Use of the aorist

[TibiasDad]

I said:
"You really are trying very hard to squeeze a description of what His sheep DO into the conditions for BECOMING His sheep. Well, that is bogus. And absurd."

Sure. Right here.

"You cannot a) exclude any of the terms associated with being a sheep, for they identify the traits of a true sheep" from post #52

I would suggest that you learn to read English! I said, "You cannot a) exclude any of the terms associated with being a sheep..." Being a sheep, not becoming a sheep. These are things that you do/are when you are a sheep. This is what I have always said.

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

Nice dodge. btw, Acts 16:31 doesn't say "start believing". It says to believe in a point in time. iow, WHEN one does believe, they will be saved.

Very simple.

Yep, when one starts to believe! All you have to do is prove that you can go from unbelief to believing without starting to believe at a particular point, and you will have proven your point!

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

You are correct. No believer can be separated from the source of eternal life. And that is called eternal security.

I did not say that a believer cannot be separated from the source of eternal life. Perhaps I will respond to you if you respond to what I actually said.

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

Second, he keeps repeating the claim that salvation is conditioned on "following God's Word".

If we are truly saved and filled with the Spirit, we will definitely follow God's word. So in this sense, being obedient is necessary if you claim to be a Christian. Which is precisely what John says in 1John 2, which I have quoted many times in our various conversations, and to which you have never responded.

Doug

 

[LoveGodsWord]

I'm getting rather tired of your repeating yourself, and without any evidence from Scripture. So please stop adding "following God's Word" as a requirement or condition for being saved. Only IF IF IF you can provide verses that clearly state that following God's Word is a condition for salvation can you legitimately say that. Until then, please stop. And I'm tired of your extremely long posts. Kinda like hearing a long winded speech that goes nowhere. Please stop making me repeat myself. Of course all active belief is in the present tense. And that FACT does NOT support your notions about having to continually believe in order to be saved. Unless and until you can find any verse that describes or calls any former believer an "unbeliever", you have no point.

The evidence has already been provided in the scriptures your ignoring already *JAMES 2:18-20; JAMES 2:26; MATTHEW 7:21-27; 1 JOHN 2:3-4; 1 JOHN 3:6-10; HEBREWS 6:4-8; HEBREWS 10:26-39. You seem not to believe them though. You are free to believe as you wish. I do not judge you as the scriptures teach it is God's Word that we accept or reject that will be our judge come judgment day *JOHN 12:47-48. To be clearer though so there is no misunderstandings, true faith or believing in the scriptures is always attached to action and following what God's Word says. If our faith is not combined with action or following what Gods' Word says it is not saving faith but dead faith according to the scriptures *JAMES 2:18-20; 26. We are saved by God's grace through faith *EPHESIANS 2:8-9 and faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God *JOHN 10:16. OBEDIENCE to God's LAW is not how we are saved but it is the FRUIT of genuine faith of those that have already been given Gods promise of salvation and the fruit of God's work in us *PHILIPPIANS 2:13 as we BELIEVE and FOLLOW his WORD. If our faith has no fruit it is dead *JAMES 2:18-20; 26 and our tree will be cast down and thrown into the fire *MATTHEW 3:10; 7:19-20; 13:49-50 according to the scriptures.

You STILL haven't proven your theory about results from PIA action are dependent upon the continuing of the action. Why not?

Well that is not true at all. As posted earlier the PIA to believe is applied to scripture context and application in which it is used. The scriptural application to believe in most scripture is always to the present tense active in the "now". What your failing to consider is that the "now" is always ongoing. The "now" does not stop. The "now" is until we die or until JESUS returns. So when we are told in JOHN 3:16 that whosoever is "believing" on him has everlasting life (PIA) then that is how we have Gods' salvation. We have God's salvation and promises as we continue to "believe" and follow God's Word in the "now". Your interpretation that you can believe once and no longer believe God's Word in the PIA is not biblical as shown and proven with evidence supported by the scriptures that disagree with you.

Further, Paul destroys your theory in Eph 1- 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. The red words indicate past action; aorist. People WERE included in Christ WHEN they heard and believed. And they WERE marked with the HS. The blue words refer to the results of the PAST ACTION of believing: being guaranteed an inheritance as God's possession. Now, since you so strongly disagree with my posts, please address each point regarding Eph 1:13,14 and explain to me HOW and WHY I am wrong. If I am wrong, that should be rather easy, as the Truth always has an answer for every question. I will not address the rest of this long post. Until you can show me that my view of Eph 1:13,14 is wrong in its use of the aorist tense, there is no point in further disussion.

Nonsense. Ephesians 1:13-14 supports and is in harmony with everything that is being shared with you. When "you believed" is in context to the beginning of "believing" or becoming a "believer" (audience the Ephesian believers). It is not stating anywhere in that scripture that the people Paul are talking to have once believed and have now stopped believing. The "our" in v14 is in reference to Paul as a believer putting him in the same context as those who he is talking to. That is to "believers". According to the scriptures, no one is saved in unbelief (present tense active) when they believed God's word yesterday and no longer believe Gods Word today. That idea is simply unbiblical and goes against the whole bible and not supported by the scriptures.

Thanks.

Your welcome

 

[LoveGodsWord]

I said: "Give me ANY verse that very clearly and plainly (no metaphors, no parables, just straightforward language) says that those who cease to believe will perish. If you can find any such verse, then explain how that verse doesn't contradict what Jesus said about recipients of eternal life. You know,that they shall never perish.

Only half true. I've been given many Scriptures. And yet none of them state what you believe. And you've presented no facts about the PIA meaning "keep on believing" or "continue to believe" with the idea that the results of PIA action depend upon the continuation of the action.

But all this is merely another dodge on your part. I have asked for specific verses that plainly say that ceasing to believe results in perishing. And you can't.

All you do is make the false claim that you have. If you had even 1, you would certainly would have quoted it again and again every time I ask for verses.

But you dodge by saying you already have. And, no you have not.


Nonsense. You've presented no facts to ignore. And I have addressed your errors, which you have ignored.

So yes, we will have to agree to disagree.


These verses are no definition. They are a description of the action of His sheep.

Do you even understand the difference between definitions and descriptions? It appears that you do not.

If or since that is the case, further discussion cannot progress.


Go ahead and just quote 1 of them that actually says salvation is by "following God's Word".

This is a challenge. Are you up to it?

Sorry F2G this is just more repetition of the same old and hand waiving. The scriptures and evidence your ignoring have already been provided. You are free to believe as you wish.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Well, you are wrong AGAIN. I AM saying that you are ignoring grammar rules. Your use of the PIA of believe is an abuse of the tense. You are trying to change "believe right now for salvation" into "continually believe for salvation". That is NOT how PIA's work. And you should know that.

It is not wrong at all dear F2G. Your disregarding context and scripture. There is not one scripture in all of God's Word that says that we can believe God's word yesterday and no longer believe Gods' Word today and be in a saved state with God.

You have already been provided the scriptures stating in God's Word (not mine) that those who were once believers who fall away and depart the faith are not in a saved state with God *HEBREWS 6:4-8; HEBREWS 10:26-39; 2 TIMOTHY 4:1. You have also been provided further evidence showing that God's promises are all conditional (IF) we believe and follow what God's Word says.

What have you provided to prove your claims? - nothing. All you have provided is strawman arguments no one is talking about. Anyhow you are free to believe as you wish. We all answer only to God come judgement day. I do not see our conversation as going anywhere so we will have to agree to disagree.

Thanks for the discussion.

 

[TibiasDad]

It is not wrong at all dear F2G. Your disregarding context and scripture. There is not one scripture in all of God's Word that says that we can believe God's word yesterday and no longer believe Gods' Word today and be in a saved state with God.

I cannot but wonder what kind of lifestyle choices one is making when they are so adamant about the inconsequential nature of our actions after believing. They cry that I am defacing and discrediting the grace and blood of our Lord; I believe that their position degrades and cheapens the grace of God, for God's grace cannot but command our utmost allegiance and commitment to "walking as Jesus walked". To renounce such allegiance is to spit in the face of such grace. To adopt such a theological and philosophical position is to deny the power of the Holy Spirit to overcome sin, and to make sin itself an irrelevant factor in relation to God's holiness and character. It flies in the face of the plain reading of Scripture, an obliterates the very essence of keeping the faith!

In this day of political wishy-washyness and " tolerance " of every form of lewdness and debauchery and "live and let live" philosophy the Church of Jesus Christ should be crying out against such sin, but if we follow the path suggested by those with whom we converse, there is no power or authority against sin, but rather a gospel that posits a God that cannot enable his children to overcome and "escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires", and therefore just disregards such " evil" acts and sweeps them under a magic rug that makes them disappear.

I have always disagreed with such ideas, but allowed for differences of opinion within the body of Christ, but as I grow older, and hopefully wiser, I have come to see the devastating harm such ideas force upon the character of God and his word. I do not discredit the salvation of anyone who claims these ideas, for that is not my place, but I cannot be idle any longer in speaking out against such concepts of Christian culture and systematic doctrinal positions. Loving God with all is not a suggestion, it is a mandate that cannot be reduced to anything less than an absolute necessity. "For without holiness, no one will see the Lord!" (Heb 12:14)

Doug

 

[LoveGodsWord]

I cannot but wonder what kind of lifestyle choices one is making when they are so adamant about the inconsequential nature of our actions after believing. They cry that I am defacing and discrediting the grace and blood of our Lord; I believe that their position degrades and cheapens the grace of God, for God's grace cannot but command our utmost allegiance and commitment to "walking as Jesus walked". To renounce such allegiance is to spit in the face of such grace. To adopt such a theological and philosophical position is to deny the power of the Holy Spirit to overcome sin, and to make sin itself an irrelevant factor in relation to God's holiness and character. It flies in the face of the plain reading of Scripture, an obliterates the very essence of keeping the faith!

In this day of political wishy-washyness and " tolerance " of every form of lewdness and debauchery and "live and let live" philosophy the Church of Jesus Christ should be crying out against such sin, but if we follow the path suggested by those with whom we converse, there is no power or authority against sin, but rather a gospel that posits a God that cannot enable his children to overcome and "escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires", and therefore just disregards such " evil" acts and sweeps them under a magic rug that makes them disappear.

I have always disagreed with such ideas, but allowed for differences of opinion within the body of Christ, but as I grow older, and hopefully wiser, I have come to see the devastating harm such ideas force upon the character of God and his word. I do not discredit the salvation of anyone who claims these ideas, for that is not my place, but I cannot be idle any longer in speaking out against such concepts of Christian culture and systematic doctrinal positions. Loving God with all is not a suggestion, it is a mandate that cannot be reduced to anything less than an absolute necessity. "For without holiness, no one will see the Lord!" (Heb 12:14)

Doug

Hi Doug,

I agree and believe it is quite concerning what is being taught by the religious teachers of today. I know recently in another section of this forum (Controversial section) I was having some discussions with some that believe even all the unrepentant wicked will be saved (Universalism). It seemed to me like an extreme form of Calvinism. I never heard of it before until I ran into a group of these believers that were trying to overrun that section of this forum with the teachings of Universalism.

I believe the problem lies in trying to seek to know God's Word and receive a knowledge of the truth of God's Word through the teachings of men outside of the scriptures and without prayerful guidance seeking and asking JESUS for a knowledge of his truth through the promise of His Spirit. Don't get me wrong. I believe God's people are in every church, but today it is just like JESUS and Paul has said, false teachings are rampant *Matthew 24:24 and the devil is active trying to lead God's elect away from God. The scriptures are true. I believe we are living in the latter times. You can see the wake up calls God is trying to give to mankind today.

We are told that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils. This I believe God is calling all of us (including myself) out from following man made traditions and teachings back to his Word. Jesus is calling his people where ever they may be back to himself. He is calling us to prayerfully seek him through his Word and to ask him for his Spirit to be our guide and teacher. If we do not do this, I believe we can all quite easily be a part of those spoken and described by Paul in 1 Timothy 4:1.

I think for now I might bow out of this discussion as I do not want to have your OP sidetracked. I thought it was quite an interesting topic so thanks for sharing this. I also enjoyed reading @GDL comments in post # 39. Thanks for sharing your thoughts guys

God bless.

 

[GDL]

I cannot but wonder what kind of lifestyle choices one is making when they are so adamant about the inconsequential nature of our actions after believing. They cry that I am defacing and discrediting the grace and blood of our Lord; I believe that their position degrades and cheapens the grace of God, for God's grace cannot but command our utmost allegiance and commitment to "walking as Jesus walked". To renounce such allegiance is to spit in the face of such grace. To adopt such a theological and philosophical position is to deny the power of the Holy Spirit to overcome sin, and to make sin itself an irrelevant factor in relation to God's holiness and character. It flies in the face of the plain reading of Scripture, an obliterates the very essence of keeping the faith!

In this day of political wishy-washyness and " tolerance " of every form of lewdness and debauchery and "live and let live" philosophy the Church of Jesus Christ should be crying out against such sin, but if we follow the path suggested by those with whom we converse, there is no power or authority against sin, but rather a gospel that posits a God that cannot enable his children to overcome and "escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires", and therefore just disregards such " evil" acts and sweeps them under a magic rug that makes them disappear.

I have always disagreed with such ideas, but allowed for differences of opinion within the body of Christ, but as I grow older, and hopefully wiser, I have come to see the devastating harm such ideas force upon the character of God and his word. I do not discredit the salvation of anyone who claims these ideas, for that is not my place, but I cannot be idle any longer in speaking out against such concepts of Christian culture and systematic doctrinal positions. Loving God with all is not a suggestion, it is a mandate that cannot be reduced to anything less than an absolute necessity. "For without holiness, no one will see the Lord!" (Heb 12:14)

Doug

Hi Doug,

I agree and believe it is quite concerning what is being taught by the religious teachers of today. I know recently in another section of this forum (Controversial section) I was having some discussions with some that believe even all the unrepentant wicked will be saved (Universalism). It seemed to me like an extreme form of Calvinism. I never heard of it before until I ran into a group of these believers that were trying to overrun that section of this forum with the teachings of Universalism.

I believe the problem lies in trying to seek to know God's Word and receive a knowledge of the truth of God's Word through the teachings of men outside of the scriptures and without prayerful guidance seeking and asking JESUS for a knowledge of his truth through the promise of His Spirit. Don't get me wrong. I believe God's people are in every church, but today it is just like JESUS and Paul has said, false teachings are rampant *Matthew 24:24 and the devil is active trying to lead God's elect away from God. The scriptures are true. I believe we are living in the latter times. You can see the wake up calls God is trying to give to mankind today.

We are told that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils. This I believe God is calling all of us (including myself) out from following man made traditions and teachings back to his Word. Jesus is calling his people where ever they may be back to himself. He is calling us to prayerfully seek him through his Word and to ask him for his Spirit to be our guide and teacher. If we do not do this, I believe we can all quite easily be a part of those spoken and described by Paul in 1 Timothy 4:1.

I think for now I might bow out of this discussion as I do not want to have your OP sidetracked. I thought it was quite an interesting topic so thanks for sharing this. I also enjoyed reading @GDL comments in post # 39. Thanks for sharing your thoughts guys

God bless.

It was a pleasure reading these quoted thoughts & your other work on this discussion. Thanks to both of you & thanks to Doug for initiating it. I had this Acts16:31 verse drilled into me as a mainstay in Free Grace Theology and I think your input in this discussion brought out much of the Truth about it. It also caused me to look back at it once again.

I couldn't agree with the 2 of you more re: the harm Free Grace Theology can do to people - not in all cases - but it many to most. This was the conclusion I and a fellow seminary student came to years after attending & meeting at a small Free Grace seminary & after much prayerful, comprehensive, & very focused study mainly on Faith & Salvation. Anything that can lead one to think a one-time, even momentary, mostly undefined belief is Salvation simply leaves the wide door wide open to the wide path of what we see in our times in lifestyles & thinking among those who say they believe. It's a mess and it does seem [Biblical] Love is ever-growing cold. But there's always the Remnant.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"Nice dodge. btw, Acts 16:31 doesn't say "start believing". It says to believe in a point in time. iow, WHEN one does believe, they will be saved.

Very simple."

Yep, when one starts to believe! All you have to do is prove that you can go from unbelief to believing without starting to believe at a particular point, and you will have proven your point!

Doug

Now, just what is the point of your so 'brilliant' thought? What's so important about "starting to believe" vs "believe"?

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"You are correct. No believer can be separated from the source of eternal life. And that is called eternal security."

I did not say that a believer cannot be separated from the source of eternal life. Perhaps I will respond to you if you respond to what I actually said.
Doug

Right. But the Bibles DOES say that. And I quoted Romans 8 to prove it.

And, since you seem to be totally unaware, you DID respond to me.

If you believe that a saved person can be separated from Christ, please share your evidence.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"Second, he keeps repeating the claim that salvation is conditioned on "following God's Word"."

If we are truly saved and filled with the Spirit, we will definitely follow God's word.

Yes, and you have just REFUTED your buddy, GDL. His claim is that salvation is conditioned on "following God's Word.

You have CORRECTLY noted that one must already be saved before they can follow God's Word.

So in this sense, being obedient is necessary if you claim to be a Christian.

With these kinds of vague statements, you have to define what you mean by "necessary". Necessary for what? Salvation? Reward? What?

Which is precisely what John says in 1John 2, which I have quoted many times in our various conversations, and to which you have never responded.

Doug

I have no memory of you ever citing that verse.

"because of the truth, which lives in us and will be with us forever:"

This is obviously a statement that indicates eternal security. So, now that it has been quoted, what am I supposed to respond to? Did you ask a question about the verse, or make a comment, or what?

 

[FreeGrace2]

The evidence has already been provided in the scriptures your ignoring already *JAMES 2:18-20; JAMES 2:26; MATTHEW 7:21-27; 1 JOHN 2:3-4; 1 JOHN 3:6-10; HEBREWS 6:4-8; HEBREWS 10:26-39. You seem not to believe them though.

Let me be very clear here. None of the verses you cite prove anything you claim.

And it does not matter what things "seem" to be to you. I don't believe your views.

You repeatedly add "follow God's Word" to a condition for salvation, and there aren't any verses that say this.

Even your buddy Doug has refuted that view.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said: "Give me ANY verse that very clearly and plainly (no metaphors, no parables, just straightforward language) says that those who cease to believe will perish. If you can find any such verse, then explain how that verse doesn't contradict what Jesus said about recipients of eternal life. You know,that they shall never perish.

Sorry F2G this is just more repetition of the same old and hand waiving.

This response to my challenge only proves that you have NO evidence for your beliefs.

If there were a verse, you would have been more than happy to quote it. But, as you know very well, you don't have even 1.

The scriptures and evidence your ignoring have already been provided. You are free to believe as you wish.

None has been provided. I asked for only 1 verse that "clearly and plainly says that those who cease to believe will perish".

And you can't do that. So you can only claim that you did. Right. Sure.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"You are trying to change "believe right now for salvation" into "continually believe for salvation". That is NOT how PIA's work. And you should know that."

It is not wrong at all dear F2G. Your disregarding context and scripture. There is not one scripture in all of God's Word that says that we can believe God's word yesterday and no longer believe Gods' Word today and be in a saved state with God.

You're dodging, oncd again, my point. Demanding specifically worded verses is childish. I dealt specifically with HOW you are abusing the PIA and you are ignoring my point.

Quit asking for the ridiculous and prove that the PIA means continuing the action so that the results will continue.

You have already been provided the scriptures stating in God's Word (not mine) that those who were once believers who fall away and depart the faith are not in a saved state with God

You are WRONG again. There is nothing in Hebrews 6 about losing salvation.

What have you provided to prove your claims? - nothing.

Well, you are free to claim that Jesus' words are "nothing" if you want to. But I believe everything that Jesus said, unlike yourself.

Jesus said: I give them (believers) etenral life, and they shall never perish.

What Jesus gives, is NEVER lost.

So, IF you ever do find a verse that says that salvation can be lost, congratulations! You've just proved Jesus to be a liar. Is that what you really want to do?

The good news is that there are no such verses. Because the Bible is internally consistent. Salvation cannot be lost.

Once Jesus gives the gift of eternal life, the recipient shall never perish.

Let me put it another way: The recipient CANNOT perish.

Now, prove me wrong. I dare you.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

It was a pleasure reading these quoted thoughts & your other work on this discussion. Thanks to both of you & thanks to Doug for initiating it. I had this Acts16:31 verse drilled into me as a mainstay in Free Grace Theology and I think your input in this discussion brought out much of the Truth about it. It also caused me to look back at it once again.

I couldn't agree with the 2 of you more re: the harm Free Grace Theology can do to people - not in all cases - but it many to most. This was the conclusion I and a fellow seminary student came to years after attending & meeting at a small Free Grace seminary & after much prayerful, comprehensive, & very focused study mainly on Faith & Salvation. Anything that can lead one to think a one-time, even momentary, mostly undefined belief is Salvation simply leaves the wide door wide open to the wide path of what we see in our times in lifestyles & thinking among those who say they believe. It's a mess and it does seem [Biblical] Love is ever-growing cold. But there's always the Remnant.

Praise to God GDL, I can see God guiding both you and @TibiasDad with your earlier posts too. Thanks for sharing them and also your personal experience with the Free Grace Theology above. I really enjoyed reading your experience and I pray it will help others as well. It is quite amusing no matter how many scriptures you share with some people or the Greek etc, if it goes against what they believe many choose to close their eyes and ears and pretend they do not exist and so fulfills the words of ISAIAH 6:9-10 spoken by JESUS and PAUL. I am out of this conversation for now (except for you guys). Nice to meet you guys here.

God bless

 

[FreeGrace2]

It is quite amusing no matter how many scriptures you share with some people or the Greek etc, if it goes against what they believe many choose to close their eyes and ears and pretend they do not exist

Not at all. What you, GDL and Doug claim about the Greek is in error.

None of you have shown that the PIA of 'believe' means to "continually believe" in order to be saved, or to keep salvation. Because it doesn't mean that.

It means to believe right now.

 

[TibiasDad]

I said:
"Nice dodge. btw, Acts 16:31 doesn't say "start believing". It says to believe in a point in time. iow, WHEN one does believe, they will be saved.

Very simple."

Now, just what is the point of your so 'brilliant' thought? What's so important about "starting to believe" vs "believe"?

Grammatically, the aorist tense, in its raw, unencumbered form, says nothing about the verb's action except that it has been enacted! In its raw form, there is nothing definitive regarding whether is is an on going action (imperfect) or a punctiliar point of action (a singular accomplished event) or if it is a holistic expression of an entire completion of act an result (perfect), or if there is a repetitious quality or expectation.

These potential possibilities are undefined in the raw sense of the aorist tense, but they are no excluded either; thus, the aorist is unlimited in its potential meanings, in fact the definition of aorist is unhindered, unlimited or unbounded. It becomes the immediate context that influences the the nature or intent of the author's meaning.

In Act's 16:31 and the surrounding context of the Philippian jailer's story, it is clearly talking about the jailer doing something that, to this point, he has not yet done, and that is to believe. The imperative demands the necessity of pistueo (believing, belief) and thus, the start of something that has not, to this point, been enacted, belief, trust!
It is a beginning point of something that will, in the future, be effective of a result, namely salvation. (There is no definitive evidence regarding the point of the future that this will happen either, so this too is open-ended.) The punctiliar aspect of the aorist is the starting point of belief being enacted!


Doug

 

[bcbsr]

Keep reading in Wallace re: the Constative Aorist potentially having a durative meaning, as well as a iterative, or momentary meaning. See my post #39 above.

Also, isn't Wallace also saying in your highlighted statement that the continuation is "simply left unstated"? IOW, it may or may not be continual (like the Constative Aorist). Wallace also notes that there is not always a hard-and-fast distinction between Ingressive & Constative. The aorist has room to be iterative (punctiliar, repeated), durative (continuous), momentary. Once we take a fixed stand on any of these a a general rule, Wallace points out how we're saying too much about the Aorist as it suits us (our theology for instance).

Your conclusion is wrong as you state, "1. IMO, the Ingressive interpretation makes sense for a continuous (durative) conclusion. To enter into a state of belief suggests something a state to be continued, not a momentary state."

You're saying that if you take medicine to be cured of a disease, you must continually take medicine to continue to be cured of that disease. It simply doesn't logically follow.

And again to quote Wallace, "The aorist tense is often used to stress the beginning of an action or the entrance into a state. Unlike the ingressive imperfect, there is no implication that the action continues. This is simply left unstated." While you're saying there is implication that the action continues. So you disagree with Wallace.

Paul is answering the question as to how to be saved. He chooses to use the aorist over the present tense. Using the aorist ingressive, "there is no implication that the action continues" as a condition for salvation.

Furthermore, logically if continue faith is a condition for salvation, then it cannot be said at any point that a person has been saved. For who knows, according to your soteriology, whether at some point the person will stop believing and end up in hell. According to your soteriology one cannot say, "You have been saved by faith". You can only say that the person has the possibility of being saved, which is contrary to such verses as Jesus said in John 5:24, "I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.", where one's fate is finalized upon coming to faith in Christ. "has crossed over" is in the perfect tense, which according to the Greek lexicon means, "The perfect tense in Greek describes an action which is viewed as having been completed in the past, once and for all, not needing to be repeated." It's a done deal upon coming to faith in Christ. And if a person doesn't believe that, then do they really believe Jesus?