Biblical Salvation

[cygnusx1]

P.S. As to Hebrews, I really do not know what to say to someone who thinks someone can be bought by the blood, sanctifed, but still be unsaved.

you could say it's another view , not that unlikely seeing as Israel were not all saved but still "redeemed" ....... I prefer Gill's interpretation but I am open to others .

 

[cygnusx1]

Your bias is preventing you from seeing both sides. Where were you when Cygnus was posting his ludicrous flame thread implying that theology at odds with his OSAS was behind a headcase murdering his family?

he wasn't acting the hypocrite bro !


"This is just a pitiful attempted guilt by association, presumption, character assassination that is all too common from some "humble" Calvinists in the forum." Oye11


guilt by association indeed!

 

[Oye11]

it may have escaped you but i didn't own up to OSAS but OTSAS , a big difference .... but i guess you want to read into things , yes it can be brought down to semantics in which case you also accept OSAS as Mikey proved !

Sure if "salvation" doesn`t begin until you enter heaven, well duh...LOL Even though we all know the saved are born again and crying "abba father" much sooner... That was a clear attempt at obfuscation, sort of a last stand of denying what you believe in order to avoid defending it.

wrong on several points , 4 very short quotes from ECF'S is hardly flooding the boards , and one cut from a kjv only site which is excellent ...all showing you made statements that are false POS didn't begin with Calvin , not to waste too much time with this other things to do

OSAS always saved began with Calvin as the theologians that preceded him, Augustine, Aquinus, Luther, believed that the truly regenerate and justified could fall away. Once regenerate always regenerate or OSAS was first articulated by Calvin. As to those who preceded Augustine, persecution brought the issue of apostasy to the fore and those that abanoned the faith were considered lost. I`ve found no claims that all these were never saved to start with. If you find it, let me know. But lay out the text and make the arguments yourself. I`ll debate you, not some KJV only bubba in Texas plucking out snippets and going on editorializing inbetween. Also, the Church has traditionally believed that salvation can be forfeited through "mortal sin".....

yes for a guy who is concerned about the dangers of doctrinal debate ya sure spend a lot of time in here ....

LOL This must be deliberate dishonesty as I never made any wholesale discouragement of all doctrinal debate. But hey, I got about 1000 posts in a few years, not 46,000.... That`s obsession, but then again, if it`s OSAS, hey why not spend half one`s life arguing on the computer?

 

[heymikey80]

I read through your reply and it`s like a game of patty cake, repeating verse 22 while ignoring the obvious exegesis presented in the last five and context of Chapter 10 that immediately follows, ...

So you're saying Paul can't even mention his change of subject until the end of his statement on apostasy?

That's a horrible way to get his point across. Paul's not that bad a preacher.

still expecting me to believe that Paul is racing for and concerned about not getting an incorruptible preaching crown. Makes me wonder what kind of crown his audience would get as he applied the race and crown to them by saying "we." Maybe they were all preachers...

The letter's read out by its reader to the church. "We" -- as Paul has already pointed out -- is Paul's ministry group. Check out 1 Cor 9:4. Does everyone have a right to mooch off the church when traveling?

Or do itinerant ministers?

It's the subject. it sounds like pattycake because you never addressed the issue in the first place. You just called the response by pejorative names.

That standard method to try and dismiss these verses was handled in all my posts from the start and your last reply does little more then just tell me I`m wrong, and to say that the many parallel verses backing up the obvious interpretation don`t count because they were written in books dated after 1 Corinthians, whatever that means. If you want to go back and give it another shot I`d be glad to take another look. At this point there is little to reply to.

Funny, that's what I think of your response. Your response is essentially a method of parallelizing the meanings of words because they were "in context of" another subject.

You can't do that and arrive at truth. Linguistics rails at such inane interpretation.

P.S. As to Hebrews, I really do not know what to say to someone who thinks someone can be bought by the blood, sanctifed, but still be unsaved.

Hm. Well you could investigate the more-developed Covenant Theology to find out how to answer. O.P. Robertson, maybe? N.T. Wright, maybe? Or there's Paul.

Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Pp 2:9-11
​

(Lord of whom?)

 

[Oye11]

So you're saying Paul can't even mention his change of subject until the end of his statement on apostasy?

That's a horrible way to get his point across. Paul's not that bad a preacher.

He was a great preacher. He spoke of his preaching and how he wanted to be a partaker himself in the Gospel. Then he goes on to talking about what this entails, the race, the imperishible crown which is obviously salvation and confirmed by the many parallels. But he must keep his body under subjection unless a most gross irony occurs. He, having preaching salvation to others winds up himself lost!, "disqualified, reprobate." Perseverance fails... Then in his next breath he begins preaching to his hearers on the perils apostasy.

It's the subject. it sounds like pattycake because you never addressed the issue in the first place. You just called the response by pejorative names.

It was patty cake. You tried to obvuscate the clear meaning, dismiss the valid parallels to "imperishible crown" and "race," and the obvious implication of "adokimos" and context of the next breath out of Paul mouth which was made Chapter 10.

You can't do that and arrive at truth. Linguistics rails at such inane interpretation.


Hm. Well you could investigate the more-developed Covenant Theology to find out how to answer. O.P. Robertson, maybe? N.T. Wright, maybe? Or there's Paul.
(Lord of whom?

Sheesh you are getting rather strident... I could care less what seminary term you import or what N. T. Wright a Calvinist theoligian claims. The intent of Paul`s words are crystal clear and not only contradict OSAS but the notion that cooperation with grace for salvation is unnecessary. His focus is forward, like much of the N.T. You know there are difficult verses for any theology, and I`ve met many Calvinists that approach these verses and just say "I don`t know." You however, choose rather to wrest the scriptures to maintain your theology. Disappointing...

 

[heymikey80]

It was patty cake. You tried to obvuscate the clear meaning, dismiss the valid parallels to "imperishible crown" and "race," and the obvious implication of "adokimos" and context of the next breath out of Paul mouth which was made Chapter 10.

Of course it was throwing you back at the issue you didn't address.

The parallels are equally parallelled against your view.

For what is our hope, our joy, or the crown in which we will glory in the presence of our Lord Jesus when he comes? Is it not you? 1 Th 2:19

Therefore, my brothers, you whom I love and long for, my joy and crown, that is how you should stand firm in the Lord, dear friends! Pp 4:1
​

The fact is, Paul uses this analogy elsewhere. And it's not for salvation. It's for Paul's beloved churches.

Sheesh you are getting rather strident...

Only when you do.

I could care less what seminary term you import or what N. T. Wright a Calvinist theoligian claims. The intent of Paul`s words are crystal clear and not only contradict OSAS but the notion that cooperation with grace for salvation is unnecessary. His focus is forward, like much of the N.T. You know there are difficult verses for any theology, and I`ve met many Calvinists that approach these verses and just say "I don`t know." You however, choose rather to wrest the scriptures to maintain your theology. Disappointing...

Aside, your attempt to imply motives is offensive to this forum and to me. If you can't say something good about someone, say nothing at all. Don't believe you can get inside someone's head by implying motives to words. It often just reflects the bias of the poster. In this case from my point of view, you don't seem to be able to retract from your beloved inferences either. Then ... why would pot call kettle black?

I could care less about a theology that's so introspective it can't make sense of a word Paul wrote, unless Paul wrote it enough times to get the full breadth of meaning and repeat its meaning a half-dozen times so they can't mistake it. I far, far prefer to take a look at works that have researched ancient texts, collated and fed the information to me. Like Walter Bauer. At least his work cites historical reality.

The intent of Paul's words are quite clear, and don't contradict perseverance, and remain on the table defying this attempt to press them into submission as some kind of proof.

"Not everything is soteriology." With that one fact Scriptural interpretation eases quickly. There are few difficult verses for Calvinism. This isn't a difficult verse for Calvinism. Paul says what he's talking about directly in the passage: "when I have preached to others".

But whatever. The facts have rarely impressed people who can't use them for their cause.

 

[Oye11]

Of course it was throwing you back at the issue you didn't address.





The parallels are equally parallelled against your view.

For what is our hope, our joy, or the crown in which we will glory in the presence of our Lord Jesus when he comes? Is it not you? 1 Th 2:19​

Therefore, my brothers, you whom I love and long for, my joy and crown, that is how you should stand firm in the Lord, dear friends! Pp 4:1 .​

The fact is, Paul uses this analogy elsewhere. And it's not for salvation. It's for Paul's beloved churches. .​

LOL! This is the height of desperation. Do these verses say anything about Paul striving to obtain a crown? This is a common N.T. theme for the reward for final salvation. And the below verses are fully consistent with the idea of Christian discipline found in 1 Corinthians 9-23-27.


Do not fear what you are about to suffer. Behold, the devil is about to cast some of you into prison, so that you will be tested, and you will have tribulation for ten days Be faithful until death, and I will give you the crown of life. Rev 2-10,11

Blessed is the man who perseveres under trial, because when he has stood the test, he will receive THE CROWN OF LIFE that God has promised to those that love him. James 1-12

So just what "crown" is Paul out to obtain in 1 Corinthians 9-23-27? You offer not alternative explanations but ony a feeble attempt at muddying the waters...

Aside, your attempt to imply motives is offensive to this forum and to me. If you can't say something good about someone, say nothing at all. .

Hey this argument that Paul is concerned about getting disqualified for a preaching ministry crown is ludicrous and must be a product of theological necessity and a shortage of integrity. Again I`ve met Calvinists that just say "I don`t know about that one" then still stick to their views. The sort of gerrmandering and obvuscation you bring though is not to be commended.

The intent of Paul's words are quite clear, and don't contradict perseverance, and remain on the table defying this attempt to press them into submission as some kind of proof. .

If they are so clear them why can`t you offer an alternative explanation for the "imperishible crown," the "race," and "adokimos"? Do you not want to say that Paul and his hearers as well for he includes them, are after some kind of "imperishible" preaching ministry crown of which they need to keep their bodies under subjection for, but if fail, are disqualfied, and are said to have still persevered? That`s ludicrous.

Paul says what he's talking about directly in the passage: "when I have preached to others". .

Yea, he thinks of preaching the salvation message to others and ending up lost himself because he gave into the flesh and failed to finish the race. Oh the irony! And the next breath out of his mouth, chapter 10 on apostasy follows. The length some go to to try and dsarm the many N.T. warnings is sickening.

But whatever. The facts have rarely impressed people who can't use them for their cause.

Yep, these verses are at odds with Calvinism and are thus assigned silly interpretations.

 

[heymikey80]

Like I said before: you're reduced to all blustering and labeling.

Requiring striving in context is a vacuous challenge, as you've only a couple of verses where it's actually present. You're throwing out your baby with the bathwater.

But just so you know that striving's right there: For you remember, brothers, our labor and toil: we worked night and day, that we might not be a burden to any of you, while we proclaimed to you the gospel of God. You are witnesses, and God also, how holy and righteous and blameless was our conduct toward you believers. For you know how, like a father with his children, 12we exhorted each one of you and encouraged you and charged you to walk in a manner worthy of God, who calls you into his own kingdom and glory. 1 Th 2:9-11

The reality is that it answers your attack, and with nothing left, only the bluster remains.

 

[Oye11]

Like I said before: you're reduced to all blustering and labeling.

Requiring striving in context is a vacuous challenge, as you've only a couple of verses where it's actually present. You're throwing out your baby with the bathwater.

But just so you know that striving's right there: For you remember, brothers, our labor and toil: we worked night and day, that we might not be a burden to any of you, while we proclaimed to you the gospel of God. You are witnesses, and God also, how holy and righteous and blameless was our conduct toward you believers. For you know how, like a father with his children, 12we exhorted each one of you and encouraged you and charged you to walk in a manner worthy of God, who calls you into his own kingdom and glory. 1 Th 2:9-11

The reality is that it answers your attack, and with nothing left, only the bluster remains.

LOL! This is pure posturing. The exegesis of the verses have been presented and soundly and you have no answer. Nope, he isn`t talking about getting disqualifed for some "imperishible" preaching crown, parallels are clear, context in Chapter 10 to follow as well. This is a real easy one. But at least you gave it a shot and I thank you for that.

 

[heymikey80]

LOL! This is pure posturing. The exegesis of the verses have been presented and soundly and you have no answer. Nope, he isn`t talking about getting disqualifed for some "imperishible" preaching crown, parallels are clear, context in Chapter 10 to follow as well. This is a real easy one. But at least you gave it a shot and I thank you for that.

I've no reason to do more. There's nothing further to your argument.

 

[cygnusx1]

OSAS didn't begin with Calvin anymore than Predestination began with Sproul.... and the label OSAS is only semantically correct , it is plain wrong to ignore what some think of that phrase and why others prefer a stronger more informed expression. OTSAS = Once TRULY saved always saved. or better still , the Perseverance Of The Saints !

but we are not going to agree , because evidence is being ignored ........ the quote I already gave of Augustine demonstrates the nonsense of the arguement.

 

[Oye11]

OSAS didn't begin with Calvin anymore than Predestination began with Sproul.... and the label OSAS is only semantically correct , it is plain wrong to ignore what some think of that phrase and why others prefer a stronger more informed expression. OTSAS = Once TRULY saved always saved. or better still , the Perseverance Of The Saints !

but we are not going to agree , because evidence is being ignored ........ the quote I already gave of Augustine demonstrates the nonsense of the arguement.

Augustine taught the perseverance of the elect, but this was mediated through the gift of perseverance. Regeneration and justification he believed possible without attaining the gift of perseverence. It was Calvin who first articulated the connection, regeneration = elect = guaranteed perseverance.

 

[cygnusx1]

Augustine taught the perseverance of the elect, but this was mediated through the gift of perseverance. Regeneration and justification he believed possible without attaining the gift of perseverence. It was Calvin who first articulated the connection, regeneration = elect = guaranteed perseverance.

based on only one quote yes , based upon further quotes , no !

cherry picking quotes may pass most people but Augustines doctrine evolved.

one could quote me and say I was a 4 point Calvinist , but that would be untrue.

 

[Oye11]

based on only one quote yes , based upon further quotes , no !

cherry picking quotes may pass most people but Augustines doctrine evolved.

one could quote me and say I was a 4 point Calvinist , but that would be untrue.

Sounds good Bro. I`m basing my conclusions on quotes I`ve read of the later Augustine and an article on the history of the doctrine of perseverance by John Jefferson Davis, a Calvinist theologian and prof of systematic theology at Gordon Conwell Theo Seminary. It was published in the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society. That`s where I`ll hang my hat for now amigo...

 

[cygnusx1]

Sounds good Bro. I`m basing my conclusions on quotes I`ve read of the later Augustine and an article on the history of the doctrine of perseverance by John Jefferson Davis, a Calvinist theologian and prof of systematic theology at Gordon Conwell Theo Seminary. It was published in the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society. That`s where I`ll hang my hat for now amigo...

I haver just read the entire work plus some quotes from Augustines Confessions , he maintains Perseverance is a gift of God to all the saints , and if any man doesn't persevere he has in no way been given the gift , for if he had been given the gift then he would have persevered unto the end . The Church and the saints must persevere because God's will is the reason given by scripture and Augustine why they must not be lost , grace alone is the answer for why we must persevere , the same grace and predestination that elects us gives us the gift of perseverance , and the Church , all Christians are taught to pray deliver us from temptation which God grants.

Chapter 62.--Prayer to Be Inculcated, Nevertheless.

But I do not think that manner which I have said should be adopted in the preaching of predestination ought to be sufficient for him who speaks to the congregation, except he adds this, or something of this kind, saying, “You, therefore, ought also to hope for that perseverance in obedience from the Father of Lights, from whom cometh down every excellent gift and every perfect gift, [Jas. i. 17] and to ask for it in your daily prayers; and in doing this ought to trust that you are not aliens from the predestination of His people, because it is He Himself who bestows even the power of doing this. And far be it from you to despair of yourselves, because you are bidden to have your hope in Him, not in yourselves. For cursed is every one who has hope in man; [Jas. xvii. 5] and it is good rather to trust in the Lord than to trust in man, because blessed are all they that put their trust in Him. [Ps. cxviii. 8] Holding this hope, serve the Lord in fear, and rejoice unto Him with trembling. [Ps. ii. 12] Because no one can be certain of the life eternal which God who does not lie has promised to the children of promise before the times of eternity,--no one, unless that life of his, which is a state of trial upon the earth, is completed. [Job vii. 1] But He will make us to persevere in Himself unto the end of that life, since we daily say to Him, `Lead us not into temptation.’” [Matt. vi. 13] When these things and things of this kind are said, whether to few Christians or to the multitude of the Church, why do we fear to preach the predestination of the saints and the true grace of God,--that is, the grace which is not given according to our merits,--as the Holy Scripture declares it? Or, indeed, must it be feared that a man should then despair of himself when his hope is shown to be placed in God, and should not rather despair of himself if he should, in his excess of pride and unhappiness, place it in himself?


http://www.romancatholicism.org/jansenism/augustine-perseverance.htm