Eternal Security and Apostasy

Winken

Heimat
Supporter
Sep 24, 2010
5,709
3,505
✟168,847.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Wow! Talk about cherry-picking passages. So, in other words, one can arrive at the OSAS position only by discounting or redirecting lots of passages.
'fraid not. That's your misinterpretation.
 
Upvote 0

TheSeabass

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2015
1,855
358
✟47,754.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Hello! I attend a Southern Baptist church and for a long time I believed in eternal security, but I am now having doubts.

I researched the Anabaptist perspective and found it quite convincing. Basically, the article was saying that you can only be born again once. However, they believe that salvation can be lost through constant sinning, but God will take you back if you sincerely repent. They define it as a Christian who perpetually sins without repenting is a dead Christian, but he can be "resurrected" to the the faith. I like this interpretation because of its parallels to the Crucifixion and Resurrection.

The article also states that if those who renounce the faith were never really saved to begin with, that would imply that those believers would have to start over in the faith should the decide to come back, relaying a foundation in other words. An interesting example they used is Moses leading the Israelites through the wilderness, and making them go back to Egypt and start over on their trek to the Promised Land because they didn't get it right the first time.

While I find the Anabaptist perspective quite convincing, there is 1 John 2:19

1) The promise of salvation is conditional (2 Peter 1:10) and not unconditional as OSAS claims

2) 1 John 2:19 does not teach the "never really saved to begin with" excuse. It is just an excuse in an attempt to get around the biblical examples of those who did possess the promise of salvation but lost it.
Logically, a person cannot lose what they never really had, a person cannot fall who was always fallen.

3) as per Moses and the Israelites. In Hebrews 3:16-19 some of the Israelites went into unbelief while in the wilderness. Does their going into unbelief "prove" they "never were really saved" from Egyptian bondage? No.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

FaithfulPilgrim

Eternally Seeking
Feb 8, 2015
455
120
South Carolina
✟39,839.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Libertarian
1) The promise of salvation is conditional (2 Peter 1:10) and not unconditional as OSAS claims

2) 1 John 2:19 does not teach the "never really saved to begin with" excuse. It is just an excuse in an attempt to get around the biblical examples of those who did possess the promise of salvation but lost it.
Logically, a person cannot lose what they never really had, a person cannot fall who was always fallen.

3) as per Moses and the Israelites. In Hebrews 3:16-19 some of the Israelites went into unbelief while in the wilderness. Does their going into unbelief "prove" they "never were really saved" from Egyptian bondage? No.

Good points you make here. What about the verse where Jesus says "All those the Father gives to me I shall never lose?" I'm paraphrasing, of course, but only because I don't remember where it is found.
 
Upvote 0

TheSeabass

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2015
1,855
358
✟47,754.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Good points you make here. What about the verse where Jesus says "All those the Father gives to me I shall never lose?" I'm paraphrasing, of course, but only because I don't remember where it is found.

John 6:35 "And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst."
John 6:36 "But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not."
John 6:37 "All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out."

Who are the ones that the Father gives to Christ? Does God unconditionally, randomly give certain men to Christ? No. Even though "belief" is not mentioned in verse 37 it is in verse 35. Therefore the ones that the Father gives to Christ are the ones that conditionally "believeth" and "cometh". The verbs "believeth" and "cometh" are in the present tense denoting an action that is ongoing, continuous. So as long as one conditionally maintains an ongoing belief, God continues to "giveth" that believer to Christ and that believer must conditionally continue to "cometh" to Christ. The present tense of the verbs "believeth", "giveth" and "cometh" show an action that must be ongoing if one is not to be cast out. If one quits believing, God will no longer continue to give him to Christ and his having quit coming to Christ means he can be cast out.....if he does not repent. So note how not being cast out, that is, being saved is CONDITIONAL upon the person maintaining a present tense "believeth" and "cometh" to Christ. OSAS teaches salvation is UNCONDITIONAL implying one can quit believing and quit coming to Christ and still be saved anyway...which is biblically not possible.
(Those that follow the OSAS teaching will generally try and dismiss the present tense of verbs, but the present tense is important.)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

FreeGrace2

Senior Veteran
Nov 15, 2012
20,401
1,703
USA
✟184,557.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
1) The promise of salvation is conditional (2 Peter 1:10) and not unconditional as OSAS claims
The claim of eternal security comes from biblical promises.

For example, Jesus promised that those who receive eternal life will never perish, in John 10:28. iow, there are no conditions or requirements for never perishing for those who have received eternal life.

Also, Eph 1:13-14 and 4:30 tell us that those "having believed" (aorist tense) ARE sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit, a guarantee for the day of redemption. Add to this is the fact that no where does the Bible address this sealing and give any warnings of how it might be undone. iow, it can't be, since it is a promise of God.

1 Pet 1:23 teaches that we have been born again of imperishable seed. Hm. How is that not teaching eternal security?

Finally, Heb 6:18 says that it is impossible for God to lie. Since there are no verses that promise that one can lose salvation/eternal life, and many verses that promise being sealed for the day of redemption, or never perishing, the view that salvation/eternal life can be lost would mean that God doesn't keep His promises.

iow, God lies. Which is impossible.
 
Upvote 0

FreeGrace2

Senior Veteran
Nov 15, 2012
20,401
1,703
USA
✟184,557.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
(Those that follow the OSAS teaching will generally try and dismiss the present tense of verbs, but the present tense is important.)
Actually, the opposite is true. The OSNAS group abuses the present tense as if it means "results of an action occur only as long as the action occurs", and ignoring the frequent use of the aorist tense for 'believe', in which duration of action isn't even considered.

However, the best example of the proper understanding of both the aorist and present tenses is found in Jesus' parable of the soils.

Luke 8 -
12 Those along the path are the ones who hear, and then the devil comes and takes away the word from their hearts, so that they may not believe (aorist) and be saved.
13 Those on the rocky ground are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it, but they have no root. They believe (present) for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away.

If the OSNAS group were correct in their view of conditional salvation, Jesus would have reversed these different tenses.

But v.12 shows that believing in a point in time (aorist) results in salvation. And in v.13, Jesus used the present tense but added "for a while", showing that the present tense clearly doesn't mean results of an action occur only as long as the action continues.
 
Upvote 0

TheSeabass

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2015
1,855
358
✟47,754.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
The claim of eternal security comes from biblical promises.

For example, Jesus promised that those who receive eternal life will never perish, in John 10:28. iow, there are no conditions or requirements for never perishing for those who have received eternal life.

Also, Eph 1:13-14 and 4:30 tell us that those "having believed" (aorist tense) ARE sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit, a guarantee for the day of redemption. Add to this is the fact that no where does the Bible address this sealing and give any warnings of how it might be undone. iow, it can't be, since it is a promise of God.

1 Pet 1:23 teaches that we have been born again of imperishable seed. Hm. How is that not teaching eternal security?

Finally, Heb 6:18 says that it is impossible for God to lie. Since there are no verses that promise that one can lose salvation/eternal life, and many verses that promise being sealed for the day of redemption, or never perishing, the view that salvation/eternal life can be lost would mean that God doesn't keep His promises.

iow, God lies. Which is impossible.
No verse teaches the promise of salvation is unconditional.

2 Peter 1:10 "Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:"

The use of the word "if" proves one can fall from his calling and election. The verb "do" shows the Christian has a working role in his own salvation to keep from falling away.

The Ephesian epistle was written to the GROUP Christian, " to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus" Ephesians 1:1. Paul is writing to the GROUP "saints" and "faithful in Christ". This GROUP called Christian is sealed and if I desire to be sealed then I must belong to this GROUP and faithfully remain in this GROUP. Yet IF i do not make my calling and election sure, I can fall from this sealed group. The group remains sealed but I will not for I am no longer in the group. The bible does not teach anything about INDIVIDUALS being UNCONDITIONALLY sealed apart from the group. So again, if one wants to be "sealed" then he must CONDITIONALLY become a Christian and faithfully remain in that group (Revelation 2:10)

1 Peter 1:12 the seed is the word of God (Luke 8:11) and God's word will last forever. Yet God's word lasting forever does not prove that the promise of salvation cannot be lost for God's eternal word does teach that promise can be lost. The word of God being the seed, 1 Pet 1:23 shows how the word of God plays a role in man being born again and man can be assured that word will never change and therefore have trust in it.

God never promised that salvation can never be lost under any circumstance.
 
Upvote 0

TheSeabass

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2015
1,855
358
✟47,754.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Actually, the opposite is true. The OSNAS group abuses the present tense as if it means "results of an action occur only as long as the action occurs", and ignoring the frequent use of the aorist tense for 'believe', in which duration of action isn't even considered.

However, the best example of the proper understanding of both the aorist and present tenses is found in Jesus' parable of the soils.

Luke 8 -
12 Those along the path are the ones who hear, and then the devil comes and takes away the word from their hearts, so that they may not believe (aorist) and be saved.
13 Those on the rocky ground are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it, but they have no root. They believe (present) for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away.

If the OSNAS group were correct in their view of conditional salvation, Jesus would have reversed these different tenses.

But v.12 shows that believing in a point in time (aorist) results in salvation. And in v.13, Jesus used the present tense but added "for a while", showing that the present tense clearly doesn't mean results of an action occur only as long as the action continues.

John 3:16
John 3:35
John 5:24
John 6:35

The above verses, along with others, have the verb "believeth" in the present tense. The reason those that back OSAS will sometimes attack the present tense is that the present tense make having everlasting life CONDITIONAL upon a present tense belief thereby undermining OSAS claims that salvation is unconditional. It is not biblical possible for a person to quit believing yet still not perish per John 3:16, quit believing yet still never thirst per John 3:35; quit believing yet still have everlasting life per John 5:24.

Luke 8:13 shows that belief must be ongoing, sustained to be saved and not believe for just awhile yet still saved. One will "fall away" without a present tense belief.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

NeedyFollower

Well-Known Member
Feb 29, 2016
1,024
437
63
N Carolina
✟71,145.00
Faith
Anabaptist
Marital Status
Celibate
Hello! I attend a Southern Baptist church and for a long time I believed in eternal security, but I am now having doubts.

I researched the Anabaptist perspective and found it quite convincing. Basically, the article was saying that you can only be born again once. However, they believe that salvation can be lost through constant sinning, but God will take you back if you sincerely repent. They define it as a Christian who perpetually sins without repenting is a dead Christian, but he can be "resurrected" to the the faith. I like this interpretation because of its parallels to the Crucifixion and Resurrection.

The article also states that if those who renounce the faith were never really saved to begin with, that would imply that those believers would have to start over in the faith should the decide to come back, relaying a foundation in other words. An interesting example they used is Moses leading the Israelites through the wilderness, and making them go back to Egypt and start over on their trek to the Promised Land because they didn't get it right the first time.

While I find the Anabaptist perspective quite convincing, there is 1 John 2:19
Hi brother ..I also used to be southern baptist butfor various reasons I left ( one biggy was the fact that God had mercy on me a wicked sinner and enemy of His so I no longer felt I could go to war and kill those who did not yet know God's mercy or if they did know God's mercy then it meant I was killing my christian brother )
Anyway ..I know all of the arguments for eternal security and it has been debated back and forth for centuries ...along with trinity , grace and works , etc. I also am aware that at some point we will see the great apostasy/ falling away/ rebellion predicted in 2nd timothy , 3 . I personally feel like I am still working out my salvation and I dare not cause anyone to stumble by spouting a theology. It is not lost on me however that most churches ( southern baptist included ) are very much storing up treasures , living the life and basing their hope on a set of scriptures ..I wonder if people want truth or assurance of salvation ? Is assurance of salvation being peddled ? It seems to me that these scriptures were written to a persecuted and cast out people ..most being very, very poor . Why are we applying them to us ? I think the message to us today would be closer to the message of our Lord to the churches in revelation ...repent . We are in love with this world like Demas and have no shame ..divorce and remarriage , career minded , pleasure seeking ...basically taking God's name in vain and plugging together many many scriptures ( written to someone else ..not wealthy Americans ) to assure us of salvation . What do you think ?
 
Upvote 0

FreeGrace2

Senior Veteran
Nov 15, 2012
20,401
1,703
USA
✟184,557.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
No verse teaches the promise of salvation is unconditional.
Let me introduce you to the promise of Jesus Himself:
I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. John 10:28

Note the promise to those who receive eternal life: they will never perish.

Therefore, the ONLY condition for never perishing is to receive eternal life. So said Jesus.

2 Peter 1:10 "Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:"

The use of the word "if" proves one can fall from his calling and election. The verb "do" shows the Christian has a working role in his own salvation to keep from falling away.
So, your view is that man has a part in saving himself. Not what Jesus taught.

To "make your call and election sure" means to confirm it.

1 Peter 1:12 the seed is the word of God (Luke 8:11) and God's word will last forever. Yet God's word lasting forever does not prove that the promise of salvation cannot be lost for God's eternal word does teach that promise can be lost. The word of God being the seed, 1 Pet 1:23 shows how the word of God plays a role in man being born again and man can be assured that word will never change and therefore have trust in it.
Speaking of 1 Pet 1, let's consider v23 - " For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God."

So, please explain how one born of imperishable seed could ever perish.

God never promised that salvation can never be lost under any circumstance.
Sure did. I just gave 2 verses: John 10:28 and 1 Pet 1:23. And there are many more.
 
Upvote 0

FreeGrace2

Senior Veteran
Nov 15, 2012
20,401
1,703
USA
✟184,557.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
John 3:16
John 3:35
John 5:24
John 6:35

The above verses, along with others, have the verb "believeth" in the present tense.
Please go back and read my post where I proved that the present tense doesn't mean an action that only has results as long as the action continues, whih is how the OSNAS group abuses it.

The reason those that back OSAS will sometimes attack the present tense is that the present tense make having everlasting life CONDITIONAL upon a present tense belief thereby undermining OSAS claims that salvation is unconditional.
In my post that you didn't read, I showed verses that have 'believe' in the aorist tense, which has no sense of duration.

It is not biblical possible for a person to quit believing yet still not perish per John 3:16
Then the ONLY conclusion is that Jesus lied in 10:28.

quit believing yet still never thirst per John 3:35; quit believing yet still have everlasting life per John 5:24.
Apparently you're unaware of the fact that thirsting in John 4 in Jesus' discussion with a woman at a well is that Jesus used the aorist tense for "drink", which results in never thirsting.

Luke 8:13 shows that belief must be ongoing, sustained to be saved and not believe for just awhile yet still saved.
This claim is simply untrue. Jesus said nothing about having to continue to believe in order to continue to be saved. As I already explained. And Jesus used the aorist tense in 8:12 in the phrase "lest they believe and be saved". Which is the opposite of your claims

One will "fall away" without a present tense belief.
Which still says nothing about loss of salvation.
 
Upvote 0

TheSeabass

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2015
1,855
358
✟47,754.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Let me introduce you to the promise of Jesus Himself:
I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. John 10:28

Note the promise to those who receive eternal life: they will never perish.

The sheep of John 10:28 are Christ's sheep that have a present tense hearing and following John 10:27.

Therefore to be of the sheep of verse 28 one must conditionally maintain a present tense hearing and following of Christ. It is impossible to be of the sheep of verse 28 without ever hearing and following Christ.

FreeGrace2 said:
Therefore, the ONLY condition for never perishing is to receive eternal life. So said Jesus.

The question is WHO receives eternal life and WHY do they receive it?

The who is Christ's sheep and the why is they faithfully continue to hear and follow Christ.

FreeGrace2 said:
So, your view is that man has a part in saving himself. Not what Jesus taught.

Jesus told men to believe, repent, confess and be baptized to be saved (Jn 8:34; Lk 13:3,5; Mt 10:32,33; Mk 16:16 thereby givng man a role in his own salvation. Therefore those that do what the Lord says (Luke 6:46) are in that sense 'saving themselves"... fulfilling their role in salvation:

Acts 2:40 Save yourselves
1 Tim 4:16 save thyself
2 Cor 7:1 cleanse ourselves
James 4:8 cleanse your hands, purify your hearts
2 Tim 2:21 man therefore purge himself
1 Pet 1:22 see ye have purified your souls

FreeGrace2 said:
To "make your call and election sure" means to confirm it

Peter said IF you do these things, ye shall never fall. Peter makes calling/election CONDITIONAL. The language clearly proves a Christian CAN fall.

FreeGrace2 said:
Speaking of 1 Pet 1, let's consider v23 - " For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God."

So, please explain how one born of imperishable seed could ever perish.

The seed is the word of God that does not perish. Simply because God's word will never perish does not mean the promise of salvation can never be lost under any circumstance. God's word/seed will never perish but the Christian can perish if he does not faithfully maintain a present tense belief John 3:16.

FreeGrace2 said:
Sure did. I just gave 2 verses: John 10:28 and 1 Pet 1:23. And there are many more.

As I have shown, neither of these verses says the promise of salvation can never be lost under any condition/circumstance.
 
Upvote 0

TheSeabass

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2015
1,855
358
✟47,754.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Please go back and read my post where I proved that the present tense doesn't mean an action that only has results as long as the action continues, whih is how the OSNAS group abuses it.

You are ignoring the present tense in these verses:

John 3:16
John 3:35
John 5:24
John 6:35

Each of these verses CONDITONALLY requires a present tense believing for one to never thirst, to have everlasting life. The present tense kills OSAS claims salvation is unconditional.

So tell me, can one quit believing a yet still maintain everlatsing life per John 5:24?

FreeGrace2 said:
In my post that you didn't read, I showed verses that have 'believe' in the aorist tense, which has no sense of duration.

I am not dealing with the aorist tense but showing the importance of the present tense. The present tense requires a faithfulness on part of the Christian to faithfully continue to believe in order to maintain the promise of everlasting life. The verses you cite do not undo this nor change this.


Luke 8 -
12 Those along the path are the ones who hear, and then the devil comes and takes away the word from their hearts, so that they may not believe (aorist) and be saved.
13 Those on the rocky ground are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it, but they have no root. They believe (present) for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away.

The reason those in verses 12 and 13 were not saved/fell away is they did not conditionally, faithfully maintain a present tense belief for in both cases they quit believing and when one quits believing he is no longer of the sheep of John 10:28, no longer has the promise of everlasting life John 5:24. These verses prove my point, not yours.

FreeGrace2 said:
Then the ONLY conclusion is that Jesus lied in 10:28.

The bible shows there are 2 sides to salvation:
1) required faithfulness on part of the Christian Revelation 2:10; 1 Corinthians 4:1-2
2) God's faithfulness to the group called Christian.

The only conclusion that can be reached here is that supporters of OSAS cherry pick out the verses that deal with (#2) God's faithfulness to Christians and falsely claim God's faithfulness is due to OSAS but avoid all the verses that require Christians to be faithful to God and His word.

You keep bringing up John 10:28 that speaks to God's faithfulness to those that are Christians but do not really want to deal with verse 27 that speaks to requirement that Christians must maintain a faithful present tense hearing and following of Christ to be of those sheep in v28. It is IMPOSSIBLE for ANYONE to be of the sheep of Jn 1);28 without ever having a faithful present tense hearing and following of Christ.
I have even seen some people attempt the impossible in trying to somehow find a way to get one to be of Christ's sheep first, THEN one hears and follows Christ in a attempt to do an end around of this passage


The fact Christians have been commanded to be faithful implies that Christians CAN become unfaithful and God has no obligation to remain faithful and save those that become unfaithful to Him.


FreeGrace2 said:
Apparently you're unaware of the fact that thirsting in John 4 in Jesus' discussion with a woman at a well is that Jesus used the aorist tense for "drink", which results in never thirsting.


John 4:14
The aorist does not change the fact that if one quits drinking of Christ's water he will thirst again. There is still a condition that must be met (drinking) that is necessary for one to never thirst again. Hopefully you are not trying to imply that the aorist tense means one can quit drinking yet still never thirst again?

The verb drink in Jn 4:14 is in the subjunctive mood. Strong's describes the subjunctive mood as "The action described may or may not occur, depending upon circumstances." This means one may or may not thirst again depending upon the circumstance if one drinks. So if one quits drinking he will thirst again.

So even though the verb tense puts the action upon initial drinking it does not mean one can quit drinking and still never thirst again. The constative aorist shows drinking is not one single momentary act:

(my emp)
The Greek verb for "drinks" is the subjunctive aorist piei. According to Lenski (p. 310), this verb "expresses one act of drinking, which is never repeated." The aorist tense, however, does not demand a single, unrepeated act. As Shank (p. 80) does, we might regard piei here as a constative aorist. Concerning the constative aorist, Wallace (p. 557) writes, "The event might be iterative in nature, or durative, or momentary, but the aorist says none of this. It places the stress on the act of the occurrence, not its nature."

According to the NAU, Jesus said (John 7:37-38), "If anyone is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink. He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, 'From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water.'" NAU With regard to these verses, Stott (pp. 53-54) writes:

Now the verbs (thirsting, coming, drinking, believing) are all in the present tense. So we are not only to come to Jesus once, in penitence and faith, but also thereafter to keep coming and to keep drinking, because we keep thirsting.
Link: John 4:7-15



====


John 2:20
The verb 'building' is a constative aorist meaning the building was one process that lasted 46 years. Likewise the 'drinking' of Jn 4:14 is one process that lasts a lifetime.

1 John 4:15
The verb "confess" is a constative aorist, subjunctive mood. (my emp)
Wuest explains that confesses "is in the aorist tense, making the act of confession a definite one, and the classification, constative aorist, speaking of the fact that that confession is a life-time confession, and represents the sustained attitude of the heart." (Word Studies from the Greek New Testament)

The subjunctive mood.... if one quits confessing God no longer will dwell in him and he no longer dwells in God.

FreeGrace2 said:
This claim is simply untrue. Jesus said nothing about having to continue to believe in order to continue to be saved. As I already explained. And Jesus used the aorist tense in 8:12 in the phrase "lest they believe and be saved". Which is the opposite of your claims


Which still says nothing about loss of salvation.

John 3:16
John 3:35
John 5:24
John 6:35

1) The use of the present tense in these 4 verses proves that Jesus is for a fact requiring a continued believing
2) you are implying one can quit believing and still be saved which is not biblically possible. Unbelief is a "condemned already" state (John 3:18) not a saved state.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

FreeGrace2

Senior Veteran
Nov 15, 2012
20,401
1,703
USA
✟184,557.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
The sheep of John 10:28 are Christ's sheep that have a present tense hearing and following John 10:27.
Which is irrelevant to how to never perish. The key is to receive eternal life.

If one had to present tense hear and follow, then Jesus would have said so IN v.28.

The "them" in v.28 are His sheep, plain and simple. And we know how one becomes one of His sheep from v.9: entering through Him as the gate. This is a metaphor for believing in Him.

Further, your obsession with abusing the present tense is refuted in Eph 1:13 where Paul says, "having believed" (aorist tense), the believer IS sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit, a guarantee for the day of redemption.

All who have received eternal life will never perish. All who have been sealed are guaranteed for the day of redemption. The Bible agrees with itself.

Therefore to be of the sheep of verse 28 one must conditionally maintain a present tense hearing and following of Christ.
There is nothing in the Bible that says this. Your opinion is not found in Scripture.

It is impossible to be of the sheep of verse 28 without ever hearing and following Christ.
I fully agree. To be saved, one MUST have heard the gospel, then understood the gospel, and then BELIEVED the gospel in order to be saved.

But following Christ is a command for believers only. It will never save any unbeliever.

The question is WHO receives eternal life and WHY do they receive it?
Only believers receive eternal life. Here's the proof for that:
Eternal Life:

John 3:15-16
15 so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life. 16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

John 3:36 "He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."

John 5:24 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.

John 6:40 "For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day."

John 6:47 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life.

Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord

1 Tim 1:16 Yet for this reason I found mercy, so that in me as the foremost, Jesus Christ might demonstrate His perfect patience as an example for those who would believe in Him for eternal life.


Gal 3:22 But the Scripture has shut up everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe.

1 John 5:13 These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life.

Now, as to "why" they receive it: it pleases God to save those who believe:
For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 1 Cor 1:21

Acts 2:40 Save yourselves
1 Tim 4:16 save thyself
2 Cor 7:1 cleanse ourselves
James 4:8 cleanse your hands, purify your hearts
2 Tim 2:21 man therefore purge himself
1 Pet 1:22 see ye have purified your souls
So, it seems you think the Bible teaches one to be their own savior, huh.

Peter said IF you do these things, ye shall never fall. Peter makes calling/election CONDITIONAL. The language clearly proves a Christian CAN fall.
I've never argued otherwise. But what would make one assume that "falling" means losing salvation?

I said this:
"Speaking of 1 Pet 1, let's consider v23 - " For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God."

So, please explain how one born of imperishable seed could ever perish."
The seed is the word of God that does not perish.
Are you kidding?? No, the verse is about our NEW NATURE (2 Cor 5:17). The verse says clearly that we "have been BORN AGAIN". By imperishable seed. Therefore, just as our physical seed is corruptible and will perish, our new nature cannot perish.

Simply because God's word will never perish does not mean the promise of salvation can never be lost under any circumstance.
The verse isn't about God's word never perishing, but the FACT that our new natures will never perish.

I'm always amazed at how far out one who believes in loss of salvation will go to misread verses in order to miss what is plainly being said.

God's word/seed will never perish but the Christian can perish if he does not faithfully maintain a present tense belief John 3:16.
Abusing the present tense doesn't help your view. The aorist tense is used frequently as well. If continuous belief was NECESSARY to stay saved, then the Bible would NEVER have used the aorist. But it does.

As I have shown, neither of these verses says the promise of salvation can never be lost under any condition/circumstance.
You've shown no such thing. Just your opinion. And Scripture had to be misread in order to come to your conclusion.
 
Upvote 0

FreeGrace2

Senior Veteran
Nov 15, 2012
20,401
1,703
USA
✟184,557.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
I said this:
"Please go back and read my post where I proved that the present tense doesn't mean an action that only has results as long as the action continues, whih is how the OSNAS group abuses it."
You are ignoring the present tense in these verses:

John 3:16
John 3:35
John 5:24
John 6:35
Notice how you ignored what I proved about the present and aorist tense.

Each of these verses CONDITONALLY requires a present tense believing for one to never thirst, to have everlasting life.
Please go back to John 4 where Jesus used the verb "to drink" the water He gives in the aorist tense. iow, just ONE drink and one will NEVER thirst again.

The present tense kills OSAS claims salvation is unconditional.
Nonsense. Why do you keep ignoring the aorist tense in these verses?
John 4 "drink"
Luke 8:12 "lest they believe and be saved"
Acts 16:31 "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved"
Rom 10:9 "If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved."

So tell me, can one quit believing a yet still maintain everlasting life per John 5:24?
I'm happy to tell you that those who believe will never perish.

So tell me, why did Paul use the aorist tense in Acts 16:31, if one must continue to believe in order to continue to be saved?

I am not dealing with the aorist tense but showing the importance of the present tense.
Of course not. Because it refutes your claims about the present tense.

And, Jesus refutes your abuse of the present tense. In Luke 8:13 He said the second soil "believed for a while". That is present tense, but they sure didn't "continue to believe" as being claimed about the present tense. And in the previous verse Jesus used the aorist tense for "lest they believe and be saved".

The present tense requires a faithfulness on part of the Christian to faithfully continue to believe in order to maintain the promise of everlasting life. The verses you cite do not undo this nor change this.
Then you simply do not even grasp the issue at all.

Luke 8 -
12 Those along the path are the ones who hear, and then the devil comes and takes away the word from their hearts, so that they may not believe (aorist) and be saved.
13 Those on the rocky ground are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it, but they have no root. They believe (present) for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away.
Once again, one is saved by a point in time belief in Christ. Very plainly stated.
And, present tense believing doesn't mean continuous believing.

The reason those in verses 12 and 13 were not saved/fell away is they did not conditionally, faithfully maintain a present tense belief for in both cases they quit believing and when one quits believing he is no longer of the sheep of John 10:28, no longer has the promise of everlasting life John 5:24. These verses prove my point, not yours.
It seems reading comprehension isn't your forte. v.12 does NOT say the first soil "quit believing" as you claim here. They NEVER believed. And the point is that one is saved from aorist tense believing. Period. Not present tense believing.

The only conclusion that can be reached here is that supporters of OSAS cherry pick out the verses that deal with (#2) God's faithfulness to Christians and falsely claim God's faithfulness is due to OSAS but avoid all the verses that require Christians to be faithful to God and His word.
Rather, you've already admitted that you're not going to deal with the aorist tense. And it's obvious why. It refutes your false claims about the present tense.

You keep bringing up John 10:28 that speaks to God's faithfulness to those that are Christians but do not really want to deal with verse 27 that speaks to requirement that Christians must maintain a faithful present tense hearing and following of Christ to be of those sheep in v28.
Where would anyone see any "requirement" to be a sheep in v.27? Jesus is simply noting what His sheep do. But the requirement for being saved is found in 10:9 - I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved.They will come in and go out, and find pasture.

So, what do you think Jesus meant in 10:9?

The fact Christians have been commanded to be faithful implies that Christians CAN become unfaithful and God has no obligation to remain faithful and save those that become unfaithful to Him.
Wow. Wrong again. This is what the Bible says about God's faithfulness in 2 Tim 2:
12 if we endure, we will also reign with him. If we deny him, he will also deny us;
13 if we are faithless, he remains faithful, for he cannot deny himself.

There are 2 parts in v.12; enduring (in the faith) or denying Him (which is the opposite of enduring in the faith).

What Jesus will deny us is reigning with Him, obviously. Not loss of salvation.

Now, v.13 makes clear that even when believers are unfaithful (don't endure), God REMAINS FAITHFUL. And Paul even gives the reason why: "for He cannot deny Himself".

Since all "having believed" are sealed IN HIM with the Holy Spirit of promise, a guarantee for the day of redemption (Eph 1:13,14) the phrase "He cannot deny Himself" obviously refers to the indwelling Holy Spirit in those who have believed.

The phrase "having believed" is aorist tense, the tense that refutes your abuse of the present tense.

John 4:14
The aorist does not change the fact that if one quits drinking of Christ's water he will thirst again.
This demonstrates a complete failure to grasp the aorist tense.

There is still a condition that must be met (drinking) that is necessary for one to never thirst again.
Wrong. One drink in the past does it. Not continuous drinking as you falsely claim.

Hopefully you are not trying to imply that the aorist tense means one can quit drinking yet still never thirst again?
That is EXACTLY what Jesus told the woman:
"but whoever drinks (aorist) the water I give them will never thirst (again). Indeed, the water I give them will become in them a spring of water welling up to eternal life.”

The words are clear and the aorist tense means a point in time action. Not continuous action. If continuous action were required, Jesus would never have used the aorist tense. Or maybe you're accusing our Lord of bad grammar. Is that it?

The verb drink in Jn 4:14 is in the subjunctive mood. Strong's describes the subjunctive mood as "The action described may or may not occur, depending upon circumstances." This means one may or may not thirst again depending upon the circumstance if one drinks. So if one quits drinking he will thirst again.
Demonstrating a failure to understand the subjunctive mood. The point is that IF one takes that single aorist tense drink, THEN they will never thirst again.

So even though the verb tense puts the action upon initial drinking it does not mean one can quit drinking and still never thirst again.
Yes it does.

The constative aorist shows drinking is not one single momentary act:

(my emp)
The Greek verb for "drinks" is the subjunctive aorist piei. According to Lenski (p. 310), this verb "expresses one act of drinking, which is never repeated." The aorist tense, however, does not demand a single, unrepeated act. As Shank (p. 80) does, we might regard piei here as a constative aorist. Concerning the constative aorist, Wallace (p. 557) writes, "The event might be iterative in nature, or durative, or momentary, but the aorist says none of this. It places the stress on the act of the occurrence, not its nature."

According to the NAU, Jesus said (John 7:37-38), "If anyone is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink. He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, 'From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water.'" NAU With regard to these verses, Stott (pp. 53-54) writes:

Now the verbs (thirsting, coming, drinking, believing) are all in the present tense. So we are not only to come to Jesus once, in penitence and faith, but also thereafter to keep coming and to keep drinking, because we keep thirsting.
Link:
John 4:7-15[/QUOTE]
There are many verses that use the aorist tense, which you've admitted to not wanting to deal with.


1) The use of the present tense in these 4 verses proves that Jesus is for a fact requiring a continued believing
Why did Jesus use the aorist in Luke 8:12?

2) you are implying one can quit believing and still be saved which is not biblically possible.
You've not proved your case.

Unbelief is a "condemned already" state (John 3:18) not a saved state.
When the Bible speaks of "unbelief" it always means "never believed". When the Bible refers to a believer who falls from the faith, it uses the word "apostate".
 
Upvote 0

EmSw

White Horse Rider
Apr 26, 2014
6,434
718
✟66,544.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The Greek verb for "drinks" is the subjunctive aorist piei. According to Lenski (p. 310), this verb "expresses one act of drinking, which is never repeated." The aorist tense, however, does not demand a single, unrepeated act. As Shank (p. 80) does, we might regard piei here as a constative aorist. Concerning the constative aorist, Wallace (p. 557) writes, "The event might be iterative in nature, or durative, or momentary, but the aorist says none of this. It places the stress on the act of the occurrence, not its nature."

According to the NAU, Jesus said (John 7:37-38), "If anyone is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink. He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, 'From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water.'" NAU With regard to these verses, Stott (pp. 53-54) writes:

Now the verbs (thirsting, coming, drinking, believing) are all in the present tense. So we are not only to come to Jesus once, in penitence and faith, but also thereafter to keep coming and to keep drinking, because we keep thirsting.
Link:
John 4:7-15

You just cut your own throat. Read the last paragraph carefully. '...but also thereafter to keep coming and to keep drinking, because we keep thirsting.'
 
Upvote 0

FreeGrace2

Senior Veteran
Nov 15, 2012
20,401
1,703
USA
✟184,557.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
You just cut your own throat.

Yet, I'm feeling quite fine, thank you.

Read the last paragraph carefully. '...but also thereafter to keep coming and to keep drinking, because we keep thirsting.'
What paragraph? I'm speaking of John 4, where Jesus told the woman to 'drink' in the aorist tense.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

TheSeabass

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2015
1,855
358
✟47,754.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Which is irrelevant to how to never perish. The key is to receive eternal life.

The point is WHO receives eternal life and WHY and in the context of John 10:27,28. The WHO iis Christ's sheep that make up the sheep in v28. And the reason WHY is they conditionally maintain a faithful present tense hearing and following of Christ.

Therefore it is IMPOSSIBLE to be of the sheep of v28 without hearing and following CHrist and you have yet to prove otherwise or give a single example of anyone being a sheep of v28 WITHOUT having to hear and follow Christ. Your OSAS argument rests on the impossible.

FreeGrace2 said:
If one had to present tense hear and follow, then Jesus would have said so IN v.28.

He did say so in verse 27 and both verse 27 and 28 are one continuous, connected thought.

So you are still faced with the impossible task of finding a way to get one to be os the sheep of v28 WITHOUT having to continuously hear and follow Christ.

FreeGrace2 said:
The "them" in v.28 are His sheep, plain and simple. And we know how one becomes one of His sheep from v.9: entering through Him as the gate. This is a metaphor for believing in Him.

SUre, the"them" in v28 refer to Christ's sheep. BUt what you are avoiding is WHO make up Christ's sheep. Those who are Christ sheep are the ones that faithfully maintain a present tense hearing and following. Therefore the sheep of v28 that shall never perish are the one's who maintain a faithful hearing and following of Christ.

Will you argue one can be a sheep of Christ WITHOUT ever having to hear and follow Christ? That is an impossibility.
Will you argue one that does hear and follow Christ but later quits will still be of the sheep of v28? That is also an impossibility.


FreeGrace2 said:
Further, your obsession with abusing the present tense is refuted in Eph 1:13 where Paul says, "having believed" (aorist tense), the believer IS sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit, a guarantee for the day of redemption.

All who have received eternal life will never perish. All who have been sealed are guaranteed for the day of redemption. The Bible agrees with itself.

The aorist tense does not change the present tense of John 10:27. Therefpore a present tense hearing and following is required if one desires to be of the sheep of v28 and the aorist tense in other verses do not change this fact.

I showed in my past post that the constative aorist is an action that is sustained. Meaning one cannot drink of the spirit for just a moment then quit and never thirst again. The drinking is a one time process that lasts till one dies.

The aorist tense used in one verse does not change nor allow you to find a way to get around the present tense in other verses.

FreeGrace2 said:
There is nothing in the Bible that says this. Your opinion is not found in Scripture.

John 10:27 requires one to have a present tense hearing and following of Christ to be of HIS (possessive pronoun) sheep. Since the sheep of v28 are Christ's sheep, then logically the sheep of v28 are the ones that have a faithful hearing and following of Christ.

Yet you are striving to find a way to get one to be of the sheep of v28 WITHOUT having to CONDITIONALLY have a present tense hearing and following of Christ...which is a biblical impossibility....and your aorist tense argument is just deflection from this and does not help your argument at all.

FreeGrace2 said:
I fully agree. To be saved, one MUST have heard the gospel, then understood the gospel, and then BELIEVED the gospel in order to be saved.

John 5:24 - From this verse can one QUIT hearing and believing and still have everlasting life or must one's hearing and following be sustained until death? Obviously the present tense shows the hearing and believing must faithfully be sustained unto death (Revelation 2:10)

Freegrace2 said:
But following Christ is a command for believers only. It will never save any unbeliever.

Luke 18:22 Christ commands a lost sinner to "follow Me".

FreeGrace2 said:
Only believers receive eternal life. Here's the proof for that:
Eternal Life:

John 3:15-16
15 so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life. 16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

John 3:36 "He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."

John 5:24 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.

John 6:40 "For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day."

John 6:47 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life.

Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord

1 Tim 1:16 Yet for this reason I found mercy, so that in me as the foremost, Jesus Christ might demonstrate His perfect patience as an example for those who would believe in Him for eternal life.


Gal 3:22 But the Scripture has shut up everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe.

1 John 5:13 These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life.

Now, as to "why" they receive it: it pleases God to save those who believe:
For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 1 Cor 1:21

And the verb 'believe' in 1 Cor 1:21 is present tense showing that a persons' belief must be sustained unto death for it one quits believing he will become lost.

FreeGrace2 said:
So, it seems you think the Bible teaches one to be their own savior, huh.

I never said man can be his own saviour, that is a straw man. What I have said is man cannot save himself by himself. Yet the bible teaches man can save himself by obeying Christ (Hebrews 5:9) and in that sense men can "save yourselves".

Acts 2:40 Save yourselves
1 Tim 4:16 save thyself
2 Cor 7:1 cleanse ourselves
James 4:8 cleanse your hands, purify your hearts
2 Tim 2:21 man therefore purge himself
1 Pet 1:22 see ye have purified your souls

These verses do prove that man has role in his own salvation and must continue to fulfill that role unto death if he desires to be saved.

FreeGrace2 said:
I've never argued otherwise. But what would make one assume that "falling" means losing salvation?

I said this:
"Speaking of 1 Pet 1, let's consider v23 - " For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God."

So, please explain how one born of imperishable seed could ever perish."

2 Pet 1:9-10 "But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins. Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:"

Obviously falling here had to do with falling from salvation fall from the elect.

Peter said "lacketh these things", Can these CHRISTIANS Peter was writing to reach a point in their life where they LACK faith, virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness and charity and STILL BE SAVED ANYWAY? Not possible for if the Christian is not diligent and loses these things he will fall from salvation. Again, these are Christians Peter is telling these things to not "fake believers" for fake believers are always fallen therefore cannot fall for lacking what they never had.


FreeGrace2 said:
Are you kidding?? No, the verse is about our NEW NATURE (2 Cor 5:17). The verse says clearly that we "have been BORN AGAIN". By imperishable seed. Therefore, just as our physical seed is corruptible and will perish, our new nature cannot perish.

The verse isn't about God's word never perishing, but the FACT that our new natures will never perish.

I'm always amazed at how far out one who believes in loss of salvation will go to misread verses in order to miss what is plainly being said.[/quote]
You cited 1 Peter `1:23. the "incorruptible seed" is the word of God (Luke 8:11).
The Holy Spirit is the author f the word of God, this incorruptible seed and this seed/word of God has a role in man's salvation by instructing man on how to be saved...."Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth..." verse 22. "The truth" here is the incorruptible seed that one obeys thereby purifying his soul?be born again.

So 1 Peter 1:22-23 is about man being born again and the role man has in this new birth in purifying his soul and the role God's word (the truth) also has in man's new birth. The verse is not even remotely about OSAS. If you can read OSAS into this passage, then there is nothing to stop anyone from reading anything they so choose into any passage they so choose.

FreeGrace2 said:
Abusing the present tense doesn't help your view. The aorist tense is used frequently as well. If continuous belief was NECESSARY to stay saved, then the Bible would NEVER have used the aorist. But it does.


You've shown no such thing. Just your opinion. And Scripture had to be misread in order to come to your conclusion.

Notice how you ignored what I proved about the present and aorist tense.


Please go back to John 4 where Jesus used the verb "to drink" the water He gives in the aorist tense. iow, just ONE drink and one will NEVER thirst again.

The issue here is your IGNORING and AVOIDING the present tense for it kills OSAS. So you think the aorist tense in John 4 somehow changes or gets rid of the present tense found in other verses when it does not.

I demonstrated in my earlier post how the verb 'drinketh' in John 4:14 is a constative aorist that shows an action that is SUSTAINED. Therefore the drinking MUST be sustained if one is to never thirst again. The drinking cannot be for just a moment. The drinking cannot be sporadic. It must be sustained else one will thirst again. Note how "drink" in John 7:37 is present tense.

John 4:14 and John 7:37 do not contradict each other with Jn 4 saying one can quit drinking yet still never thirst and Jn 7 showing one must continue to drink to never thirst.

FreeGrace2 said:
Nonsense. Why do you keep ignoring the aorist tense in these verses?
John 4 "drink"
Luke 8:12 "lest they believe and be saved"
Acts 16:31 "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved"
Rom 10:9 "If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved."

I have dealt with you fault "aorist argument" head on and shown it to be faulty.

FreeGrace2 said:
I'm happy to tell you that those who believe will never perish.

John 3:16 the present tense of the verb "believeth" and the subjunctive mood of "should not perish" proves that perishing or not perish is CONDITIONAL upon one faithfully maintaining that present tense belief.

FreeGrace2 said:
So tell me, why did Paul use the aorist tense in Acts 16:31, if one must continue to believe in order to continue to be saved?

So the jailer can believe for just a second, then quit and still be saved? Not biblically possible at all and why your "aorist argument" fails miserably.

If one can be saved without believing then he can be saved without grace. Romans 5:2 faith is what gives access to grace. Without faith there is no grace so how are you going to get one who quits believing access to God's grace while remaining faithless?

Furthermore, the verb "shalt be saved" in Acts 16:31 is future tense so he would not have salvation at that moment by just a momentary belief. Evidently the belief must be sustained (constative aorist) for him to have that future salvation. In verse 30, the jailer asks "what must I do (present tense) to be saved" hence the believing is an ongoing sustained doing.

Luke 16:31 does not contradict John 3:16 that requires a continual present tense belief in order to not perish. Jn 3:16 has one perishing if he does not continue to believe per the subjunctive mood. Why wasn't the aorist used in Jn 3:16 instead of the present tense? Do the present tense verses contradict the aorist verses? God's word is flawed and full of contradictions?

In Luke 16:34 the participle phrase "having believed" included his repentance (washing stripes) and being baptized per verse 33. Therefore the "believed" of v31 is not a momentary belief only mental acknowledgment of facts and nothing more. The fact he was told to believe in verse 31 yet

--washed their stripes and was baptized in v33;
--brought them to his house and gave them food, rejoiced and and "believed" (now the verb "believe" is in the perfect tense showing an ongoing action from past to present) in v34;
--and the next day gave a message to Paul in v36

all show that the jailers belief was ongoing, sustained and not momentary and that he did not ever have belief only.

Jn 3:16 NIV "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."
Note how the NIV had to butcher Jn 3:16 in changing the subjunctive Mood (should not) to an indicative mood (shall not) creating the impossiblity that if one quits believing he still shall not perish in his unbelief. It had to make changes to the passage to get aound the present tense and subjunctive mood that kill the OSAS argument.


FreeGrace2 said:
Of course not. Because it refutes your claims about the present tense.

And, Jesus refutes your abuse of the present tense. In Luke 8:13 He said the second soil "believed for a while". That is present tense, but they sure didn't "continue to believe" as being claimed about the present tense. And in the previous verse Jesus used the aorist tense for "lest they believe and be saved".


Then you simply do not even grasp the issue at all.


Once again, one is saved by a point in time belief in Christ. Very plainly stated.
And, present tense believing doesn't mean continuous believing.


It seems reading comprehension isn't your forte. v.12 does NOT say the first soil "quit believing" as you claim here. They NEVER believed. And the point is that one is saved from aorist tense believing. Period. Not present tense believing.


Rather, you've already admitted that you're not going to deal with the aorist tense. And it's obvious why. It refutes your false claims about the present tense.


Where would anyone see any "requirement" to be a sheep in v.27? Jesus is simply noting what His sheep do. But the requirement for being saved is found in 10:9 - I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved.They will come in and go out, and find pasture.

So, what do you think Jesus meant in 10:9?


Wow. Wrong again. This is what the Bible says about God's faithfulness in 2 Tim 2:
12 if we endure, we will also reign with him. If we deny him, he will also deny us;
13 if we are faithless, he remains faithful, for he cannot deny himself.

There are 2 parts in v.12; enduring (in the faith) or denying Him (which is the opposite of enduring in the faith).

What Jesus will deny us is reigning with Him, obviously. Not loss of salvation.

Now, v.13 makes clear that even when believers are unfaithful (don't endure), God REMAINS FAITHFUL. And Paul even gives the reason why: "for He cannot deny Himself".

Since all "having believed" are sealed IN HIM with the Holy Spirit of promise, a guarantee for the day of redemption (Eph 1:13,14) the phrase "He cannot deny Himself" obviously refers to the indwelling Holy Spirit in those who have believed.

The phrase "having believed" is aorist tense, the tense that refutes your abuse of the present tense.


This demonstrates a complete failure to grasp the aorist tense.


Wrong. One drink in the past does it. Not continuous drinking as you falsely claim.


That is EXACTLY what Jesus told the woman:
"but whoever drinks (aorist) the water I give them will never thirst (again). Indeed, the water I give them will become in them a spring of water welling up to eternal life.”

The words are clear and the aorist tense means a point in time action. Not continuous action. If continuous action were required, Jesus would never have used the aorist tense. Or maybe you're accusing our Lord of bad grammar. Is that it?


Demonstrating a failure to understand the subjunctive mood. The point is that IF one takes that single aorist tense drink, THEN they will never thirst again.


Yes it does.

The constative aorist shows drinking is not one single momentary act:

(my emp)
The Greek verb for "drinks" is the subjunctive aorist piei. According to Lenski (p. 310), this verb "expresses one act of drinking, which is never repeated." The aorist tense, however, does not demand a single, unrepeated act. As Shank (p. 80) does, we might regard piei here as a constative aorist. Concerning the constative aorist, Wallace (p. 557) writes, "The event might be iterative in nature, or durative, or momentary, but the aorist says none of this. It places the stress on the act of the occurrence, not its nature."

According to the NAU, Jesus said (John 7:37-38), "If anyone is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink. He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, 'From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water.'" NAU With regard to these verses, Stott (pp. 53-54) writes:

Now the verbs (thirsting, coming, drinking, believing) are all in the present tense. So we are not only to come to Jesus once, in penitence and faith, but also thereafter to keep coming and to keep drinking, because we keep thirsting.
Link:
John 4:7-15
There are many verses that use the aorist tense, which you've admitted to not wanting to deal with.


Why did Jesus use the aorist in Luke 8:12?


You've not proved your case.


When the Bible speaks of "unbelief" it always means "never believed". When the Bible refers to a believer who falls from the faith, it uses the word "apostate".[/QUOTE]

The last statement of your that "unbelief" always means 'never believed" was pulled out of thin air. Hebrews 3:12; Hebrews 4:11.

John 1:12 "But as many as received (aorist) him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe (present) on his name:"

Why wasn't not the aorist tense used in both places if just a single momentary act of belief is all that is needed to receive Christ and be unconditionally saved?

John 3:15 "That whosoever believeth (present) in him should not perish (aorist), but have eternal life.
Again, why wasn't the aorist used for believeth if one cannot perish once and for all time?

John 5:44 "How can ye believe (aorist), which receive (present) honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?"

If the aorist believe means one single momentary act, then how can that one momentary act CONTINUE to receive honor of another? If one quits believing then it is impossible to continue to receive the honor of another when that is the very thing he is desiring.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0