No John didn’t say that at all, you’re misquoting him.
see this is what you get when you do not look at my posts. or at least. look at the words of scripture
1 John 2:
18 Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour. 19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.
1. John is speaking about the antichrists, who were part of us, and with us who are no longer with us.
2. He says clearly and as a matter of fact. they were Not of us, if the were they would have never left (continued with us)
3. He says they left to show or prove or make manifest they were never of us (they were never saved)
4. John will get to who the antichrists are in vs 22
20 But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you know all things. 21 I have not written to you because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and that no lie is of the truth.
1. Unlike these antichrists who left. the ones who stayed have the anointing (they are saved)
22 Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son. 23 Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father either; he who acknowledges the Son has the Father also.
who is the antichrist?
1. They are liars
2. They deny Christ
3. They also deny the father
4. They not only do not have the son, they do not have the father.
5. They are not saved now. and they have never been saved. They were never of us
You’re saying that if Paul had left then he wouldn’t have been a true believer but we already know that Paul was in fact a true believer when he wrote the epistles to Timothy. The second epistle to Timothy was near the end of his life.
lol. See here is the part that many do not understand
1. Paul had true faith
2. God knew paul had true saving faith
3. So God saved him, and gave him the spirit. Paul had the father and he had the son.
This differs from the antichrist, the one who denies Christ in that
1. Paul had the anointing
2. The antichrist did not
3. The antichrist left. to expose the fact he never had faith, and thus never had salvation.
4. God knows who has real faith and who does not. He does not save people who never really trusted him.. Going to church and being a part of a church does not make you saved. Good chance many of these people were baptized and did other things. But the fact remains. they were never of us. Works did not do them a bit of good
You need to ask Danthemailman what that statement means because he understands it. You’re falling into the incorrect interpretation of the verse by saying that were saved without faith which is refuted everywhere in the New Testament.
I have never stated anyone was saved without faith. Dan has been a great friend and brother for many years.. So I do not need to talk to dan. why are you bringing him into this, we are in agreement
If we are faithless He is faithful for He cannot deny Himself means that if we turn from our faith and deny Christ,
No.
If we are faithless he remains faithful.
if we deny him he will deny us
two different things. you are trying to put them together.
Christ is faithful to do what He said
Yes he is, thats why My Faith is in him and his promise, and I am secure in him, because he will do this
He would do to those who deny Him.
Yes. And they are antichrist, and they were never of us
And before you mention Peter denying Christ three times I’ll just go ahead and point out that Peter repented of his denial of Christ and died a martyr so that excuse isn’t going to work either.
Actually there is no evidence peter repented. If you read John 21. we see where jesus restored peter. He asked him three times, do you love me feed my people.
He did not ask peter to repent.
Also, peter never actually in his heart denied Jesus, In fear of his life. he denied he was with Jesus. Peter was never an antichrist.
The fact of the matter is that we know for a fact that Paul was a true believer when he wrote the second epistle to Timothy and he specifically said that Christ would deny him. If Paul taught eternal security then he couldn’t have written that Christ would deny him without contradicting eternal security. Furthermore your interpretation of verse 13 directly contradicts what Paul just said in verse 12. You’re saying that if we are faithless that Christ won’t deny us when Paul just got finished saying that Christ will deny us. How does that make any sense at all?
lol. Paul taught eternal security all over the place. you are causing paul to contradict himself.
here is just a few places.
Philippians 1:6
being
confident of this very thing, that He who has begun a good work in you will complete it until the day of Jesus Christ;
God will complete the work. Its not on us.
romans 8: 29 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. 30 Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.
He knew who would believe, and chose to save them before time began. he taught eternal life
Rom 8: 37 Yet in all these things
we are more than conquerors through Him who loved us. 38 For
I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, 39 nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Nothing (not even us( can separate us from Gods love.
I can find much more I am sure. But you get the point
