[deleted]

[Jesus First]

JesusFirst

Thank you for taking the time to respond and to do so in such detail.

However, Aorist is not ..ongoing as you would define...but undefined. it is past tense or undetermined/undefined time. Not that that really changes anything in your points...just a semantical correction.

But to consider John 4:14 referring to an ongoing drinking has problems. Because as you said Aorist is built by the contexts of the words/phrases surrounding it. And some of that comes from verse 13. ..."Everyone who drinks this water will thirst again" This is speaking of the water from the well. the same aorist verb is utilized here as in Verse 14. It is widely understood that if a person puts their face in a drinking fountain and keeps sucking water...they won't get thirsty again. So we undertand verse 13 to indicate that if you take a drink and stop...just like taking a sip of water from the fountain. You will get thirsty again.

So it does not make sense that Jesus shifted meanings in the middle of a thought to suddenly mean that you have to keep drinking of the water that he provides.

You also have to look at the second half of verse 14 because this explains why you only have to drink once and you will never be thirsty again....it is because the water that Christ provides will become a well of water springing up to eternal life. So you won't get thirsty again after taking a drink because you will have a well of that water inside you that quenches that thirst.

You had written: "Apostasy is when someone who was in the faith, leaves the faith and no longer believes" On the points of belief v faith I believe we tend to agree. I did do a common error by utilizing the phrase "when a believer" to indicate a loss of faith. Because we have to rememeber in order to have faith you have to believe, but in order to believe you do not have to have faith.

You had written: "The verse says “drinks” (a verb that denotes action) because true believers continue in the faith. Grammatically, and contextually, the action of “drinks” is not a one time, completed action event."
We agree that 'drinks' is a verb... It is the tense of the verb that we disagree on. As pointed out however, the same verb form (aorist) was utilized in the preceeding verse and we both accept that Jesus was referring to someone taking a single drink and then getting thirsty again. It is illogical and erroneous to take the same verb phrasing and apply a different tense to it from the same speaker in the same conversation, in the same sentence even.

Your notes on John 7:37-38. Again the verb for drink is the same as used in the previous verses. it is important to notice Jesus said "to come", not to come and stay, so it is a one time action that is being described. We also know this because Christ also told the followers to go.

So here is what we know. You take a drink of the water that Christ offers...you no longer have to drink of the water that Christ is offering...you just have to drink once. Because after you drink of that water, you will have a spring of water inside you. Now please note that not once do we see an indication that we are drinking from that water, you are making an implication/assumption that the well that springs up is what we are drinking from in order to never thirst. My position is without assumptions, and I take the verse to mean exactly what it means...we will not thirst ever again.

I look forward to continued discussions and I hope you are having/ or had a great weekend.

Brother Jerry,

In John 4:13, the word “drinks” is a Greek present tense participle. Your view that it represents a one time drink is not widely held. You apparently believe it’s an aorist tense verb, but it’s not. You might want to reconsider what the implication is of a present tense particle (verb) “drinks” in verse 13 and the aorist tense of “drinks” in verse 14. In the end, this is one salvation passage of many (over 100) that should be considered in the New Testament.

I'm having difficulty understanding how you conclude that the verb “come” is a one-time action in John 7:37. You don't appear to consider the underlying Greek present tense verb. In verse 38, the word “believes” is a present tense participle.

In a previous post you provided John 6:35 as support. Before I cover this verse, please consider some verses prior in the chapter which undeniably indicate the necessity to continue to persevere to be saved:

“26 Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you are seeking me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves. 27 Do not work [Greek present tense verb; imperative] for the food that perishes, but [work here is implied] for the food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you. For on him God the Father has set his seal.” 28 Then they said to him, “What must we do [Greek present tense verb], to be doing [Greek present tense verb] the works of God?” 29 Jesus answered them, “This is the work of God, that you believe [Greek present tense verb] in him whom he has sent.” John 6:26-29

This is another passage where a one-time action for salvation would be illogical and unsupported. In verse 27, Jesus commands his audience not to work for “food that perishes”. People don't work once and never have to work again. Jesus answers their question after they ask concerning what “work” Jesus requires. One must “believe” (not a one-time action) to be saved.

The word “believe” for salvation is sometimes misunderstood in our English language. It's more than acknowledging some facts to be true. According to BDAG, the word believe for eternal life means, “to entrust oneself to an entity in complete confidence, believe (in), trust, w. implication of total commitment to the one who is trusted. In our literature God and Christ are objects of this type of faith that relies on their power and nearness to help, in addition to being convinced that their revelations or disclosures are true” (A Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament, page 817, 2000).

“Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst.” John 6:37

The words “comes” and “believes” are not one time requirements. Not only did translators not translate them in our English language as such (has come, has believed), the underlying present tense verbs don't support this conclusion.

As the account unfolds in the verses that follow, Jesus says, “49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness [an ongoing activity], and they died. 50 This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.” 6:49-51

Jesus went on to describe eating his flesh as “feeds”: “56 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. 57 As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like the bread the fathers ate, and died. Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.” (6:56-58).

Brother Jerry, please reconsider your position that sinners must only believe on Jesus once to have eternal life. In my church today, our pastor quoted a verse often overlooked, “The righteous shall live by faith.” Romans 1:17b.

Keep the faith and have a spiritually profitable week!

In Christ!

 

[brotherjerry]

JesusFirst

I beg to differ that "one time drink" is not held by many. Anyone believing in eternal security understands it as a one time drink.

I also tend to disagree that 'drinks' is present participle...that would be drinking. Drinks is present tense 3rd person.

As to the understanding that it is a one time drink. I suggest this example "if anyone drinks of that water they will get E. coli" It is understood that the meaning was if anyone takes one drink they will get E. coli, the understanding is not that if they keep drinking it.

As to 'come' being a one time action. Really? If I tell you to come here, how many times are you going to do it? Once...because once you come you have reached your destination. Specifically in John 7:37 did Jesus say "come and follow me" Nope he said "come to me and drink". So once you come to Jesus and drink...you have completed that which you were asked to do. How can you do it again?
Of course for those that salvation can be lost will say that you walk away. But did Jesus say that "anytime you are thirsty, come to me and drink"? Not once did He say anything like that. Only if you are thirsy come to me. And then as mentioned in John 4...if you drink of the water that Christ will give, you will not be thirsty ever again.

I also find it interesting that you would cite those verses in John 6 as evidence to continue to perserve...Let's look at those verse in a form of a script to see who is saying what.

Jesus: Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were filled. Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you, for on Him the Father, God, has set His seal.
Crowd: What shall we do, so that we may work the works of God.
Jesus: This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.
Crowd: What then do You do for a sign, so that we may see, and believe You? What work do You perform? Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, 'He gave them bread out of heaven to eat'"
Jesus: Truly, truly, I say to you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread out of heave, but it is My Father who gives you the true bread out of heaven. For the bread of God is that which comes down out of heaven, and gives life to the world."
Crowd: "Lord, always give us this bread"
Jesus: "I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst. Buty I said to you that you have seen Me, and yet do not believe. All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out."

We can clearly see that the crowd wanted to know what works they could do to earn what Jesus was preaching about. But the only "work" Jesus said was needed was "you believe in Him whom He has sent". The crowd even asked Jesus to keep feeding them the bread "always give us this bread" and Jesus then restated what was in John 4 as well...anyone who comes to me will never be hungry or thirsty.

I added some...notice "the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out." If salvation can be lost...if the gift that was given by God can be taken back, then what Jesus said here is untrue and those that come to Him are cast out.

These verses completely support the idea that salvation is once given and secure by the Power of God and not by anything we as mere humans could do. It is given by God and not of any works that we have done.

See God is an equalizer, He shows no partiality. That is why salvation is achieved the same way for everyone...simple faith. If there was any sort of rider along with that, man would corrupt it and boast. "I got my salvation by saving 20 kids on a bus", "Oh yeah, well I got my salvation by never saving money and always taking what money I earned and giving it to the church...look how much I sacrificed in my life"...Nope definitely NOT what God wants.

Salvation was never meant to replace God. And when people focus on "losing" the free gift that God has given, they take their eyes off of God and start treating their gift like Golem treated the ring in Lord of the Rings...as if it was "my precious", and they tucked it away for no one to see because they were afraid of losing it. The gift then becomes that persons god. They will surely wrap their life up with works and good deeds. But the reason for it becomes so they can hang onto their "precious" and their reason to please God is not out of gratitude for what God has done, but out of fear for what God may do.

When you believe in eternal security you do not have that fear. There is nothing you can lose, so people are more apt to wear the ring on their finger and show it off to the world. The church is considered the bride....what do women do when they get that engagement ring? Our salvation in this world is just like that engagement ring and we should be showing it off. The works that we do are no longer maintenance works...stuff done to keep the ring...but instead stuff done because we got the ring and want to show it off.

Are there people out there that would lay claim to being a Christian and being saved and then continue to live in a sinful life. Yes absolutely. The testimony they have is a terrible one for God and for Christ. Are they Christians? You or I will never know, nor is it our place to judge that about them. We only have to take people at their word. Which again is something honestly many I have encountered that are salvation lost followers have a hard time doing...as even evident in some of the threads here on this forum. A tragic side effect of feeling one has to work for salvation..as I pointed out, boasting.

I know however, that salvation is a transformation. Salvation is a new birth, a death to the old. I still sin, we all do, even Paul. But Christ is my advocate and covers that sin with His blood. I have killed as many people as I wanted to today...which is 0 BTW I have used fowl language as much as I wanted to today...which is 0. The process of sanctification takes time but I have become more Christ-like every day I study. Fortunately I am secure in that even if slip up, Jesus is there to help me, not there to cast me out.

 

[Jesus First]

JesusFirst

I beg to differ that "one time drink" is not held by many. Anyone believing in eternal security understands it as a one time drink.

I also tend to disagree that 'drinks' is present participle...that would be drinking. Drinks is present tense 3rd person.

As to the understanding that it is a one time drink. I suggest this example "if anyone drinks of that water they will get E. coli" It is understood that the meaning was if anyone takes one drink they will get E. coli, the understanding is not that if they keep drinking it.

As to 'come' being a one time action. Really? If I tell you to come here, how many times are you going to do it? Once...because once you come you have reached your destination. Specifically in John 7:37 did Jesus say "come and follow me" Nope he said "come to me and drink". So once you come to Jesus and drink...you have completed that which you were asked to do. How can you do it again?
Of course for those that salvation can be lost will say that you walk away. But did Jesus say that "anytime you are thirsty, come to me and drink"? Not once did He say anything like that. Only if you are thirsy come to me. And then as mentioned in John 4...if you drink of the water that Christ will give, you will not be thirsty ever again.

I also find it interesting that you would cite those verses in John 6 as evidence to continue to perserve...Let's look at those verse in a form of a script to see who is saying what.

Jesus: Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were filled. Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you, for on Him the Father, God, has set His seal.
Crowd: What shall we do, so that we may work the works of God.
Jesus: This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.
Crowd: What then do You do for a sign, so that we may see, and believe You? What work do You perform? Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, 'He gave them bread out of heaven to eat'"
Jesus: Truly, truly, I say to you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread out of heave, but it is My Father who gives you the true bread out of heaven. For the bread of God is that which comes down out of heaven, and gives life to the world."
Crowd: "Lord, always give us this bread"
Jesus: "I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst. Buty I said to you that you have seen Me, and yet do not believe. All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out."

We can clearly see that the crowd wanted to know what works they could do to earn what Jesus was preaching about. But the only "work" Jesus said was needed was "you believe in Him whom He has sent". The crowd even asked Jesus to keep feeding them the bread "always give us this bread" and Jesus then restated what was in John 4 as well...anyone who comes to me will never be hungry or thirsty.

I added some...notice "the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out." If salvation can be lost...if the gift that was given by God can be taken back, then what Jesus said here is untrue and those that come to Him are cast out.

These verses completely support the idea that salvation is once given and secure by the Power of God and not by anything we as mere humans could do. It is given by God and not of any works that we have done.

See God is an equalizer, He shows no partiality. That is why salvation is achieved the same way for everyone...simple faith. If there was any sort of rider along with that, man would corrupt it and boast. "I got my salvation by saving 20 kids on a bus", "Oh yeah, well I got my salvation by never saving money and always taking what money I earned and giving it to the church...look how much I sacrificed in my life"...Nope definitely NOT what God wants.

Salvation was never meant to replace God. And when people focus on "losing" the free gift that God has given, they take their eyes off of God and start treating their gift like Golem treated the ring in Lord of the Rings...as if it was "my precious", and they tucked it away for no one to see because they were afraid of losing it. The gift then becomes that persons god. They will surely wrap their life up with works and good deeds. But the reason for it becomes so they can hang onto their "precious" and their reason to please God is not out of gratitude for what God has done, but out of fear for what God may do.

When you believe in eternal security you do not have that fear. There is nothing you can lose, so people are more apt to wear the ring on their finger and show it off to the world. The church is considered the bride....what do women do when they get that engagement ring? Our salvation in this world is just like that engagement ring and we should be showing it off. The works that we do are no longer maintenance works...stuff done to keep the ring...but instead stuff done because we got the ring and want to show it off.

Are there people out there that would lay claim to being a Christian and being saved and then continue to live in a sinful life. Yes absolutely. The testimony they have is a terrible one for God and for Christ. Are they Christians? You or I will never know, nor is it our place to judge that about them. We only have to take people at their word. Which again is something honestly many I have encountered that are salvation lost followers have a hard time doing...as even evident in some of the threads here on this forum. A tragic side effect of feeling one has to work for salvation..as I pointed out, boasting.

I know however, that salvation is a transformation. Salvation is a new birth, a death to the old. I still sin, we all do, even Paul. But Christ is my advocate and covers that sin with His blood. I have killed as many people as I wanted to today...which is 0 BTW I have used fowl language as much as I wanted to today...which is 0. The process of sanctification takes time but I have become more Christ-like every day I study. Fortunately I am secure in that even if slip up, Jesus is there to help me, not there to cast me out.

Thanks for continuing the discussion. It may be two or three days before I reply. Abide in Christ! (John 15).

 

[Jesus First]

JesusFirst

I beg to differ that "one time drink" is not held by many. Anyone believing in eternal security understands it as a one time drink.

Calvinist’s believe that perseverance is necessary.

I also tend to disagree that 'drinks' is present participle...that would be drinking. Drinks is present tense 3rd person.

If we want to be correct in our theology we accept the Bible as written. If a conditional present tense participle or present tense verb outlines the action, we better believe it.

As to the understanding that it is a one time drink. I suggest this example "if anyone drinks of that water they will get E. coli" It is understood that the meaning was if anyone takes one drink they will get E. coli, the understanding is not that if they keep drinking it.

Again, if we want our theology to be correct, we don't get to invent a context and read it in to justify our biases. I used to hold to eternal security myself. It was a spiritual battle to change. We believe the Bible as written and allow it to shape our views over time or we risk being deceived. I write this in a spirit of honesty. God continues to challenge and change my beliefs. So what I write applies to myself first.

As to 'come' being a one time action. Really? If I tell you to come here, how many times are you going to do it? Once...because once you come you have reached your destination.

We must read the Bible and attempt to extract the truth based on the historical setting, the context provided and the underlying grammar.

Specifically in John 7:37 did Jesus say "come and follow me" Nope he said "come to me and drink". So once you come to Jesus and drink...you have completed that which you were asked to do. How can you do it again?
Of course for those that salvation can be lost will say that you walk away. But did Jesus say that "anytime you are thirsty, come to me and drink"? Not once did He say anything like that. Only if you are thirsy come to me. And then as mentioned in John 4...if you drink of the water that Christ will give, you will not be thirsty ever again.

The promises for eternal life are conditional. Are they presented as one-time actions, or ongoing actions when the Scriptures as a whole is considered? I'm convinced that perseverance is required. Here are a few verses (of many possible) where the required action is clearly ongoing:

“My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me.” John 10:27.

The context is sheep under the direction of the Chief Shepherd. The “sheep hear”. They don't hear the Shepherd once; the Shepherd calls them out by name at least daily. “I know them”. He doesn't know them just once. “They follow”. The “sheep” follow the Chief Shepherd as He leads them daily from pasture to pasture. The underlying grammar is progressive action. The context is progressive action. The Bible doesn't contradict itself.

I also find it interesting that you would cite those verses in John 6 as evidence to continue to perserve...Let's look at those verse in a form of a script to see who is saying what.

Jesus: Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were filled. Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you, for on Him the Father, God, has set His seal.
Crowd: What shall we do, so that we may work the works of God.
Jesus: This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.
Crowd: What then do You do for a sign, so that we may see, and believe You? What work do You perform? Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, 'He gave them bread out of heaven to eat'"
Jesus: Truly, truly, I say to you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread out of heave, but it is My Father who gives you the true bread out of heaven. For the bread of God is that which comes down out of heaven, and gives life to the world."
Crowd: "Lord, always give us this bread"
Jesus: "I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst. Buty I said to you that you have seen Me, and yet do not believe. All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out."

“Do not work [an ongoing action!] for the food that perishes, but [work is implied and is ongoing!] for the food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you. For on him God the Father has set his seal.” 28 Then they said to him, “What must we do, to be doing the works of God?” 29 Jesus answered them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.” John 6:27-29

Brother Jerry, Surely you would agree that the response that Jesus asks for is not a one-time, completed action. The context and grammar are clear.

We can clearly see that the crowd wanted to know what works they could do to earn what Jesus was preaching about. But the only "work" Jesus said was needed was "you believe in Him whom He has sent". The crowd even asked Jesus to keep feeding them the bread "always give us this bread" and Jesus then restated what was in John 4 as well...anyone who comes to me will never be hungry or thirsty.

Jesus was first to mention “work”. There is work that results in perishing and work that results in eternal life (v. 27). The crown understood Jesus to be describing work as an ongoing action (28). Jesus describes believing as a “work” (v. 29).

Verse 33: For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.”

Notice verse 34 where they understand Jesus is describing an ongoing action: “They said to him, “Sir, give us this bread always.” [“always” implies continuously].

I added some...notice "the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out." If salvation can be lost...if the gift that was given by God can be taken back, then what Jesus said here is untrue and those that come to Him are cast out.

The authors of the New Testament chose their words carefully. Their written record was inspired. They purposely chose verbs to accurately represent the action required.

“the one who comes [not “came” ] to Me I will certainly not cast out." Who does Jesus not cast out? Is it the one who came, or the one who “comes”. You know the answer.

These verses completely support the idea that salvation is once given and secure by the Power of God and not by anything we as mere humans could do. It is given by God and not of any works that we have done.

We are not saved by our works but by faith in the pure, sinless blood of Jesus Christ. But these verses support perseverance.

Your reply continued with human arguments. I have many too; The truth is found in the Scriptures.

I'll leave you with some beautiful conditional verses:

"Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears [not heard] my word and believes [not has believed] him who sent me has [in the present; right now] eternal life. He [the one who "hears" and "believes"] does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life." John 5:24

"11 And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is [right now] in his Son. 12 Whoever has [right now] the Son has [right now] life; whoever does not have [right now] the Son of God does not have [right now] life. 13 I write these things to you who believe [right now] in the name of the Son of God that you may know [right now] that you have [right now] eternal life." 1 John 5:11-13

I'll throw a ball in your court. Please respond with passages that explicitly promise that one will always have eternal life, even if they become apostate.

Keep your eyes on Jesus (Colossians 3:1-4).

In Christ who is LORD of all!

 

[brotherjerry]

JesusFirst

Calvinist's believe that perseverance is necessary

Understood...and they would be incorrect

[/quote]If we want to be correct in our theology we accept the Bible as written. If a conditional present tense participle or present tense verb outlines the action, we better believe it.[/quote]
Here is where I have problems with this. The Bible was written so anyone can read it, understand it, and even come to be saved by Christ through it. It does not require an English degree or even a High School education to understand it. So when we digress too far into analysis of the language we quit focusing on the message and spend more time on the analysis. So while I personally do like to delve into deeper parts of langauge, history, and such...they are definitely not required to have a correct theology. Nor does what you say change what I said. Drinking is the present participle of drink, while drinks is 3rd person present tense.

Again, if we want our theology to be correct, we don't get to invent a context and read it into justify our bias.

I didn't, I used a different example to express my point. One that clearly indicates an understanding that "if anyone drinks" is indicating a one time event.

We must read the Bible and attempt to extract the truth based on historical setting, the context provided and the underlying grammar.

See above for the most part. I really disagree with the notion of "we must", because really we do not. When we get into saying "we must" we start to get close to claiming that "people that don't, are not saved because they obviously do not understand the history, the context, or the grammar so they did not interpret that correctly." This is why we also see reference to children understanding the gospel...does a child know what a present participle is? No. They do understand that when Jesus says "if you drink of the water that I give you, you will never thirst again" means that if I take a drink I will never need another drink.

They don't hear the Shepherd once; the Shepherd calls them out by name at least daily

What was that you were trying to tell me earlier about "we don't get to invent a context"...what part of John 10:27 says that Jesus calls out to them at least daily? Let alone calling them out by name?

Your bit on John 6:27-29...yes context and grammar are very clear
Do not work for the food that perishes, but instead work for the food that endures to eternal life, and this food will be provided by the Son of Man. And the work that needs to be done...believe in Him who God has sent.
What is that food? Jesus answers that a couple of verses later
John 6:33 "For the bread of God is that which comes down out of heaven, and gives life to the world"
John 6:35 "I am the bread of life, he who comes to me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst"

So back to John 6:27-29...work for the bread of life that is Jesus Christ and you will not hunger, and never thirst....what is that work? Believe in Him who God has sent....beleive in Jesus Christ.

Once you have that belief...that faith, you will have eaten of the bread and you will not hunger. You will have drank from the water Jesus provides and will never thrist.

No where in the Bible does it say that Jesus will quit giving you bread or that the well that springs up inside you will go away.

And your comment on verse 34...yes they thought they had to keep working to be saved....But Jesus corrected them by restating in verse 35 "he who beleives in Me will NEVER thirst"

“the one who comes [not “came” ] to Me I will certainly not cast out." Who does Jesus not cast out? Is it the one who came, or the one who “comes”. You know the answer.

You do realize Jesus was using present/future tense there right? He did not come to save the saved (those that came), he came to save the lost (those who are yet to come)...so when He preaches they have yet to come...so the proper wording if you are trying to get someone who is lost to be saved "come to me".

Your verses
John 5:24...you seem to again ignore that Jesus is talking about those that are lost...not those that are saved...context is key And you seemed to ignore the 'what happens'...actually more correctly 'what happened'
Whoever hears my word and believes right now...has eternal life...gets it right now. You got that right...so again..if eternal life can be taken away it is not eternal.
Also note that he who hears and believes not only HAS eternal life...but PASSED from death to life.
So if anyone hears the words and believes they HAVE eternal life and HAVE PASSED from death to life.
What was it you mentioned before...oh yes "The authors of the New Testament chose their words carefully."....I completely agree....they did not choose the phrase "keep listening" or "keep beleiving" which would have conveyed a much clearer message of conditional security...instead they chose simple words that continue to express eternal security....hmmm

1 John 5:11-13
ABSOLUTELY!!! God GAVE us eternal life....how long is eternal? If it can be removed then it was not eternal was it?

as to the ball being in my court. Let me ask you this. Can you show in the Bible were a person became apostate? Is there one person who Jesus said he knew, but then forgot? I can show you many examples of false prophets...which are people that claim to do things in God's name, through the power of God and even Jesus, they even perform miracles in God's name, cast out demons, etc. These people never seem to be counted among the sheep of Jesus...Jesus even said to some who came to him claiming many great works in God's name...but yet Jesus said to them to go away for I NEVER knew you.
We can honestly toss verses back and forth all day long and it more than likely won't change anything. The two sets of verses you mentioned above are prime examples. I have shown how they do give clear indication of eternal security.

The thing is this. Salvation is a completely personal things. It is strictly between you and God. For you and I to make any sort of judgement call on anyone else is wrong and the Bible teaches us that. Whether you believe in eternal security or conditional security you will see good works out of people. We each have to work out or own salvation (Philippians 2:12), and if you feel you need to keep working to earn your salvation then I should not get in your way.

But I do want to ask you this and consider it coming from a position of respect and brotherly love. Do you think God desires people to worry about their salvation? I mean you seem secure enough in your faith, but you have to admit reading some of the forums and such that there are people who live in fear that they are not doing good enough. Does God really want us to focus on our salvation, or do you think He would rather we focus on spreading the Gospel having security in knowing that God will keep your soul (Psalm 121:7)? I know I see more confidence trusting in God with my soul, than trusting myself with it.

 

[sdowney717]

Well, who is it that preserves our salvation?
Jude teaches quite clearly we are preserved by God Himself as does Paul.

JudeNew King James Version (NKJV)
Greeting to the Called
1 Jude, a bondservant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James,

To those who are called, sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ:

2 Mercy, peace, and love be multiplied to you.

So it is that you must be called, sanctified and preserved. Still these are things the Holy Spirit does for us, all things work together for good to those who are the called of Jesus Christ, And Jesus said HE would lose not a single one of those the Father has given Him.

Simply it is about those who do not persist-persevere in belief, that they are not of the Father and never were of the Father even though they outwardly appeared to men to be so, they were only of Antichrist and are antichrists.

18 Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour.
19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.

Lets keep the whole counsel of God into our souls when considering our common salvation.

The my sheep know my voice and they follow me, is a declarative statement of absolute truth. They do not cease ever to be Christ's sheep. But if they appear to have departed the faith for demonic doctrines, Apostle John tells us that none of them were (PAST TENSE) of us.

All this fits in great with Jesus teaching us about the sheep and the goats and the parable of the wheat and the tares. The tares NEVER turned into wheat and neither the wheat turn into tares. Each one was and is what they are. Christ is the great shepherd of the sheep and only of the sheep, Christ does not shepherd goats or wolves or serpents. These things were written in simple ways to help common people understand, so do not go beyond what was written.

At some point in a person's life, if they are of the sheep, they will hear the voice of Christ and they will follow Him, and He will give to them eternal life and they will never perish becuase God the Holy Spirit preserves them in Jesus Christ, IF they are of His sheep.

And if they are not of the sheep of Christ, then they will die in their unbelief, they will die in their sins because they do not believe when they physically die. After you pass from this life unsaved, there is no possibility of salvation, people die and then comes the judgement. All of us who are saved would also have died in our sins, except that due to God's great love for US, he made us alive who were dead in trespasess and sins, seating us with Christ in heavenly places and that was a pure undeserved gift not of ourselves.

 

[brotherjerry]

Amen

 

[Jesus First]

Delete

 

[Jesus First]

Here is where I have problems with this. The Bible was written so anyone can read it, understand it, and even come to be saved by Christ through it. It does not require an English degree or even a High School education to understand it. So when we digress too far into analysis of the language we quit focusing on the message and spend more time on the analysis. So while I personally do like to delve into deeper parts of langauge, history, and such...they are definitely not required to have a correct theology. Nor does what you say change what I said. Drinking is the present participle of drink, while drinks is 3rd person present tense.


I didn't, I used a different example to express my point. One that clearly indicates an understanding that "if anyone drinks" is indicating a one time event.


See above for the most part. I really disagree with the notion of "we must", because really we do not. When we get into saying "we must" we start to get close to claiming that "people that don't, are not saved because they obviously do not understand the history, the context, or the grammar so they did not interpret that correctly." This is why we also see reference to children understanding the gospel...does a child know what a present participle is? No. They do understand that when Jesus says "if you drink of the water that I give you, you will never thirst again" means that if I take a drink I will never need another drink.


What was that you were trying to tell me earlier about "we don't get to invent a context"...what part of John 10:27 says that Jesus calls out to them at least daily? Let alone calling them out by name?

Your bit on John 6:27-29...yes context and grammar are very clear
Do not work for the food that perishes, but instead work for the food that endures to eternal life, and this food will be provided by the Son of Man. And the work that needs to be done...believe in Him who God has sent.
What is that food? Jesus answers that a couple of verses later
John 6:33 "For the bread of God is that which comes down out of heaven, and gives life to the world"
John 6:35 "I am the bread of life, he who comes to me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst"

So back to John 6:27-29...work for the bread of life that is Jesus Christ and you will not hunger, and never thirst....what is that work? Believe in Him who God has sent....beleive in Jesus Christ.

Once you have that belief...that faith, you will have eaten of the bread and you will not hunger. You will have drank from the water Jesus provides and will never thrist.

No where in the Bible does it say that Jesus will quit giving you bread or that the well that springs up inside you will go away.

And your comment on verse 34...yes they thought they had to keep working to be saved....But Jesus corrected them by restating in verse 35 "he who beleives in Me will NEVER thirst"


You do realize Jesus was using present/future tense there right? He did not come to save the saved (those that came), he came to save the lost (those who are yet to come)...so when He preaches they have yet to come...so the proper wording if you are trying to get someone who is lost to be saved "come to me".

Your verses
John 5:24...you seem to again ignore that Jesus is talking about those that are lost...not those that are saved...context is key And you seemed to ignore the 'what happens'...actually more correctly 'what happened'
Whoever hears my word and believes right now...has eternal life...gets it right now. You got that right...so again..if eternal life can be taken away it is not eternal.
Also note that he who hears and believes not only HAS eternal life...but PASSED from death to life.
So if anyone hears the words and believes they HAVE eternal life and HAVE PASSED from death to life.
What was it you mentioned before...oh yes "The authors of the New Testament chose their words carefully."....I completely agree....they did not choose the phrase "keep listening" or "keep beleiving" which would have conveyed a much clearer message of conditional security...instead they chose simple words that continue to express eternal security....hmmm

1 John 5:11-13
ABSOLUTELY!!! God GAVE us eternal life....how long is eternal? If it can be removed then it was not eternal was it?

as to the ball being in my court. Let me ask you this. Can you show in the Bible were a person became apostate? Is there one person who Jesus said he knew, but then forgot? I can show you many examples of false prophets...which are people that claim to do things in God's name, through the power of God and even Jesus, they even perform miracles in God's name, cast out demons, etc. These people never seem to be counted among the sheep of Jesus...Jesus even said to some who came to him claiming many great works in God's name...but yet Jesus said to them to go away for I NEVER knew you.
We can honestly toss verses back and forth all day long and it more than likely won't change anything. The two sets of verses you mentioned above are prime examples. I have shown how they do give clear indication of eternal security.

The thing is this. Salvation is a completely personal things. It is strictly between you and God. For you and I to make any sort of judgement call on anyone else is wrong and the Bible teaches us that. Whether you believe in eternal security or conditional security you will see good works out of people. We each have to work out or own salvation (Philippians 2:12), and if you feel you need to keep working to earn your salvation then I should not get in your way.

But I do want to ask you this and consider it coming from a position of respect and brotherly love. Do you think God desires people to worry about their salvation? I mean you seem secure enough in your faith, but you have to admit reading some of the forums and such that there are people who live in fear that they are not doing good enough. Does God really want us to focus on our salvation, or do you think He would rather we focus on spreading the Gospel having security in knowing that God will keep your soul (Psalm 121:7)? I know I see more confidence trusting in God with my soul, than trusting myself with it.

I'll address a few disagreements. I'm questioning the wisdom of continuing our discussions much further. I enjoy interacting with you, but my time is limited. I'm looking forward to interacting with others also.

You wrote,
"Whoever hears my word and believes right now...has eternal life...gets it right now. You got that right...so again..if eternal life can be taken away it is not eternal." [end of your quote].

You are using an argument that had been demonstrated to be a fallacy. Eternal life last forever. But don't confuse eternal life with possession of eternal life. If an employer offers life insurance to its employees free of charge while they remain with the company, it would unreasonable to assume that it remains in affect after one leaves the company just because it's called "life insurance"

In John 5:24, the promise of "eternal life is conditional. The benefit (eternal life) is realized as long as the conditions established remains true.

"Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears [ongoing action] my word and believes [ongoing action] him who sent me has [at the moment] eternal life. He [while the conditions are met] does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life." John 5:24.

Just because children can believe the gospel does not means that there isn't value in studying grammar with the intend to more accurately interpret God's Word.

You wrote, "We each have to work out or own salvation (Philippians 2:12), and if you feel you need to keep working to earn your salvation then I should not get in your way. [end of your quote].

You've likely been exposed to the straw man argument that those who don't believe in eternal security are working for their salvation and don't know if they are saved. These false arguments are constructed to exalt their theology at the expense of the truth.

I used to be part of a Free Grace Theology church which did this very thing. They had me and others convinced that both Calvinist and Arminians were working for their salvation and many didn't even know if they were saved.

Salvation is by faith in Jesus Christ! we cannot earn one second in the kingdom. It was purchased with the precious blood of Jesus.

This may be my last reply. You have demonstrated the love of Christ in your posts. Thanks for being willing to be challenged.

Brother Jerry –you can have the last word.

In Christ my Lord!

 

[brotherjerry]

JesusFirst

Understood as far as time is concerned. Not certain as far as interaction with others...some of those others are less...shall we say friendly to open and civil discussion

The comparison of life insurance to eternal life is a fallicious example in and of itself. If you were given an flashlight that was eternally lit. Do you think you could turn it off? If it could be turned off then it would not be eternally lit would it? In a physical realm if one is immortal they can never die because the body never decays...get's old. So if one were to get old and die...then one is not immortal. Being mortal means to be subject to death. Now those are on the physical level.

Eternal life is speaking on the spiritual level. We are born mortal...we are born dead. When we are saved we are born again alive. As John said in 5:24 we pass from death to life.

You are still missing in John 5:24. When Jesus says "whoever hears my word and believes Him who sent me..." He is not saying that the person that is saved has to continue to hear the word....or to continue to believe. The ongoing action that you are referring to is not the action of the believer, but the action of Christ....Basically from the time Christ said this sentence until this very second, and the next second, and every second until the end, whoever hears the word and believes HAS eternal life...yes at that moment when they hear and believe they are given the free gift from God, out of His grace. And Jesus finishes up...He that has eternal life will not face judgement but has passed (at the moment of receiving eternal life) from death to life.

Never said you did not know if you were saved...matter of fact I said you seemed quite secure in your faith. This is evident in the fact that we have carried on a discussion in a civil manner without castsing any judgements or anything like that. By working out our own salvations I feel that is more in relation to what we do with our salvation. It does come into play in these types of discussions however. For if you believe in any sort of conditions for salvation then one must be able to spell out what those conditions would be. God shows no partiality so the conditions would be the same for every man, just as the Laws applied to all Jews. So by definition of conditional security, you ARE working for your salvation. There is no straw man arguement to it. It does not matter if the condition is say 4 hail Mary's every morning or to maintain a belief....condition by definition is placing "work" into the mix. And if you are linking salvation to the condition, then you are creating a works based salvation. Maybe not to earn it initially, but to keep it you are.

I know you said you probably would not respond that makes me sad. Please understand I am not trying to argue with you, but I truly do want to try and better understand the theology better. I see a logical phallacy in conditional security when talking to people because just as I mentioned, by definition it places works as a condition of salvation, but then often those that follow this theology will turn around and say just what you did as well "salvation is by faith in Jesus! We cannot earn one second in the kingdom"....This confuses me when you say this, but then also say that salvation is conditional on something we are to do.

Maybe we will chat again here or in another thread. I wish you the best in whatever you do brother.

 

[Jesus First]

who is it that preserves our salvation?
Jude teaches quite clearly we are preserved by God Himself as does Paul.

Yes, “we” (those in the faith) are preserved by God. Are not the one’s who are preserved by God the same ones that continue in the faith? Jude encouraged believers to continue in the faith:

“But you, beloved, building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit, 21 keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ that leads to eternal life.” Jude 20

Yes, a gracious God keeps us saved. But we must be balanced and acknowledge our responsibility to keep our faith in Christ.

So it is that you must be called, sanctified and preserved. Still these are things the Holy Spirit does for us, all things work together for good to those who are the called of Jesus Christ, And Jesus said HE would lose not a single one of those the Father has given Him.

Dear brother “Sdoeney717, please quote Scripture without blending them together.

“And we know that for those who love [present tense participle] God all things work together for good, for those [same group who love God in the present] who are called according to his purpose.” Romans 8:28

“35 Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever [open ended] comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. 36 But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. 37 All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever [open invitation] comes to me I will never cast out.” John 6:35-38.

Who are the ones who “will come to me”? (V. 37). They are identified in verse 35 by “comes” and “believes”.

Simply it is about those who do not persist-persevere in belief, that they are not of the Father and never were of the Father even though they outwardly appeared to men to be so, they were only of Antichrist and are antichrists.

18 Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour.
19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.

I'm amazed how often my Calvinists brothers quote 1 John 2:19 (I say this respectfully) to teach that those who are not saved will depart from us. But is this really what John is saying? If John is introducing a new doctrine for the church, we would have confirmation from other passages and we would all have to stay in the same church our entire lives. And all who leave our churches would be unsaved. Of course John is not teaching this here, as this was a special situation that happened and we don't have all the details. So if John is not teaching that all who depart our church were never saved, then why is ok to give it this meaning for the sake of a theology?Or, maybe I'm incorrect in how Calvinist’s use this verse. Please let me know if I’m wrong .

Also, if the unsaved depart our presence according to this verse, how do we understand the parable of the wheat and tares where some who are not believers are with us until the final judgement?

The my sheep know my voice and they follow me, is a declarative statement of absolute truth. They do not cease ever to be Christ's sheep. But if they appear to have departed the faith for demonic doctrines, Apostle John tells us that none of them were (PAST TENSE) of us.

While the “sheep know my voice and they follow me” [end of your quote]. I didn't find in this passage here that those who departed were never saved. If they departed after “hear” (hearing) and “follow” (following) would this not make them formerly Christ’s sheep?

All this fits in great with Jesus teaching us about the sheep and the goats and the parable of the wheat and the tares. The tares NEVER turned into wheat and neither the wheat turn into tares. Each one was and is what they are. Christ is the great shepherd of the sheep and only of the sheep,
These things were written in simple ways to help common people understand, so do not go beyond what was written.

Your theology that “tares NEVER turned into wheat and neither the wheat turn into tares” [end of your quote], was NOT the point of this parable (correct?). Here is the conclusion given by Jesus: “Let both grow together until the harvest, and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.’ ” Matthew 13:30.

I agree with my Calvinist brothers (and sisters of course) that some people go through the motions but were never saved. However, I'm unable to establish a doctrine from drawing truth out of the Scriptures that all who leave the faith were never saved. Of course, as my brother Jerry wrote in another post —God knows who are His and we can be deceived.

Further, I agree " Christ does not shepherd goats or wolves or serpents.” [end of your quote]. Some are self deceived with a superficial faith. They may have acknowledged some facts and thought they were saved. Real faith in Christ will have action that testify of the Love of Christ in their heart.

In Christ!

 

[brotherjerry]

JesusFirst good to see you.

You said the following:

Yes, “we” (those in the faith) are preserved by God

Yes, a gracious God keeps us saved

And then you say "acknowledge our responsibility to keep our faith in Christ"
So which is it? Are you saying that God cannot keep us or preserve us? Seems to me if we are kept by God, and preserved by God...which the Bible does say...then we cannot be unsaved or unpreserved...the Bible also tells us that no one can snatch us from the Father's hands. Are we to say that we are more powerful than God and that we can take ourselves out of His grasp? See this is where I always get confused with the logical piecing together of the conditional salvation theology. On one hand proponents agree that salvation is by the grace of God, through faith and that it only takes faith to gain salvation. But then they turn it over to works in order to maintain or keep that salvation...which takes it from God's grace and makes salvation based on works. But the proponents will deny that it is works based. But the logical problem is that if it is conditional, then by definition it is works based.

I'm amazed how often my Calvinists brothers quote 1 John 2:19 (I say this respectfully) to teach that those who are not saved will depart from us. But is this really what John is saying?

Yes that is what John is saying...because Jesus said it as well in Matthew 7:22,23"Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me who practice lawlessness.'"

 

[expos4ever]

The comparison of life insurance to eternal life is a fallicious example in and of itself. If you were given an flashlight that was eternally lit. Do you think you could turn it off? If it could be turned off then it would not be eternally lit would it.

I think his analogy was indeed valid. In your counterargument, you raise the matter of "turning off" an eternally lit light. Well, that is not the appropriate analogy. No one, I think, is saying that the concept of "eternal life" can be changed to mean "non-eternal life". If someone said that, you would be quite right to object with the analogy to the flashlight.

But I believe the relevant issue here is indeed the possession of eternal life. The fact that the thing that we are given - "life" - is eternal does not mean we cannot effectively "return the gift" and lose that life. The "eternality" is a feature of the life in an of itself, not a feature governing the relationship of "possession" we have to that life.

 

[Jesus First]

I think his analogy was indeed valid. In your counterargument, you raise the matter of "turning off" an eternally lit light. Well, that is not the appropriate analogy. No one, I think, is saying that the concept of "eternal life" can be changed to mean "non-eternal life". If someone said that, you would be quite right to object with the analogy to the flashlight.

But I believe the relevant issue here is indeed the possession of eternal life. The fact that the thing that we are given - "life" - is eternal does not mean we cannot effectively "return the gift" and lose that life. The "eternality" is a feature of the life in an of itself, not a feature governing the relationship of "possession" we have to that life.

Thanks "Expos4ever" for your excellent explanation.

 

[brotherjerry]

Really? So whose life is it? This argument seems to be based on the idea that God is like Santa Claus...he has a bag full of gifts that are all the same and He just hands you one. You get to stick it in your pocket and take it out whenever you want to play with it...and if you don't play right, then Santa takes it back and gives it to someone else.

In the Book of Life does it have peoples names? Why yes it does. Life is intrinsically linked to the person. My eternal life belongs to me, it cannot be taken from me and given to you. Remember Jesus talking about drinking water? And when we drink of the water that he offers us, a well springs up inside of us to eternal life. When we drink eternal life becomes a part of us.

Jesus even a few verses earlier than John 4:14 mentioned above refers to the water as "living water" (John 4:10).

Jesus reiterates similar later in John 7:38 "From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water"

Jesus also explained to Nicodemus in John 3, about being born again. He says in Verse 5 "...unless one is born of water and the Spirit..." This is a spiritual birth, it makes us a new creature in Christ as Paul said in 2 Corinthians 5:17 "Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come"

Water being symbolic of salvation and eternal life are not new. Isaiah 12 speaks of both as well in verse 2 and 3
"Behold, God is my salvation, I will trust and not be afraid; For the Lord God is my strength and song, and He has become my salvation. Therefore you will joyously draw water from the springs of salvation"

The relationship between water being eternal life is very clear. And the relationship of that water to the believer is also very clear, it is a part of that person. Not once in any verse do we ever see mention of the water being removed, or the spring being turned off. But we get a clear picture that the spring is a part of us. We get a clear picture that those that are saved experienced a spiritual birth, which is into eternal life.

So if we are born again spiritually then how many times can we be born again? How many new creatures can a person become.

Back to salvation being a possession. Can you cite any verse that has someone telling God to take back the gift? No one would do that?! It is more valuable than gold, and you can bet if someone gave them a free brick of gold, they are not going to say "I don't want this anymore...go ahead and take it back". Sorry but God would have to take it from that person. Which brings us back to works to keep salvation and ultimately to earn salvation. If you can DO something to lose your salvation, then you must have to DO something to get it back...works based salvation...which is conditional salvation defined. So we are again back to the logical issues I mentioned before.

 

[expos4ever]

Really? So whose life is it? This argument seems to be based on the idea that God is like Santa Claus...he has a bag full of gifts that are all the same and He just hands you one. You get to stick it in your pocket and take it out whenever you want to play with it...and if you don't play right, then Santa takes it back and gives it to someone else.

The "eternality" attribute can be understood as applying to the life, not to the "possession" relation that exists between a person and such life. Let's go back to your flashlight. Suppose I have the magical power to light the flashlight and cause it to shine forever. I then give it to you. You can toss the flashlight away.

Your position on this is that God takes your existing "life" and irreversibly transforms so that it lasts forever. I get it - on this particular way of looking at things you have a point. But, and this is the point, it is not the only possible way to interpret what it means to be given eternal life. In light of a range of scriptures that I think clearly show that OSAS is false, we can legitimately interpret "eternal life" as a "thing" gets given to you and which can be taken away, or thrown away. And not as an irreversible transformation in the existing thing we call "our life".

I take your point, but this approach based on analyzing the concept of 'eternal life' does not get us anywhere - either your view or the view of JesusFirst and me could be correct - the concept of "eternal life" is too open-ended to be resolved by a simple inner analysis of it.

 

[brotherjerry]

I toss the flashlight away...does it quit shining? If I then repent does God give me a new flashlight?
Let's look at some scripture here with the flashlight in mind.
Now after John 7:38 previously we have John telling us what Jesus meant in reference to the rivers of living water.
John 7:39 But this He spoke of the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive; for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.
So the water that is in us is symbolic of the Holy Spirit
So lets go on and look at the Spirit some more.
2 Corinthians 1:22 who also sealed us and gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge
Ephesians 1:13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation - having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise.
Ephesians 4:30 Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption

Those 3 verses would be like if you put superglue on that flashlight and handed it to me. It will have sealed a bond between me and the flashlight.

Now take a look here at
John 10:29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.

This verse clearly states that no one can be taken from the Father's hand. The conditional salvation theology adds to this verse by claiming an omission...Typically they claim that the verse does not say that someone could not walk out of the Father's hands. But in reality it does say that...it says that 'no one is able'...no one is no one...not even yourself.

And you may be correct in that it will get us no where. I would disagree that the concept is open ended, I find it very neat and closed up with a pretty bow on it. And I still have a hard time with the logical problems with the idea that conditional security proponents will say salvation is by faith alone, but yet fall back on works in order to maintain salvation...which puts salvation as works based, but yet most proponents will claim it is not. But then they never explain how it is not...if I have to DO something to earn/keep salvation, then salvation becomes works based. And that contradicts clear verses in the Bible.

 

[sdowney717]

Eph 1
13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.

God has ownership rights, God sees us through to the end, to the praise of His glory.
It is glorious for God to be preserving His saints. We are purchased to God by the blood of His Son.
God will never leave or forsake us, consider truly He is all powerful and does whatever He pleases, taking NO counsel from any other being, including YOU! And that God is within you to work and to will of His own pleasure. And it is His pleasure to give to you the kingdom. He guarantees our inheritance. He does all these things for His own sake, for His glory.

He works all things according to the will of His own council will and no one else's will.
The implications here are tremendous for the believer and the unbeiever.
11 In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will, 12 that we who first trusted in Christ should be to the praise of His glory.

Philippians
2
12 Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; 13 for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure.

This working out our salvation is our faith walk with Christ, we have choices to make, we are not robots. Paul is describing what to do after we are saved, we are to walk with God and do things pleasing to Him, and we are to fear and tremble that God is working His will in us, that is all things are in His control and God does whatever He wants. We are to pay close attention the what God teaches by way of His apostles ans His words, and not to be careless with what He says, but be diligent. That is we are to profitable to the Lord, recall the parables of the talents, God required it of those who did not respect Him in what He gave them and told them to do, stripping rewards from one and giving it all to another.

Eph 5
Walk in Wisdom
15 See then that you walk circumspectly, not as fools but as wise, 16 redeeming the time, because the days are evil.

17 Therefore do not be unwise, but understand what the will of the Lord is. 18 And do not be drunk with wine, in which is dissipation; but be filled with the Spirit, 19 speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord, 20 giving thanks always for all things to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, 21 submitting to one another in the fear of God.

 

[expos4ever]

Those 3 verses would be like if you put superglue on that flashlight and handed it to me. It will have sealed a bond between me and the flashlight.

I disagree and will claim that a common way to get misled is to over-reach on metaphors. Yes, we have references to our eternal future being "sealed", but some seals can indeed be broken.

I will suggest that people often do the following:

1. Over-reach on metaphors to support a doctrine they are otherwise committed to;
2. Based on that over-reach, they simply ignore, or invent wildly implausible arguments, to deal with texts that challenge their position. Romans 2:6-7 is a prime example - it clearly states salvation is "according to good works". But people resist this tooth and nail by coming up with frankly absurd explanations for it. So what are you going to do .

I prefer the "balance" of nuancing these metaphors (e.g. the metaphor of the seal) in light of other texts that, to me at least, justify such nuancing. In short, I think the "cost" of nuancing a metaphor within reason is lower than the cost of inventing wildly implausible explanations for other texts if the metaphor is not appropriately nuanced.

All of this to say: The issues at play in debating matters of theology are complex enough to allow a person to hold to almost any position, no matter how strange, since unlike the scenario in a mathematical proof, there is never any clear "coup-de-grace" that can be delivered against a position on a matter of theology.

ASIDE: I do not expect to change your mind - I have never met a person on any of these sites who ever changed their minds about an item of doctrine that they were clearly committed to coming in to the discussion.

This, of course, is a massive indictment on the entire premise of this and similar sites - it really seems to be a futile endeavor to discuss matters of doctrine with people who all appear to be too emotionally invested in what they believe. I believe I can truthfully say that I believe I am somewhat of an exception in this respect: I have changed my mind on a number of matters of doctrine based on study and discussion.

I only post for the lurkers who I suspect are not already committed to a position and therefore are able to evaluate arguments reasonably objectively. But, of course, I am happy to respond to your arguments in pursuit of this goal. And I will not take offense if you do not expect me to evaluate your position objectively - based on my personal history, almost no one changes their minds, even in the face of overwhelming evidence.

 

[sdowney717]

I disagree and will claim that a common way to get misled is to over-reach on metaphors. Yes, we have references to our eternal future being "sealed", but some seals can indeed be broken.

I will suggest that people often do the following:

1. Over-reach on metaphors to support a doctrine they are otherwise committed to;
2. Based on that over-reach, they simply ignore, or invent wildly implausible arguments, to deal with texts that challenge their position. Romans 2:6-7 is a prime example - it clearly states salvation is "according to good works". But people resist this tooth and nail by coming up with frankly absurd explanations for it. So what are you going to do .

I prefer the "balance" of nuancing these metaphors (e.g. the metaphor of the seal) in light of other texts that, to me at least, justify such nuancing. In short, I think the "cost" of nuancing a metaphor within reason is lower than the cost of inventing wildly implausible explanations for other texts if the metaphor is not appropriately nuanced.

All of this to say: The issues at play in debating matters of theology are complex enough to allow a person to hold to almost any position, no matter how strange, since unlike the scenario in a mathematical proof, there is never any clear "coup-de-grace" that can be delivered against a position on a matter of theology.

ASIDE: I do not expect to change your mind - I have never met a person on any of these sites who ever changed their minds about an item of doctrine that they were clearly committed to coming in to the discussion.

This, of course, is a massive indictment on the entire premise of this and similar sites - it really seems to be a futile endeavor to discuss matters of doctrine with people who all appear to be too emotionally invested in what they believe. I believe I can truthfully say that I believe I am somewhat of an exception in this respect: I have changed my mind on a number of matters of doctrine based on study and discussion.

I only post for the lurkers who I suspect are not already committed to a position and therefore are able to evaluate arguments reasonably objectively. But, of course, I am happy to respond to your arguments in pursuit of this goal. And I will not take offense if you do not expect me to evaluate your position objectively - based on my personal history, almost no one changes their minds, even in the face of overwhelming evidence.

I have changed my mind before, based on what I read in Scriptures. Too many times people simply express their personal views and biases and try to make scripture fit, maybe for not so pure reasons. Such is life, cultic and charming personalities with wonderful sounding words both Paul and Peter condemned as agents of Satan and false apostles and teachers. But their's are empty words not having any of God's spiritual power behind them, and are energized by demons-satan. You know that people who are in opposition to God are as Paul said held captive by Satan to do his will, and it takes God to be be merciful to grant them to repent, and come to their senses, else they never will repent. The coming to their senses, makes me think they are in obvious demonic doctrines which sound people in the faith easily will recognize.

I like this one.
2 Peter 2, the whole chapter is magnificently describing false teachers, prophets, who are so much all over the airwaves today. And Peter gives us a lot of obvious traits in his description of these false fakes.
18 For when they speak great swelling words of emptiness,