Adam and eve and Arminian Thought

[Ben johnson]

will be soundly panned by theologians who have a much deeper understanding of these issues that either Ben, myself, or anyone else on these boards.

Great. Then you will be happy to answer post #60.

Will you?

Post #60:
Please address Galatians 3:1-3, 5:1-7. The Galatians were "begun in the Spirit, RUNNING WELL", But they returned to a doctrine of WORKS rather than GRACE. They are "fallen from grace, severed from Christ". Please choose one:

1. They weren't REALLY SAVED in the FIRST place.
2. They didn't REALLY fall, they really STAYED SAVED.
3. This is not a REAL STORY, it's HYPOTHETICAL; just "bugbear" to "keep us in line".
4. There is some reason that this letter does not apply to US TODAY.
5. They were truly saved, and they became unsaved.

Please choose one, or write your own.

 

[frumanchu]

The question is, does Scripture actually INDICATE some people CAN fall away?

No, the question is does Scripture actually indicate that people can LOSE THEIR SALVATION. I make the distinction in light of your insistence that any such euphemism automatically be indicative of losing salvation.

 

[Sunbeam]

Very good. I often rail against what I call, "Incantation Salvation".

ha, interesting phrase. A good way to put that. I haven't seen one preacher on tv not do the instant impersonal sinner's prayer. Every preacher on tv from Baptist to charismatic does this. Only my old church that was into deliverance has a pastor that says "you can be born again but not saved" but yet still does the sinners' prayer with people that does not require you to name to God any personal sins, and does not say whether they have given them up. It only admits that they are wrong, and they knew that before so the prayer is not anything. It's just a show of seeming like they are doing something religious or Chrsitian, or godly, when there is no substance. I like to watch Lakewood Church, and Charles Stanley, and Pat Robertson but I don't watch without some common sense. For the life of me, I don't understand why this issue isn't obvious.

ugggg. I am just so tired of these religious mindgames.

 

[Sunbeam]

What Arminians don't seem to be able to grasp is the philosophical constraints of causality: it is not possible for one's desire to precede one's desire. Once one has a desire for Christ, He is already saved. While He doesn't have a desire for Christ, there is no way to have a desire for Christ.

That just makes no sense at all. Your desires of what you feel do not make you saved. It is only doing the Lord's will that will do that. God help us all.

 

[Sunbeam]

Thus, while such Calvinists claim to be preaching the truth, those who oppose them are not asleep, but quite awake, waiting patiently for the former group to open their eyes, make a little stretch, breathe the free air, and realize where they are.

Yes this was all the way back on page 1, but I had to say I like the way you worded it.

 

[Sunbeam]

Adam and eve and Arminian Thought



It just dawned on me.

Adam and Eve sought to become like God. That's why they ate of the fruit.

Genesis 5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.


They wanted to be in control.

Now, Calvinists will say that God is Sovereign in all things, including who is saved.

Arminians will deny that of God. They want to be in charge of their salvation. They deny the Sovereignty of God and in so doing so they attempt to elevate themselves to God-like status.

I know that is not what they will say, but isn't it the obvious conclusion??

I have no idea how you can reconcile what you have proposed.

Eve disobeyed God. Arminians seek to obey God as mandatory.

The two are clearly strikingly opposed.

 

[nobdysfool]

Great. Then you will be happy to answer post #60.

Will you?

Post #60:
Please address Galatians 3:1-3, 5:1-7. The Galatians were "begun in the Spirit, RUNNING WELL", But they returned to a doctrine of WORKS rather than GRACE. They are "fallen from grace, severed from Christ". Please choose one:

1. They weren't REALLY SAVED in the FIRST place.
2. They didn't REALLY fall, they really STAYED SAVED.
3. This is not a REAL STORY, it's HYPOTHETICAL; just "bugbear" to "keep us in line".
4. There is some reason that this letter does not apply to US TODAY.
5. They were truly saved, and they became unsaved.

Please choose one, or write your own.

I'm not going to jump to another construct of yours until we have settled 2 Peter 2. Let's stick to one topic and examine it thoroughly, instead of jumping all around like a bug on a hotplate.

You said, "those in 2Pet2:20-22 are the FALSE PROPHETS/TEACHERS, who were NEVER SAVED". I showed you how they could NOT "live righteously", UNLESS they were saved. To say "the repbrobate can even APPEAR saved", disputes Jesus in Matt716-20 and 24:6, Paul in Romans 6:16, John in 1:3:7-10. I showed you the TRULY ESCAPED are NOT the false-teachers/prophets, but are the ones that the FALSE, ENTICE (vs 18). I showed you that "FALLING FROM SALVATION" is the only understanding possible in 2Pet2:20-22.

For when they [false teachers] speak great swelling words of vanity, they [false teachers] allure through the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonness, those [true believers] that were clean escaped from them who live in error. While they [false teachers] promise them [true believers] liberty, they themselves [false teachers] are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage. For if after they [false teachers] have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they [false teachers] are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them [false teachers] than the beginning. For it had been better for them [false teachers] not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they [false teachers] have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them [false teachers]. But it is happened unto them [false teachers] according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire. (2Pe 2:18-22)

In verses 4-11, it is shown that "God knows how to deliver the godly [true believers] out of temptation."

The mistake is to assume that the knowledge (epignosis) of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ necessarily means saving knowledge. This can be proven from everyday life. Many unsaved people will acknowledge that Jesus is the Saviour, and some might even acknowledge His Divinity . Does that mean they're saved, because they "know" that? Knowledge alone isn't what saves you. Faith is. For someone to say they have knowledge of Jesus doesn't not necessarily mean that they are saved. This is a self-evident fact. The demons know who Jesus is. They have knowledge of Jesus. But we know the demons aren't saved. Muslims have knowledge of Jesus. Jews have knowledge of Jesus, but you wouldn't assume that they are saved, based on that knowledge. To do so would be very foolish.

To say that we are saved by knowledge is Gnosticism. We are saved by faith. Is it not obvious that “knowledge” and “faith” are two different things? Would you not agree that this is a self-evident fact?

It is no stretch of credibility to see that the false teachers spoken of here have knowledge of Jesus, else how could they subtly try to entice away true believers? They have to "talk the talk", or they would be spotted immediately! So they do have knowledge, but that knowledge isn't according to faith, but according to the nefarious activities they hope to carry out on God's People.


You may ask, "Well why didn't Peter just say so?" He did! But the Holy Spirit inspired him to write it in such a way that "seeing they won't see, and hearing, they won't hear." Otherwise, the false teachers would have even more knowledge to work with and try to corrupt. It also is designed to drive the reader to seek the Holy Spirit for enlightenment.

There must be an understanding for those who hold "osas" (any of the 3 osas views), not-dealing-with-it is not a choice. As far as I know, there are only FOUR possibilities:

1. They were never really SAVED.
2. They never really LOST salvation.
3. This is not a real story, it's an "IF" hypothetical, hyperbole, saying "if you COULD then ____, but you really CAN'T."
4. There is a device that allows us to dismiss entire leters, James' (same argument with Jms1:14-16 and 5:19-20), Peter's, some of John's, Paul's; maybe they were written for JEWS, back THEN, and not for us today. Or there is a kind of "dispensationism" that says "these letters were written for a different covenant, and don't apply to us today.

The answer is obviously number 1. They [the false teachers] were never really saved. they "talked the talk", and through self discipline seemed to "walk the walk", but Peter exposes them for what they are. They heard the Word, the same as the true believers, but it did not regenerate their hearts to believe savingly. That's where the knowledge they had came from. But they perverted and twisted it to entice true believers away to another Gospel, to encourage true believers to sin, and to entangle them again in bondage.

This passage does not of itself prove OSAS, to use your term (Calvinists would call it Perseverance of the Saints). But more importantly, it in no way disproves OSAS (Perseverance of the Saints).

 

[Ben johnson]

I'm not going to jump to another construct of yours until we have settled 2 Peter 2. Let's stick to one topic and examine it thoroughly, instead of jumping all around like a bug on a hotplate.

Fine by me; I see the two passages as equally asserting "falling-from-savlation".

To say that we are saved by knowledge is Gnosticism. We are saved by faith. Is it not obvious that “knowledge” and “faith” are two different things? Would you not agree that this is a self-evident fact?

It was explained to me as "EXPERIENTIAL knowledge", which ENCOMPASSES faith. "Epignosis" is SAVED knowledge in Eph1:17, Philip1:9, Col1:10, 2Pet1:2; is it "SAVED" in 2:20? Paul says "epignosis" of Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is the MEANS by which they ESCAPED.

Recognizing that Jesus said "you cannot serve two masters, you will love the one and hate the other" (Matt6:24)...

Recognizing that Paul said "when you present yourselves as slaves, you are slaves to the one you serve --- EITHER to sin resulting in death, OR to obedience to righteousness." (Rm6:16)...

Recognizing that John wrote: "Let no one deceive you, he who practicees rigtheousness IS righteous, he who practices sin is of the devil; by this the children of God and the children of the devil are exposed --- he who does not practice righteousness is not of God" (1Jn3:7-10)...

Recognizing that Jesus said, "No good tree produces bad fruit, and no bad tree PRODUCES GOOD FRUIT" (Matt7:18)...

Can you please explain to me how the FALSE, who "never cease from sin" (2Pet2:2:14), who are "SLAVES of corruption" (2:19), how you think THEY are the ones who "escape the defilements"? Especially when the WAY they escape is by the "epignosis of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ"?

How did they ESCAPE, and if they ARE the false (slaves-corruption & never-cease-sin), how did they get entangled in them AGAIN (if they never LEFT them)?

How did they "epistrepho-ek-spiritually-turn-FROM the Holy Commandment", if they had never dwelt IN it (never were SAVED)? 2:21

How do you justify "FALSE-ESCAPED", especially in light of the verses I cited here?

(And thank you VERY much for replying to this question!)

 

[nobdysfool]

Fine by me; I see the two passages as equally asserting "falling-from-savlation".

Ben, quit trying to give yourself an out. Deal with this passage, without holding the other one as a "trump card". OK? You've got more twists and turns than a West Virginia mountain road! 2 Peter 2 can stand on its own. We'll get to Galatians, and I'll show you why you're wrong about that one, too.

It was explained to me as "EXPERIENTIAL knowledge", which ENCOMPASSES faith. "Epignosis" is SAVED knowledge in Eph1:17, Philip1:9, Col1:10, 2Pet1:2; is it "SAVED" in 2:20? Paul says "epignosis" of Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is the MEANS by which they ESCAPED.

Well, whoever explained it to you, explained it wrongly! Here's the verses you cited:

1. That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom [sophia -gr.] and revelation [apokalupsis -gr.] in the knowledge [epignosis] of him: (Eph 1:17)
2. And this I pray, that your love may abound yet more and more in knowledge [epignosis] and in all judgment; (Phi 1:9)
3. That ye might walk worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing, being fruitful in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge [epignosis]of God; (Col 1:10)
4. Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge [epignosis] of God, and of Jesus our Lord, (2Pe 1:2)

In every case where you have cited, the word epignosis is used in the context of them already having been saved, so the sense of knowledge here is not saving knowledge, but full knowledge, growing in knowledge, increasing in knowledge, having revelation of knowledge and wisdom. These speak to the actions of God in His People. This kind of knowledge is not what saves them, it is the ongoing teaching of the Holy Spirit in keeping them and growing them in the wisdom and admonition of the Lord.

Epignosis, and its related and root words, have several meanings:

1. epignosis: recognition

1. , that is, (by implication) full discernment, acknowledgement: - (ac-) knowledge (-ing, -ment).
2. epiginōskō: to know upon some mark, that is, recognise; by implication to become fully acquainted with, to acknowledge: - (ac-, have, take) know (-ledge, well), perceive.
3. ginōskō: A prolonged form of a primary verb; to "know" (absolutely), in a great variety of applications and with many implications (as shown at left, with others not thus clearly expressed): - allow, be aware (of) , feel, (have) known (-ledge), perceive, be resolved, can speak, be sure, understand.

You are eisegeting into the text your idea that epignosis always means, without exception, saving knowledge. Pure eisegesis, Ben. Again, let me point out that we are not saved by knowledge. Scripture says with the heart man believes unto salvation, not the head. You know yourself that there are many in churches that have a head full of knowledge about Jesus, about God, His Word, and can quote scriptures with the best of them, but they are not saved! You know this to be true! Ben, I have a relative who is a methodist minister, has been for years, and yet he holds grossly unscriptural doctrines, is rabidly pro-abortion, and gets visibly nervous when the subject of salvation by faith comes up. I'll bet serious money this guy is as lost as any demon! And he's a minister!!! So don't tell me that knowledge of the Lord is always saving knowledge. I know better!!!

The whole context of 2 Peter 2 is in regard to false teachers and how to recognize them. Why would Peter suddenly switch to teaching that God's Elect can fall away?? The whole modus operandi of the false teachers revolves around them knowing the Word, dealing with the Truth, appearing to be true believers, which involves a good deal of knowledge about the ways of righteousnes and the holy commandments, because they could not subtly alter and twist them unless they knew them. They were exposed to sound teaching. They were exposed to knowledge of the Lord and of His commandments. They had the opportunity to become true believers, but the didn't. Why is another discussion, but let me point out that Paul speaks of vessels of wrath fitted to destruction in Romans 9, and Peter also says the end of these false teachers is destruction. In 1 Kings 12:20, God speaks of a man he had "appointed to utter destruction". Scripture shows that God has allowed and appointed that false teachers will do the work of culling the unsaved from the saved, by drawing away the unsaved to their destruction. This is a classic example of God's Sovereignty in using the evil intents of the wicked to accomplish His Will, just as He did in Job, with Satan.

Recognizing that Jesus said "you cannot serve two masters, you will love the one and hate the other" (Matt6:24)...

Recognizing that Paul said "when you present yourselves as slaves, you are slaves to the one you serve --- EITHER to sin resulting in death, OR to obedience to righteousness." (Rm6:16)...

Recognizing that John wrote: "Let no one deceive you, he who practicees rigtheousness IS righteous, he who practices sin is of the devil; by this the children of God and the children of the devil are exposed --- he who does not practice righteousness is not of God" (1Jn3:7-10)...

Recognizing that Jesus said, "No good tree produces bad fruit, and no bad tree PRODUCES GOOD FRUIT" (Matt7:18)...

I don't see how this is relevant. Certainly you cannot be suggesting that if a Christian commits a sin, that he is therefore practicing unrighteousness, and of the devil! One sin does not a practice make! By your reasoning, it seems that you are saying that if a Christian sins, even once, after salvation, they are lost. Practicing unrighteousness, practicing sin, is an on-going, habitual activity, not a one-time or occasional thing! My gosh, Ben, you are setting a standard that only Jesus Himself could meet!

Can you please explain to me how the FALSE, who "never cease from sin" (2Pet2:2:14), who are "SLAVES of corruption" (2:19), how you think THEY are the ones who "escape the defilements"? Especially when the WAY they escape is by the "epignosis of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ"?

How did they ESCAPE, and if they ARE the false (slaves-corruption & never-cease-sin), how did they get entangled in them AGAIN (if they never LEFT them)?

How did they "epistrepho-ek-spiritually-turn-FROM the Holy Commandment", if they had never dwelt IN it (never were SAVED)? 2:21

How do you justify "FALSE-ESCAPED", especially in light of the verses I cited here?

(And thank you VERY much for replying to this question!)

I have shown you exactly how that is, Ben. In my last two posts, I have detailed for you exactly how that is! THEY WERE NEVER SAVED!!!!!! They had the outward appearance, they were self-disciplined enough to have withdrawn from the defilements of the world, and the outward sins that are easy to spot, but they were never saved. They had knowledge of the Lord, they had knowledge of the Saviour, but their hearts were not regenerated to hold that knowledge savingly.

That is the only explanation that fits!

It is the only one that makes sense!

 

[Ben johnson]

that epignosis always means, without exception, saving knowledge.

I didn't say it ALWAYS means "saved" --- I gave you verses where it DOES. It is the CONTEXT that shows "true-knowledge". Here it says "escape defilements" -- you say, "they only APPEARED escaped but didn't REALLY escape."

You recognize that "the FALSE were SLAVES to corruption, and NEVER CEASED FROM SIN" --- they "count it as a pleasure to REVEL IN THE DAYTIME"; they are "stains and blemishes, carouse, eyes full of adultery, NEVER CEASE FROM SIN." THey are "darnkess and arrogance and sensual". But you are willing to beleive all of this (including the REVELLING IN THE DAYTIME0, was SECRET, they APPEARED to have ESCAPED.

Does the context say anything about only APPEARED to be escaped? It clearly says "ESCAPED through the EPIGNOSIS-KNOWLEDGE of the LORD and SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST". Is there ANY REASON to think they were UNSAVED, against the true-saved-believers described WORD-FOR-GREEEK-WORD the same in 2:1:1-4, any reason OTHER than a preconception of PREDESTINATION? There is nothing in the context that even HINTS they were not saved, NBF.

If they were NEVER REALLY ESCAPED, then how can they become "again entangled in defilements and OVERCOME"? Does it make sense that Peter would say, "though they never LEFT defilements, they can BECOME entangled in them AGAIN"?

I'll bet serious money this guy is as lost as any demon

That would be a sucker bet. It's too bad about your relative. He is Matt7:21, 2Tim3:5, Rev3:17-18. I will join you praying for his salvaiton...

I don't see how this is relevant.

It's very relevant. Peter says, "they escaped defilements". Those Scriptures say, "unsaved never escape" --- they are slaves to sin, they do not serve God". Even APPEARANCE cannot be counterfeited for long; their natures will "out" eventually. You see your relative --- are you CONVINCED he is saved? Does he truly APPEAR to have escaped defilements? Or can you see THROUGH his masqerade?

Peter does NOT alude to "masqerading" -- he simply says, "escaped defilements through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ".

They had the outward appearance, they were self-disciplined enough to have withdrawn from the defilements of the world, and the outward sins that are easy to spot, but they were never saved. They had knowledge of the Lord, they had knowledge of the Saviour, but their hearts were not regenerated to hold that knowledge savingly

Where in Peter's words does he say, "only APPEARED to have escaped""? If they were NOT REALLY escaped, then by definition were they not CONTINUALLY (even if SECRETLY) entangled in defilements? How does that justifiy, "IF they are AGAIN entangled indefilements" --- does that make sense?

To read the context and say "the TRULY ESCAPED" (vs18) were not REALLY regenerated" --- is that DEDUCTION, or INDUCTION? Is there anything in the verse that HINTS at your conclusion, or does your conclusion flow from your belief in Predestined-Election"?

That is the only explanation that fits!

No, the explanation that FITS is that "they truly escaped, by true knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, but they again became entangled in the defilements of the world and overcome; they spiritually-turned-away-from the holy commandment delivered to them; they returned to vomit (and became dogs again), they returned to mire (and became pigs again).

(btw, how could they RETURN to vomit/mire, if they never LEFT?)

It is the only one that makes sense!

[/quote]I hope you can explain to me how...

 

[nobdysfool]

I didn't say it ALWAYS means "saved" --- I gave you verses where it DOES. It is the CONTEXT that shows "true-knowledge". Here it says "escape defilements" -- you say, "they only APPEARED escaped but didn't REALLY escape."

You recognize that "the FALSE were SLAVES to corruption, and NEVER CEASED FROM SIN" --- they "count it as a pleasure to REVEL IN THE DAYTIME"; they are "stains and blemishes, carouse, eyes full of adultery, NEVER CEASE FROM SIN." THey are "darnkess and arrogance and sensual". But you are willing to beleive all of this (including the REVELLING IN THE DAYTIME0, was SECRET, they APPEARED to have ESCAPED.

Does the context say anything about only APPEARED to be escaped? It clearly says "ESCAPED through the EPIGNOSIS-KNOWLEDGE of the LORD and SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST". Is there ANY REASON to think they were UNSAVED, against the true-saved-believers described WORD-FOR-GREEEK-WORD the same in 2:1:1-4, any reason OTHER than a preconception of PREDESTINATION? There is nothing in the context that even HINTS they were not saved, NBF.

If they were NEVER REALLY ESCAPED, then how can they become "again entangled in defilements and OVERCOME"? Does it make sense that Peter would say, "though they never LEFT defilements, they can BECOME entangled in them AGAIN"?
That would be a sucker bet. It's too bad about your relative. He is Matt7:21, 2Tim3:5, Rev3:17-18. I will join you praying for his salvaiton...
It's very relevant. Peter says, "they escaped defilements". Those Scriptures say, "unsaved never escape" --- they are slaves to sin, they do not serve God". Even APPEARANCE cannot be counterfeited for long; their natures will "out" eventually. You see your relative --- are you CONVINCED he is saved? Does he truly APPEAR to have escaped defilements? Or can you see THROUGH his masqerade?

Peter does NOT alude to "masqerading" -- he simply says, "escaped defilements through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ".
Where in Peter's words does he say, "only APPEARED to have escaped""? If they were NOT REALLY escaped, then by definition were they not CONTINUALLY (even if SECRETLY) entangled in defilements? How does that justifiy, "IF they are AGAIN entangled indefilements" --- does that make sense?

To read the context and say "the TRULY ESCAPED" (vs18) were not REALLY regenerated" --- is that DEDUCTION, or INDUCTION? Is there anything in the verse that HINTS at your conclusion, or does your conclusion flow from your belief in Predestined-Election"?
No, the explanation that FITS is that "they truly escaped, by true knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, but they again became entangled in the defilements of the world and overcome; they spiritually-turned-away-from the holy commandment delivered to them; they returned to vomit (and became dogs again), they returned to mire (and became pigs again).

(btw, how could they RETURN to vomit/mire, if they never LEFT?)
I hope you can explain to me how...

Does a dog stop being a dog? Or does a pig stop being a pig? If their natures have not been changed, they will eventually do what all dogs and pigs do. Likewise, if men's natures are not changed (regeneration of the heart by God), men may for a time act differently, but they will always return to that which they are.

I think John Gill has done a masterful job of explaining this, so I will defer to him, and quote his Commentary on the passage:

2Pe 2:20 - For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world,.... The sins of it, the governing vices of it, which the men of the world are addicted to, and immersed in; for the whole world lies in wickedness, and which are of a defiling nature: the phrase is Rabbinical; it is said (q),

"he that studies not in the law in this world, but is defiled בטנופי עלמא, "with the pollutions of the world", what is written of him? and they took him, and cast him without:''

these, men may escape, abstain from, and outwardly reform, with respect unto, and yet be destitute of the grace of God; so that this can be no instance of the final and total apostasy of real saints; for the house may be swept and garnished with an external reformation; persons may be outwardly righteous before men, have a form of godliness and a name to live, and yet be dead in trespasses and sins; all which they may have through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. The Vulgate Latin, and all the Oriental versions, read, our Lord, and the latter leave out, "and Saviour"; by which "knowledge" is meant, not a spiritual experimental knowledge of Christ, for that is eternal life, the beginning, pledge, and earnest of it; but a notional knowledge of Christ, or a profession of knowledge of him, for it may be rendered "acknowledgment"; or rather the Gospel of Christ, which, being only notionally received, may have such an effect on men, as outwardly to reform their lives, at least in some instances, and for a while, in whose hearts it has no place.

Now if, after all this knowledge and reformation, they are again entangled therein; in the pollutions of the world, in worldly lusts, which are as gins, pits and snares: and overcome; by them, so as to be laden with them, and led away, and entirely governed and influenced by them: the latter end, or state, is worse with them than the beginning; see Mat_12:45. Their beginning, or first estate, was that in which they were born, a state of darkness, ignorance, and sin, and in which they were brought up, and was either the state of Judaism, or of Gentilism; their next estate was an outward deliverance and escape from the error of the one, or of the other, and an embracing and professing the truth of the Christian religion, joined with a becoming external conversation; and this their last estate was an apostasy from the truth of the Gospel they had professed, a reception of error and heresy, and a relapse into sin and immorality, which made their case worse than it was at first; for, generally, such persons are more extravagant in sinning; are like raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; and are seldom, or ever, recovered; and by their light, knowledge, and profession, their punishment will be more aggravated, and become intolerable.

(q) Zohar in Gen. fol. 104. 3. Vid. Bechinot Olam, p. 178.

 

[Ben johnson]

Does a dog stop being a dog? Or does a pig stop being a pig?

Were they LITERALLY dogs and pigs? Of course not. They were CALLED "dogs" and CALLED "pigs', by virtue of the vomit and mire in which they dwelt.

Now if, after all this knowledge and reformation, they are again entangled therein, ...and overcome;

The problem, is that you are asserting they were NEVER FREED from defilements, they were ALWAYS OVERCOME (they didn't REALLY escape, it was a "FALSE escape").

Paul says, "They ESCAPED through the KNOWLEDGE of the LORD and SAVIOR JESUS'. but they "became again entangled in defilements" --- again entangled? How can that BE, if they had never LEFT? "And OVERCOME" --- but they were ALWAYS overcome, right? They "epistrepho-epi-returned-TO the mire", they "epistrepho-eis-returned-UNTO the vomit". But how can that be, if (as you say) they never really LEFT the mire/vomit? How can one RETURN to what one has never really LEFT? Clearly, there was a TIME when they did NOT dwell in vomit/mire; there was a time when they were NOT dogs/pigs.

He says, "their LAST state is worse than their FIRST" --- how can that be if their LAST state (false, never-saved) is the SAME as their first (false, never-saved)? The only thing that makes sense here, is they are WORSE, than BEFORE they were SAVED.

a becoming external conversation; and this their last estate was an apostasy from the truth of the Gospel they had professed, a reception of error and heresy, and a relapse into sin and immorality, which made their case worse than it was at first; for, generally, such persons are more extravagant in sinning; are like raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; and are seldom, or ever, recovered; and by their light, knowledge, and profession, their punishment will be more aggravated, and become intolerable.

There is ABSOLUTELY NO CAUSE to even THINK of only an "outward conversion but retained corrupt hearts). Does God differentiate between OUTWARD ONLY conversion? No, in fact Jesus says "outward only is not POISSIBLE." "No bad tree can produce good fruit", NBF; have you an EXCEPTION for that?

By saying "the escaped are the FALSE PROPHETS/TEACHERS", you identify them with the "NEVER CEASE FROM SIN", and "SLAVES TO CORRUPTION". The forever conflicts and prevents ANY semblance of "ESCAPED", not even SUPERFICIALLY.

I submit that the entire REASON to even CONSIDER a "superficial-only-escape", is an attempt to accomodate any facet of OSAS. There is no other reason, certainly not the CONTEXT.

 

[nobdysfool]

Were they LITERALLY dogs and pigs? Of course not. They were CALLED "dogs" and CALLED "pigs', by virtue of the vomit and mire in which they dwelt.
The problem, is that you are asserting they were NEVER FREED from defilements, they were ALWAYS OVERCOME (they didn't REALLY escape, it was a "FALSE escape").

The dog returns to his vomit, and the pig returns to wallowing in the mire because that's what they do. It's their nature! They are only being who they are! You're missing the point. Each acts according to its nature! The mire doesn't make the pig a pig. Neither does the vomit make the dog a dog. The point is their nature. The False teachers returned to what they do by nature.

Paul says, "They ESCAPED through the KNOWLEDGE of the LORD and SAVIOR JESUS'. but they "became again entangled in defilements" --- again entangled? How can that BE, if they had never LEFT? "And OVERCOME" --- but they were ALWAYS overcome, right? They "epistrepho-epi-returned-TO the mire", they "epistrepho-eis-returned-UNTO the vomit". But how can that be, if (as you say) they never really LEFT the mire/vomit? How can one RETURN to what one has never really LEFT? Clearly, there was a TIME when they did NOT dwell in vomit/mire; there was a time when they were NOT dogs/pigs.

If that were so, they would not have returned to the vomit and mire, would they?

Everyone remaining in Him does not sin. Everyone sinning has not seen Him, nor known Him. (1Jo 3:6) Sinners know who Christ is. But they don't KNOW Him intimately, the way Christians do, and the way Jesus knows who are His (intimately).

Anyone with sufficient self-discipline can stop committing sins that brand them as sinners outwardly, and can give the appearance of piety, and many do, but unless their heart is changed, regenerated, reborn, sooner or later they will return to their former conduct. Churches are filled with people like this. That is exactly what Peter is detailing here.

As John said, They [the antichrists] went out from us, but they were not OFus. For if they were OF us, they would have remained WITH us; but they left so that it might be revealed that they all are not OF us. (1Jo 2:19)

False teachers, antichrists, those who oppose sound doctrine, go beyond the Word, they go out from the sound teachings to false doctrines, devilish doctrines, doctrines of demons. They speak where God has not spoken, they teach what God has not taught, they attempt to set aside sound and pure doctrine to replace it with doctrines of bondage, sin, and devilish intent. By them doing so, they reveal themselves as not of God, not saved, and not having anymore than intellectual knowledge of who Christ is, using that knowledge and perverting it to their own ends. No such person could possibly be saved.

He says, "their LAST state is worse than their FIRST" --- how can that be if their LAST state (false, never-saved) is the SAME as their first (false, never-saved)? The only thing that makes sense here, is they are WORSE, than BEFORE they were SAVED.
There is ABSOLUTELY NO CAUSE to even THINK of only an "outward conversion but retained corrupt hearts). Does God differentiate between OUTWARD ONLY conversion? No, in fact Jesus says "outward only is not POISSIBLE." "No bad tree can produce good fruit", NBF; have you an EXCEPTION for that?

Ben, you are insisting that they are "good trees" that wind up bearing bad fruit. You don't want to appeal to that comparison, because it speaks against your argument. The very fact that they are teaching bad doctrine is proof that they are not saved, are not "good trees", and are only acting saved to fool the unwary and unlearned new Christians (those having clean, or barely, escaped from those walking in error (sinners). They do so for their own ends, to achieve their own ungodly goals and desires, and they do so from within the church, until they are found out. Anyone truly born of God would not and could not do such things.

By saying "the escaped are the FALSE PROPHETS/TEACHERS", you identify them with the "NEVER CEASE FROM SIN", and "SLAVES TO CORRUPTION". The forever conflicts and prevents ANY semblance of "ESCAPED", not even SUPERFICIALLY.

I submit that the entire REASON to even CONSIDER a "superficial-only-escape", is an attempt to accomodate any facet of OSAS. There is no other reason, certainly not the CONTEXT.

Ben, do realize what you're arguing for here? You are arguing for saved believers teaching false doctrines, drawing away true believers after their own lusts, introducing damnable heresies, and then trying explain away the obvious contradiction by saying the only reason they are doing so is because they "fell away" and "lost their salvation". You are arguing for an utter impossibility, rather than accept the simplest of explanations, which is that they were NEVER SAVED to begin with! Are you so naive as to think that Satan wouldn't try to slip some of his own in by stealth? That Satan couldn't help them to fake salvation, to work with them to give the illusion of being saved?

Is God so impotent that He cannot protect His own? Is He so powerless that He cannot prevent one of His own from falling away? Is the Blood of Christ so ineffective that it can be overcome by the mere will of man? Is the Creator and Sovereign Lord of all the Universe so impotent and weak that He can be overcome by the decision of a mere mortal man, who is as the grass, and as a flower, existing only for a brief instant, and then gone?

What kind of God is that, Ben?????

Certainly not the Lord God YHWH, or Jesus Christ, His Son, or the Holy Spirit!!! Where is the POWER of His Resurrection? What of Jesus saying "I will never leave you or forsake you?" Where did He say, "but you can leave Me anytime you want, and I can't do a thing about it?" Jesus said "No man can pluck them (the saved, his sheep) out of My Hand." Did John forget to add the words "except for the man himself?"

Think, man, think!!!

 

[reformedfan]

Don't forget the Arminian sin of accusing God of being the creator of sin "IF" Calvinism is true, blaming God just like Adam did when he said Gen 3:12

 

[Ben johnson]

The dog returns to his vomit, and the pig returns to wallowing in the mire because that's what they do. It's their nature! They are only being who they are!

I'm afraid we'll just hafta disagree on this. I read, "Having ESCAPED from the defilements through the TRUE KNOWLEDGE of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ..."
You read, "Having only APPEARED to escape through the SUPERFICIAL knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ..."

If that were so, they would not have returned to the vomit and mire, would they?

Not if you PRESUME "osas"...

Everyone remaining in Him does not sin. Everyone sinning has not seen Him, nor known Him. (1Jo 3:6) Sinners know who Christ is. But they don't KNOW Him intimately, the way Christians do, and the way Jesus knows who are His (intimately).

Do you KNOW HIM? Do you SIN? 'Nuff said, eh?

"knows" is "perfect-active-indicative", so the NAS renders it, "KNOWS". (No one who sins, KNOWS Him; does not indicate "they NEVER knew Him".)

Anyone with sufficient self-discipline can stop committing sins that brand them as sinners outwardly, and can give the appearance of piety, and many do, but unless their heart is changed, regenerated, reborn, sooner or later they will return to their former conduct. Churches are filled with people like this. That is exactly what Peter is detailing here.

If you insist on adding words to your understanding, that it becomes: "After APPEARING to escape by the FALSE-SUPERFICIAL-knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ"... --- it seems there is no way to convince you differently...

As John said, They [the antichrists] went out from us, but they were not OFus. For if they were OF us, they would have remained WITH us; but they left so that it might be revealed that they all are not OF us. (1Jo 2:19)

And those TRUE CHILDREN addressed in 2Jn1 were absolutely OF them; but they "go too far and not abide". Here too this changes in your paradigm, to: "Go too far but REALLY were ALWAYS too far (he didn't actually MEAN "go")..."

False teachers, antichrists, those who oppose sound doctrine, go beyond the Word, they go out from the sound teachings to false doctrines, devilish doctrines, doctrines of demons. They speak where God has not spoken, they teach what God has not taught, they attempt to set aside sound and pure doctrine to replace it with doctrines of bondage, sin, and devilish intent. By them doing so, they reveal themselves as not of God, not saved, and not having anymore than intellectual knowledge of who Christ is, using that knowledge and perverting it to their own ends. No such person could possibly be saved.

I doubt that you will deny verse 18, to REALLY say: "they (false) entice ...those who TRULY ESCAPE." First in your mind this becomes, "It's not a REAL enticement 'cause they can't REALLY fall" --- then you disconnect the contextual flow, from TRULY ESCAPED to (in the same breath) FALSELY ESCAPED. In your mind it becomes: "Those who ESCAPED defilements through knowledge of Lord & Savior Jesus --- they were OBVIOUSLY not the SAME PEOPLE as those who TRULY escaped just twenty words earlier --- obviously if they FELL then they couldn't be TRULY escaped, COULD they! For some reason he changes SUBJECTS and suddenly talks about FAKERS..."

I know of no way to pursuade/convince/convict you...

Ben, you are insisting that they are "good trees" that wind up bearing bad fruit. You don't want to appeal to that comparison, because it speaks against your argument. The very fact that they are teaching bad doctrine is proof that they are not saved, are not "good trees", and are only acting saved to fool the unwary and unlearned new Christians (those having clean, or barely, escaped from those walking in error (sinners). They do so for their own ends, to achieve their own ungodly goals and desires, and they do so from within the church, until they are found out. Anyone truly born of God would not and could not do such things.

Context, NBF; a good tree produces only good fruit, a bad tree only bad; but can a GOOD TREE become a BAD TREE?
"Every branch IN ME that does not bear fruit, HE TAKES AWAY; ...if anyone does not abide in Me he is thrown away as a branch ...and burned." Jn15:1-6 Know any way to be IN CHRIST, but UNSAVED? Here to in your mind it becomes: "Anyone who isn't REALLY SAVED He casts out and ...burns; He doesn't REALLY MEAN "in Him", He didn't mean "doesn't abide" He meant "NEVER abide"...

Ben, do realize what you're arguing for here? You are arguing for saved believers teaching false doctrines, drawing away true believers after their own lusts, introducing damnable heresies, and then trying explain away the obvious contradiction by saying the only reason they are doing so is because they "fell away" and "lost their salvation". You are arguing for an utter impossibility, rather than accept the simplest of explanations, which is that they were NEVER SAVED to begin with! Are you so naive as to think that Satan wouldn't try to slip some of his own in by stealth? That Satan couldn't help them to fake salvation, to work with them to give the illusion of being saved?

Peter said, "the FALSE entice the TRUE; if after having escaped the defilements through the TRUE KNOWLEDGE of the Lord and Savior Jesus CHrist, the BECOME AGAIN ENTANGLED (not remain entangled)..." I perceive that if Peter had MEANT "falsely-escaped, only APPEARED saved", he would have SAID "false/appeared-saved".

In saying "false escaped" you are disputing Paul in Rom6:16, Jesus in Matt6:24 & 7:18, John in 1:3:7-10; "Do not be deceived, NBF; he who PRACTICES righteousness IS righteous; he who practices sin ...IS NOT OF GOD."

You see, NBF, your entire doctrine is stuffed-full of thoughts of: "it was FALSE-ESCAPED, it was SQUATTERS/PRETENDERS-but-not-REAL-believers, it doesn't really MEAN what it SAYS.."

About those people in churches you describe --- those who MASQUERADE and are not REALLY saved --- do you think Jesus was WRONG? Are there some that we will NOT "know by their fruits"? They will succeed at DECEIVING us --- we cannot look at their lives and SEE THE TRUTH? Do you really THINK that?

Is God so impotent that He cannot protect His own? Is He so powerless that He cannot prevent one of His own from falling away?

Tell me something, NBF; in Luke15, there was this "PRODIGAL SON"; did the FATHER prevent him from LEAVNING? Did the father run him down and DRAG HIM BACK? Did the father journey to the other TOWN and have servants grab the son and TIE HIM to the RETURN-WAGON?

The father let him LEAVE, didn't he?

Why did the Prodigal RETURN, NBF? Did the father have anything to DO with that return? Or --- did the son...

...suffer...

CONVICTION?

 

[rnmomof7]

I'm afraid we'll just hafta disagree on this. I read, "Having ESCAPED from the defilements through the TRUE KNOWLEDGE of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ..."

I'm afraid we'll just hafta disagree on this. I read, "Having ESCAPED from the defilements through the TRUE KNOWLEDGE of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ..."You read, "Having only APPEARED to escape through the SUPERFICIAL knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ..."

Not if you PRESUME "osas"...
Do you KNOW HIM? Do you SIN? 'Nuff said, eh?

Is it knowledge that saves Ben or grace?

There are many people that go to church every Sunday that can quote you scripture and are trying to get saved or stayed saved by their actions...but will still be pulled up as a tare and burned,

Ben it seems that you do not believe in a salvation by the grace and mercy of God.
What you are presenting is a salvation by works..it it is works it is not grace, if it is not grace it is not Mercy.

Jesus fulfilled the law Ben. As we were saved by grace , we are kept by grace. Not because we deserve it, but by the grace of God.

 

[Ben johnson]

Ben said:
Do you KNOW HIM? Do you SIN? 'Nuff said, eh?

RnMom said:
Is it knowledge that saves Ben or grace?

This was said in RESPONSE to this:
Everyone remaining in Him does not sin. Everyone sinning has not seen Him, nor known Him. (1Jo 3:6) Sinners know who Christ is. But they don't KNOW Him intimately, the way Christians do, and the way Jesus knows who are His (intimately).

The fact is, we DO still sin (though we don't PRACTICE it). Thus not-sinning is NOT part of Christianity; not-PRACTICING-sin, is.

Ben it seems that you do not believe in a salvation by the grace and mercy of God.
What you are presenting is a salvation by works..it it is works it is not grace, if it is not grace it is not Mercy.

In the last several months, Ben has said 173 times that "we are not saved by works, but works flow from a saved heart". The salvation Ben believes in, is called "FELLOWSHIP with JESUS and the Spirit and the Father through Jesus". If salvation is FELLOWSHIP, through BELIEF, then why is it not possible for NON-fellowship through UNbelief?

Was Post #73 too long to respond to the rest of it?

 

[rnmomof7]

This was said in RESPONSE to this:
Everyone remaining in Him does not sin. Everyone sinning has not seen Him, nor known Him. (1Jo 3:6) Sinners know who Christ is. But they don't KNOW Him intimately, the way Christians do, and the way Jesus knows who are His (intimately).

1Jo 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.


1Jo 1:10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

The fact is, we DO still sin (though we don't PRACTICE it).

Was Paul saved? he had a "thorn in the flesh"?




Romans 7:15-25 "For that which I do, I do not understand, for what I will to do, I don't do. But what I hate, that I practice. [16] If I then do that which I do not want to do, I acknowledge that the law is right. [17] Now, then, it is no longer I that do it, but sin that dwells in me. [18] For I know that there is no good that dwells in me, in my flesh, for even though the will is present in me to do right, I can't do right. [19] I do not do the good that I desire to practice, but I do the evil that I do not want to do. [20] But if I do the thing that I do not want to do, then it is no longer me who is doing it, but the sin that is dwelling in me. [21] I find, then, a law: that when I would do good, evil is present within me. [22] For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man, [23] but I see another law in my inner self, warring against the law of my mind, and leading me captive to the law of sin which is in my members. [24] O wretched man that I am! Who shall deliver me out of the body of this death? [25] I thank God: through Jesus Christ our Lord! So, then, I myself with the mind indeed serve God's law, but with the flesh serve sin's law."

Jesus taught that even the saved need forgiveness


Matthew 6:12-15 "...and forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil, for yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen. For if you forgive people their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you, but, if you do not forgive people their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses."

Thus not-sinning is NOT part of Christianity; not-PRACTICING-sin, is.

Ben , We are not keeping from "practicing "sin to keep our salvation..we hate sin because of our salvation .

I believe your stand on loosing your salvation come from a legalist view that if a saved man falls into persistent sin he will lose his salvation, it suggests a salvation by works not grace..
It suggests that it is necessary to grit ones teeth to stay saved.

I would suggest that I have not one with of righteous in myself . I am only righteous because I am clothed in the righteous of Christ .

We hate sin and are no longer servants of sin because we are saved. That is a fruit of our salvation Ben. Because of Christ we hate sin ,we are no longer its slave.

We are not saved because we hate sin, we are not saved by anything but the grace of God, we can not keep ourself saved by any other means than Gods grace ..and not our works or our personal "holiness".

In the last several months, Ben has said 173 times that "we are not saved by works, but works flow from a saved heart". The salvation Ben believes in, is called "FELLOWSHIP with JESUS and the Spirit and the Father through Jesus". If salvation is FELLOWSHIP, through BELIEF, then why is it not possible for NON-fellowship through UNbelief?

Was Post #73 too long to respond to the rest of it?

That is a work that man performs Ben . It removes the grace of God to save and the grace of God to sanctify ( bring us to holiness).

A man that is" truly " saved, has an indwelling of the Holy Spirit top lead to all truth and to convict us of sin.....thus our awareness of it and our hatred for it.
A man that has said the right words and can quote the right verses..and even make himself walk the walk for a time, is not by necessity saved.

Look at Judas..

Naw not too long just basically not to interested in reading the same things over and over hoping repetition will make it true

 

[nobdysfool]

I

'm afraid we'll just hafta disagree on this. I read, "Having ESCAPED from the defilements through the TRUE KNOWLEDGE of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ..."

You read, "Having only APPEARED to escape through the SUPERFICIAL knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ..."

Well, this disagreement isn't something that "just came up", we've disagreed about this from the beginning. The truth is, you've felt this need to "refute" what you call "once saved-always saved", as though it were some terrible nefarious thing that would bring damnation on any who believed it, and that just isn't the way it is. For the True Believer, it is a recognition of the keeping power of God. The True Believer realizes that he is kept by the power of God, and that anything he does is only by the enabling and empowering of God to that end. It has to do with yieldedness to the Holy Spirit. "I am crucified with Christ; nevertheless I live, yet not I, but Christ lives in me, and the life that I now live, I live by the faith of (or from) the Son of God, who died and gave Himself for me." "Ye are bought with a price; Ye are not your own." This is what I see as a major problem, Ben.You are emphasizing almost exclusively the works of the believer. Over and over again, you make a case for the believer 's efforts to maintain their salvation, to keep themselves, to make their calling and election sure, as though it was all up to the believer. Where's God in that? Where's the promises of God to keep, to protect, to preserve? I don't see it in what you say, Ben.

Not if you PRESUME "osas"...

I am not PRESUMING anything. What I see you doing is adding words to scripture (true-knowledge, etc.), rewording and parapharasing scripture, pulling scripture out of immediate context and stringing them together to prove a pre-conceived notion. You presume to know that "osas" is wrong, and you filter every verse you find through that preconceived presumption. Not only that, you presume to know what Reformed theology teaches and EVERY TIME you've tried to detail it, you have demonstrated that YOU DON'T HAVE A CLUE about Reformed theology. But you presume to "know" anyway. Those of us of the Reformed persuasion just shake our heads in incredulity at your outlandish and totally inaccurate attempts to "tell us" what we believe.

Do you KNOW HIM? Do you SIN?

'Nuff said, eh?

I could ask the same question of you. That's not the issue. There's a difference between knowing Christ and being known by Him. "Many will say to Me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy and do many wonderful works IN YOUR NAME?' and I will say to them 'Depart from me...I NEVER KNEW YOU'. But Ben, if they decided for Jesus, if they chose Him, how can He say He never knew them???

"knows" is "perfect-active-indicative", so the NAS renders it, "KNOWS". (No one who sins, KNOWS Him; does not indicate "they NEVER knew Him".)

Ben, it is becoming quite evident that you are not really knowledgeable about what God has wrought in you as a believer, what it means to be saved, and how salvation operates in the life of a believer. How many of your sins were forgiven when you were born again? Does that include sins you haven’t AS YET committed? Or after salvation, are your sins forgiven on a sin by sin basis, sort of a “pay as you go” set-up? I have asked you this before, and I would like an answer.

If you insist on adding words to your understanding, that it becomes:

"After APPEARING to escape by the FALSE-SUPERFICIAL-knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ"... --- it seems there is no way to convince you differently...

And those TRUE CHILDREN addressed in 2Jn1 were absolutely OF them; but they "go too far and not abide". Here too this changes in your paradigm, to: "Go too far but REALLY were ALWAYS too far (he didn't actually MEAN "go")..."

I doubt that you will deny verse 18, to REALLY say: "they (false) entice ...those who TRULY ESCAPE." First in your mind this becomes, "It's not a REAL enticement 'cause they can't REALLY fall" --- then you disconnect the contextual flow, from TRULY ESCAPED to (in the same breath) FALSELY ESCAPED. In your mind it becomes: "Those who ESCAPED defilements through knowledge of Lord & Savior Jesus --- they were OBVIOUSLY not the SAME PEOPLE as those who TRULY escaped just twenty words earlier --- obviously if they FELL then they couldn't be TRULY escaped, COULD they! For some reason he changes SUBJECTS and suddenly talks about FAKERS..."

I’m not “adding words” to my understanding, that’s your method. I’m understanding the words as they are used and as the context demands them to be understood, in order to make sense and be consistent.

Whosoever goeth onward and abideth not in the teaching of Christ, hath not God: he that abideth in the teaching, the same hath both the Father and the Son. (2 John1:9) ASV

Everyone transgressing and not abiding in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. The one abiding in the doctrine of Christ, this one has the Father and the Son. (2Jo 1:9) YLT

Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. (2Jo 1:9) KJV


It seems we have a slight disagreement in translation, here, Ben. And the correct translation is actually a self-evident statement. Your idea that those who "go onward" , as though they were once abiding and then stopped, just isn't there. Strong's says "to violate", "to go contrary to". Most of the older translations translate it as "transgress". Only the ASV and the NASB seem to translate it as you do. I'm going to stick with the Geneva and King James, which , I believe, rightly defines the heresy that Jesus did not come in the flesh, IS a transgression, which is the warning John was giving. You haven't got a leg to stand on here, Ben. It doesn't say what you so desperately want it to say.

I know of no way to pursuade/convince/convict you...

Convict??? There’s no way on God’s green earth that YOU can convict ANYONE of ANYTHING!!! That’s not your job!!! The Holy Spirit is the one who convicts people of sin and error. You're not going to convince me of something that isn't true! It ain't gonna happen, Ben! You're wrong about this, and we have shown you patiently and repeatedly that you are wrong.

Context, NBF; a good tree produces only good fruit, a bad tree only bad; but can a GOOD TREE become a BAD TREE?

Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. (Mat 7:15-20)

Take notice of the first sentence, Ben. Game, set, match, nobdysfool.

"Every branch

IN ME that does not bear fruit, HE TAKES AWAY; ...if anyone does not abide in Me he is thrown away as a branch ...and burned." Jn15:1-6 Know any way to be IN CHRIST, but UNSAVED? Here to in your mind it becomes: "Anyone who isn't REALLY SAVED He casts out and ...burns; He doesn't REALLY MEAN "in Him", He didn't mean "doesn't abide" He meant "NEVER abide"...

Peter said, "the FALSE entice the TRUE; if after having escaped the defilements through the TRUE KNOWLEDGE of the Lord and Savior Jesus CHrist, the BECOME AGAIN ENTANGLED (not remain entangled)... " I perceive that if Peter had MEANT "falsely-escaped, only APPEARED saved", he would have SAID "false/appeared-saved".

Ben, everything is black and white for you. You have evidence all around you that people "fake it", and yet you still insist that the false teachers MUST have been saved at one time, and WILL NOT hear it any other way. I can only surmise that it is because we are systematically ripping pages out of your book and tearing them up, and you can't abide that. Your whole view of salvation is one of what YOU must do, what YOU must choose, how YOU must keep yourself, how YOU must ensure your own salvation, which is not surprising since YOU think that YOU chose Christ. Your whole theology is all about you!

In saying "false escaped" you are disputing Paul in Rom6:16, Jesus in Matt6:24 &

7:18, John in 1:3:7-10; "Do not be deceived, NBF; he who PRACTICES righteousness IS righteous; he who practices sin ...IS NOT OF GOD."



You see, NBF, your entire doctrine is stuffed-full of thoughts of: "it was FALSE-ESCAPED, it was SQUATTERS/PRETENDERS-but-not-REAL-believers, it doesn't really MEAN what it SAYS.."

But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. (Rom 6:17)

No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon. (Mat 6:24)

A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither [can] a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. (Mat 7:18)
Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother. (1Jo 3:7-10)

About those people in churches you describe --- those who MASQUERADE and are not REALLY saved --- do you think Jesus was WRONG? Are there some that we will NOT "know by their fruits"? They will succeed at DECEIVING us --- we cannot look at their lives and SEE THE TRUTH? Do you really THINK that?

I am really getting tired of you twisting words and purporting to repeat back to me something I did not say! Did I ever say I thought Jesus was wrong? NO!! Did I ever say that there are some we will not know by their fruits? NO!! Did I ever say that they will succeed in deceiving us? NO!! Jesus said we will know them by their fruits. Not by their words, not by their lives, but by the result of their teaching. Can't you see that??? They can lie, they can put on a false front (wolves in sheep's clothing), but the result of their teaching they cannot hide. Open your eyes Ben!!! Quit resisting sound teaching and quit bearing false witness!

You know who's saying those things?? YOU ARE!!! You are expressing your own fears. And you know why? BECAUSE YOU ARE TRUSTING IN YOUR OWN EFFORTS TO MAINTAIN YOUR SALVATION!!! That is the underlying theme in everything you have said! Every bit of it! As God is my witness, Ben!

Tell me something, NBF; in Luke15, there was this "PRODIGAL SON";

did the FATHER prevent him from LEAVNING? Did the father run him down and DRAG HIM BACK? Did the father journey to the other TOWN and have servants grab the son and TIE HIM to the RETURN-WAGON?



The father let him LEAVE, didn't he?



Why did the Prodigal RETURN, NBF? Did the father have anything to DO with that return? Or --- did the son...



...suffer...



CONVICTION?

This is hardly the parable to use to try to prove that believers can lose their salvation, Ben. Did the Prodigal ever cease being his father's son? Even when he was feeding slop to pigs? NO!!! He tried to count himself as not being a son any more, BUT HIS FATHER WOULD NOT HEAR OF IT!!!

Ever hear of the Pharisees, and how they appeared as pious and perfect, but were actually whited sepulchres, full of dead men's bones? They appeared as something other than what they were. Think on that a while, and then go back and read 2 Peter 2 again, and keep on reading it until you see the truth!!

As I said before: Game, Set, Match, nobdysfool.

 

[Received]

Your whole view of salvation is one of what YOU must do, what YOU must choose, how YOU must keep yourself, how YOU must ensure your own salvation, which is not surprising since YOU think that YOU chose Christ. Your whole theology is all about you!

Lie of the year. What a load of utter nonsense. You fail to recognize the essence of God, perhaps fail to experience God in His truth, and call the opposition that you cannot know cognitively and from certainty to be wrong theologically egocentric whose motivation for writing the things presented are doubtlessly from the very essence that you cannot comprehend. I'm sorry, but this is just mean.