✟26,705.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Sir copy and pasted previous messages is not the best debate tactic.

but
sir as I mention before, everything is answered here:

John Courson & Tekton apologetics review Heb 6 apostacy.docx

due to the length of your posts, I find it unreasonable for time sake to refute your points one by one as that would simply take too much time. I have provided half a dozen unrefuted verses, that you have not yet refuted in other places than hebrews 6. But if you are honestly searching for the truth regarding this, please read the document.
You are the one that keeps pasting the same article.

What I have presented is NOT COPIED AND PASTED from someone else, but copied out of articles that I myself have written.

I too have college experience, but do not post my experience to scare off, or try to intimidate my opponents.

I rarely write the words of others, because over the past 35 years of both study, and teaching; I have written a vast amount of articles.

So Again, can you ...

1) tell me where Hebrews 6:1 mentions apostacy (in either the English, or the Greek)?; or
2) Specifically show me where what I have stated concerning verses 4 through 6 are NOT in alignment with the direct text; or
3) Show me where the Greek text uses αποστασια in verse six (fall away) to support your view that apostacy is the subject of the text.

It is time to either present straight forward answers, or step down ... you choose.
 
Upvote 0

Wordkeeper

Newbie
Oct 1, 2013
4,285
477
✟83,580.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Is Final Salvation Free or Contingent upon Obeying Commandments?

Does willful sin separate the elect from God?

If you keep sinning after you are saved are you still saved?



When believers are confused about the purpose of the Cross, these are the questions they end up asking.

On the one hand, preachers teach that the work of Christ is sufficient to justify those who simply believe it is sufficient. On the other side, we have the verses that deal with judgment, the righteous with good works to a judgment of resurrection, and the lazy to a judgment of wrath.

A good way to think about it is to consider that the sufficiency is with regard to cleansing the Temple, the Body of Christ, with the blood of Jesus, not the blood of bulls and goats, empowering believers so that they can be how God fulfill His promise to Abraham, not how God admits them into heaven. Else the promise to Abraham is left hanging in the air. God made the One without sin to be a sin offering, do that in Him we can be the fulfillment of the promise to Abraham, of being a blessing to the world.

The land is an important element in the process of salvation. When Israel is carried away into captivity in Babylon, they are impotent, unable to sing the Lord's song in a strange land. They must be IN the Promised Land, rest, a type of Christ. Equally important, whoever lives in the Land must serve God loyally. When the King of Assyria brought in settlers from Babylon to harness the Land, God sent lions that killed them, because they did not know how God was to be approached. No wonder the rest of Jerusalem feared to join Peter:

Acts of the Apostles 5
13No one else dared join them, even though they were highly regarded by the people.

How different from the easy believism taught in the church today.

Let's lay out how a believer grows

1. Hears the Gospel, the good news that it is possible to walk away from serving mammon for treasure that rusts to serving God for treasure that never perishes.

2. This belief allows a person to be baptised, changes him or her from a dog to a child of God, permits the eating and understanding of bread, spiritual food, the idea that God can protect a person in the dangerous journey of becoming a blessing to the world.

3. Everybody who confesses that mammon is a hard slave-driver, whose wages do not last, receives bread from heaven. But Judas, Ananias and Sapphira, and all in Israel above 20 years old apart from Joshua and Israel, were vomited out of the People of God, because of craving for worldly food. Only those who perfect their faith can rest in Christ.

Conclusion
Jesus’s work cleansed the invisible Church forever. Our contribution is to be faithful to God, not mammon. We can not just walk away from salvation (against Dr Jack's view), we can also be vomited out of the real Promised Land, the Body of Christ (against gradyll's view).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Dr. Jack

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2019
839
120
63
Pennsylvania
✟26,705.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Is Final Salvation Free or Contingent upon Obeying Commandments?

Does willful sin separate the elect from God?

If you keep sinning after you are saved are you still saved?



When believers are confused about the purpose of the Cross, these are the questions they end up asking.

On the one hand, preachers teach that the work of Christ is sufficient to justify those who simply believe it is sufficient. On the other side, we have the verses that deal with judgment, the righteous with good works to a judgment of resurrection, and the lazy to a judgment of wrath.

A good way to think about it is to consider that the sufficiency is with regard to cleansing the Temple, the Body of Christ, with the blood of Jesus, not the blood of bulls and goats, empowering believers so that they can be how God fulfill His promise to Abraham, not how God admits them into heaven. Else the promise to Abraham is left hanging in the air. God made the One without sin to be a sin offering, do that in Him we can be the fulfillment of the promise to Abraham, of being a blessing to the world.

The land is an important element in the process of salvation. When Israel is carried away into captivity in Babylon, they are impotent, unable to sing the Lord's song in a strange land. They must be IN the Promised Land, rest, a type of Christ. Equally important, whoever lives in the Land must serve God loyally. When the King of Assyria brought in settlers from Babylon to harness the Land, God sent lions that killed them, because they did not know how God was to be approached. No wonder the rest of Jerusalem feared to join Peter:

Acts of the Apostles 5
13No one else dared join them, even though they were highly regarded by the people.

How different from the easy believism taught in the church today.

Let's lay out how a believer grows

1. Hears the Gospel, the good news that it is possible to walk away from serving mammon for treasure that rusts to serving God for treasure that never perishes.

2. This belief allows a person to be baptised, changes him or her from a dog to a child of God, permits the eating and understanding of bread, spiritual food, the idea that God can protect a person in the dangerous journey of becoming a blessing to the world.

3. Everybody who confesses that mammon is a hard slave-driver, whose wages do not last, receives bread from heaven. But Judas, Ananias and Sapphira, and all in Israel above 20 years old apart from Joshua and Israel, were vomited out of the People of God, because of craving for worldly food. Only those who perfect their faith can rest in Christ.

Conclusion
Jesus’s work cleansed the invisible Church forever. Our contribution is to be faithful to God, not mammon. We can not just walk away from salvation (against Dr Jack's view), we can also be vomited out of the real Promised Land, the Body of Christ (against gradyll's view).
How do you reconcile this with Ephesians 1:13 and 4:30?
 
Upvote 0

Wordkeeper

Newbie
Oct 1, 2013
4,285
477
✟83,580.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
How do you reconcile this with Ephesians 1:13 and 4:30?
A seal does not mean the redemption is guaranteed. Simon Magus was baptised, he confessed that serving mammon for treasure that perishes was futile, yet he could not resist reaching out for power that would be good for his former lifestyle. Peter told him he was in danger of being vomited out.
 
Upvote 0

Dr. Jack

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2019
839
120
63
Pennsylvania
✟26,705.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
A seal does not mean the redemption is guaranteed. Simon Magus was baptised, he confessed that serving mammon for treasure that perishes was futile, yet he could not resist reaching out for power that would be good for his former lifestyle. Peter told him he was in danger of being vomited out.
Really? I don't read that in the text at all. Did Peter warn him of his wrong thoughts, and his need to repent? Yes. Did Simon repent? Yes. Si where is this teaching from.

And was then the Holy Spirit wrong for inspiring Paul to put a time element on the length of the seal?

Always remember, you cannot destroy one set of Biblical facts, by presenting others that seem to contradict the former ... very bad hermeneutics!
 
Upvote 0

Wordkeeper

Newbie
Oct 1, 2013
4,285
477
✟83,580.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Really? I don't read that in the text at all. Did Peter warn him of his wrong thoughts, and his need to repent? Yes. Did Simon repent? Yes. Si where is this teaching from.

And was then the Holy Spirit wrong for inspiring Paul to put a time element on the length of the seal?

Always remember, you cannot destroy one set of Biblical facts, by presenting others that seem to contradict the former ... very bad hermeneutics!
I wanted to highlight that even those baptised into drinking from spiritual food can fall into danger of being vomited out. So that was a valid example.

Acts of the Apostles 8
20Peter answered: “May your money perish with you, because you thought you could buy the gift of God with money!
 
Upvote 0

Dr. Jack

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2019
839
120
63
Pennsylvania
✟26,705.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
I wanted to highlight that even those baptised into drinking from spiritual food can fall into danger of being vomited out. So that was a valid example.

Acts of the Apostles 8
20Peter answered: “May your money perish with you, because you thought you could buy the gift of God with money!
I'm sorry, I'm not seeing ANYTHING about being "vomited out" here.
 
Upvote 0

Wordkeeper

Newbie
Oct 1, 2013
4,285
477
✟83,580.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I'm sorry, I'm not seeing ANYTHING about being "vomited out" here.
Pete said Simon Magus was in danger of perishing. Ananias and Sapphira died.

Leviticus 18
28And if you defile the land, it will vomit you out as it vomited out the nations that were before you.

2 Kings 17
24The king of Assyria brought people from Babylon, Kuthah, Avva, Hamath and Sepharvaim and settled them in the towns of Samaria to replace the Israelites. They took over Samaria and lived in its towns. 25When they first lived there, they did not worship the Lord; so he sent lions among them and they killed some of the people.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Dr. Jack

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2019
839
120
63
Pennsylvania
✟26,705.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Pete said Simon Magus was in danger of perishing. Ananias and Sapphira died.

Leviticus 18
28And if you defile the land, it will vomit you out as it vomited out the nations that were before you.

2 Kings 17
24The king of Assyria brought people from Babylon, Kuthah, Avva, Hamath and Sepharvaim and settled them in the towns of Samaria to replace the Israelites. They took over Samaria and lived in its towns. 25When they first lived there, they did not worship the Lord; so he sent lions among them and they killed some of the people.
First of all, the promised land wasn't a type of salvation ... it was a type of "entering into His rest".

Secondly, there is no witness that A) Ananias and Sapphira were saved; or B) the physical death of Ananias and Sapphira meant that they also died spiritually.

To build a Biblical doctrine, the text must actually say precisely what you present as truth. Unless the Bible says (for example) that the promised land is a type of heaven ... we cannot just assume it does.

Yes, I know, there are many old 'gospel' songs like "Shall we gather at the river"; but unless the Bible teaches such, it is not so.

Are you also saying then that because Moses didn't get to enter the promise land, but went to the mountain and died, that Moses also didn't go to heaven?

(Yes I know he went to Abraham's bosom, then to heaven after the resurrection.)

Please ... stop reaching for straws.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Wordkeeper

Newbie
Oct 1, 2013
4,285
477
✟83,580.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
First of all, the promised land wasn't a type of salvation ... it was a type of "entering into His rest".

Secondly, there is no witness that A) Ananias and Sapphira were saved; or B) the physical death of Ananias and Sapphira meant that they also died spiritually.

To build a Biblical doctrine, the text must actually say precisely what you present as truth. Unless the Bible says (for example) that the promised land is a type of heaven ... we cannot just assume it does.

Yes, I know, there are many old 'gospel' songs like "Shall we gather at the river"; but unless the Bible teaches such, it is not so.

Are you also saying then that because Moses didn't get to enter the promise land, but went to the mountain and died, that Moses also didn't go to heaven?

(Yes I know he went to Abraham's bosom, then to heaven after the resurrection.)

Please ... stop reaching for straws.

The real Promised Land is Christ, of which Canaan is only a type. Israel couldn't be a people of God in Babylon, they couldn't sing His song in a strange land. That's why it's important to be IN Christ.

The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses

Frame-Poythress

Quote
We may return to the same conclusion that we reached before: the sacrifice of animals is inadequate to achieve final cleansing, nor can it cleanse anything more than the copies of heavenly things. Then who will bring the definitive sacrifice? A man must do it. A similar point is made indirectly in Num. 35:33-34: “Do not pollute the land where you are. Bloodshed pollutes the land, and atonement cannot be made for the land on which blood has been shed, except by the blood of the one who shed it. Do not defile the land where you live and where I dwell, for I, the LORD, dwell among the Israelites.” When a man had shed blood, the man must die. But there is one exception, when the blood of the death of the high priest releases a manslaughterer to return home (Num. 35:25-28). The blood of the high priest has special value. In agreement with this principle, Zech. 3 uses all the symbolism of a defiled human high priest Joshua and then mysteriously of the Branch in connection with which “I will remove the sin of this land in a single day” (Zech. 3:9).

The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses
 
Upvote 0

Dr. Jack

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2019
839
120
63
Pennsylvania
✟26,705.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
The Shadow of Christ in the law of Moses

Frame-Poythress

Quote
We may return to the same conclusion that we reached before: the sacrifice of animals is inadequate to achieve final cleansing, nor can it cleanse anything more than the copies of heavenly things. Then who will bring the definitive sacrifice? A man must do it. A similar point is made indirectly in Num. 35:33-34: “Do not pollute the land where you are. Bloodshed pollutes the land, and atonement cannot be made for the land on which blood has been shed, except by the blood of the one who shed it. Do not defile the land where you live and where I dwell, for I, the LORD, dwell among the Israelites.” When a man had shed blood, the man must die. But there is one exception, when the blood of the death of the high priest releases a manslaughterer to return home (Num. 35:25-28). The blood of the high priest has special value. In agreement with this principle, Zech. 3 uses all the symbolism of a defiled human high priest Joshua and then mysteriously of the Branch in connection with which “I will remove the sin of this land in a single day” (Zech. 3:9).

The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses
And exactly what does that have to do with salvation?
 
Upvote 0

Dr. Jack

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2019
839
120
63
Pennsylvania
✟26,705.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
The real Promised Land is Christ, of which Canaan is only a type. Israel couldn't be a people of God in Babylon, they couldn't sing His song in a strange land. That's why it's important to be IN Christ.

The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses

Frame-Poythress

Quote
We may return to the same conclusion that we reached before: the sacrifice of animals is inadequate to achieve final cleansing, nor can it cleanse anything more than the copies of heavenly things. Then who will bring the definitive sacrifice? A man must do it. A similar point is made indirectly in Num. 35:33-34: “Do not pollute the land where you are. Bloodshed pollutes the land, and atonement cannot be made for the land on which blood has been shed, except by the blood of the one who shed it. Do not defile the land where you live and where I dwell, for I, the LORD, dwell among the Israelites.” When a man had shed blood, the man must die. But there is one exception, when the blood of the death of the high priest releases a manslaughterer to return home (Num. 35:25-28). The blood of the high priest has special value. In agreement with this principle, Zech. 3 uses all the symbolism of a defiled human high priest Joshua and then mysteriously of the Branch in connection with which “I will remove the sin of this land in a single day” (Zech. 3:9).

The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses
Christ is not the promised land. The promised land is entering into His rest AFTER salvation.

If you don't follow Christ you do not stay in His rest, (after entering), but guess what ... the Israelites were still, (and still are) His chosen nation .. sorry.
 
Upvote 0

Dr. Jack

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2019
839
120
63
Pennsylvania
✟26,705.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Acts of the Apostles 5
13No one else dared join them, even though they were highly regarded by the people.

How different from the easy believism taught in the church today.
What makes you think I support "easy beliefism"?

Have you not read what I have written concerning what we should know prior to salvation?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Dr. Jack

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2019
839
120
63
Pennsylvania
✟26,705.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Acts of the Apostles 5
13No one else dared join them, even though they were highly regarded by the people.

How different from the easy believism taught in the church today.
Okay, It's been a noisy night tonight. (I like peace and quiet when I sleep.)

I'm going to try to go back to sleep ... Do me a favor ... don't tell me what you think I believe. It's rather annoying.
 
Upvote 0

Wordkeeper

Newbie
Oct 1, 2013
4,285
477
✟83,580.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
What makes you think I support "easy beliefism"?

Have you not read what I have written concerning what we should know prior to salvation?
Why do you think it was dangerous to join the church?
Christ is not the promised land. The promised land is entering into His rest AFTER salvation.

If you don't follow Christ you do not stay in His rest, (after entering), but guess what ... the Israelites were still, (and still are) His chosen nation .. sorry.

Jesus said "Destroy this Temple and I will raise it in three days". Because the Jews had defiled it, turning it from a sanctuary of God into a den of thieves, it needed to be returned back to its original condition. In one single day, the land was cleansed, according to Zechariah 3:9
 
Upvote 0

Dr. Jack

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2019
839
120
63
Pennsylvania
✟26,705.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Why do you think it was dangerous to join the church?
It was dangerous because of the persecution.


Jesus said "Destroy this Temple and I will raise it in three days". Because the Jews had defiled it, turning it from a sanctuary of God into a den of thieves, it needed to be returned back to its original condition. In one single day, the land was cleansed, according to Zechariah 3:9
1) When Jesus said, "Destroy this Temple and I will raise it in three days"; he wasn't talking about Herod's temple, He was talking about His OWN body.

2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. 2:20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? 2:21 But he spake of the temple of his body. John

2) Zechariah is speaking of a yet future event ... unless you think that the land of Isreal, or more specifically the temple mount, (which currently hosts the Islamic Dome of the Rock ... a religious sect that despises both Israel and Christians), is a "clean" location.

Pretty much NOTHING you present is correct Biblically. Stop grasping for straws.
 
Upvote 0

Wordkeeper

Newbie
Oct 1, 2013
4,285
477
✟83,580.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It was dangerous because of the persecution.

This statement is so wrong. The context shows the danger was because the Body of Christ required sinlessness from believers on the issue of loyalty to God, with serious consequences for non compliance:

Acts of the Apostles 5
1But a man named Ananias, with his wife Sapphira, sold a piece of property, 2and kept back someof the price for himself, with his wife’s full knowledge, and bringing a portion of it, he laid it at the apostles’ feet. 3But Peter said, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back some of the price of the land? 4“While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not under your control? Why is it that you have conceived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God.” 5And as he heard these words, Ananias fell down and breathed his last; and great fear came over all who heard of it. 6The young men got up and covered him up, and after carrying him out, they buried him.

7Now there elapsed an interval of about three hours, and his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. 8And Peter responded to her, “Tell me whether you sold the land for such and such a price?” And she said, “Yes, that was the price.” 9Then Peter said to her, “Why is it that you have agreed together to put the Spirit of the Lord to the test? Behold, the feet of those who have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out as well.” 10And immediately she fell at his feet and breathed her last, and the young men came in and found her dead, and they carried her out and buried her beside her husband. 11And great fear came over the whole church, and over all who heard of these things.

12At the hands of the apostles many signs and wonders were taking place among the people; and they were all with one accord in Solomon’s portico. 13But none of the rest dared to associate with them; however, the people held them in high esteem.


You would do well to think, and study, before posting.

1) When Jesus said, "Destroy this Temple and I will raise it in three days"; he wasn't talking about Herod's temple, He was talking about His OWN body.

2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. 2:20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? 2:21 But he spake of the temple of his body. John

But a temple is only a temple when it contains people, and He didn’t have people in His body. So He must have meant His group, Church, the Body of Christ.

2) Zechariah is speaking of a yet future event ... unless you think that the land of Isreal, or more specifically the temple mount, (which currently hosts the Islamic Dome of the Rock ... a religious sect that despises both Israel and Christians), is a "clean" location.

Pretty much NOTHING you present is correct Biblically. Stop grasping for straws.

The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses
John Frame

Quote
We may return to the same conclusion that we reached before: the sacrifice of animals is inadequate to achieve final cleansing, nor can it cleanse anything more than the copies of heavenly things. Then who will bring the definitive sacrifice? A man must do it. A similar point is made indirectly in Num. 35:33-34: “Do not pollute the land where you are. Bloodshed pollutes the land, and atonement cannot be made for the land on which blood has been shed, except by the blood of the one who shed it. Do not defile the land where you live and where I dwell, for I, the LORD, dwell among the Israelites.” When a man had shed blood, the man must die. But there is one exception, when the blood of the death of the high priest releases a manslaughterer to return home (Num. 35:25-28). The blood of the high priest has special value. In agreement with this principle, Zech. 3 uses all the symbolism of a defiled human high priest Joshua and then speaks mysteriously of the Branch in connection with which “I will remove the sin of this land in a single day” (Zech. 3:9).


That article is written by John Frame, a respected Reformed scholar. He is using a hermeneutic employed by Jewish scholars, PARDES. When Paul links the Old Covenent to Ishmael, he is also employing PARDES. Again, please study. Especially don't forget, PARDES.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Dr. Jack

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2019
839
120
63
Pennsylvania
✟26,705.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
This statement is so wrong. The context shows the danger was because the Body of Christ required sinlessness from believers on the issue of loyalty to God, with serious consequences for non compliance:

Acts of the Apostles 5
1But a man named Ananias, with his wife Sapphira, sold a piece of property, 2and kept back someof the price for himself, with his wife’s full knowledge, and bringing a portion of it, he laid it at the apostles’ feet. 3But Peter said, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back some of the price of the land? 4“While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not under your control? Why is it that you have conceived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God.” 5And as he heard these words, Ananias fell down and breathed his last; and great fear came over all who heard of it. 6The young men got up and covered him up, and after carrying him out, they buried him.

7Now there elapsed an interval of about three hours, and his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. 8And Peter responded to her, “Tell me whether you sold the land for such and such a price?” And she said, “Yes, that was the price.” 9Then Peter said to her, “Why is it that you have agreed together to put the Spirit of the Lord to the test? Behold, the feet of those who have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out as well.” 10And immediately she fell at his feet and breathed her last, and the young men came in and found her dead, and they carried her out and buried her beside her husband. 11And great fear came over the whole church, and over all who heard of these things.

12At the hands of the apostles many signs and wonders were taking place among the people; and they were all with one accord in Solomon’s portico. 13But none of the rest dared to associate with them; however, the people held them in high esteem.


You would do well to think, and study, before posting.

Part of the above quote from you ...

The context shows the danger was because the Body of Christ required sinlessness from believers on the issue of loyalty to God, with serious consequences for non compliance

Paul told Timothy ...
1:15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief. 1 Timothy

Notice the present tense of Pau saying "to save sinners; of whom I am chief"

In the Greek the above phrase reads ...
"ἁμαρτωλοὺς σῶσαι, ὧν πρῶτός εἰμι ἐγώ·"

This leaves no doubt as the "ειμι" is used. So since by inspiration of the Holy Spirit Paul declared he was the "chief of sinners" ... how exactly does this fit into you view of "sinnlessness"?


But a temple is only a temple when it contains people, and He didn’t have people in His body. So He must have meant His group, Church, the Body of Christ.

Witness One:
The Holy Spirit had John write ...
2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.2:20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?2:21 But he spake of the temple of his body.2:22 When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said. John

So the disciples of Jesus remembered after Jesus physically resurrected that Jesus said this would happen.

Witness Two:
6:18 Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body. 6:19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? 1 Corinthians
So the Holy Spirit inspired both John and Paul to say that the physical body is a temple; but you don't except what the Holy Spirit says.


The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses
John Frame

Quote
We may return to the same conclusion that we reached before: the sacrifice of animals is inadequate to achieve final cleansing, nor can it cleanse anything more than the copies of heavenly things. Then who will bring the definitive sacrifice? A man must do it. A similar point is made indirectly in Num. 35:33-34: “Do not pollute the land where you are. Bloodshed pollutes the land, and atonement cannot be made for the land on which blood has been shed, except by the blood of the one who shed it. Do not defile the land where you live and where I dwell, for I, the LORD, dwell among the Israelites.” When a man had shed blood, the man must die. But there is one exception, when the blood of the death of the high priest releases a manslaughterer to return home (Num. 35:25-28). The blood of the high priest has special value. In agreement with this principle, Zech. 3 uses all the symbolism of a defiled human high priest Joshua and then speaks mysteriously of the Branch in connection with which “I will remove the sin of this land in a single day” (Zech. 3:9).


That article is written by John Frame, a respected Reformed scholar. He is using a hermeneutic employed by Jewish scholars, PARDES. When Paul links the Old Covenent to Ishmael, he is also employing PARDES. Again, please study. Especially don't forget, PARDES.
I'm not saying that the slaying of innocent blood doesn't bring a curse on the land; I'm saying that your, and Pardes are in error.

Reformed scholars have others things wrong as well... Like predestination. And Jewish scholars have been wrong about Jesus for a very long time.

Stop trying to allegorize the Scriptures, and take them at face value.
 
Upvote 0