Are you saved or delusional?

Bible Highlighter · Jul 29, 2019

aiki said:
The passage "has to" express the view you say it does because if it means what it actually says, your false doctrine ends up with a very big hole in it.

It doesn't follow that because someone might abuse God's gracious gift of salvation, God therefore doesn't really offer it as such. That's a glaring non sequitur. It's like saying that because little Sally uses the doll her Uncle Joe gave her for Christmas to beat the cat, that her uncle never intended to give the doll to her as a gift. It'd be right to say that Sally's uncle didn't give her the gift of the doll so she could abuse the cat with it, but it is going too far to say that, because Sally misuses the doll, Uncle Joe never gave the doll as a gift at all. This sort of faulty, too-far reasoning, though, is exactly what you're doing with the gift of salvation that God offers to us. You're asserting that because a Christian may misuse God's gracious gift of salvation that therefore God never actually offers it as a gift. But, this thinking doesn't follow any more with the gift of salvation than it does with Uncle Joe's Christmas gift to his niece. As I said, it's a glaring non sequitur.

However, you add no conditions to the continuation of the keeping of the gift. If a child is being abusive with their gift that got at Christmas, the parents (if they are responsible and loving parents who care about the well being of their fellow neighbors and the well being of their own child) will take away their gift if that gift was used to harm others in some way. In short, there is a difference between trading hours for dollars like at a job, vs. works of responsibility in owning a free gift. For example: Rick can receive a car as a free gift, but if he runs red lights, hits pedestrians, drives drunk, and constantly texts on the road all the time, there is a good chance that he will destroy his gift, and or lose it.

You said:
Well, let's see...

Ephesians 2:8-10
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,
9 not of works, lest anyone should boast.
10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.

Right off the bat, you start to go awry. Paul doesn't say that salvation is like a gift; he says that it is a gift.

You are nitpicking. Salvation being a gift and it being like a gift is saying the same thing. Unless you can describe how they are different, you are simply nitpicking a point that is minor. I am saying salvation is a gift. I can also say that a car is means to get me from Point A to Point B. Yet, I can say that a car is like a way of getting me from Point A to Point B. I am saying the same thing. One is a literal way of saying it, and the other is a way by comparison. Both are saying the same thing.

You said:
Are gifts given to us once? Most are, yes.

A Christmas gift given repeatedly would not be a new gift, no.

How you can go from talking about used Christmas gifts to "Initial Salvation" is a mystery to me. You offer no clear bridge of reasoning between the two things.

The phrase "Initial Salvation" does not appear anywhere in the New Testament, nor does the phrase "Continued Salvation." Paul never even implies such a thing in the Ephesians 2 passage. How, then, is what you've offered above "biblical proof" of your view? As it stands, it's just bad thinking.

Because you can only receive gifts once.
Thus, Paul is talking about the entrance gate (access) to salvation.

Initial Salvation:

1 "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:
2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God." (Romans 5:1-2).

"Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;" (Acts of the Apostles 3:19).

"Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning. If that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father." (1 John 2:24).

"Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love." (Revelation 2:4).

A "Man Directed Work"? What are you talking about? Paul doesn't use this phrase. Why are you? Because, it seems to me, you have to in order to get his words to say what you want them to say.

Because it says this...

"Not of works, lest any man should boast."
(Ephesians 2:9).

The Pharisees loved the praise of men more than the praise of God because they did things to be seen of men by their good deeds so as to receive glory of men:

1 "Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.
2 Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men." (Matthew 6:1).

"For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God." (John 12:43).

You said:
Verse 10 does not "switch gears." Verses 8-10 all follow a coherent line of thought. You seem, though, to have caught the gist of Paul's teaching: A person is saved for or unto good works, not by them. This is the conclusion of what Paul has been asserting in verses 8-10. Good works do not save anyone. Salvation is a gracious gift of God, something He works into us, not something we obtain or maintain by our good deeds.

Yes, Ephesians 2:10 does switch gears from Ephesians 2:9.
Ephesians 2:10 clearly describes a God directed work done through the believer because it says this:

"For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them." (Ephesians 2:10).

Is verse 10 here talking about a man directed work? No. It is talking about the kind of work that we are created in Christ Jesus to do. These are the kind of works that God has ordained that we should walk within. We would not boast in ourselves over this kind of work (Which is a different kind of work mentioned in Ephesians 2:9), but verse 10 is a God directed work. Philippians 2:13 says, "For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure." John 15:5 says, "I am the vine; you are the branches. The one who remains in me and I in him produces much fruit, because you can do nothing without me."

"Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven." (Matthew 5:16).

The light we shine unto men is Christ.
For it is the good works of Christ done through us that we shine unto men to the glory of God the Father. We give praise to the Lord for such good works and we do not boast in ourselves like the Pharisees would do.

Bible Highlighter · Jul 29, 2019

genez said:
OSOS arguments ?

I recently heard my pastor put it succinctly.

"Dumb" = not able to get it.

"Stupid" = will not get it.

There is a difference!

The Bible is not a goody two shoes communication as some who are prissy by nature will allege it to be. In the original languages the Word will be at times blunt, and offensive.

Offensive? Offensive to those whom are the guilty of what it points to.

"Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge,
but whoever hates correction is stupid."
NIV Prov 12:1

The Bible is not for the prissy types. Nor is it of the licentious types

Some are born that way in their flesh. God wants to transform them.

Transform them with what? Corrections, when they come their way.

Now, keep in mind. Those who refuse to get it? They are not dumb. The Bible says they make themselves stupid.

NASB
Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge,
But he who hates reproof is stupid.

NKJV
Whoever loves instruction loves knowledge,
But he who hates correction is stupid.

As you all can see... I did not make this up!

And, keep in mind. This same "loving" Jesus is the Word of God made flesh! He says they are stupid.

Grace and truth....

But the context does not support a sin and still be saved type belief.

1 "Whoso loveth instruction loveth knowledge: but he that hateth reproof is brutish.
2 A good man obtaineth favour of the LORD: but a man of wicked devices will he condemn.
3 A man shall not be established by wickedness: but the root of the righteous shall not be moved." (Proverbs 12:1-3).

Proverbs 28:13 says that confesses and forsakes sin shall have mercy.

How exactly is the standard "Eternal Security Proponent" or the "Sin and Still Be Saved Type Believer" forsaking sin? Many times I hear them tell me that they sin almost every day or that a believer will never overcome sin (grievous sin) in this life. They will always sin at some point in the future as a matter of fact. How is that forsaking sin? Jesus said to "sin no more." (John 5:14) (John 8:11). Somehow they think it means "sin less." (When that is not what Jesus said).

Side Note:

Also what if you did a sermon on how future sin is forgiven for a believer and or your words on the internet on this topic is what really convinced George Sodini to go out and murder a bunch of people, including the taking of his own life, would you really want to keep pushing such a belief despite this?

aiki · Jul 29, 2019

Bible Highlighter said:
Well, I disagree. I set forth many verses, and they simply go unanswered most times from the Eternal Security Proponent, or these verses are changed beyond what they plainly say.

Yes, you do "set forth many verses" which is part of the problem. You have this long collection of verses you've strung together that often don't make the case for what it is you're arguing for. I suspect many of the verses you offer are ignored because it is obvious that they don't apply and/or have been taken out of context. And as for taking verses beyond what they plainly say, well, you've done this many times to make your case for your views. But, of course, you see the Scriptures through the lens of your doctrinal presuppositions and can't, but for the grace of God, see them otherwise. Consequently, you're rather blind to the reinterpretation of verses/passages that you make.

Bible Highlighter said:
It is not wrong to re quote what you have already written.

Not morally wrong, no. But it does have the effect of bogging down conversation, burdening the person to whom you're speaking with a very rapidly delivered and often very large body of information to process. It may also have the effect of making you less engaged in the discussions in which you take part, less thoughtful about what a person is actually saying. You may just trigger off of key words and phrases, cutting-and-pasting reflexively in response to them, rather than carefully considering what the other person is saying. This has certainly seemed to be the case in some of the discussions I've had with you.

Bible Highlighter said:
They say things like "fear" does not mean "fear" because it does not agree with their belief, etc.

Or perhaps "fear" in Scripture doesn't always have precisely one meaning (which is the case, actually). Can you acknowledge this? Or must it always be that your opponent is just twisting Scripture to their perspective?

Bible Highlighter said:
Jesus did not really say that looking at a woman in lust would cause one to be cast into hell fire.

But to whom was he speaking and when? Was he speaking to born-again believers? No. Was he speaking before or after his atoning work on the cross? Before. Why don't these things have a bearing on how you apply his words? Why are you imposing upon spiritually-regenerated people words spoken by Christ in warning to the unregenerate?

Bible Highlighter said:
They either will say that was Old Covenant, or they will say that Jesus was speaking metaphorically.

Yes, and? I don't think Jesus was actually recommending people pluck out their eyes, but the connection he makes between sin and punishment was quite literal. Jesus was speaking in an Old Covenant circumstance, though. Does this have a bearing upon how we should understand what he said? I think so. See above.

Bible Highlighter said:
Jesus agreed with the lawyer on the truth that we are to love God and love our neighbor as a part of inheriting eternal life (Luke 10:25-28).

Did you not notice that Christ says nothing about trusting in himself as the lawyer's Saviour and Lord? Jesus doesn't speak of his approaching atoning work at Calvary; he doesn't mention the lawyer's need of spiritual cleansing through Jesus' shed blood; he doesn't speak of the mercy and grace of God extended to the lawyer in the soon-to-come gift of salvation; Jesus also never mentions the regenerating, empowering effect of the Spirit within every person who trusts in himself as Saviour. No, instead, Jesus leaves the lawyer with the very Old Testament route to life which the lawyer quoted from the OT. Christ completely conceals from the lawyer the way to eternal life in himself that he is about to create through the cross. So, we don't have in Luke 10:25-28, the New Covenant way of salvation, but Christ confirming the lawyer in the OT way of remaining right with God. Why? Because the time had not yet come for Christ to publicly reveal what he was to do on the cross. Because the lawyer was just testing him, not searching sincerely for the truth.

How you've used the Luke 10 passage to confirm your saved-and-lost doctrine is a great example of the problems in thinking that you have that are constantly leading you awry in interpreting Scripture. You adopted a very simplistic understanding of the passage, which allowed you to shape the passage to your viewpoint. But a simple - not simplistic - and straightforward reading of the passage should have prompted you to ask why Jesus did not tell the lawyer of the New Covenant way of salvation he was about to create through himself. Your interest, though, doesn't appear to have been to get at the truth of the passage, but merely to collect it as a seemingly useful part of your works-salvation arsenal. You do this a lot, covering a conveniently simplistic interpretation of Scripture under phrases like "plain meaning" or "honest reading," etc.

Bible Highlighter said:
James says that even the demons believe and tremble (James 2:19). For James says, I will show you me faith by my works (James 2:18). James says a faith without works is dead. You seem to think true faith does not have works because you think a person can be saved by a faith without works (that should manifest itself). But faith always has works.

I have clarified this for you before. Faith and works are directly related, the former giving rise to the latter. Genuine, saving faith, as James points out, generally manifests in corresponding action. But faith always precedes works and may exist independently of works. A quadraplegic believer confined immobile to bed, for instance, cannot do any good works, but may still properly trust in Christ as his Saviour and Lord; a woman in the last days of her fight with cancer may trust in Christ and be saved, though she is not physically able to perform any good works; the thief on the cross next to Jesus could not do any good works but exercised faith in Christ and was saved. So, saving faith can and does exist apart from works but, usually, if circumstances allow, saving faith will manifest in good works.

This is an important point, actually. Works-salvation folks make the mistake of thinking that because good works are (usually) an inevitable consequence of salvation that they are, therefore, necessary to salvation. But something that is inevitable is not always necessary. For example, it is inevitable that if a man owns a lawnmower to mow his lawn and the lawn needs mowing, he will use the mower to mow his lawn. But the man could possess the lawnmower and never use it. His use of the mower, while inevitable, is not necessary to his possession of it. So, too, with salvation - as the thief on the cross illustrates. If he had not been about to die, the thief's faith would have inevitably manifested in corresponding good works. But he was saved without such works, because works are not necessary to salvation.

In the light of verses like Ephesians 2:8-9, 2 Timothy 1:9, and Titus 3:5, then, all that we can understand James to be saying is that works are inevitable rather than necessary to a saving faith in Christ. Unfortunately, your simplistic (and myopic) approach to Scripture prevents you from making such an important and somewhat subtle distinction.

Bible Highlighter said:
Titus 1:16 says you can deny God by a lack of works.

Actually, this isn't what the verse says. It says that the works of "idle talkers and deceivers" who claim to know God are "abominable, disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate." So, it isn't that such people are denying God merely by a lack of good works - like those I described above who might be too ill to do any works - but are in their conduct actively living in an evil, immoral way. Paul did not suggest that these people were ever saved but described them as religious posers, "false brethren" he calls such people in other letters, who have not been truly born-again.

I hope other readers of this thread see how much effort is required to untangle your poor handling of Scripture. As my comments above demonstrate, a great deal of explanation is often required to correct your misuse of the verses/passages you cite in support of your erroneous doctrines.

I have run out of time to answer other assertions you've made. Perhaps I'll write more later. Though, in the past, doing so has been an exercise in diminishing returns...

Bible Highlighter · Jul 29, 2019

aiki said:
"Uh huh"? That's it? That's all you can muster in response to my point? I suppose if you've got nothing to say, you say nothing (or, almost nothing, in this instance).

Well, here's another big non sequitur in your thinking: How an adherent to a particular view lives does not actually determine if the view they hold is true or not. Hitler was a murderous monster. But, if he held that 2+2=4, would the equation be wrong? Would his evil behaviour make 2+2=4 untrue? Of course not. So, too, with Sodini. The character of his living does not have any direct bearing on whether or not OSAS is true.

??? When Jesus died for my sins 2000-some years ago, all of my sins were future sins. This is the case for every person born after Jesus' atoning death on the cross. We're talking billions, here. As Scripture says repeatedly, Jesus died "once for all." Unless you're prepared to say that Jesus dies anew for every person he has saved since his death at Calvary and anew for every sin they commit, your idea that he hasn't died for future sin must be abandoned.

This all talks past my point about Sodini. Really, it is just a deflection.

I have answered this question from you before. My answer has not changed. A person claiming to be a Christian who is living in willful, persistent sin without pang of conscience or chastisement from God has never been saved.

I should also point out that, while there is a hierarchy of consequence that exists temporally for our sin (murder has graver consequences than stealing a cookie from Grandma's jar), as far as God is concerned, a proud look is just as much an abomination as the shedding of innocent blood. (Proverbs 6:17) So, I don't subscribe to the idea of "grievous" sin. All sin is grievous, which is why it all merits the wrathful judgment of God.

But this puts a pretty serious crimp in your false doctrine. Paul talks to the Corinthian believers about their sins (all of which were "grievous") (1 Corinthians 3:1-3; 1 Corinthians 5; 1 Corinthians 6; 1 Corinthians 11, etc.) and yet he repeatedly confirms that he thought of these sinning believers as Christian brethren (1 Corinthians 3:1; 1 Corinthians 3:9; 1 Corinthians 3:16; 1 Corinthians 3:23; 1 Corinthians 4:15; 1 Corinthians 6:2; 1 Corinthians 6:8; etc.) Why doesn't he think as you do that these sinning Corinthian believers had sinned themselves out of their salvation? Well, because such an idea is false.

What is the difference between Hitler and Mother Theresa? They both believe(d) 2+2=4. Do you honestly not see the enormous non sequitur in your thinking here?

Here are several lists of verses that makes it absolutely clear that believers can fall away from the faith:

Here is a General List of Verses on How Believers Can Fall Away:

1 Samuel 16:14
1 Samuel 31:4
Ezekiel 18:24
Hebrews 3:12-14
Hebrews 4:11
Hebrews 6:4-9
Hebrews 10:26-30
Hebrews 12:15
1 Timothy 1:18-20
1 Timothy 4:1-7
Galatians 3:1-5
2 Peter 2:20-22
2 Peter 3:17
Matthew 13:18-23
1 Corinthians 10:12
2 Thessalonians 2:3

Now, do not misunderstand me, believers cannot lose their salvation, but they can forfeit their salvation (i.e. they can willingly throw it away by rebelling against God). In fact,

Here is a list of believers who have forfeited their salvation:

Saul (1 Samuel 16:14) (1 Samuel 31:4)
Demas (2 Timothy 4:10)
The Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32)
Judas Iscariot (Psalm 41:9) (Luke 6:16) (Acts 1:25)
Hymenaeus and Philetus (2 Timothy 2:17-18)
Unnamed Christians destroyed by false teaching (2 Timothy 2:17-18)
Many Unnamed Disciples (John 6:66)
Some Younger Christian Widows (1 Timothy 5:14-15)
Some Christians Eager For Money (1 Timothy 6:8-10)
Ananias and Sapphira (Acts of the Apostles 5:1-11)

And here is a list of potential fallen believers:

The Servant Who is Not Looking For Him (Luke 12:45-46)
Recent Convert Who is a Potential Spiritual Leader (1 Timothy 3:6)
The Unforgiving in Heart (Matthew 6:14-15)
Luke Warm Unrepentant Believer (Revelation 3:14-22)
Fruitless Christians (John 15:1-10) (Matthew 25:14-30)
Widows That Live in Pleasure (1 Timothy 5:5-6)
Believers Whose Seed Fell Upon the Rocks (Luke 8:13)
Believers Whose Seed Was Choked by Thorns (Matthew 13:22)
Gentile Believer Who Did Not Have on a Wedding Garment (Matthew 22:1-14) (Revelation 19:7-8)
The Potential Fellow Believer Who Erred From the Truth & Was Converted Back
(James 5:19-20)

Paul is against Eternal Security. For Paul says,

We can fall from grace (Galatians 5:4).
We can be moved away from the hope (Colossians 1:23).
We can be a castaway (1 Corinthians 9:27).
We can be cut off just like the Jews if we do not continue in God’s goodness (Romans 11:20-22).
We can sow to the flesh and reap corruption instead of sowing to the Spirit which reaps everlasting life. (Galatians 6:8).
We can deny God by a lack of good works (Titus 1:16).
We can shipwreck our faith (1 Timothy 1:19).
We can deny the faith and be worse than an infidel if we do not provide for our own household (1 Timothy 5:8).
We can err from the faith and pierce ourselves thru with many sorrows if we love and covet after money (1 Timothy 6:10).
Hymnenaeus and Philetus have overthrown the faith of some (2 Timothy 2:18).

Bible Highlighter · Jul 29, 2019

aiki said:
Yes, you do "set forth many verses" which is part of the problem. You have this long collection of verses you've strung together that often don't make the case for what it is you're arguing for. I suspect many of the verse you offer are ignored because it is obvious that they don't apply and/or have been taken out of context. And as for taking verses beyond what they plainly say, well, you've done this many times to make your case for your views. But, of course, you see the Scriptures through the lens of your doctrinal presuppositions and can't, but for the grace of God, see them otherwise. Consequently, you're rather blind to the reinterpretation of verses/passages that you make.

Not morally wrong, no. But it does have the effect of bogging down conversation, burdening the person to whom you're speaking with a very rapidly delivered and often very large body of information to process. It may also have the effect of making you less engaged in the discussions in which you take part, less thoughtful about what a person is actually saying. You may just trigger off of key words and phrases, cutting-and-pasting reflexively in response to them, rather than carefully considering what the other person is saying. This has certainly seemed to be the case in some of the discussions I've had with you.

Or perhaps "fear" in Scripture doesn't always have precisely one meaning (which is the case, actually). Can you acknowledge this? Or must it always be that your opponent is just twisting Scripture to their perspective?

But to whom was he speaking and when? Was he speaking to born-again believers? No. Was he speaking before or after his atoning work on the cross? Before. Why don't these things have a bearing on how you apply his words? Why are you imposing upon spiritually-regenerated people words spoken by Christ in warning to the unregenerate?

Yes, and? I don't think Jesus was actually recommending people pluck out their eyes, but the connection he makes between sin and punishment was quite literal. Jesus was speaking in an Old Covenant circumstance, though. Does this have a bearing upon how we should understand what he said? I think so. See above.

Did you not notice that Christ says nothing about trusting in himself as the lawyer's Saviour and Lord? Jesus doesn't speak of his approaching atoning work at Calvary; he doesn't mention the lawyer's need of spiritual cleansing through Jesus' shed blood; he doesn't speak of the mercy and grace of God extended to the lawyer in the soon-to-come gift of salvation; Jesus also never mentions the regenerating, empowering effect of the Spirit within every person who trusts in himself as Saviour. No, instead, Jesus leaves the lawyer with the very Old Testament route to life which the lawyer quoted from the OT. Christ completely conceals from the lawyer the way to eternal life in himself that he is about to create through the cross. So, we don't have in Luke 10:25-28, the New Covenant way of salvation, but Christ confirming the lawyer in the OT way of remaining right with God. Why? Because the time had not yet come for Christ to publicly reveal what he was to do on the cross. Because the lawyer was just testing him, not searching sincerely for the truth.

How you've used the Luke 10 passage to confirm your saved-and-lost doctrine is a great example of the problems in thinking that you have that are constantly leading you awry in interpreting Scripture. You adopted a very simplistic understanding of the passage, which allowed you to shape the passage to your viewpoint. But a simple - not simplistic - and straightforward reading of the passage should have prompted you to ask why Jesus did not tell the lawyer of the New Covenant way of salvation he was about to create through himself. Your interest, though, doesn't appear to have been to get at the truth of the passage, but merely to collect it as a seemingly useful part of your works-salvation arsenal. You do this a lot, covering a conveniently simplistic interpretation of Scripture under phrases like "plain meaning" or "honest reading," etc.

I have clarified this for you before. Faith and works are directly related, the former giving rise to the latter. Genuine, saving faith, as James points out, generally manifests in corresponding action. But faith always precedes works and may exist independently of works. A quadraplegic believer confined immobile to bed, for instance, cannot do any good works, but may still properly trust in Christ as his Saviour and Lord; a woman in the last days of her fight with cancer may trust in Christ and be saved, though she is not physically able to perform any good works; the thief on the cross next to Jesus could not do any good works but exercised faith in Christ and was saved. So, saving faith can and does exist apart from works but, usually, if circumstances allow, saving faith will manifest in good works.

This is an important point, actually. Works-salvation folks make the mistake of thinking that because good works are (usually) an inevitable consequence of salvation that they are, therefore, necessary to salvation. But something that is inevitable is not always necessary. For example, it is inevitable that if a man owns a lawnmower to mow his lawn and the lawn needs mowing, he will use the mower to mow his lawn. But the man could possess the lawnmower and never use it. His use of the mower, while inevitable, is not necessary to his possession of it. So, too, with salvation - as the thief on the cross illustrates. If he had not been about to die, the thief's faith would have inevitably manifested in corresponding good works. But he was saved without such works, because works are not necessary to salvation.

In the light of verses like Ephesians 2:8-9, 2 Timothy 1:9, and Titus 3:5, then, all that we can understand James to be saying is that works are inevitable rather than necessary to a saving faith in Christ. Unfortunately, your simplistic (and myopic) approach to Scripture prevents you from making such an important and somewhat subtle distinction.

Actually, this isn't what the verse says. It says that the works of "idle talkers and deceivers" who claim to know God are "abominable, disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate." So, it isn't that such people are denying God merely by a lack of good works, like those I described above who might be too ill to do any works, but are in their conduct actively living in an evil, immoral way. Paul did not suggest that these people were ever saved but described them as religious posers, "false brethren" he calls them in other letters, who have not been truly born-again.

I hope other readers of this thread see how much effort is required to untangle your poor handling of Scripture. As my comments above demonstrate, a great deal of explanation is often required to correct your misuse of the verses/passages you cite in support of your erroneous doctrines.

I have run out of time to answer other assertions you've made. Perhaps I'll write more later. Though, in the past, doing so has been an exercise in diminishing returns...

But the Bible teaches that you can be saved and then lose it and even be saved again. In the Parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32), when the son came home to the father (and he repented) from his prodigal life of riotous living, the father said that his son was "dead" and he is "alive again" two times (Luke 15:24) (Luke 15:32). The son was said to be "lost" and he is now "found." Generally when we speak of the "lost" in the Bible, we are referring to the "unsaved." (For example: 2 Corinthians 4:3 says, "But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost"). Anyways, the Parable of the Prodigal Son is speaking in spiritual terms. The son was "dead" spiritually and he became "alive again" spiritually.

James 5:19-20 also expresses this same very truth, as well. Unless of course a person who does not like this truth seeks to twist or change God's Word in this instance to make it say something else (way beyond what it plainly says).

yeshuaslavejeff · Jul 29, 2019

A_Thinker said:
Jesus said that He would NEVER cast out anyone that has come to Him ...

But Jesus also warned that some(multitudes) would themselves bring judgment on themselves by trampling underfoot His Graciousness and Preciousness, relieving themselves of salvation. He did not take away their free will to leave, as also most of the disciples following Jesus left in the Gospels when His Words "got to hard" for them to accept.

Bible Highlighter · Jul 29, 2019

aiki said:
Yes, you do "set forth many verses" which is part of the problem. You have this long collection of verses you've strung together that often don't make the case for what it is you're arguing for. I suspect many of the verses you offer are ignored because it is obvious that they don't apply and/or have been taken out of context. And as for taking verses beyond what they plainly say, well, you've done this many times to make your case for your views. But, of course, you see the Scriptures through the lens of your doctrinal presuppositions and can't, but for the grace of God, see them otherwise. Consequently, you're rather blind to the reinterpretation of verses/passages that you make.

Not morally wrong, no. But it does have the effect of bogging down conversation, burdening the person to whom you're speaking with a very rapidly delivered and often very large body of information to process. It may also have the effect of making you less engaged in the discussions in which you take part, less thoughtful about what a person is actually saying. You may just trigger off of key words and phrases, cutting-and-pasting reflexively in response to them, rather than carefully considering what the other person is saying. This has certainly seemed to be the case in some of the discussions I've had with you.

Or perhaps "fear" in Scripture doesn't always have precisely one meaning (which is the case, actually). Can you acknowledge this? Or must it always be that your opponent is just twisting Scripture to their perspective?

But to whom was he speaking and when? Was he speaking to born-again believers? No. Was he speaking before or after his atoning work on the cross? Before. Why don't these things have a bearing on how you apply his words? Why are you imposing upon spiritually-regenerated people words spoken by Christ in warning to the unregenerate?

Yes, and? I don't think Jesus was actually recommending people pluck out their eyes, but the connection he makes between sin and punishment was quite literal. Jesus was speaking in an Old Covenant circumstance, though. Does this have a bearing upon how we should understand what he said? I think so. See above.

Did you not notice that Christ says nothing about trusting in himself as the lawyer's Saviour and Lord? Jesus doesn't speak of his approaching atoning work at Calvary; he doesn't mention the lawyer's need of spiritual cleansing through Jesus' shed blood; he doesn't speak of the mercy and grace of God extended to the lawyer in the soon-to-come gift of salvation; Jesus also never mentions the regenerating, empowering effect of the Spirit within every person who trusts in himself as Saviour. No, instead, Jesus leaves the lawyer with the very Old Testament route to life which the lawyer quoted from the OT. Christ completely conceals from the lawyer the way to eternal life in himself that he is about to create through the cross. So, we don't have in Luke 10:25-28, the New Covenant way of salvation, but Christ confirming the lawyer in the OT way of remaining right with God. Why? Because the time had not yet come for Christ to publicly reveal what he was to do on the cross. Because the lawyer was just testing him, not searching sincerely for the truth.

How you've used the Luke 10 passage to confirm your saved-and-lost doctrine is a great example of the problems in thinking that you have that are constantly leading you awry in interpreting Scripture. You adopted a very simplistic understanding of the passage, which allowed you to shape the passage to your viewpoint. But a simple - not simplistic - and straightforward reading of the passage should have prompted you to ask why Jesus did not tell the lawyer of the New Covenant way of salvation he was about to create through himself. Your interest, though, doesn't appear to have been to get at the truth of the passage, but merely to collect it as a seemingly useful part of your works-salvation arsenal. You do this a lot, covering a conveniently simplistic interpretation of Scripture under phrases like "plain meaning" or "honest reading," etc.

I have clarified this for you before. Faith and works are directly related, the former giving rise to the latter. Genuine, saving faith, as James points out, generally manifests in corresponding action. But faith always precedes works and may exist independently of works. A quadraplegic believer confined immobile to bed, for instance, cannot do any good works, but may still properly trust in Christ as his Saviour and Lord; a woman in the last days of her fight with cancer may trust in Christ and be saved, though she is not physically able to perform any good works; the thief on the cross next to Jesus could not do any good works but exercised faith in Christ and was saved. So, saving faith can and does exist apart from works but, usually, if circumstances allow, saving faith will manifest in good works.

This is an important point, actually. Works-salvation folks make the mistake of thinking that because good works are (usually) an inevitable consequence of salvation that they are, therefore, necessary to salvation. But something that is inevitable is not always necessary. For example, it is inevitable that if a man owns a lawnmower to mow his lawn and the lawn needs mowing, he will use the mower to mow his lawn. But the man could possess the lawnmower and never use it. His use of the mower, while inevitable, is not necessary to his possession of it. So, too, with salvation - as the thief on the cross illustrates. If he had not been about to die, the thief's faith would have inevitably manifested in corresponding good works. But he was saved without such works, because works are not necessary to salvation.

In the light of verses like Ephesians 2:8-9, 2 Timothy 1:9, and Titus 3:5, then, all that we can understand James to be saying is that works are inevitable rather than necessary to a saving faith in Christ. Unfortunately, your simplistic (and myopic) approach to Scripture prevents you from making such an important and somewhat subtle distinction.

Actually, this isn't what the verse says. It says that the works of "idle talkers and deceivers" who claim to know God are "abominable, disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate." So, it isn't that such people are denying God merely by a lack of good works - like those I described above who might be too ill to do any works - but are in their conduct actively living in an evil, immoral way. Paul did not suggest that these people were ever saved but described them as religious posers, "false brethren" he calls such people in other letters, who have not been truly born-again.

I hope other readers of this thread see how much effort is required to untangle your poor handling of Scripture. As my comments above demonstrate, a great deal of explanation is often required to correct your misuse of the verses/passages you cite in support of your erroneous doctrines.

I have run out of time to answer other assertions you've made. Perhaps I'll write more later. Though, in the past, doing so has been an exercise in diminishing returns...

You are wasting your time if you are going to keep criticizing me as a person. I will skip past such words and not even read them. So do not waste your time or efforts in attacking my character, etc. or attempt to continue to debate how I post, or whatever.

All posts you write about my character will NOT be read. I will simply skip past them and look for only Bible verses you have provided in your posts to give a reply.

I will only address Bible verses from you. So please stick to the Scriptures and do not make this about me. Thank you.

yeshuaslavejeff · Jul 29, 2019

Bible Highlighter said:
But the Bible teaches that you can be saved and then lose it and even be saved again.

Well, partly correct. Those for whom no sacrifice for their sins remains cannot be restored.

Bible Highlighter · Jul 29, 2019

yeshuaslavejeff said:
But Jesus also warned that some(multitudes) would themselves bring judgment on themselves by trampling underfoot His Graciousness and Preciousness, relieving themselves of salvation. He did not take away their free will to leave, as also most of the disciples following Jesus left in the Gospels when His Words "got to hard" for them to accept.

Indeed.

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

yeshuaslavejeff · Jul 29, 2019

PaulCyp1 said:
what the Bible states - "He who endures until the end, he SHALL be saved". (Matt 24:13, Mk 13:13) Obviously then, he who does not endure to the end will NOT be saved. No-one is certain of salvation until he/she is in heaven. Until the moment of death, there is always the possibility of turning away from Christ

What the Bible states is a cause for fear and trembling for believers , as written,
let alone the demons (who know the Bible, and they know Jesus, and they tremble because they know their doom also, and can never be rescued from final destruction).
Obviously then, yes, those who do not endure to the end will not be saved.
Less obvious, many who think they endure to the end, believing right up to the day they die, that they are saved, find out on Judgment Day after the resurrection what Jesus warns in Scripture, when He says to them "bye bye"..... I never knew you.....

Bible Highlighter · Jul 29, 2019

yeshuaslavejeff said:
What the Bible states is a cause for fear and trembling for believers , as written,
let alone the demons (who know the Bible, and they know Jesus, and they tremble because they know their doom also, and can never be rescued from final destruction).
Obviously then, yes, those who do not endure to the end will not be saved.
Less obvious, many who think they endure to the end, believing right up to the day they die, that they are saved, find out on Judgment Day after the resurrection what Jesus warns in Scripture, when He says to them "bye bye"..... I never knew you.....

I agree, brother. We know God by keeping His commandments (1 John 2:3). The person who says they know the Lord, and they do not keep His commandments, they are a liar, and the truth (i.e. The "Truth" in John 14:6) is not in them (1 John 2:4). No man can have eternal life without abiding in the Son. For 1 John 5:12 says he that has the Son, has life, and he that does not have the Son, does not have life.

GenemZ · Jul 29, 2019

Bible Highlighter said:
I known for a long time of the Eternal Security Proponent's belief that says 1 John 1:9 is dealing with sins of fellowship only and not sins relating to salvation.

So you have had known for a 'long time?"

That means? You're too slow for me.

Why should I waste my time now? :wave:

... on Ignore you shall go.

I am told to redeem my time. Not throw it away.

"I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish;
no one will snatch them out of my hand. (that includes the believer)
My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all;
no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. I and the
Father are one.” Jn 10:28-30

Enjoy your clever spirit that obviously hangs with you.... (while you can)

yeshuaslavejeff · Jul 29, 2019

genez said:
Why should I waste my time now?

Look at the long lists of (millions of) members in hundreds (or thousands) of forums wasting their time. Why should someone be any different ?

Bible Highlighter · Jul 29, 2019

genez said:
So you have had known for a 'long time?"

That means? You're too slow for me.

Why should I waste my time now?

You are free to bow out of the thread anytime and not explain any of the verses I presented in what they plainly say (and or place me on ignore). If you are leaving the thread, it only helps to make my case stronger in showing people the truth in the fact that Eternal Security is nothing more than a house of sand that cannot be explained using the regular words in their own Bibles (that they would normally read). If you ignore my posts, then my verses within my post will go unchallenged by you. Thank you. You are making my job easier in serving the Lord by giving me no opposition.

yeshuaslavejeff · Jul 29, 2019

Bible Highlighter said:
the truth in the fact that Eternal Security is nothing more than a house of sand that cannot be explained using the regular words in their own Bibles (that they would normally read).

Might not be able to "show people" when the Word says that there are requirements.

Also, eternal security works fine for people who are still alive after judgment day, eh?
Those who believe it now today on earth, but are not found alive after judgment day,
it didn't help them at all , did it? More like prevented them from finding the truth.....?

Bible Highlighter · Jul 29, 2019

genez said:
So you have had known for a 'long time?"

That means? You're too slow for me.

Why should I waste my time now? ... on Ignore you shall go.

I am told to redeem my time. Not throw it away.

"I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish;
no one will snatch them out of my hand. (that includes the believer)
My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all;
no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. I and the
Father are one.” Jn 10:28-30

Enjoy your clever spirit that obviously hangs with you.... (while you can)

I noticed that you edited your post to add a Bible passage to defend OSAS.

However, you did not quote verse 27 (that exposes the false OSAS belief). For it says this:

"My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me." (John 10:27).

So the kind of sheep that cannot be snatched out of His hand are the kind of sheep that FOLLOW Jesus, and these are not lazy sheep and or sheep that justify sin or evil on some level. Follow means to obey.

GenemZ · Jul 29, 2019

This so complex! Who can understand it?

"I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish;
no one will snatch them out of my hand. (that includes the believer)
My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all;
no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. I
and the Father are one.” Jn 10:28-30

That is so easy to contradict!?

No one can snatch a person who followed Jesus into salvation out of His hand.

Bible Highlighter · Jul 29, 2019

Again, verse 27. You are still leaving out the verse because it contradicts your belief in OSAS.
Verse 27 says that the kind of sheep that cannot be snatched out of his hand are the kind of sheep the FOLLOW Jesus!!!

This makes sense because Jesus says if you love me, keep my commandments (John 14:15);
And Paul says if any man does not love the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be accursed (1 Corinthians 16:22).

yeshuaslavejeff · Jul 29, 2019

Bible Highlighter said:
"My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me." (John 10:27).

So the kind of sheep that cannot be snatched out of His hand are the kind of sheep that FOLLOW Jesus, and these are not lazy sheep and or sheep that justify sin or evil on some level. Follow means to obey.

Even better than follow means obey, or as good with it, follow Jesus goes to everlasting life. Follow anything else goes to destruction.

aiki · Jul 29, 2019

Bible Highlighter said:
You are wasting your time if you are going to keep criticizing me as a person. I will skip past such words and not even read them. So do not waste your time or efforts in attacking my character, etc. or attempt to continue to debate how I post, or whatever.

I have never attacked your character. But I have criticized your thinking which is front-and-center in every assertion and line of reasoning you employ in your posts. There is no way to properly address your mistaken assertions without addressing their cause, which is the simplistic way you think. If you don't like my criticism of your faulty logic and reasoning, don't make posts that are filled with both.

Bible Highlighter said:
All posts you write about my character will NOT be read. I will simply skip past them and look for only Bible verses you have provided in your posts to give a reply.

That's fine with me, given that I don't address your character in my posts, only your poor reasoning.

Bible Highlighter said:
I will only address Bible verses from you. So please stick to the Scriptures and do not make this about me. Thank you.

But your views on Scripture are your views. Your views are unavoidably about you, about how you handle Scripture, about how you reason things through, about the tactics you employ in debate. You cannot separate yourself from your own words and thoughts.

Are you saved or delusional?

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Regular Member

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Well-Known Member

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Well-Known Member

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua

Regular Member

Similar threads