God can still reject any Christian, or reject as many as he sees fit from the new covenant.

[black.hawk]

Now, Malachi 3:7 seems to suggest that the new covenant of Christ would allow all sins to be forgiven, so that any Christian can still return to a state of grace with God via a process of confession, contrition, or repentance:-

"Return to me, and I will return to you".

However, the OT example of 1 Samuel 15:23-26 would seem to 'contradict' this interpretation of Malachi 3:7.

As Saul begged for clemency with the Prophet Samuel who represented God (V24/V25) but was rejected by Him.

Now, we know that not every word written/spoken in the Bible is true, since the words spoken by Satan are usually false (Genesis 3:4, John 8:44).

Therefore, we should always give priority to any words spoken by God (or Jesus) over the words spoken by Satan and his minions.

However, since God (or Jesus) cannot contradict himself we must apportion equal priority to any words which they have spoken - So that the New Testament should never take priority over the Old Testament, vice versa.

So, we thereby know that Malachi 3:7 and 1 Samuel 15:23, 26 should be given equal priority, since they are words spoken by God and his prophet Samuel in the Old Testament.

But also, we should consider Malachi 3:7 and 1 Samuel 15:23, 26 to be on equal footing with Matthew 7:21, 23 in the New Testament, since God's word in the NT cannot be superior to his word in the Old Testament, vice versa - Based on the premise that God cannot contradict himself, so that every word he has spoken must be given equal priority.

But if every godly word spoken is equal, then how should one resolve the apparent 'contradictions' between Malachi 3:7 vs. 1 Samuel 15:23, 26 and Matthew 7:21, 23 - Remember, that the alleged followers of Christ have effectively beseeched him to reconsider their plea of clemency (Matthew 7:22), but are nonetheless rejected by Christ who is their Judge in V21 & V23?

Basically, the only way to avoid contradiction in this case would be to assume that God's grace (or mercy) has a *limitation*, which is defined by the intersection between Malachi 3:7 vs. 1 Samuel 15:23, 26 and Matthew 7:21, 23.

Beyond this boundary, God has every right to reject any Christian (Who has seriously or consistently transgressed the covenant of Christ) from the new covenant, which is loud and clear, and irrefutable according to Matthew 7:21-23.

So despite their plea of clemency God (or Jesus) would still have every right to reject those alleged 'Christians' from the new covenant - Since they have seriously or consistently crossed the line, which is the intersection between Malachi 3:7 vs. 1 Samuel 15:23, 26 and Matthew 7:21, 23.

Therefore, it's wrong to presume that "All Christians will be saved" (Matthew 7:13-14, 21, 22, 23, 25:41-46), as much as it is also incorrect to presume that a Christian can Always return to a state of grace with God by a process of confession, contrition, or repentance.

Now, we know that it's wrong because the New Testament tells us that Christ will definitely return to Judge the Living and the Dead (Matthew 25:31-46), so that the sheep and goats are divided by rejecting all the false prophets and faux Christians from his covenant, and this separation happens at the intersect between Malachi 3:7 vs. 1 Samuel 15:23, 26 and Matthew 7:21, 23.

Therefore, God has every right to reject False prophets and Faux Christians from the new covenant of Christ, and the new covenant is no guarantee that a Christian won't be rejected.

This is loud and clear, and irrefutable according to the New Testament - Matthew 7:21-23 - Which says that the "Workers of lawlessness" (or those who have breached the covenant) are still rejected from the new covenant, notwithstanding their plea of clemency with Jesus Christ who is their Judge at the End Times.

Discuss.

 

[A_Thinker]

Now, Malachi 3:7 seems to suggest that the new covenant of Christ would allow sins to be forgiven, so that any Christian can still return to a state of grace with God via a process of confession, contrition, or repentance:-

"Return to me, and I will return to you".

However, the OT example of 1 Samuel 15:23-26 would seem to 'contradict' this interpretation of Malachi 3:7.

As Saul begged for clemency with the Prophet Samuel who represented God (V24/V25) but was rejected by Him.

Now, we know that not every word written/spoken in the Bible is true, since the words spoken by Satan are usually false (Genesis 3:4, John 8:44).

Therefore, we should always give priority to any words spoken by God (or Jesus) over the words spoken by Satan and his minions.

However, since God (or Jesus) cannot contradict himself we must apportion equal priority to any words which they have spoken - So that the New Testament should never take priority over the Old Testament, vice versa.

So, we thereby know that Malachi 3:7 and 1 Samuel 15:23, 26 should be given equal priority, since they are words spoken by God and his prophet Samuel in the Old Testament.

But also, we should consider Malachi 3:7 and 1 Samuel 15:23, 26 to be on equal footing with Matthew 7:21, 23 in the New Testament, since God's word in the NT cannot be superior to his word in the Old Testament, vice versa - Based on the premise that God cannot contradict himself, so that every word he has spoken must be given equal priority.

But if every godly word spoken is equal, then how should one resolve the apparent 'contradictions' between Malachi 3:7 vs. 1 Samuel 15:23, 26 and Matthew 7:21, 23 - Remember, that the alleged followers of Christ have effectively beseeched him to reconsider their plea of clemency (Matthew 7:22), but are nonetheless rejected by Christ who is their Judge in V21 & V23?

Now, basically, the only way to avoid contradiction would be to assume that God's grace (or mercy) has a *limitation*, which is defined by the intersection between Malachi 3:7 vs. 1 Samuel 15:23, 26 and Matthew 7:21, 23.

Beyond this boundary, God has every right to reject any Christian (Who has seriously or consistently transgressed the covenant of Christ) from the new covenant, which is loud and clear, and irrefutable according to Matthew 7:21-23.

So despite their plea of clemency God (or Jesus) would still have every right to reject those alleged 'Christians' from the new covenant - Since they have seriously or consistently crossed the line, which is the intersection between Malachi 3:7 vs. 1 Samuel 15:23, 26 and Matthew 7:21, 23.

Therefore, it's wrong to presume that "All Christians will be saved" (Matthew 7:13-14, 21, 22, 23, 25:41-46), as much as it is also incorrect to presume that a Christian can Always return to a state of grace with God by a process of confession, contrition, or repentance.

Now, we know that it's wrong because the New Testament tells us that Christ will definitely return to Judge the Living and the Dead (Matthew 25:31-46), so that the sheep and goats are divided by rejecting all the false prophets and faux Christians from his covenant, and this separation happens at the intersect between Malachi 3:7 vs. 1 Samuel 15:23, 26 and Matthew 7:21, 23.

Therefore, God has every right to reject False prophets and Faux Christians from the new covenant of Christ, and the new covenant is no guarantee that a Christian won't be rejected.

This is loud and clear, and irrefutable according to the New Testament - Matthew 7:21-23 - Which says that the "Workers of lawlessness" (or those who have breached the covenant) are still rejected from the new covenant, notwithstanding their plea of clemency with Jesus Christ who is their Judge at the End Times.

Discuss.

WHY would God reject any of His children who have come home ?

The whole reconciliation was HIS IDEA ... and He allowed HIS SON to die in order to bring it to pass ...

Your Samuel and Malachi references are in the context the Old Covenant, not the New Covenant. And the Matthew passage only identifies those that are rejected as "claimants" to followship of Christ, ... but Jesus says "I NEVER KNEW YOU," ... so they can't have EVER been true followers ...

 

[black.hawk]

WHY would God reject any of His children who have come home ?

The whole reconciliation was HIS IDEA ... and He allowed HIS SON to die in order to bring it to pass ...

Your Samuel and Malachi references are in the context the Old Covenant, not the New Covenant. And the Matthew passage only identifies those that are rejected as "claimants" to followship of Christ, ... but Jesus said "I NEVER KNEW YOU," ... so they can't have EVER been true followers ...

Correct, the "claimants" are rejected [from the new covenant] since they have never been true followers of Christ; but only God can tell whether or not somebody is a true believer (follower) of Christ - As their opinion may well be at variance with God's viewpoint - Since in 99.99 percent of cases a Defendant would usually plead, "Not guilty" - Although it is also true that 99.99 percent of the same are in actual fact GUILTY.

Ultimately, only God can know whether or not his children have been reconciled.

 

[Doug Melven]

So that the New Testament should never take priority over the Old Testament, vice versa.

God found fault with the Old Covenant. The fault was man, man could not keep the Old Covenant, so it passed away when the New Covenant replaced it. See Hebrews 8.

Beyond this boundary, God has every right to reject any Christian (Who has seriously or consistently transgressed the covenant of Christ) from the new covenant, which is loud and clear, and irrefutable according to Matthew 7:21-23.

As noted by A Thinker in post 2, these people were not believers. So yes, they were rejected.
When God makes a promise, He cannot break it. Hebrews 6:18 says He cannot lie. If He broke His promise He would have lied.
I am not one that believes in once saved always saved.
But not just any believer can become a non-child of God.
No believer can lose his salvation.
A mature believer can reject his salvation.
Just as a minor can't say, "I don't want to be in this family any more" and have it honored.
If a 5 year old child told his parents I hate you and wanted to leave and the parents let the child go, let's just say they have places for people like that.
If a 18 year old child told his parents I hate you and wanted to leave and the parents let the child go, he could go
and the parents would have nothing to say.

Therefore, God has every right to reject False prophets and Faux Christians from the new covenant of Christ, and the new covenant is no guarantee that a Christian won't be rejected.

God will reject false prophets and faux Christians.
But to say that the New Covenant is no guarantee that a Christian won't be rejected is to call God a liar.
It is an iron'clad guarantee. Hebrews 6:19
Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil;

 

[black.hawk]

God found fault with the Old Covenant. The fault was man, man could not keep the Old Covenant, so it passed away when the New Covenant replaced it. See Hebrews 8.

This simply means that as far as the thread is concerned we should avoid any further discussion of Malachi 3:7 and 1 Samuel 15:23-26, since they are allegedly part of the old covenant - Although I do not necessarily agree that every rule/doctrine in the Old Testament is automatically null and void by the new covenant, which is according to these words spoken by Jesus: Matthew 5:17.

As noted by A Thinker in post 2, these people were not believers. So yes, they were rejected.

But how do you discern a true believer from someone who is a non believer?

Where do we draw the line?

Now, remember, that on a graduated scale there are different shades of "brownness or greyness" which are situated between Outright Theism or Atheism.

So could you still call somebody a true believer/follower of Christ if s/he suffered from frequent (or consistent) lapses in faith, so that the individual concerned is a repeat offender who would frequently revert to committing the same transgressions, over and over again?

Should such repeat offences be construed as "contrition, penitence or repentance in a Real sense", which are key components in the new covenant of Christ?

Do you consider such repeat offenders to have satisfied the terms of the new covenant if they are consistently in "breach of contract"?

Are they true believers who are consistently in breach of the covenant (An oxymoron which is automatically null and void)?

When God makes a promise, He cannot break it. Hebrews 6:18 says He cannot lie. If He broke His promise He would have lied.

Sorry, but it's largely my fault if I didn't make myself clear.

In retrospect, I should have included more explanation in the OP; but the idea of "covenant" is simply another word to describe the Law of Contract (The Law of Obligations or Contractual Liability) - This is self evident as an "Implicit Truth" in the Bible, which is a doctrine that Catholics share with many other Christians - Because something is not explicitly mentioned in the Bible doesn't mean to say that it could not be inferred by what is clearly stated e.g. Such as the idea of "false prophets" in Matthew 7:15, which implies the existence of Faux Christians who follow the false teachings of the aforementioned - This is a necessary truth which is implied by V15 - Since there can be no concept of any "false prophets" without the Faux Christians who follow them, although False Christians are not expressly mentioned anywhere in the Bible.

The word, "covenant" simply means that there is a "vertical" relationship (or contract) between God and the individuals concerned; whereas, "contract" by itself simply means that there is a "horizontal" relationship (Which is a legal, moral, or legitimate agreement) between individuals who are more or less considered "equal".

So, in hindsight I should have explained the basic workings of the Law of Contract in order to explain why God doesn't need to "lie nor break his promise" to Terminate his Agreement with those individuals concerned.

Now, Scripture tells us that Christians would invariably sin despite the Saving grace of the new covenant. Romans 3:10, 23, Ecclesiastes 7:20

So, by definition, every Christian is in breach of the covenant by virtue of their transgressions.

However, this is no failure on the part of God who has neither broken his promise nor breached the covenant; but the fault lies squarely on the shoulders of those who are in "breach of contract" - Thus, rendering the contract null and void, or at least the contract is to be seen as voidable if not immediately null and void - Which depends on a number of factors, such as the nature of the Contract between the respective parties, and also Contractual law may well differ as contingent on the jurisdiction.

For instance, a Service user who defaults on his monthly payment of car insurance is said to be in "breach of contract", which would entail a penalty (or interest) in addition to his payment in arrears. This is required to keep his Contract running smoothly and to reinstate his "good standing" with the Service provider.

So, the Service provider would usually demand "Immediate payment in addition to interest charged for the Late payment"; but if such a "breach of contract" were to continue over an extended period the Law of Obligations would allow the SP to unilaterally TERMINATE the Contract.

This is the same situation whereby God would reject False prophets and Faux Christians since they are consistently repeat offenders who are in "breach of contract".

Since they are in "breach of contract" God doesn't need to lie nor break his promise, nor breach the terms of his contract to TERMINATE the contract - God is released from his Contractual obligation by those who are in "breach of contract", which gives him every right to TERMINATE the contract without breaching his contract.

This is precisely the meaning of Matthew 7:21-23, whereby God would reject any False Christian who is seriously and consistently in "breach of contract".

By definition, no repeat offender can be called a believer (or child of God) if they are frequently consistently in breach of the covenant of Christ.

Why would any true believer breach the covenant at all, let alone breach it severally on numerous occasions - Whilst also pretend that the contract could still be maintained or reinstated if they are seriously or consistently in breach of contract over an extended period?

But on the contrary, Scripture teaches that such persistent offenders could well be rejected by God if they are consistently in breach of contract over an extended period; and God can still reject them unilaterally, either with, or without their approval.

Such is the meaning of Matthew 7:21-23.

I am not one that believes in once saved always saved.
But not just any believer can become a non-child of God.
No believer can lose his salvation.

Again, no believer (or child of God) can be a repeat offender who is consistently (and seriously) in breach of the covenant of Christ.

No believer can lose his salvation, but no serious or consistent offender can be called a "believer", either.

A mature believer can reject his salvation.
Just as a minor can't say, "I don't want to be in this family any more" and have it honored.
If a 5 year old child told his parents I hate you and wanted to leave and the parents let the child go, let's just say they have places for people like that.
If a 18 year old child told his parents I hate you and wanted to leave and the parents let the child go, he could go
and the parents would have nothing to say.

Whether mature or not, the Bible makes no allowances for Christians who are "immature"; but everyone is Judged on equal merit, based on whether or not they have fulfilled the terms of their covenant with Jesus: Luke 10:27, 28, John 11:25, 26, Romans 10:9.

God will reject false prophets and faux Christians.
But to say that the New Covenant is no guarantee that a Christian won't be rejected is to call God a liar.

False.

There is no guarantee - Since those who are in "breach of contract" (or have breached the terms of the covenant) cannot rightly expect their contract to remain intact. But under the circumstances, God would be in his right to Terminate the Contract (Which means to reject the False Christians who are thereby expelled from the covenant) without breaking his Contractual obligations, nor lie, nor break his promise to honour the Agreement.

It is an iron'clad guarantee. Hebrews 6:19
Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil;

But it's iron clad [guarantee] Only if the individual concerned has honoured the terms of his Covenant: Luke 10:27, 28, John 11:25, 26, Romans 10:9.

Everything is contingent as to whether or not you have honoured the Terms of the Agreement - Which is the new covenant of Christ.

 

[A_Thinker]

So, by definition, every Christian is in breach of the covenant by virtue of their transgressions.

Believers can't be in breach of the New Covenant ... because the new Covenant is not based upon performance and perfection. It is based upon LOVE and GRACE/FORGIVENESS ... and the faithfulness of GOD to FORGIVE our sins/lapses ...

Ephesians 2:8-10

8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast. 10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.

So the soul which desires fellowship with God can always call upon God to forgive his/her sins per God's GRACE. For the saving of souls is the will of the Father ...

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. 38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. 39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. 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.

John 1:17 For the Law came by Moses, but GRACE and truth came by Jesus the Christ.

John 1:9 If we confess our sins, HE is FAITHFUL and just to FORGIVE us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

 

[black.hawk]

Believers can't be in breach of the New Covenant ... because the new Covenant is not based upon performance and perfection. It is based upon LOVE and GRACE/FORGIVENESS ... and the faithfulness of GOD to FORGIVE our sins/lapses ...

So the soul which desires fellowship with God can always call upon God to forgive his/her sins. For the saving of souls is the will of the Father ...

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. 38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. 39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. 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.

John 1:17 For the Law came by Moses, but GRACE and truth came by Jesus the Christ.

John 1:9 If we confess our sins, HE is FAITHFUL and just to FORGIVE us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

Sorry, but this is where we agree to DISAGREE - Since you have no right to challenge God's authority, nor the Supreme authority of Christ, which is clearly stated in Matthew 28:18.

Lastly, you don't seem to understand that you have no way to persuade God to overturn his Judgment, nor to "make" him do anything which he doesn't want, such as to stay his hand of execution in regards to those who are condemned.

Since God is Sovereign (Romans 9:21) salvation depends solely on God who has mercy (Romans 9:16), but it doesn't depend at all on your whim, resistance nor argumentation, which will have no impact whatsoever in the long term - Since the END RESULT would still be the same on the day of Judgement.

Frankly, I don't see how this forum is going to make any difference at all in regards to the END RESULT on the day of Judgement, which would still happen no what you may do, say or think in the interim.

So, now the Second Coming of Christ will NEVER happen during the lifetime of this generation, but for reasons which cannot be made explicit due to the rules of the forum.

God has no wish to save nor help those who have rejected the Teachings of Christ - Which includes Jesus' own interpretation of Scripture - As such Authority is held to be infallible, which nobody has any right to challenge, debate nor question.

 

[A_Thinker]

So, by definition, every Christian is in breach of the covenant by virtue of their transgressions.

Once again, ... sin does not breach the Second Covenant (i.e. the Covenant of Grace).

Sin did breach the First Covenant (i.e. the Covenant of the Law), but the Second Covenant (of Grace) was put forward by God PRECISELY BECAUSE God knew that all were in BREACH of the First Covenant.

God desired to save souls (John 3:16), and it is the Second Covenant (of Grace) which saves souls.

The First Covenant (of Law) was put forth by God to definitively demonstrate that ALL were in BREACH of God's Law, ... and therefore should become aware of their need for participation in God's Second Covenant (of Grace).

Hebrews 8

7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second. 8 Because finding fault with them, He says: “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah— 9 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the Lord.

10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 11 None of them shall teach his neighbor, and none his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them. 12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.

 

[A_Thinker]

For instance, a Service user who defaults on his monthly payment of car insurance is said to be in "breach of contract", which would entail a penalty (or interest) in addition to his payment in arrears. This is required to keep his Contract running smoothly and to reinstate his "good standing" with the Service provider.

So, the Service provider would usually demand "Immediate payment in addition to interest charged for the Late payment"; but if such a "breach of contract" were to continue over an extended period the Law of Obligations would allow the SP to unilaterally TERMINATE the Contract.

There is no "monthly payment" required for the Second Covenant.

The requirement for participation in the Second Covenant is BELIEF, ... which is stated at numerous points in the New Testament.

John 1:12 But to all who did receive Him, to those who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God— 13 children born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but born of God.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that WHOSEVER BELIEVETH in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

John 5:24 “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life.

Acts 16:29 Calling for lights, the jailer rushed in and fell trembling before Paul and Silas. 30 Then he brought them out and asked, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”

31 They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved, you and your household.”

Romans 10:8 But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth, and in your heart.” That is, the word of faith which we proclaim, 9 that if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised Him out from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For in the heart is belief unto righteousness, and in the mouth is confession unto salvation.

11 For the Scripture says, “Everyone believing on Him will not be put to shame

 

[A_Thinker]

Frankly, I don't see how this forum is going to make any difference at all in regards to the END RESULT on the day of Judgement, which would still happen no what you may do, say or think in the interim.

I trust in the GRACE of God and His FAITHFULNESS.

 

[black.hawk]

I trust in the GRACE of God and His FAITHFULNESS.

THEN, YOU ARE DELUDED AND KIDDING YOURSELF - SINCE I AM GOD AND AM RESOLVED NOT TO SAVE (FORGIVE) YOU. John 10:30

 

[black.hawk]

There is no "monthly payment" required for the Second Covenant.

The requirement for participation in the Second Covenant is BELIEF, ... which is stated at numerous points in the New Testament.

John 1:12 But to all who did receive Him, to those who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God— 13 children born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but born of God.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that WHOSEVER BELIEVETH in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

John 5:24 “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life.

Acts 16:29 Calling for lights, the jailer rushed in and fell trembling before Paul and Silas. 30 Then he brought them out and asked, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”

31 They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved, you and your household.”

Romans 10:8 But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth, and in your heart.” That is, the word of faith which we proclaim, 9 that if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised Him out from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For in the heart is belief unto righteousness, and in the mouth is confession unto salvation.

11 For the Scripture says, “Everyone believing on Him will not be put to shame

But it’s not based on belief ALONE because Jesus said you still have to fulfil certain CONDITIONS in Luke 10:28.

So WHO is more likely to be right: You or Jesus?

You or God?

 

[black.hawk]

Believers can't be in breach of the New Covenant ... because the new Covenant is not based upon performance and perfection. It is based upon LOVE and GRACE/FORGIVENESS ... and the faithfulness of GOD to FORGIVE our sins/lapses ...

Ephesians 2:8-10

8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast. 10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.

So the soul which desires fellowship with God can always call upon God to forgive his/her sins per God's GRACE. For the saving of souls is the will of the Father ...

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. 38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. 39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. 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.

John 1:17 For the Law came by Moses, but GRACE and truth came by Jesus the Christ.

John 1:9 If we confess our sins, HE is FAITHFUL and just to FORGIVE us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

Didn’t even bother to read your convoluted response, but I can see that this is no more than an Ego trip (or the stiff upper lip) as far as you are concerned - Since you have no wish to concede DEFEAT in front of the entire world, let alone DEFEAT in front of your husband the 1st Duke of Eddy.

Oh, by the way, “defeat” is just a euphemism for something else much worse, which I think you can well guess. Matthew 25:41, Revelation 20:15, 21:8.

Frankly, I don’t like you, so how am I going to save someone whom I dislike?????

What happened to your LOGIC 101?

 

[A_Thinker]

THEN, YOU ARE DELUDED AND KIDDING YOURSELF - SINCE I AM GOD AND AM RESOLVED NOT TO SAVE (FORGIVE) YOU. John 10:30

Your issue (with YOUR argument) ... is that there is NOWHERE in scripture where God says anything like this. This is much more a human/fleshly attitude.

 

[A_Thinker]

But it’s not based on belief ALONE because Jesus said you still have to fulfil certain CONDITIONS in Luke 10:28.

Jesus and the young man were speaking of keeping the Law ... which had not been yet retired at that time (i.e. prior to Jesus' sacrifice).

They spoke of "doing things", which is the heart of the Law.

But the second covenant is "NOT OF WORKS" says Paul.

So I believe Jesus and Paul.

 

[A_Thinker]

Frankly, I don’t like you, so how am I going to save someone whom I dislike?????

Thank God that God doesn't feel like this ... so says Peter, who certainly had his lapses ...

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

 

[Doug Melven]

But how do you discern a true believer from someone who is a non believer?

Where do we draw the line?

There is no way any man can determine whether someone else is a believer or not. Unless someone somehow figured out a way to look into the heart.
I have seen atheists live pretty moral lives. Would you say they are saved?
Only God knows the heart., whether or not someone is a believer or not.

Now, remember, that on a graduated scale there are different shades of "brownness or greyness" which are situated between Outright Theism or Atheism.

God has no graduated scale. You are His child or you are not His child.

So could you still call somebody a true believer/follower of Christ if s/he suffered from frequent (or consistent) lapses in faith, so that the individual concerned is a repeat offender who would frequently revert to committing the same transgressions, over and over again?

Jesus told His disciples in Luke 17 that if someone sinned against them 490 times in a day you should forgive them. Are we to be more forgiving than God?

Should such repeat offences be construed as "contrition, penitence or repentance in a Real sense", which are key components in the new covenant of Christ?
Do you consider such repeat offenders to have satisfied the terms of the new covenant if they are consistently in "breach of contract"?

,
Repent and Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and confess Him with your mouth. And believe, believe and continue to believe in Jesus your Savior. Contrition, penitence are not part of the New Covenant.
Repent = change your mind

In retrospect, I should have included more explanation in the OP; but the idea of "covenant" is simply another word to describe the Law of Contract (The Law of Obligations or Contractual Liability)

A covenant is not the same as a contract.
A contract is an agreement between 2 parties where each party has an obligation.
We have a Covenant. Marriage is a covenant.
Those who think marriage is just a contract may not be married long.
https://newcreeations.org/contracts-vs-covenants-why-the-difference-matters/

With a contract, if one agreeing party does something in violation of the contract then it is considered broken. The whole contract becomes null and void. Basically the signers of a contract agree to hold up their ends as long as the other signatories hold up theirs too.

With a covenant, both parties agree to hold up their ends regardless of whether the other party keeps their part of the agreement. A violation of a covenant by one party doesn’t matter as far as the other party’s responsibility to continue to do what they agreed to do.

However, this is no failure on the part of God who has neither broken his promise nor breached the covenant; but the fault lies squarely on the shoulders of those who are in "breach of contract" - Thus, rendering the contract null and void, or at least the contract is to be seen as voidable if not immediately null and void - Which depends on a number of factors, such as the nature of the Contract between the respective parties, and also Contractual law may well differ as contingent on the jurisdiction.

This whole statement is based on what we have is a contract. And if it were a contract, nobody on Earth who ever lived or ever will live could keep it.
It is only due to the mercy of God that we are saved.

The major problem with your theology is it puts all the responsibility on you.
And if you think for one second you can live up to God's standard, you are badly mistaken.

 

[Doug Melven]

But it’s not based on belief ALONE because Jesus said you still have to fulfil certain CONDITIONS in Luke 10:28.

So WHO is more likely to be right: You or Jesus?

You or God?

Is Jesus right?
John 3:16, 6:40,
Believe

or is Jesus right.
Luke 10:25-28

A rich young ruler who thought he lived a pretty good life and wanted to know what act he could perform to get eternal life.
So Jesus used the law for its intended purpose, to point out sin.

 

[hedrick]

This is a response to the OP:

The Bible, OT and NT, teach that God will forgive those who repent. In 1 Sam, the question is not Saul's salvation or even God's forgiveness. Saul is rejected as king, but nothing is said about his eventual salvation.

 

[Butch5]

Now, Malachi 3:7 seems to suggest that the new covenant of Christ would allow all sins to be forgiven, so that any Christian can still return to a state of grace with God via a process of confession, contrition, or repentance:-

"Return to me, and I will return to you".

However, the OT example of 1 Samuel 15:23-26 would seem to 'contradict' this interpretation of Malachi 3:7.

As Saul begged for clemency with the Prophet Samuel who represented God (V24/V25) but was rejected by Him.

Now, we know that not every word written/spoken in the Bible is true, since the words spoken by Satan are usually false (Genesis 3:4, John 8:44).

Therefore, we should always give priority to any words spoken by God (or Jesus) over the words spoken by Satan and his minions.

However, since God (or Jesus) cannot contradict himself we must apportion equal priority to any words which they have spoken - So that the New Testament should never take priority over the Old Testament, vice versa.

So, we thereby know that Malachi 3:7 and 1 Samuel 15:23, 26 should be given equal priority, since they are words spoken by God and his prophet Samuel in the Old Testament.

But also, we should consider Malachi 3:7 and 1 Samuel 15:23, 26 to be on equal footing with Matthew 7:21, 23 in the New Testament, since God's word in the NT cannot be superior to his word in the Old Testament, vice versa - Based on the premise that God cannot contradict himself, so that every word he has spoken must be given equal priority.

But if every godly word spoken is equal, then how should one resolve the apparent 'contradictions' between Malachi 3:7 vs. 1 Samuel 15:23, 26 and Matthew 7:21, 23 - Remember, that the alleged followers of Christ have effectively beseeched him to reconsider their plea of clemency (Matthew 7:22), but are nonetheless rejected by Christ who is their Judge in V21 & V23?

Basically, the only way to avoid contradiction in this case would be to assume that God's grace (or mercy) has a *limitation*, which is defined by the intersection between Malachi 3:7 vs. 1 Samuel 15:23, 26 and Matthew 7:21, 23.

Beyond this boundary, God has every right to reject any Christian (Who has seriously or consistently transgressed the covenant of Christ) from the new covenant, which is loud and clear, and irrefutable according to Matthew 7:21-23.

So despite their plea of clemency God (or Jesus) would still have every right to reject those alleged 'Christians' from the new covenant - Since they have seriously or consistently crossed the line, which is the intersection between Malachi 3:7 vs. 1 Samuel 15:23, 26 and Matthew 7:21, 23.

Therefore, it's wrong to presume that "All Christians will be saved" (Matthew 7:13-14, 21, 22, 23, 25:41-46), as much as it is also incorrect to presume that a Christian can Always return to a state of grace with God by a process of confession, contrition, or repentance.

Now, we know that it's wrong because the New Testament tells us that Christ will definitely return to Judge the Living and the Dead (Matthew 25:31-46), so that the sheep and goats are divided by rejecting all the false prophets and faux Christians from his covenant, and this separation happens at the intersect between Malachi 3:7 vs. 1 Samuel 15:23, 26 and Matthew 7:21, 23.

Therefore, God has every right to reject False prophets and Faux Christians from the new covenant of Christ, and the new covenant is no guarantee that a Christian won't be rejected.

This is loud and clear, and irrefutable according to the New Testament - Matthew 7:21-23 - Which says that the "Workers of lawlessness" (or those who have breached the covenant) are still rejected from the new covenant, notwithstanding their plea of clemency with Jesus Christ who is their Judge at the End Times.

Discuss.

While I agree that not all Christians will enter the kingdom, the passages you're using Malachi 3 and 1 Samuel 15 have nothing to do with that subject. You've got them out of context.