Question: What are the conditions for salvation?

[Oldmantook]

Salvation is not based on how a person lives, which obviously shocks you. But then, it is your woeful grasp of Scripture that would make such a conclusion.

Instead of this ongoing argument between you and I; I challenge you to post your quote above for discussion in a new thread with others and see what kind of feedback you get. You already know my position. I bet you the majority side with me that how person lives indeed affects their salvation. But QUESTION FOR YOU. If you were to become a serial murderer despite your claiming to be a believer, ARE YOU STILL SAVED? Yes or no. Simple question isn't it?

 

[FreeGrace2]

Instead of this ongoing argument between you and I; I challenge you to post your quote above for discussion in a new thread with others and see what kind of feedback you get. You already know my position. I bet you the majority side with me that how person lives indeed affects their salvation.

Having participated in Christiasn forums for nearly 2 decades, I already know how the majority believe. And I challenge them to prove their beliefs, which they can't. Oh, if you accept very poor readings, misreadings, etc, then, yeah, they will tell you they have proven their beliefs.

But QUESTION FOR YOU. If you were to become a serial murderer despite your claiming to be a believer, ARE YOU STILL SAVED? Yes or no. Simple question isn't it?

lol. You guys just don't stop, huh. Why is horrible sin such an issue with you?

Do you believe that Jesus died only for those sins that don't offend you?

In your question, can you find ANY verse that supports your emotional ideas?

Just because there are exceedingly horrible sins that really offend you, why do you think that God has the same gut reaction that you seem to have?

The answer is YES. Once belief, the believer is sealed permanently, is given eternal life (which means life that cannot die), is justified, is regenerated.

Now, how many verses can you either cite or quote that specifically addresses these changes when one believes and that they can be revoked, etc?

That's the only way you can defend your own views.

 

[Oldmantook]

Having participated in Christiasn forums for nearly 2 decades, I already know how the majority believe. And I challenge them to prove their beliefs, which they can't. Oh, if you accept very poor readings, misreadings, etc, then, yeah, they will tell you they have proven their beliefs.


lol. You guys just don't stop, huh. Why is horrible sin such an issue with you?

Do you believe that Jesus died only for those sins that don't offend you?

In your question, can you find ANY verse that supports your emotional ideas?

Just because there are exceedingly horrible sins that really offend you, why do you think that God has the same gut reaction that you seem to have?

The answer is YES. Once belief, the believer is sealed permanently, is given eternal life (which means life that cannot die), is justified, is regenerated.

Now, how many verses can you either cite or quote that specifically addresses these changes when one believes and that they can be revoked, etc?

That's the only way you can defend your own views.

Well, it looks like for 2 decades, you've been wrong! Once AGAIN you failed to answer my question. My last time I'll ask: If you as a believer become a serial murderer, are you still saved. YES or NO? Cat got your tongue?

 

[FreeGrace2]

Well, it looks like for 2 decades, you've been wrong!

Well, thanks for your opinion. But since I've provided verses that actually SAY what I claim, unlike yourself, we know who is wrong.

Once AGAIN you failed to answer my question. My last time I'll ask: If you as a believer become a serial murderer, are you still saved. YES or NO? Cat got your tongue?

Apparently the cat has your eyeballs. I DID answer your question, in capital letters, no less.

But, hopefully, the cat gave them back to you. Here is my answer again, the 3rd paragraph from the bottom of my post.

"The answer is YES. Once belief, the believer is sealed permanently, is given eternal life (which means life that cannot die), is justified, is regenerated."

What is it about John 10:28 that is such a problem for Arminians? Jesus said, in very plain and clear language, that those He gives eternal life shall never perish.

And He previously said who possesses eternal life; believers. John 5:24 and 6:47.

 

[Oldmantook]

Well, thanks for your opinion. But since I've provided verses that actually SAY what I claim, unlike yourself, we know who is wrong.


Apparently the cat has your eyeballs. I DID answer your question, in capital letters, no less.

But, hopefully, the cat gave them back to you. Here is my answer again, the 3rd paragraph from the bottom of my post.

"The answer is YES. Once belief, the believer is sealed permanently, is given eternal life (which means life that cannot die), is justified, is regenerated."

What is it about John 10:28 that is such a problem for Arminians? Jesus said, in very plain and clear language, that those He gives eternal life shall never perish.

And He previously said who possesses eternal life; believers. John 5:24 and 6:47.

Step right up folks! He says a serial murderer is still saved based upon a past moment of belief. That says it all. Your belief is sheer folly, not to mention dangerous but believe as you wish. I already addressed Jn 10:28 as it is predicated on v.27. Don't say you weren't warned! This nonsense stops here for me.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Step right up folks! He says a serial murderer is still saved based upon a past moment of belief.

No, the Bible clearly says that those who have NOT believed (meaning NEVER believed) will be condemned.

It says NOTHING about those who used to believe, other than having a miserable life on earth, due to God's divine discipline, and having NO inheritance IN the kingdom.

Doesn't sound like anyone will get away with anything.

The Bible says that those who have believed (notice the past tense) ARE sealed with the Holy Spirit, who is a deposit GUARANTEEING their inheritance for the day of redemption as God's possession.

Also, Jesus said those He gives eternal life shall never perish.

That says it all. Your belief is sheer folly, not to mention dangerous but believe as you wish.

You are free to describe Jesus' teachings any way you wish, but I don't recommend it.

I already addressed Jn 10:28 as it is predicated on v.27. Don't say you weren't warned!

From your supposed "explanation" of v.27, the only warning I see is the warning that you are totally unable to discern what a conditional clause looks like.

Can you provide the EXACT words from either v.27 or v.28 that form a conditional clause? I ask, knowing that you can't do it.

This nonsense stops here for me.

Your faulty explanation of v.27 is what is sheer nonsense. There are NO conditional clauses in either verse.

v.27 provides a simple of what Jesus' sheep DO, or OUGHT TO DO, like in a policy statement.

v.28 is a straightward statement of the result of being given eternal life.

Recipients of eternal life shall never perish. That is what Jesus was saying.

But Arminians try to FORCE some silly conditional clause into the verse, to twist its clear meaning out of existence and giving it a completely different meaning.

Here's what a conditional clause would look like IF Jesus included one in v.28.

I give them eternal life, and AS LONG AS... or IF... THEY CONTINUE TO FOLLOW AND LISTEN TO ME (from v.27), they shall never perish.

No charge for the English lesson on conditional clauses.

What we know is that Jesus gave NO CONDITIONAL CLAUSES in either v.27 or v.28.

Regardless of what you want to believe.

Period. Case very closed.

 

[Oldmantook]

No Conditions?? Rom 8:13 contains two clauses of the first class condition. Deal with it. Or rather, don't deal with it as is your habit.

 

[FreeGrace2]

No Conditions?? Rom 8:13 contains two clauses of the first class condition. Deal with it. Or rather, don't deal with it as is your habit.

Let's get back to sanity. This thread is entitled, "what are the conditions for salvation?". So your question "No conditions??" is bogus. I've never said there are NO conditions for salvation. That would be the claim of universalists, who think everyone will ultimately arrive in heaven.

There is just ONE condition for salvation. A Philippian jailer asked Paul, "sir, what must I do to be saved?".

Paul's answer was clear. "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved."

Paul knew Greek better than ANY Greek scholar who translates the Greek. And he used the aorist tense for the verb "believe" in his answer to the jailer.

Yet, omt continues to perseverate over his faulty understanding of the Greek present tense regarding salvation.

And then, he takes a verse that has nothing to do with conditions for salvation and tries to use it to prop up his erroneous views.

This is the verse he cited:
"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."

I have no idea what he thinks this verse is referring to, but one thing should be quite clear. It has NOTHING to do with how to be saved, or how to lose salvation.

The "living" and "dying" here isn't spiritual life or death. How do we know that? Because every human being is born spritually DEAD. So any act of sin cannot result in spiritual death AGAIN.

The Bible does speak of physical death as a consequence of sinful lifestyle. Paul said so in 1 Cor 5:5 and 11:30. And there are many examples in Scripture; 1 Cor 10, Acts 5:5, to cite a few.

Rom 8:13 is referring to how to have FELLOWSHIP or not with the Lord. Any believer who wants an intimate fellowship with the Lord needs to live by the Spirit. Paul said to the Ephesian believers this way: "but be filled with the Spirit" in Eph 5:18. To the Galatian believers he commanded them to "walk by means of the Spirit" in 5:16.

He also told the Ephesian believers to "do not grieve the Holy Spirit" in 4:30, and he told the Thessalonian believers to "not quench the Spirit". Yet, in neither of these verses did Paul give any warning about losing salvation for thoe who do grieve or quench the Spirit. In fact, in Eph 4:30, he reminded them this:

"And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption." So instead of warning of losing salvation, Paul reminded them of their SECURITY in their salvation, which he had previously stated to the Ephesians:

1:13,14
13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit,
14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.

And Paul again used the aorist tense for the verb "believed". This means that WHEN someone has believed, they were marked with a seal, the actual Holy Spirit, who is a deposit that GUARANTEES their inheritance for the day of redemption.

How is that not perfectly clear to anyone without an extreme bias?

So omt's focus on the present tense of Rom 8:13 is out of focus on the subject about conditions for salvation, since the verse isn't even about salvation.

It is, otoh, all about how the believer should be living their life IN THE PRESENT.

iow, rather than living according to the flesh, believers should be living by the Spirit, right now.

Believers who understand Scripture understand that those who live by the Spirit, rather than grieve or quench the Spirit, are IN fellowship with the Lord. And those believers who are grieving and/or quenching the Spirit are OUT OF fellowship with the Lord.

And, finally, to address his totally FALSE claim that I don't deal with his points, this post once again proves the exact opposite of his FALSE claim.

 

[Oldmantook]

Let's get back to sanity. This thread is entitled, "what are the conditions for salvation?". So your question "No conditions??" is bogus. I've never said there are NO conditions for salvation. That would be the claim of universalists, who think everyone will ultimately arrive in heaven.

There is just ONE condition for salvation. A Philippian jailer asked Paul, "sir, what must I do to be saved?".

Paul's answer was clear. "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved."

Paul knew Greek better than ANY Greek scholar who translates the Greek. And he used the aorist tense for the verb "believe" in his answer to the jailer.

Yet, omt continues to perseverate over his faulty understanding of the Greek present tense regarding salvation.

And then, he takes a verse that has nothing to do with conditions for salvation and tries to use it to prop up his erroneous views.

This is the verse he cited:
"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."

I have no idea what he thinks this verse is referring to, but one thing should be quite clear. It has NOTHING to do with how to be saved, or how to lose salvation.

The "living" and "dying" here isn't spiritual life or death. How do we know that? Because every human being is born spritually DEAD. So any act of sin cannot result in spiritual death AGAIN.

The Bible does speak of physical death as a consequence of sinful lifestyle. Paul said so in 1 Cor 5:5 and 11:30. And there are many examples in Scripture; 1 Cor 10, Acts 5:5, to cite a few.
Another lame excuse.
Rom 8:13 is referring to how to have FELLOWSHIP or not with the Lord. Any believer who wants an intimate fellowship with the Lord needs to live by the Spirit. Paul said to the Ephesian believers this way: "but be filled with the Spirit" in Eph 5:18. To the Galatian believers he commanded them to "walk by means of the Spirit" in 5:16.

He also told the Ephesian believers to "do not grieve the Holy Spirit" in 4:30, and he told the Thessalonian believers to "not quench the Spirit". Yet, in neither of these verses did Paul give any warning about losing salvation for thoe who do grieve or quench the Spirit. In fact, in Eph 4:30, he reminded them this:

"And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption." So instead of warning of losing salvation, Paul reminded them of their SECURITY in their salvation, which he had previously stated to the Ephesians:

1:13,14
13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit,
14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.

And Paul again used the aorist tense for the verb "believed". This means that WHEN someone has believed, they were marked with a seal, the actual Holy Spirit, who is a deposit that GUARANTEES their inheritance for the day of redemption.

How is that not perfectly clear to anyone without an extreme bias?

So omt's focus on the present tense of Rom 8:13 is out of focus on the subject about conditions for salvation, since the verse isn't even about salvation.

It is, otoh, all about how the believer should be living their life IN THE PRESENT.

iow, rather than living according to the flesh, believers should be living by the Spirit, right now.

Believers who understand Scripture understand that those who live by the Spirit, rather than grieve or quench the Spirit, are IN fellowship with the Lord. And those believers who are grieving and/or quenching the Spirit are OUT OF fellowship with the Lord.

And, finally, to address his totally FALSE claim that I don't deal with his points, this post once again proves the exact opposite of his FALSE claim.

Another lame excuse. Don't you realize how a 1st class conditional sentence in the Greek is constructed? Do I have to explain it to you or are you intelligent enough to know or at least look it up. Explain to me what makes Rom 8:13 a first class conditional in the Greek since you claim there are no conditions except for belief. Explain to me what the protasis and apodosis are in this verse. I look forward to your scramble for an answer.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Another lame excuse. Don't you realize how a 1st class conditional sentence in the Greek is constructed?

Sure do. What would you like to know?

Do I have to explain it to you or are you intelligent enough to know or at least look it up.

Your ad hominems are quite childish.

Explain to me what makes Rom 8:13 a first class conditional in the Greek since you claim there are no conditions except for belief.

I never claimed anything about "belief" in that verse. In fact, the word doesn't even occur.

All the verbs are present indicative, except the last one, which is future indicative.

All this means is that the action is considered as occurring "in the present", or "right now", or "currently".

I've given several ways to understand the present tense verb. Take your pick.

Explain to me what the protasis and apodosis are in this verse. I look forward to your scramble for an answer.

Again, your ad homimens are childish.

However, a complete conditional sentence consists of two clauses the protasis and the apodosis. The clause containing the condition is called the PROTASIS the clause containing the conclusion is called the APODOSIS.

Rom 8:13 - 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.

The red words are the protasis. The blue words that follow the red words are the apodosis.

Any questions?

And, what does all of this prove to you?

 

[Oldmantook]

Sure do. What would you like to know?


Your ad hominems are quite childish.


I never claimed anything about "belief" in that verse. In fact, the word doesn't even occur.

All the verbs are present indicative, except the last one, which is future indicative.

All this means is that the action is considered as occurring "in the present", or "right now", or "currently".

I've given several ways to understand the present tense verb. Take your pick.


Again, your ad homimens are childish.

However, a complete conditional sentence consists of two clauses the protasis and the apodosis. The clause containing the condition is called the PROTASIS the clause containing the conclusion is called the APODOSIS.

Rom 8:13 - 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.

The red words are the protasis. The blue words that follow the red words are the apodosis.

Any questions?

And, what does all of this prove to you?

Your lame reply proves to me you don't know what you're talking about. You falsely claimed that there are no conditional verses in the Bible which reference loss of eternal life. FYI v.13 is a 1st class conditional sentence in the Greek which in English is a simple conditional sentence. Comprende? Thus you falsely claim only belief is required for eternal. However Paul in v.13 makes it quite apparent that obedience/living according to the Spirit is necessary for eternal life. He also warns the brethren that disobedience/living according the flesh results in death. No where in all of the NT is death referred to as loss of fellowship. Show me a single verse that backs your definition. The wages of sin is death meaning spiritual death and separation from God; not merely loss of fellowship.
Keep on scrambling.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Your lame reply proves to me you don't know what you're talking about.

Since you admit to being so smart, please show me how my reply was so "lame".

I answered your request about how conditional clauses are constructed.

Then I fully explained the conditional clauses in Rom 8:13, even included a color coded guide.

Or was there something else that you deem "lame"?

You falsely claimed that there are no conditional verses in the Bible which reference loss of eternal life.

That is a TRUE claim. It is only your opinion that it is false.

FYI v.13 is a 1st class conditional sentence in the Greek which in English is a simple conditional sentence. Comprende? Thus you falsely claim only belief is required for eternal. However Paul in v.13 makes it quite apparent that obedience/living according to the Spirit is necessary for eternal life.

OK, let's just stop here. Where do you find the words "eternal life" in v.13? I think that's where you go off the rails. Again reading INTO the verse what ISN'T there.

He also warns the brethren that disobedience/living according the flesh results in death. No where in all of the NT is death referred to as loss of fellowship.

Well, again, that would be your own faulty opinion.

The prodigal parable is just one example. And the clearest one, too. The father described his son as "lost" and "dead", yet, in that human story, he was neither.

So, what, specifically was lost and dead? Fellowship between father and son. And when the son returned, the father said his son was "found" and "alive". Obviously the fellowship wa restored.

Remember that a parable is a human story. No father would ever speak in terms of soul death or life. They would speak in temporal terms like being alive and dead, if literal. Since we know the father wasn't speaking in literal terms, he was describing the change in fellowship with his son.

But Arminians seem to have no clue what fellowship even means. The ones I've dealt with show a total ignorance of the concept, in spite of it many uses in the NT.

Show me a single verse that backs your definition.

Luke 15 - prodigal son. Just explained.

The wages of sin is death meaning spiritual death and separation from God; not merely loss of fellowship.

Right. And since human beings are all born spiritually dead already, it should be obvious that Paul was speaking from the point of Adam, when he sinned and put a sin curse on the entire human race.

That, in fact, is the reason Jesus Christ HAD to come to earth and pay the sin debt for all of humanity.

Keep on scrambling.

Opine all you want. I'm having fun correcting all your faulty and false comments. It's a pleasure, not a scramble.

 

[Oldmantook]

Since you admit to being so smart, please show me how my reply was so "lame".

I answered your request about how conditional clauses are constructed.

Then I fully explained the conditional clauses in Rom 8:13, even included a color coded guide.

Or was there something else that you deem "lame"?


That is a TRUE claim. It is only your opinion that it is false.


OK, let's just stop here. Where do you find the words "eternal life" in v.13? I think that's where you go off the rails. Again reading INTO the verse what ISN'T there.


Well, again, that would be your own faulty opinion.

The prodigal parable is just one example. And the clearest one, too. The father described his son as "lost" and "dead", yet, in that human story, he was neither.

So, what, specifically was lost and dead? Fellowship between father and son. And when the son returned, the father said his son was "found" and "alive". Obviously the fellowship wa restored.

Remember that a parable is a human story. No father would ever speak in terms of soul death or life. They would speak in temporal terms like being alive and dead, if literal. Since we know the father wasn't speaking in literal terms, he was describing the change in fellowship with his son.

But Arminians seem to have no clue what fellowship even means. The ones I've dealt with show a total ignorance of the concept, in spite of it many uses in the NT.


Luke 15 - prodigal son. Just explained.


Right. And since human beings are all born spiritually dead already, it should be obvious that Paul was speaking from the point of Adam, when he sinned and put a sin curse on the entire human race.

That, in fact, is the reason Jesus Christ HAD to come to earth and pay the sin debt for all of humanity.


Opine all you want. I'm having fun correcting all your faulty and false comments. It's a pleasure, not a scramble.

You continue to give inadequate replies because I pointed out to you that in the Greek, v.13 is a CONDITIONAL SENTENCE. In the English it is a conditional sentence as indicated by the word IF. If denotes a condition in this clause accompanied by a consequence which in this case is DEATH. Yet you have falsely claimed that there are no scriptures that are conditional claiming that death refers to loss of fellowship citing the prodigal. Since the father wasn't speaking in literal terms it doesn't mean that he was describing a change in fellowship. You neglect the other option - which is spiritual death. Is the wages of sin referenced in Rom 3:22 loss of fellowship or spiritual death? Please answer.
The other apostle James confirms Paul's warning of spiritual death in Js 5:19-20 where James warned about sinning resulting in death of the soul. Death of the soul is certainly not merely just loss of fellowship.

 

[FreeGrace2]

You continue to give inadequate replies because I pointed out to you that in the Greek, v.13 is a CONDITIONAL SENTENCE.

I addressed both the protasis and the apodosis in that verse. Weren't you following along?

In the English it is a conditional sentence as indicated by the word IF. If denotes a condition in this clause accompanied by a consequence which in this case is DEATH. Yet you have falsely claimed that there are no scriptures that are conditional claiming that death refers to loss of fellowship citing the prodigal.

Once again, you are NOT following along. The prodigal IS a Scripture that shows death referring to loss of fellowship. The idiot son didn't die physically, but fellowship between father and son was PROVEN to be broken by the son's request.

btw, were you aware that such a request in 1 Century Palestine would be considered a huge insult to the father? He was essentially telling his father he wished his father was dead (the condition for receiving an inheritance). So it wasn't a simple ordinary request. It was highly insulting and showed the hatred the son had for the father.

And since parables about about human stories, there wouldn't be "spiritual language" at all. So "death" in the prodigal story couldn't mean that the son had died spiritually. That totaly doesn't fit the context.

Since the father wasn't speaking in literal terms it doesn't mean that he was describing a change in fellowship.

There's NO other option available. What human father would say anything about any of their children dying spiritually? That's absurd.

You neglect the other option - which is spiritual death

No, that is spiritual language, and is totally inappropriate in a parable of a human story. You just don't want to admit something that you weren't aware of.

Is the wages of sin referenced in Rom 3:22 loss of fellowship or spiritual death? Please answer.

You really don't follow, do you? I already explained Rom 6:23 in my previous post.

You said:
"The wages of sin is death meaning spiritual death and separation from God; not merely loss of fellowship."
I responded with:
"Right. And since human beings are all born spiritually dead already, it should be obvious that Paul was speaking from the point of Adam, when he sinned and put a sin curse on the entire human race.

That, in fact, is the reason Jesus Christ HAD to come to earth and pay the sin debt for all of humanity."

My answer stands. Biblically.

The other apostle James confirms Paul's warning of spiritual death in Js 5:19-20 where James warned about sinning resulting in death of the soul.

Error again. The Greek word for "soul" was used in the 1st Century Greek speakers referred to the human being. Not specifically the eternal soul.

In fact, the US Air Force uses the word "soul" for people, just as the Greeks did. In mass casualty exercises, one of the data points of the number of people "on board", like an aircraft or bus, etc, is "SOB". This stands for "souls on board" and is the number of people that were on the vehicle.

The problem is trying to spiritualize words that don't have that meaning.

Death of the soul is certainly not merely just loss of fellowship.

I never said anything about James 5:19,20.

In fact, James was telling us that when a sinning believer is turned back, his LIFE is saved. iow, he won't die physically from God's discipline.

 

[Oldmantook]

I addressed both the protasis and the apodosis in that verse. Weren't you following along?


Once again, you are NOT following along. The prodigal IS a Scripture that shows death referring to loss of fellowship. The idiot son didn't die physically, but fellowship between father and son was PROVEN to be broken by the son's request.

btw, were you aware that such a request in 1 Century Palestine would be considered a huge insult to the father? He was essentially telling his father he wished his father was dead (the condition for receiving an inheritance). So it wasn't a simple ordinary request. It was highly insulting and showed the hatred the son had for the father.

And since parables about about human stories, there wouldn't be "spiritual language" at all. So "death" in the prodigal story couldn't mean that the son had died spiritually. That totaly doesn't fit the context.


There's NO other option available. What human father would say anything about any of their children dying spiritually? That's absurd.


No, that is spiritual language, and is totally inappropriate in a parable of a human story. You just don't want to admit something that you weren't aware of.


You really don't follow, do you? I already explained Rom 6:23 in my previous post.

You said:
"The wages of sin is death meaning spiritual death and separation from God; not merely loss of fellowship."
I responded with:
"Right. And since human beings are all born spiritually dead already, it should be obvious that Paul was speaking from the point of Adam, when he sinned and put a sin curse on the entire human race.

That, in fact, is the reason Jesus Christ HAD to come to earth and pay the sin debt for all of humanity."

My answer stands. Biblically.


Error again. The Greek word for "soul" was used in the 1st Century Greek speakers referred to the human being. Not specifically the eternal soul.

In fact, the US Air Force uses the word "soul" for people, just as the Greeks did. In mass casualty exercises, one of the data points of the number of people "on board", like an aircraft or bus, etc, is "SOB". This stands for "souls on board" and is the number of people that were on the vehicle.

The problem is trying to spiritualize words that don't have that meaning.


I never said anything about James 5:19,20.

In fact, James was telling us that when a sinning believer is turned back, his LIFE is saved. iow, he won't die physically from God's discipline.

SCRIPTURE STATES: The wages of sin is DEATH - NOT loss of fellowship. You are free to disregard Scripture.
You are actually quoting from the Air Force now to define Scripture? That is hilarious! You choose the Air Force. I'll stick with Jesus.
Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell. Matt 10:28
Contrary to your claim, soul cannot refer to the human being because Jesus stated that humans can kill other persons but only God can kill both the soul and the body.
Look how ridiculous the verse reads using your definition.
Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the [person]. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both [person] and body in hell.

You are running out of excuses.

 

[FreeGrace2]

SCRIPTURE STATES: The wages of sin is DEATH - NOT loss of fellowship. You are free to disregard Scripture.

No, you are free to disregard the truth.

You are actually quoting from the Air Force now to define Scripture? That is hilarious! You choose the Air Force. I'll stick with Jesus.

lol. Jesus didn't write Rom 6:23. So what verse are you thinking of where Jesus defined "death" as "spiritual death"? btw, it was Rom 6:23 that you quoted, so any statement from Jesus isn't proof of what Paul wrote anyway.

Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell. Matt 10:28

Aren't you aware that context is king? When both soul and body are mentioned in the same breath, then YES, "soul" refers to the immaterial part of a human being.

But when "soul" is used alone, it CAN mean the person. I showed how the AF uses it, which is the same way as 1st Century Greeks used it. But I don't care what you want to believe. That's your choice.

Contrary to your claim, soul cannot refer to the human being because Jesus stated that humans can kill other persons but only God can kill both the soul and the body.

Right. In THAT context. But you seem rather unaware of context, huh.

[QUOTEYou are running out of excuses.[/QUOTE]
Where have I given any excuses. That's just a laugh riot.

You're the one without any evidence at all for your views.

But go ahead, and keep on spiritualizing the verses that you need to spiritualize in order to support your unbiblical claims.

 

[Oldmantook]

No, you are free to disregard the truth.


lol. Jesus didn't write Rom 6:23. So what verse are you thinking of where Jesus defined "death" as "spiritual death"? btw, it was Rom 6:23 that you quoted, so any statement from Jesus isn't proof of what Paul wrote anyway.


Aren't you aware that context is king? When both soul and body are mentioned in the same breath, then YES, "soul" refers to the immaterial part of a human being.

But when "soul" is used alone, it CAN mean the person. I showed how the AF uses it, which is the same way as 1st Century Greeks used it. But I don't care what you want to believe. That's your choice.


Right. In THAT context. But you seem rather unaware of context, huh.

[QUOTEYou are running out of excuses.

Where have I given any excuses. That's just a laugh riot.

You're the one without any evidence at all for your views.

But go ahead, and keep on spiritualizing the verses that you need to spiritualize in order to support your unbiblical claims.[/QUOTE]
You are the one who claimed death means loss of fellowship so death in Rom 8:13 means loss of fellowship - not spiritual death - according to you.
So I then cited you James 5:19-20 where sinning results in death of the soul - not loss of fellowship. I even gave you Matt 10:28 where Jesus distinguishes between the person and the soul as they are definitely not the same thing as you claim. Despite that you prefer to believe the Air Force over Jesus' definition. You can certainly choose to believe the Air Force and disregard Jesus. I prefer to believe Jesus instead.

 

[FreeGrace2]

You are the one who claimed death means loss of fellowship so death in Rom 8:13 means loss of fellowship - not spiritual death - according to you.

I was specifically referring to Rom 8:13, and the prodigal parable. Not just every time "death" appears in Scripture.

So I then cited you James 5:19-20 where sinning results in death of the soul - not loss of fellowship.

Since your bias prevents you from objective thought on this, I've already explained the meaning, which you scoffed at. But so what? The AF use of "soul" is an example of how the 1st Century Greeks used it. That you seem totally unaware of that FACT isn't my problem.

So scoff all you want. You just don't have the facts.

I even gave you Matt 10:28 where Jesus distinguishes between the person and the soul as they are definitely not the same thing as you claim.

And I agreed.

Despite that you prefer to believe the Air Force over Jesus' definition.

What a childish snark.

You can certainly choose to believe the Air Force and disregard Jesus. I prefer to believe Jesus instead.

lol. Just more and more childish snarks. And you know better.

 

[Oldmantook]

You gave me the Air Force's definition of what soul means. I gave you JESUS' DEFINITION of the soul as as he distinguished in Matt 10:28. You stated soul refers to a finite person. Jesus referred to the soul as that which is eternal. Do you choose your definition over Jesus'? The soul cannot be both finite and eternal. You have run out of lame excuses.

 

[FreeGrace2]

You gave me the Air Force's definition of what soul means.

Only denseness would stop there and ignore what ELSE I said; that the 1st Century Greek speakers ALSO used the Greek word for "person".

I gave you JESUS' DEFINITION of the soul as as he distinguished in Matt 10:28.

And I pointed out about CONTEXT. Sure, when soul and body are mentioned together, it is obvious to any clear thinking person that a distinction is being made.

But what you HAVEN'T shown yet is that the Greek word cannot mean "person". And it does.

You stated soul refers to a finite person.

That is how the Greeks used the word, when "body" wasn't included.

Jesus referred to the soul as that which is eternal.

You make a lot of statements but don't give any support from Scripture.

Do you choose your definition over Jesus'?

Oh, just stop this silliness. What Jesus said was a totally different context than James 5:19,20.

Why do you reject or deny that God's discipline CAN and DOES include physical death?

Aren't you aware of 1 Cor 11:30? Or 1 Cor 5:5?

The soul cannot be both finite and eternal. You have run out of lame excuses.

And I never said such a thing. That's only your very straw man excuse.