Eternal Security

[Hupomone10]

“However, Christians who abandon their faith in Christ fall from grace and become eternally dammed to the fires of hell.

Now that you've said that, see if you can find a verse that puts those three together -
1) falling from grace
2) due to abandoning faith
3) with destined for eternal hell or losing eternal life.

I'm not talking about merely references to "fall" or not enduring to the end; one with that together with losing eternal life or destined for hell fire.

And I'd rather not have verses where one can "infer" the meaning; i.e., "well he must mean..."
but ones that say similar to what you just said. Eternal punishment as consequences to actions (or attitude) of a person already clearly saved.

Thanks,
H.

 

[His_disciple3]

Now that you've said that, see if you can find a verse that puts those three together -
1) falling from grace
2) due to abandoning faith
3) with destined for eternal hell or losing eternal life.

I'm not talking about merely references to "fall" or not enduring to the end; one with that together with losing eternal life or destined for hell fire.

And I'd rather not have verses where one can "infer" the meaning; i.e., "well he must mean..."
but ones that say similar to what you just said. Eternal punishment as consequences to actions (or attitude) of a person already clearly saved.

Thanks,
H.

I can show a verse that says it can't happen, that is you falling away. so if you can't fall away, how do you abandon your faith , and lose Your etternal life

Jude 24-25
24 Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy,
25 To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.
KJV

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Well, I am not sure if I feel honored that you follow my posts or that you just accused me of error without providing evidence. I am leaning towards the latter because you did not include a link or explanation. Please provide a link to my grievous error so that I can defend myself. Once you provide it I will start a new thread to discuss it with you so as to not derail this thread.

I do not recall in which thread you stated an incorrect meaning of the Greek word ἀπειθῶν based on the incorrect assumption that compound Greek words mean the sum of their parts. I do remember, however, that faceofbear replied by posting several translations of John 3:36 in which the word occurs, commenting that the translations of the word vary considerably, and asking for an explanation for these variations (chiefly having to do with the question of whether the word means “not believing” [as you claimed] or “disobedience” [as I claimed]. I replied to faceofbear’s post by explaining that the very early Christians believed that the worst kind of disobedience was failing to believe in the Gospel, and hence some translators believe that ἀπειθῶν should be translated “not believing”. I then wrote that this use of the word is not found in ancient secular literature and it is doubtful that it is actually found in ancient Christian literature. I did not document these facts because they are very well known to people who have studied (making use of recent, in-depth resources) the meaning of the word ἀπειθῶν. I did, however, suggest that he purchase two standard reference works that are invaluable for Greek word studies, namely the following:

The standard Greek lexicon in English, commonly known by its users as the “BDAG lexicon”:

Danker, Frederick W. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3d ed. Based on Walter Bauer's Griechisch-deutsches Worterbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der fruhchristlichen Literatur, 6th ed., ed. Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, with Viktor Reichmann and on previous English editions by W. F. Arndt, F. W. Gingrich, and F. W. Danker. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press, 2000. lxxxix + 1108 pgs.

The standard theological dictionary, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (commonly known by its users a “Kittel” or the “TDNT”), a 10 volume work which is an authorized and unabridged translation of Theologisches Worterbuch zum Neuen Testament edited by Gerhard Kittel. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing,1964.

Both of these works are based upon in-depth contextual studies of the words found in the New Testament, and they cite the ancient literature in which the words are found so that the user can go to large university libraries (Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Oxford, Cambridge, etc.) and read the literature for themselves to see if they agree with the editors and contributors. Both of these works provide extensive documentation in support of the meaning of ἀπειθῶν that I presented in my post, and none at all for the meaning of ἀπειθῶν that you presented in your post.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

hupostasis lit., "a standing under, support" (hupo, "under," histemi, "to stand"), hence, an "assurance," is so rendered in Heb_11:1, RV, for AV, "substance." It here may signify a title-deed, as giving a guarantee, or reality. See CONFIDENCE, PERSON, SUBSTANCE.

Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words

5287. hupostasis hoop-os'-tas-is from a compound of 5259 and 2476; a setting under (support), i.e. (figuratively) concretely, essence, or abstractly, assurance (objectively or subjectively):--confidence, confident, person, substance.

Strong's Greek Lexicon Search Results

a setting or placing under thing put under, substructure, foundation that which has foundation, is firm that which has actual existence a substance, real being the substantial quality, nature, of a person or thing the steadfastness of mind, firmness, courage, resolution confidence, firm trust, assurance

Hupostasis - New Testament Greek Lexicon - King James Version

Hupostasis is a very common word from Aristotle on and comes from upisthmi (upo, under, isthmi, intransitive), what stands under anything (a building, a contract, a promise). See the philosophical use of it in 1 Thessalonians 1:3 , the sense of assurance (une assurance certaine, Mngoz) in 1 Thessalonians 3:14 , that steadiness of mind which holds one firm ( 2 Corinthians 9:4 ). It is common in the papyri in business documents as the basis or guarantee of transactions. "And as this is the essential meaning in Hebrews 11:1 we venture to suggest the translation 'Faith is the title-deed of things hoped for'" (Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary, etc.).

Hebrews 11:1 - Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament, Bible Commentary

Vincent (Word Studies In The New Testament – M. R. Vincent) says, “It is important that the preliminary definition be clearly understood, since the following examples illustrate it. The key is furnished by verse 27 , as seeing him who is invisible. Faith apprehends as a real fact what is not revealed to the senses. It rests on that fact, acts upon it, and is upheld by it in the face of all that seems to contradict it. Faith is real seeing.” The word “substance” deserves careful treatment. It is hupostasis, made up of stasis “to stand,” and hupo “under,” thus “that which stands under, a foundation.” Thus, it speaks of the ground on which one builds a hope. (Wuest Word studies, Logos).

Short Description: standing under, sediment, foundation. under, sediment, foundation; in Neoplatonism, hupostasis is a synonim of ousia, that means being, substance, existence; the three hupostaseis of Plotinus are three fundamental levels, or dimensions, of divine reality: the One, Intellect, and Soul.

Definition of "hupostasis" - The Dictionary of Spiritual Terms

Should I continue?

BTW- I do not see you citing any sources to support your opinions.

While still a very young, zealous Christian, I purchased a copy of the works that you quoted from by Strong (who, by the way, was a Methodist who believed in and argued for the doctrine of conditional security) Vine, and Robertson, along with Marvin R. Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament and Thayer’s Greek Lexicon of the New Testament.

After being a Christian for three years, and making good use of those and other works (including many popular commentaries), I believed that I was ready to begin teaching Bible studies in my church, and I did so for about three years. Then God gave me the opportunity to get a good education and I very soon realized that the works that I had studied were all either very outdated, written by men who lacked a solid education in Greek lexical studies, or both! I also very soon realized the necessity of studying Old and New Testament bibliography to learn which works were written by men with very extensive knowledge of their subject matter, and which ones were not.

In my post that you are finding fault with, I did quote from A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature where the editors wrote, “The sense ‘confidence’, ‘assurance’ must be eliminated, since examples of it cannot be found (acc. to Dörrie and Köster [below]). It cannot play a role in Hb. 11:1, where it has enjoyed much favor since Luther (also Tyndale, RSV; not KJ).” I did not quote, however, the documentation provided therein because it is lengthy and uses very numerous abbreviations that would be meaningless to my readers who do not have a copy of the work in which the meaning of the abbreviations is given. I did quote from Moulton and Milligan’s The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, but I did not quote the documentation provided therein because it is lengthy. I did not quote the documentation from the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament because the documentation therein is very lengthy (17 pages). I did not quote from Notes de lexicographie néo-testamentaire by Ceslas Spicq because the documentation provided therein is lengthy and it is written in French. However, anyone who chooses to check my reference to evaluate the accuracy of my posts will learn for themselves that my posts are very accurate, and that the posts of some other people are seriously inaccurate because they relied upon what they read in works that are either very outdated or were written by men who lacked a solid education in Greek lexical studies, or both.

Lexicons and lexical “aids’ that provide the reader with no more than the author’s opinion and a few quotes from the Bible that support the author’s opinion are worse than useless because the author’s opinions are typically based on a woefully inadequate study of the words being defined. In a day such as this, in which publications are readily available that provide the reader not only with mere opinions, but with extensive documentation that supports those opinions, there is no excuse for Christians to use anything other than the best resources for studying the Bible.

 

[DeaconDean]

See Henry, I told you so.

No matter what, you'll be wrong in everything.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Hupomone10]

I can show a verse that says it can't happen, that is you falling away. so if you can't fall away, how do you abandon your faith , and lose Your etternal life

Jude 24-25
24 Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy,
25 To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.
KJV

The above verse, they would say that it is inferred by you and me that you can't fall, because it says He is "able"; it doesn't say He infallibly will keep you every time.

I find strength in the verse you shared, but I also try to look for the holes objectively that others will find.

Likewise, I haven't found in all my reading any verse that includes the word "fall" with the concept of losing eternal life. Sometimes "saved" is connected to temporal things; but that is because there is an aspect of salvation that is temporal as well as an aspect that is eternal.

In one verse, it says "fall from your own steadfastness", indicating that the term "fall" can refer to several different things. But in no context is it placed with losing eternal life, that I'm aware.

I notice no verse passages have been shared yet. Because I'm pretty sure there aren't any. I'm sure the two Hebrews passages will be appealed to, but a thorough study of Hebrews the book, instead of isolating passages and reading into them what a person superficially wants to see will show they do not mean losing eternal life, and when used in that context of losing eternal life produce more problems than they solve.

Blessings,
H.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

If the verb is used as a completed action then it can not be uncompleted. We are partakers in Christ that is a completed action. If the verb was in the future tense then your interpretation would work but it is not. In addition, what do we need to hold fast to? τὴν ἀρχὴν τῆς ὑποστάσεως, the beginning of our assurance. If we never had a beginning to our assurance then we can not hold fast until the end. You can't ignore the grammar.

Heb. 3:14. For we have become partakers of Christ, if we hold fast the beginning of our assurance firm until the end, (NASB, 1995)

The use of Greek perfect tense in Hebrews 3:14 is very similar to our English present perfect tense which speaks of action sometime in the past with consequences of that action remaining down to the present. In the sentence, “Kevin has memorized the entire Book of Romans,” “has memorized” is in the present perfect tense. Therefore, the sentence means that Kevin, at a time in the past, memorized the entire Book of Romans and that down to the present time he has continued to remember it. However, it does not mean that Kevin will, at a later time, continue to remember the entire Book of Romans. Indeed, he may or may not—largely depending upon whether or not he continues to exercise his memory of it. The same is true of those Christians who have become partakers of Christ; they may or may not continue to be partakers—largely depending upon whether or not they continue to exercise their faith in Christ.

Let us not forget that the Greek Fathers of the Church were native Greek speakers, and we do not find the slightest trace of the doctrine of eternal security in any of their writings, but we do find the doctrine of conditional security throughout their writings. Let us also not forget that the doctrine of eternal security is believed today by only a minority of Christian scholars of the New Testament, and that among lay people and pastors, the doctrine of eternal security is to a very large extent limited geographically to the United States and Canada. In much of the world, the doctrine is virtually unknown to Protestant Christians.

 

[His_disciple3]

I do not recall in which thread you stated an incorrect meaning of the Greek word ἀπειθῶν based on the incorrect assumption that compound Greek words mean the sum of their parts. I do remember, however, that faceofbear replied by posting several translations of John 3:36 in which the word occurs, commenting that the translations of the word vary considerably, and asking for an explanation for these variations (chiefly having to do with the question of whether the word means “not believing” [as you claimed] or “disobedience” [as I claimed]. I replied to faceofbear’s post by explaining that the very early Christians believed that the worst kind of disobedience was failing to believe in the Gospel, and hence some translators believe that ἀπειθῶν should be translated “not believing”. I then wrote that this use of the word is not found in ancient secular literature and it is doubtful that it is actually found in ancient Christian literature. I did not document these facts because they are very well known to people who have studied (making use of recent, in-depth resources) the meaning of the word ἀπειθῶν. I did, however, suggest that he purchase two standard reference works that are invaluable for Greek word studies, namely the following:

The standard Greek lexicon in English, commonly known by its users as the “BDAG lexicon”:

Danker, Frederick W. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3d ed. Based on Walter Bauer's Griechisch-deutsches Worterbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der fruhchristlichen Literatur, 6th ed., ed. Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, with Viktor Reichmann and on previous English editions by W. F. Arndt, F. W. Gingrich, and F. W. Danker. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press, 2000. lxxxix + 1108 pgs.

The standard theological dictionary, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (commonly known by its users a “Kittel” or the “TDNT&#8221, a 10 volume work which is an authorized and unabridged translation of Theologisches Worterbuch zum Neuen Testament edited by Gerhard Kittel. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing,1964.

Both of these works are based upon in-depth contextual studies of the words found in the New Testament, and they cite the ancient literature in which the words are found so that the user can go to large university libraries (Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Oxford, Cambridge, etc.) and read the literature for themselves to see if they agree with the editors and contributors. Both of these works provide extensive documentation in support of the meaning of ἀπειθῶν that I presented in my post, and none at all for the meaning of ἀπειθῶν that you presented in your post.

now we are down to splitting hairs over a definition, while hundreds if not thousands die every day, and many will go into an everlasting damnation without Christ. and I am not casting stones but rather preaching to myself also. one says "not believing" the other says "diobedient" , But I say to you, not believing is disobedient. So you are both saying the same thing, but one is speaking of a faith while the other has made it a self-work(relying on what they can do) !!

John 6:40
40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
KJV

we can not be in the will of God( in obedience with the Father) unless we believe that God hath Raised him from the Dead. and this sums up the Gospel, for in order for Him to be raised He would had to been sent, He would had to teach the Will of the Father, and He would had to Died before He could have Been raised.

Princeton guy,
two people that I know ( true stories) . one did not believe that there was a God. He could not believe, no matter what anyone said, that there was a Good Loving God over such a evil place as earth. this man knew it was wrong to steal, kill and even lie. He would hold me accountable as a God fearing person, when he saw me do something that a christian should do, or even not do something That a Christian should do. He had an alcholic son of 50 years old, that had never worked and been jailed numberous times, this father was there every time to bail him out, pay the attorney fees and numberous trips to the rehab place. He was in his late 70's and still working for he felt he could not retire and still take care of his son, he had provided a loving home for his wife of fifty years and their two children, But He was an atheist.
the second person, knew it was wrong to kill, steal, and even lie, feared God, was a farmer. had a hard life, but raised 4 children and they never went with out a meal. took care of His wife of fifty years and 4 children the best He could. made them all go to church so that they too could know his Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ,

princetonguy, you tell me according to scripture where they will go,if nothing changes, when they die? Sir if you say both are in heaven , we don't have the same Bible Or God. If you say the atheist went to hell for his unbelief, and the other is in Heaven, then sir you believe in a salvation by faith alone also, you just can't see it for all that you have been taught by man, has clouded your vision of salvation of faith along, not by works least I boast. look what I have done for you Lord, is what we boast!! instead of sharing with others, look what the Lord hath done for me!!! which way do you see it princeton guy? what you hath done for the Lord or what the Lord hath done For You?? think careful. salvation depends on your answer!!!

 

[PrincetonGuy]

1 Cor. 10
13 No temptation has overtaken you except such as is common to man; but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will also make the way of escape, that you may be able to bear it.

Nowhere in 1 Cor 10 does it even hint at loss of salvation. I disagree with your exegesis of Hebrews because you are basing said exegesis in the incorrect understanding of the grammar. I will stand by my exegesis.

God is faithful, who will not allow Christians to be tempted beyond what we are able to endure, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that we will be able to endure it. Nonetheless, very many Christians sin.

The Jews of whom Paul is writing in 1 Cor. 10:1-11 were “destroyed” in the wilderness; that is, they died in the wilderness and never reached the Promised Land! The Apostle Paul uses the same example as a warning to Gentile Christians and writes,

1 Cor 10:11. Now these things happened to them as an example, and they were written for our instruction, upon whom the ends of the ages have come.
12. Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed that he does not fall.

Are you suggesting that the Jews who became unfaithful and were destroyed in the wilderness are not an example of what will happen to Christians who become unfaith, as did the Jews?

If I am misunderstanding the Greek grammar used by the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, it was also misunderstood by the Greek Fathers of the Church who were native Greek speakers and it is misunderstood by the very large majority of professors of Greek in our universities and seminaries. Please review what Greek grammars, regardless of the author’s theological position, say about the Greek perfect tense.

 

[His_disciple3]

God is faithful, who will not allow Christians to be tempted beyond what we are able to endure, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that we will be able to endure it. Nonetheless, very many Christians sin.

1 John 2:1-3
2 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
KJV

The Jews of whom Paul is writing in 1 Cor. 10:1-11 were “destroyed” in the wilderness; that is, they died in the wilderness and never reached the Promised Land! The Apostle Paul uses the same example as a warning to Gentile Christians and writes,

this promise land was a physical land with a physical promised attached, nothing about the spiritual promise, Canaan Land was not a picture of Heaven for they still had to battle, after they got there that can not be heaven


1 Cor 10:11. Now these things happened to them as an example, and they were written for our instruction, upon whom the ends of the ages have come.
12. Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed that he does not fall.

Are you suggesting that the Jews who became unfaithful and were destroyed in the wilderness are not an example of what will happen to Christians who become unfaith, as did the Jews?

could you show me one place in the Bible where it says that the jews that was destroyed in the wilderness were sent to hell, yes they are a very good examples but where does it say that they went to hell??? as you have assumed that they have. and is this not condemning, where as that is not your job or place?

1 Corinthians 5:5
5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
KJV

 

[DeaconDean]

Well, I am not sure if I feel honored that you follow my posts or that you just accused me of error without providing evidence. I am leaning towards the latter because you did not include a link or explanation. Please provide a link to my grievous error so that I can defend myself. Once you provide it I will start a new thread to discuss it with you so as to not derail this thread.

hupostasis lit., "a standing under, support" (hupo, "under," histemi, "to stand"), hence, an "assurance," is so rendered in Heb_11:1, RV, for AV, "substance." It here may signify a title-deed, as giving a guarantee, or reality. See CONFIDENCE, PERSON, SUBSTANCE.

Brother, I am forced to agree with you.

ὑπόστα^σις , εως, h(, (ὑφίστημι, ὑφίσταμα&#953:
A. as an act, standing under, supporting, “ἡ κεφαλὴ ἔχει γενέσεως ὑ. καθ᾽ ἑαυτήν has no power of originating by itself, Hermog. Id.1.10.

II. foundation or substructure of a temple, etc., LXX Na.2.7, D.S.1.66, 13.82; ὑποστάσεις ἐπάλξεων lower part of a crenellated wall, Ph.Bel.84.9; ὑ. ξύλου is f.l. for ὑπότασις ξ. in Hp. Mochl.25.

2. metaph. of a narrative, speech, or poem, ground-work, subject-matter, argument, Plb.4.2.1, D.S.1.3, etc.


3. plan, purpose, Id.16.32; “κατὰ τὴν ἰδίαν ὑ.” Id.1.28, 15.70; “πρὸς τὴν ἰδίαν ὑ.” Id.1.3; οἱ Αἰγύπτιοι . . ἰδίᾳ τινὶ ὑ. κεχρημένοι εἰσί (sc. in their calendar) Gem.8.16, cf. 25; “κατὰ τὴν Καίσαρος ὑ.” BMus.Inscr.892.21 (Halic., i B. C./i A. D.).

4. confidence, courage, resolution, steadiness, of soldiers, Plb.4.50.10,6.55.2; hope, “ἔστι μοι ὑ. τοῦ γενηθῆναί με ἀνδρί” LXX Ru.1.12; ἀπώλετο ἡ ὑ. αὐτῆς ib.Ez.19.5, cf. Ep.Hebr.3.14; “ἡ ὑ. τῆς καυχήσεως” 2 Ep.Cor.11.17, cf. 9.4; ἔστιν δὲ πίστις ἐλπιζομένων ὑπόστασις confidence in things hoped for, Ep.Hebr.11.1 (unless substance be the right sense here).

5. undertaking, promise, “οἱ ὑπογεγραμμένοι γεωργοὶ ἐπέδωκαν ἡμῖν ὑπόστασιν” PEleph.15.3 (iii B. C.), cf. PTheb.Bank1.8 (ii B. C.), PTeb.61（b).194 (ii B. C.).

6. Astrol., τὰ τούτου (sc. κλήρου τύχης） τετράγωνα ὑπόστασις (fort. -στάσεις） [λέγεται] Serapio in Cat.Cod.Astr.8(4).227.

III. substantial nature, substance, δύσσχιστα, τῷ κολλώδη τὴν ὑ. ἔχειν woods hard to cleave, because of their resinous substance, Thphr.CP5.16.4; ἡ τοῦ γεώδους ὑ. ib.6.7.4.

2. substance, actual existence, reality (“οἱ νεώτεροι τῶν φιλοσόφων ἀντὶ τῆς οὐσίας τῇ λέξει τῆς ὑ. ἐχρήσαντο” Socr. HE3.7), opp. semblance, “φαντασίαν μὲν ἔχειν πλούτου, ὑ. δὲ μή” Artem.3.14; τῶν ἐν ἀέρι φαντασμάτων τὰ μέν ἐστι κατ᾽ ἔμφασιν, τὰ δὲ καθ᾽ ὑπόστασιν (substantial, actual), Arist.Mu.395a30, cf. Placit.3.6, D.L.7.135, 9.91; so ὑποστάσεις are the substances of which the reflections (αἱ κατοπτρικαὶ ἐμφάσει&#962 appear in the mirror, Placit.4.14.2; ὑ. ἔχειν have substantial existence, Demetr.Lac.Herc.1055.14, S.E. P.2.94, 176, M.Ant.9.42; ἰδίᾳ χρησάμενον ὑποστάσει （ὑποτάσει cod.), πρὸς ἰδίαν ὑ. φυτευθέντα, a separate existence, Sor.1.96, cf. 33; “ὑπόστασιν μὴ ἔχειν” Id.2.57; “ὑποστάσεις τε καὶ μεταβολαί” M.Ant.9.1, cf. 10.5; [ἡ παρασιτικὴ] διαφέρει καὶ τῆς ῥητορικῆς καὶ τῆς φιλοσοφίας . . κατὰ τὴν ὑ. (in respect of reality）“: ἡ μὲν γὰρ ὑφέστηκεν, αἱ δὲ οὔ” Luc. Par.27; “κατ᾽ ἰδίαν ὑ. καὶ οὐσίαν” S.E.M.9.338.

3. real nature, essence, “χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑ.” Ep.Hebr.1.3.

IV. as a Rhet. figure, the full expression or expansion of an idea, Hermog.Id.1.11, Aristid. Rh.1p.479S., Syrian. in Hermog.1.60 R.

V. = ὑπόστημα 111, camp, LXX 1 Ki.13.23, 14.4.

VI. wealth, substance, property, ib.De.11.6, Je.10.17, POxy.1274.15 (iii A. D.), BGU1020.16 (vi A. D.), etc.

2. pl., title deeds, documents recording ownership of property, POxy.237 viii 26 (ii A. D.).

Source

Everything you stated was correct.

But the thing is Hentenza, depending on your view/stance about "free will" and what "type" of Baptist you are, whether its Calvinist or Arminian, you can find support for both sides of the arguement.

You and I are in full agreement that we:

"are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation "

While others insist that it is all a work you do.

Once a person has been saved, and Jesus turns care of His sheep over to the Father, can the Father, God, lose one of His own?

Scripture says no.

"My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand." -Jn. 10:27-29 (KJV)

The Bottom line still is this, we use the word "omnipotent" to describe just one, of God's attributes.

If God is "omnipotent" as we claim, then Jesus' words are true and no man, not even ourselves, can take us out of God's hands once we have been turned over to His care.

But, if man is able to take Himself out of the Father's hand either through failure on man's part through lack of faith or apostasy, then man is the omnipotent component in this universe and God isn't because man has the power, more power than the Creator, more power than God Himself, because he has taken himself out of God's hands.

And if the latter is true, then Jesus lied, and therefore scriptures lie. And the scriptures aren't worth the papyrus they were wrote on.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Hentenza]

I do not recall in which thread you stated an incorrect meaning of the Greek word ἀπειθῶν based on the incorrect assumption that compound Greek words mean the sum of their parts. I do remember, however, that faceofbear replied by posting several translations of John 3:36 in which the word occurs, commenting that the translations of the word vary considerably, and asking for an explanation for these variations (chiefly having to do with the question of whether the word means “not believing” [as you claimed] or “disobedience” [as I claimed]. I replied to faceofbear’s post by explaining that the very early Christians believed that the worst kind of disobedience was failing to believe in the Gospel, and hence some translators believe that ἀπειθῶν should be translated “not believing”. I then wrote that this use of the word is not found in ancient secular literature and it is doubtful that it is actually found in ancient Christian literature. I did not document these facts because they are very well known to people who have studied (making use of recent, in-depth resources) the meaning of the word ἀπειθῶν. I did, however, suggest that he purchase two standard reference works that are invaluable for Greek word studies, namely the following:

The standard Greek lexicon in English, commonly known by its users as the “BDAG lexicon”:

Danker, Frederick W. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3d ed. Based on Walter Bauer's Griechisch-deutsches Worterbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der fruhchristlichen Literatur, 6th ed., ed. Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, with Viktor Reichmann and on previous English editions by W. F. Arndt, F. W. Gingrich, and F. W. Danker. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press, 2000. lxxxix + 1108 pgs.

The standard theological dictionary, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (commonly known by its users a “Kittel” or the “TDNT”), a 10 volume work which is an authorized and unabridged translation of Theologisches Worterbuch zum Neuen Testament edited by Gerhard Kittel. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing,1964.

Both of these works are based upon in-depth contextual studies of the words found in the New Testament, and they cite the ancient literature in which the words are found so that the user can go to large university libraries (Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Oxford, Cambridge, etc.) and read the literature for themselves to see if they agree with the editors and contributors. Both of these works provide extensive documentation in support of the meaning of ἀπειθῶν that I presented in my post, and none at all for the meaning of ἀπειθῶν that you presented in your post.

1. πιστεύων is not a compound word.
2. The short meaning of πιστεύων is disbelieve not disobey.
3. Even if the word meant disobey, the context of John 3:36 makes it clear that the disobedience would be disobedience by rejecting Christ. Either way, those that believe in Christ (πιστεύων present active) will see eternal life while those that do not will not.

PG, I do not debate by mud slinging others. I prefer to keep discussions friendly and biblical. Please stick to the present discussion in this thread. Thanks.

 

[Hentenza]

While still a very young, zealous Christian, I purchased a copy of the works that you quoted from by Strong (who, by the way, was a Methodist who believed in and argued for the doctrine of conditional security) Vine, and Robertson, along with Marvin R. Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament and Thayer’s Greek Lexicon of the New Testament.

After being a Christian for three years, and making good use of those and other works (including many popular commentaries), I believed that I was ready to begin teaching Bible studies in my church, and I did so for about three years. Then God gave me the opportunity to get a good education and I very soon realized that the works that I had studied were all either very outdated, written by men who lacked a solid education in Greek lexical studies, or both! I also very soon realized the necessity of studying Old and New Testament bibliography to learn which works were written by men with very extensive knowledge of their subject matter, and which ones were not.

In my post that you are finding fault with, I did quote from A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature where the editors wrote, “The sense ‘confidence’, ‘assurance’ must be eliminated, since examples of it cannot be found (acc. to Dörrie and Köster [below]). It cannot play a role in Hb. 11:1, where it has enjoyed much favor since Luther (also Tyndale, RSV; not KJ).” I did not quote, however, the documentation provided therein because it is lengthy and uses very numerous abbreviations that would be meaningless to my readers who do not have a copy of the work in which the meaning of the abbreviations is given. I did quote from Moulton and Milligan’s The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, but I did not quote the documentation provided therein because it is lengthy. I did not quote the documentation from the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament because the documentation therein is very lengthy (17 pages). I did not quote from Notes de lexicographie néo-testamentaire by Ceslas Spicq because the documentation provided therein is lengthy and it is written in French. However, anyone who chooses to check my reference to evaluate the accuracy of my posts will learn for themselves that my posts are very accurate, and that the posts of some other people are seriously inaccurate because they relied upon what they read in works that are either very outdated or were written by men who lacked a solid education in Greek lexical studies, or both.

Lexicons and lexical “aids’ that provide the reader with no more than the author’s opinion and a few quotes from the Bible that support the author’s opinion are worse that useless because the author’s opinions are typically based on a woefully inadequate study of the words being defined. In a day such as this, in which publications are readily available that provide the reader not only with mere opinions, but with extensive documentation that supports those opinions, there is no excuse for Christians to use anything other than the best resources for studying the Bible.

Brother, Moulton and Milligan's The Vocabulary of Greek Testament disagrees with your opinion. They describe hupostosis as a legal term. They write that the term stands for the whole body of documents bearing on the ownership of a person's property, deposited in archives, and forming the evidence of ownership.

Look, when I do a word study I consult several lexicons and dictionaries to filter out author's opinions and the reason why I submitted several as examples. I will warn you that it is easy to fall into error by only consulting reference materials that agree with one's opinion. I will also warn you that assuming that years of study equals no error is in itself an error. I am sure that there are plenty of theologians that you disagree with so again, attempting to discredit some by smear is not a good debate tactic.

 

[Hentenza]

Heb. 3:14. For we have become partakers of Christ, if we hold fast the beginning of our assurance firm until the end, (NASB, 1995)

The use of Greek perfect tense in Hebrews 3:14 is very similar to our English present perfect tense which speaks of action sometime in the past with consequences of that action remaining down to the present. In the sentence, “Kevin has memorized the entire Book of Romans,” “has memorized” is in the present perfect tense. Therefore, the sentence means that Kevin, at a time in the past, memorized the entire Book of Romans and that down to the present time he has continued to remember it. However, it does not mean that Kevin will, at a later time, continue to remember the entire Book of Romans. Indeed, he may or may not—largely depending upon whether or not he continues to exercise his memory of it. The same is true of those Christians who have become partakers of Christ; they may or may not continue to be partakers—largely depending upon whether or not they continue to exercise their faith in Christ.

Kevin relies on himself to remember which does not guarantee that Kevin will remember the book of Romans all of his life. However, the completed action in Heb. 3:14 is not of ourselves. Paul makes that clear in verse 12 by warning us "lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief ". Again, we see those that do not hold to their "beginning assurance" because they never had it.

Brother, what you are ultimately teaching is salvation by self reliance on ourselves. That is not the message of the gospel. Faith is not our work but God's work.

John 6:29
29Jesus answered and said to them, "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.


Jesus continues to tell us in John 6:

27"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." (bold mine).

The works that we do are not our own. Paul tells us in Eph. 2:

10For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them. (Bold mine).

Let us not forget that the Greek Fathers of the Church were native Greek speakers, and we do not find the slightest trace of the doctrine of eternal security in any of their writings, but we do find the doctrine of conditional security throughout their writings. Let us also not forget that the doctrine of eternal security is believed today by only a minority of Christian scholars of the New Testament, and that among lay people and pastors, the doctrine of eternal security is to a very large extent limited geographically to the United States and Canada. In much of the world, the doctrine is virtually unknown to Protestant Christians.

I submit to you that many of the early church fathers went faithfully to their deaths not because they relied on themselves but on the promise of our Savior. I submit to you that none of them relied on their own works for salvation.

Irenaeus tells us:

Unless it had been God who had freely given salvation, we could never had possessed it securely. And unless man had been joined to God, he could never have become a partaker of incorruptibility, For it is incumbent upon the mediator between God and men, by His relationship to both, to bring both to friendship and concord, and present man to God, while He revealed God to man. For, in what way could we be partakers of the adoption of sons? (Against Heresies, I.3.18.7 in Roberts and Donaldson, ANF).

Clement of Alexandria tells us:

If one should captiously say, "and how is it possible for feeble flesh to resist the energies and spirits of Powers?" well, let him know this, that, confiding in the Almighty and the Lord, we war against the principalities of darkness, and against death. "Whilst thou are yet speaking" He says, "lo, here am I". See the invincible Helper who shields us. "Think it not strange, therefore, concerning the burning sent for your trial, as though some strange thing happened to you; nut as you are partakers i the suffering of Christ, rejoice; that at the revelation of His glory and of God resteth on you." As it is written, "Because for Thy sake we are killed all day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors, through Him that loved us". (Stromata, II,IV,VII).

I can, again, continue of you wish.

 

[Hentenza]

God is faithful, who will not allow Christians to be tempted beyond what we are able to endure, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that we will be able to endure it. Nonetheless, very many Christians sin.

ALL Christians sin. There is not a single one that does not.

The Jews of whom Paul is writing in 1 Cor. 10:1-11 were “destroyed” in the wilderness; that is, they died in the wilderness and never reached the Promised Land! The Apostle Paul uses the same example as a warning to Gentile Christians and writes,

1 Cor 10:11. Now these things happened to them as an example, and they were written for our instruction, upon whom the ends of the ages have come.
12. Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed that he does not fall.

Are you suggesting that the Jews who became unfaithful and were destroyed in the wilderness are not an example of what will happen to Christians who become unfaith, as did the Jews?

Christians with saving faith can not become unfaithful. Tell me, Moses did not reach the promise land either. How does that play into your theory?

If I am misunderstanding the Greek grammar used by the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, it was also misunderstood by the Greek Fathers of the Church who were native Greek speakers and it is misunderstood by the very large majority of professors of Greek in our universities and seminaries. Please review what Greek grammars, regardless of the author’s theological position, say about the Greek perfect tense.

The Greek fathers did not misunderstand the Greek grammar. None of them taught salvation by works.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

1. πιστεύων is not a compound word.
2. The short meaning of πιστεύων is disbelieve not disobey.
3. Even if the word meant disobey, the context of John 3:36 makes it clear that the disobedience would be disobedience by rejecting Christ. Either way, those that believe in Christ (πιστεύων present active) will see eternal life while those that do not will not.

PG, I do not debate by mud slinging others. I prefer to keep discussions friendly and biblical. Please stick to the present discussion in this thread. Thanks.

You are correct in stating that πιστεύων is not a compound word, and I did not write that it is or that it means “disobeying;” it clearly means “believing.” Are you confusing the word πιστεύων with the compound word ὰπειθῶν (a compound of the Greek particle “α”and the Greek word πεἱθ&#969?

There is no such thing as “the short meaning” of a word. The meaning of words is determined by their usage. Ancient Greeks used the word ὰπειθῶν to express the concept of “disobedience,” not “disbelief,” and the evidence in support of this fact is cited by the best Greek-English lexicons and theological dictionaries of the New Testament. The slinging of mud at others, whether it be at the posters themselves, or at the authorities that they city, is fundamentally evil and has no place on a Christian message board. Stating that the information posted by another is “seriously inaccurate” and proving that fact through documentation from reference works regularly quoted from by the finest New Testament scholars of all Christian denominations as being authoritative is not slinging mud; it is fairly and objectively defending the true teachings of the New Testament.

The Apostle John, when writing of belief in Christ resulting in the believer having eternal life, regularly uses either the Greek present tense or the Greek present participle, the functions of which are very different from the English present tense and the English present participle. Indeed, all Greek tenses stress the aspect of the action (see the very many recent studies on the subject of ‘verbal aspect’) rather than the time of the action. The very opposite is true of all of our English tenses. In John 3:36, therefore, both of the present particles stress the continuity of the action spoken of—in one case believing, in the other case, disobeying. People who are truly believing in Christ, as evidenced by their obeying Him, are partaking of His life, his eternal life; but those people who cease to believe in Christ, as evidenced by their disobeying Him, are no longer partaking of His 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.” (NASB, 1995)

John 3:36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever disobeys the Son will not see life, but must endure God's wrath. (NRSV)

John 3:36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him. (ESV)

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Brother, Moulton and Milligan's The Vocabulary of Greek Testament disagrees with your opinion. They describe hupostosis as a legal term. They write that the term stands for the whole body of documents bearing on the ownership of a person's property, deposited in archives, and forming the evidence of ownership.

Yes, Moulton and Milligan, in The Vocabulary of Greek Testament, express a different opinion than mine, and I quoted them fairly and objectively this paragraph:

Therefore, the notion that the meaning of the compound Greek word ὑπόστασις is the sum of its parts is severely inaccurate. Indeed, we read in A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, “The sense ‘confidence’, ‘assurance’ must be eliminated, since examples of it cannot be found (acc. to Dörrie and Köster [below]). It cannot play a role in Hb. 11:1, where it has enjoyed much favor since Luther (also Tyndale, RSV; not KJ).” In Moulton and Milligan’s The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, we read, “For this important word we may begin by citing a few of the exx. of the common meaning ‘substance,’ ‘property,’ ‘effects’:” followed by the documentation for these meanings. They then suggest the following translation for its use in Heb. 11:1, “Faith is the title-deed of things hoped for.” For additional, detailed documentation, please see the works that I have cited above in this post, and Notes de lexicographie néo-testamentaire by Ceslas Spicq.
​

The subject of that paragraph is that “the notion that the meaning of the compound Greek word ὑπόστασις is the sum of its parts is severely inaccurate.” I quoted from The Vocabulary of Greek Testament to document my statement; I did not quote from it to document that they share my opinion of the meaning of the word. The Vocabulary of Greek Testament is very valuable tools for New Testament exegesis because, rather than simply give an unfounded opinion, Moulton and Milligan give an opinion based upon the use of Greek words found in the ancient papyri, and they provide their readers with quotes from the papyri to document the accuracy of their opinion. It should be noted, however, that Moulton and Milligan give an opinion based upon the use of Greek words found in the ancient papyri—and not on the basis of the much broader spectrum of ancient Greek literature. For this much broader spectrum of ancient Greek literature, we must consult the lexicons and theological dictionaries that do—and these works support my view over the view of Moulton and Milligan. Nonetheless, the precise meaning of the word that we are discussing as found in Heb. 3:14 is subject to question. We do not have any ancient sources that support the opinion that you posted, but we do have ancient sources that support a variety of other opinions.

Look, when I do a word study I consult several lexicons and dictionaries to filter out author's opinions and the reason why I submitted several as examples. I will warn you that it is easy to fall into error by only consulting reference materials that agree with one's opinion. I will also warn you that assuming that years of study equals no error is in itself an error. I am sure that there are plenty of theologians that you disagree with so again, attempting to discredit some by smear is not a good debate tactic.

I typically consult only those works that are recognized as being authoritative by the finest scholars of all of the Christians denominations. I have thousands of reference works in my personal library, and the authors and editors of them represent nearly the full spectrum of Christian denominations—including the Roman Catholic Church, Anglicans and Episcopalians—both Arminian and Reformed, several Lutheran denominations, Methodists—conservative and liberal, Presbyterians—conservative and liberal, the Church of the Nazarene, the Assemblies of God, and even Baptists!

Two of my favorite New Testament scholars are Roman Catholics—Raymond E. Brown and Joseph Fitzmyer. Father Brown, although a Roman Catholic priest that is as Roman Catholic as a priest can possibly, enjoyed telling his fellow priests that he has had the pleasure of being the guest speaker in Baptist Churches! (As indeed, he had).

 

[Hupomone10]

What about the alzheimer Christian?
Believe me. My mother in law had alzheimer's disease. At the end, she no longer remembered her confidence firm to the end.

Assumption here: "to the end" means to the end of her life. You see, it's just an assumption, read back into scripture.

Blessings,
H.

 

[DD2008]

What about the alzheimer Christian?
Believe me. My mother in law had alzheimer's disease. At the end, she no longer remembered her confidence firm to the end.

Assumption here: "to the end" means to the end of her life. You see, it's just an assumption, read back into scripture.

Blessings,
H.

Again, that's another reason that your faith isn't what you need to provide for salvaiton. It is salvation that provides your faith. If the body then fails you need not worry, it's only for a little while then you see Jesus. Theres a big difference between the brain and the spirit.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Kevin relies on himself to remember which does not guarantee that Kevin will remember the book of Romans all of his life. However, the completed action in Heb. 3:14 is not of ourselves. Paul makes that clear in verse 12 by warning us "lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief ". Again, we see those that do not hold to their "beginning assurance" because they never had it.

Brother, what you are ultimately teaching is salvation by self reliance on ourselves. That is not the message of the gospel. Faith is not our work but God's work.

John 6:29
29Jesus answered and said to them, "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.


Jesus continues to tell us in John 6:

27"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." (bold mine).

The works that we do are not our own. Paul tells us in Eph. 2:

10For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them. (Bold mine).






I submit to you that many of the early church fathers went faithfully to their deaths not because they relied on themselves but on the promise of our Savior. I submit to you that none of them relied on their own works for salvation.

Irenaeus tells us:

Unless it had been God who had freely given salvation, we could never had possessed it securely. And unless man had been joined to God, he could never have become a partaker of incorruptibility, For it is incumbent upon the mediator between God and men, by His relationship to both, to bring both to friendship and concord, and present man to God, while He revealed God to man. For, in what way could we be partakers of the adoption of sons? (Against Heresies, I.3.18.7 in Roberts and Donaldson, ANF).

Clement of Alexandria tells us:

If one should captiously say, "and how is it possible for feeble flesh to resist the energies and spirits of Powers?" well, let him know this, that, confiding in the Almighty and the Lord, we war against the principalities of darkness, and against death. "Whilst thou are yet speaking" He says, "lo, here am I". See the invincible Helper who shields us. "Think it not strange, therefore, concerning the burning sent for your trial, as though some strange thing happened to you; nut as you are partakers i the suffering of Christ, rejoice; that at the revelation of His glory and of God resteth on you." As it is written, "Because for Thy sake we are killed all day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors, through Him that loved us". (Stromata, II,IV,VII).

I can, again, continue of you wish.

I am teaching that we are saved by grace through faith—but not a temporary faith, but a faith last lasts—just as did Irenaeus and Clement of Alexandra:

For as, among men, those sons who disobey their fathers, being disinherited, are still their sons in the course of nature, but by law are disinherited, for they do not become the heirs of their natural parents; so in the same way is it with God, — those who do not obey Him being disinherited by Him, have ceased to be His sons. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book 4, Chap. XLI. Edinburgh Edition of The Ante-Nicene Fathers.

We ought not, therefore, as that presbyter remarks, to be puffed up, nor be severe upon those of old time, but ought ourselves to fear, lest perchance, after [we have come to] the knowledge of Christ, if we do things displeasing to God, we obtain no further forgiveness of sins, but be shut out from His kingdom. And therefore it was that Paul said, “For if [God] spared not the natural branches, [take heed] lest He also spare not thee, who, when thou wert a wild olive tree, wert grafted into the fatness of the olive tree, and wert made a partaker of its fatness.” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book 4, Chap. XXVII. Edinburgh Edition of The Ante-Nicene Fathers.

For it is neither the faith, nor the love, nor the hope, nor the endurance of one day; “but, he that endureth to the end shall be saved.” Clement of Alexandria, Salvation of the Rich Man, Chap. XXXI. Edinburgh Edition of The Ante-Nicene Fathers.

​