Assurance of Salvation according to John...

[d taylor]

If Matthew, Mark and Luke are all about performances to enter the Kingdom of Heaven for the Jews, for example, the Sermon on the Mount, the author of John cannot be meaning anything that is different.

But I can understand why you will conclude that. Out of all the 4 gospel accounts, John is the one that is most suitable and easiest for Christians who want to eisegesis, and make Paul's gospel appear there.

No, 20:31

 

[Guojing]

No, 20:31

Precisely my point. There are verses in John, such as John 3:16, that one can "eisegesis, and make Paul's gospel appear there."

One just need to assume that those verses are saying believe and do nothing else, and you will be saved.

And when one encounter those troublesome verses in 1 John, like our 1 John 3:14-15, just ignore them, or assume that John is only referring to loss of fellowship.

 

[ozso]

Precisely my point. There are verses in John, such as John 3:16, that one can "eisegesis, and make Paul's gospel appear there."

One just need to assume that those verses are saying believe and do nothing else, and you will be saved.

Considering that it's an extremely minority fringe view, that has never been taught in virtually all of Christianity, the idea you're espousing that there are two seperate gospels is far more likely to be a product of eisegesis.

 

[Guojing]

Considering that it's an extremely minority fringe view, that has never been taught in virtually all of Christianity, the idea you're espousing that there are two seperate gospels is far more likely to be a product of eisegesis.

Have you ever tried to go the book of Matthew and to get that "salvation is by grace thru faith alone, apart from works"?

 

[IoanC]

If you truly want want to be saved, it is enough. God will know this, and save you.

 

[Carl Emerson]

From a Catholic perspective, 1 John 5:13 states that we can be confident that we have eternal life through our belief in Jesus as the Son of God. However, it is important to remember that this does not mean that we can be absolutely certain that we are among the elect, or those chosen by God for salvation. The Catholic Church teaches that salvation is a gift from God, and ultimately, it is up to God to decide who will be saved. While we can have faith and confidence in our salvation through Jesus, we should not presume to know for certain who is among the elect.

I am not sure how one can have eternal life and not be Elect...

 

[Carl Emerson]

Yet, you will still conclude that none of those "I loved the brethren, I have never had a hatred for anyone", are works that you have done?

Why the hesitancy and shyness in calling them your works/your performances? (although both of us know why)

My question to you was "So those passages in 1 John are all about performances for rewards, rather than for eternal life?"

Are you saying yes or no?

No I don't 'know why'...

I don't hold my position from some learned theology.

I hold my position largely from conclusions I draw from direct encounters with Him.

I had a shipwrecked life and He broke into it and gave me a second chance.

I can attribute nothing to myself. Amazing Grace - I once was lost - and blind.

Salvation is a Gift.

Eternal rewards are a different issue.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I am not sure how one can have eternal life and not be Elect...

The whole story of salvation is wrapped in mystery yet you want it to be within the grasp of your understanding.

I could say:

According to Catholic teaching, salvation is open to all through faith in Jesus Christ and the sacrament of baptism. However, the concept of "the elect" refers to those who are predestined by God for salvation. The Catholic Church teaches that God's grace is available to all, but it is ultimately up to each individual to choose to accept or reject it. So, one can be saved without being one of the elect by accepting God's grace and following the teachings of the Church.​

Would that help you to understand?

 

[Guojing]

No I don't 'know why'...

I don't hold my position from some learned theology.

I hold my position largely from conclusions I draw from direct encounters with Him.

I had a shipwrecked life and He broke into it and gave me a second chance.

I can attribute nothing to myself. Amazing Grace - I once was lost - and blind.

Salvation is a Gift.

Eternal rewards are a different issue.

You used 2 "I"s when you said

1. I loved the brethren.
2. I have never had a hatred for anyone.

Are you not implying that 1 and 2 are what you have done?

 

[ozso]

Have you ever tried to go the book of Matthew and to get that "salvation is by grace thru faith alone, apart from works"?

That deflection doesn't change the fact that the view you hold has never been held in all of Christianity from the beginning, except by an extremely small fringe group. Which makes it far more likely to be eisegetical than any doctrine you're calling eisegetical.

 

[ozso]

The whole story of salvation is wrapped in mystery yet you want it to be within the grasp of your understanding.

I could say:

According to Catholic teaching, salvation is open to all through faith in Jesus Christ and the sacrament of baptism. However, the concept of "the elect" refers to those who are predestined by God for salvation. The Catholic Church teaches that God's grace is available to all, but it is ultimately up to each individual to choose to accept or reject it. So, one can be saved without being one of the elect by accepting God's grace and following the teachings of the Church.​

Would that help you to understand?

You're revamping what you originally said to the point where it seems to nullify the context of your original statements.

 

[ozso]

It seems often there's the case where someone says, that you can't be certain that you're saved, you can only hope that you're one of the elect that God chose to be saved.

But then when someone expresses the discomfort that's so likely to follow such a statement, the person who made that statement goes onto give lots of reassurance in how to know that you're one of the elect.

It seems to often go from saying that there's no way to know for sure that you're saved, to there being a 99.999% probability that you're saved.

And when it comes to those who say there's no salvation apart from works, it often boils down to them specifying absolutely zero works whatsoever, which seems virtually impossible. Even Hitler most likely performed at least a single good work during his lifetime.

 

[Carl Emerson]

The doctrine of election was first articulated and popularized in the 4th century by Augustine.

The doctrine of Election was penned by Paul in the 50's...

 

[Carl Emerson]

You used 2 "I"s when you said

1. I loved the brethren.
2. I have never had a hatred for anyone.

Are you not implying that 1 and 2 are what you have done?

Frankly No...

The individual heart is profoundly dark, and without His Grace there is no goodness possible.

When we meet Him we will be prostrate - we wont be saying 'didnt we cast out demons in your name...'

 

[ozso]

The doctrine of Election was penned by Paul in the 50's...

If so then one has to question why for centuries the church fathers didn't expound on it. I've found that if one goes by what was taught for the first three to four hundred years, a lot of current theology, doctrine and tradition either doesn't exist or barely exists.

 

[ozso]

Have you ever tried to go the book of Matthew and to get that "salvation is by grace thru faith alone, apart from works"?

I believe one of the foundational passages used to support the "salvation is by grace thru faith alone, apart from works" doctrine is:

25 When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked, “Who then can be saved?”

26 Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” Matthew 19:25-26

 

[d taylor]

Precisely my point. There are verses in John, such as John 3:16, that one can "eisegesis, and make Paul's gospel appear there."

One just need to assume that those verses are saying believe and do nothing else, and you will be saved.

And when one encounter those troublesome verses in 1 John, like our 1 John 3:14-15, just ignore them, or assume that John is only referring to loss of fellowship.

Paul's gospel, Paul received what he taught from Jesus, so there is no Paul's gospel, there is only God's gospel in receiving God's free gift of Eternal Life.

Only troublesome to people like you

1st John, 2nd John, 3rd John are not evangelistic they are written to believers.

I have spent quite a few post in discussion with you and this will be my last reply.

Condition and Consequence: A Key to Correct Interpretation – Grace Evangelical Society

 

[Guojing]

I believe one of the foundational passages used to support the "salvation is by grace thru faith alone, apart from works" doctrine is:

25 When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked, “Who then can be saved?”

26 Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” Matthew 19:25-26

I see, thanks for sharing

 

[Guojing]

Paul's gospel, Paul received what he taught from Jesus, so there is no Paul's gospel, there is only God's gospel in receiving God's free gift of Eternal Life.

Paul calls it "my gospel" 3 times in his epistles, so I am following him there.

 

[ozso]

Paul calls it "my gospel" 3 times in his epistles, so I am following him there.

That's pretty much the foundation of the two separate gospels idea. But there's nowhere that Paul says it's a different separate gospel.

When someone says "my bible" does that mean that it's a different or separate bible from the rest? How about "My church?" "My denomination"?

"I like reading my bible at my church which belongs to my denomination".

That must mean I wrote my own bible, and founded/built my own church to represent the denomination I created.