How do you : "Fall from Grace"

[Butterball1]

As I already explained to you, there is NO QUESTION that
"disciples" of Christ turn back. (a) First, I already showed
you JESUS said many/most in the "church" are unsaved
"tares" sown by Satan and (b) I showed you SCRIPTURE
teaching these "tares" fall away to SHOW (make manifest)
that they were NEVER saved "wheat"... I do not know WHY
you seem unable to accept what Scripture says. I will now


1Jn 2:19
They went out from us, but they were not of us;
for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued
with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest
that they were not all of us.


OK.... did you UNDERSTAND the SCRIPTURE says the unsaved
tares "WENT OUT" that they might be made "MANIFEST" they
were never "OF US".

1 Jn 2:19 "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us."

--if those antichrists John speaks about were never saved then the most the verse proves is a never saved person was never saved, it does not prove it is impossi le for one to fall away.

--let's assume those antichrist had once been saved and of the church, the verse still does not prove your point:
a) John does NOT say they were NEVER of us but that they were not of at the time they went out from us. They may have been saved at point (A) remained faithful till point (B) where they no longer let what they had heard (the gospel) abide in them (1 John 2:24) and THEN FELL away from them and continued to not be a part of them from point (B) to they left at point (C).

Furthermore if it is impossible for one to fall away then the warning, admonition John gives in 1 John 2:24 is pointless, needless and senseless. John says " If (conditional word) that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father." THerefore again, it may have been those people were faithful Christians many years with God's word abiding in them but they did not conditionally let God's word abide in them, they may have been lead astray by the false teachings of the Gnostics thereby falling away from Christ, then they no longer of them and was not of them til they day they went out from them.

b) John is talking about specific people in this context, these antichrist. THerefore no matter if they were "never saved" you cannot use them to make universal application. For there are examples of those who were of the church, Christian who had been redeemed by fell away, 2 Peter 2:1 who went from being washed, cleansed of their sin back to wallowing in the mire of sin, 2 Peter 2:22.

In Acts 15 there were those who were teaching a false teaching, "Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved". ..that the Gentiles could not be saved unless they were circumcised, the Apostles met with the church in Jerusalem to discuss this matter, verse 2. James speaks at this meeting and in verse 24 "Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:" Those false teachers came from the church teaching things without authority of the Apostles. THe fact they "went out from us" does not in any way imply they were 'never of us'.

So (I hope) that has SETTLED the issue that unsaved "tares"
in the church will go out (fall away or depart or abandon, etc)
in order to SHOW (make manifest) they were never saved.


More importantly, I will AGAIN remind you the most important
question is NOT whether unsaved "disciples" can abandon Jesus,
the ISSUE is WHY did the disciples in John 6 abandon Jesus?
I will re-post what I already showed you. Please read it again
CAREFULLY and focus on comprehension.


------------- Re-Posted from post #148 -------------


No, the POINT of John 6:65-66 is NOT that (unsaved) disciples
can abandon Jesus... although that is true, in fact the Bible says
unsaved "tares" will depart from the church to MANIFEST that
they were never saved "wheat".


Joh 6:37
All [not some but ALL MEN] that the Father giveth me
shall come to me; [all given SHALL COME] and him that cometh
to me I will in no wise cast out [NONE will be lost... no, not one].


Joh 6:39
And this is the Father's will which hath sent me,
that of all [not SOME, but ALL] which he hath given me
I should lose nothing, [NONE will be lost, no, not even one]
but should raise it up again at the last day.


Joh 6:44
NO MAN [not SOME men, but NO MAN]
can come to me [can be SAVED by having Jesus as Savior],
except the Father which hath sent me DRAW HIM:
and I will raise him up at the last day. [they will be SAVED]


The REAL POINT is the disciples realized that Jesus was teaching
salvation by ELECTION [v37. v39, v43] and, like most men today
they didn't want a salvation plan where God is Sovereign and elects
who HE will, based only on His Good Purpose and NOT on anything
that person would do during their lifetime. Like most men today,
the disciples that abandoned Jesus wanted a (synergistic) salvation
plan where THEY could initiate their own salvation. But that is just
not the way REAL (monergistic) Sovereign Grace works, as was
made clear to Nicodemus, who ALSO wanted to DO SOMETHING
to be saved ("born again").


Joh 3:4
Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?


Nicodemus, like the disciples who abandoned Jesus when they
realized He was teaching salvation by the Sovereign Grace of God
("election"), and like most men today who demand a synergistic
salvation plan... the hard TRUTH about the monergistic Gospel is
just not something they can understand or accept.


Joh 3:9
Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?


Now, WHY do I say they cannot understand or accept the Gospel?
Because that is EXACTLY what Jesus taught. Jesus was very clear
some men were NEVER MEANT to "perceive" or "understand"
the Gospel or "be converted" or "have their sins forgiven".
These people (which are the vast majority of "Christians" being
unsaved "tares" and ALL those outside the church) are not able
to ever accept the (monergistic) Gospel of Sovereign Grace...
most (in the church) don't have "eyes to see" or "ears to hear"
because they are unsaved "tares" NEVER MEANT to be saved.


The Bible is VERY CLEAR that being "born again" is based ONLY
on the Will of God... and has NOTHING to do with the will of men.
We can see this reality (if we have "eyes to see") throughout the
Scriptures. Here are just a FEW of those passages:


Joh 1:13
Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh,
nor of the will of man, but of [the Will of] God.


Rom 9:1516
For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then it is NOT of him that willeth, NOR of him that runneth,
but of God that sheweth mercy.


John 15:16
Ye have NOT chosen me, but I have chosen you,
and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit,
and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask
of the Father in my name, he may give it you.


Acts 13:48
And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad,
and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were
ordained to eternal life believed.


2Th 2:13
But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you,
brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the BEGINNING chosen you to salvation through sanctification of
the Spirit and belief of the truth:


Eph 1:4
According as he hath CHOSEN US in him
before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy
and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us
unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself,
according to the good pleasure of his will,


So, the ISSUE is not whether "disciples" can abandon Jesus
because we already KNOW the majority of the "church" are
unsaved "tares" sown by Satan and destined to eternal torment.
Instead, the ISSUE of John 6 is that His "disciples" abandoned
Him for a VERY SPECIFIC REASON.


If you cannot discern the VERY SPECIFIC REASON causing
His disciples to abandon Him then you cannot understand the
primary TEACHING of John 6. It is really as simple as that.
The teaching of John 6 is NOT that unsaved people depart,
it is that salvation is by the Sovereign ELECTION of God.


Jim

I have dealt with John 6 multiple times showing it does not teach Calvinism. You can go back and reread those posts. Continuing to recite those verses will never make them teach Calvinism.

One verse I do not think I have dealt with is John 1:13 "Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."

--this verse does NOT teach monergism where salvation (new birth) is all God and man has no role in it at all.
--the 2 verses prior to verse 13 say in John 1:11-12 "He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:" The "received not" and "received" and "believe" all show mans free will and not what God has forced upon men against man's will but what men are willing to do in receiving and believing. Clealy man has a role in his own salvation
--man's role in his own salvation can also be clearly seen in verses as Acts 2:40 with Peter telling them to "save yourselves", 1 Corinthians 7:1 "cleanse ourselves", 1 Peter 1:22 "you purified your soul"


Furthermore, John 1:13 is a not-but elliptical, a figure of speech were emphasis is put on one thing over another but not the the total exclusion of either.

examples:

John 6:27 "Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed."
Jesus is NOT literally saying one should not work for the food one eats for that would contradict 2 Thessalonians 3:10. Jesus is telling them to put more emphasis on working for the food that endures unto everlasting life over working for the physical food but not to the total exclusion of working for the physical food.

1 Peter 3:3-4 "Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price."
Peter is NOT literally telling wives to not plait their hair or not wear gold or apparel but to put more emphasis on the inward adorning over the outward but not to the total exclusion of the outward adorning. (see also 1 Timothy 2:9-10)


John 1:13 is putting emphasis on God's role in the new birth over man's role but not to the total exclusion of man's role. The physical birth John speaks of in John 1:13 does not in and of itself make one born again but one must be physically born to be born again. Cannot be born again if never physically born, never exist. Man's will in and of itself cannot make one born again but man's will is necessary in being born again, man must be willing to 'receive' and 'believe' per verse 12. John 7:17, Revelation 22:17 also show man's will has a role in his own salvation. God certainly has given man instructions and direction to man as to how to be born again, an important role on God's part but that does not absolutely rule out any role on the part of man. Again, those who had a "right to become sons of God" are the ones who freely chose to receive and believe not those God UNconditionally forces to become sons against their will.

 

[Butterball1]

Based solely on verse 63 yes it would be an assumption but based on verses 70 & 71 it is a scriptural supported fact.

“Jesus answered them, “Did I Myself not choose you, the twelve? And yet one of you is a devil.” Now He meant Judas the son of Simon Iscariot; for he, one of the twelve, was going to betray Him.”
‭‭John‬ ‭6:70-71‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

It does not say Judas was always a devil.

 

[Butterball1]

Fall is an inaccurate translation.

παραβαίνω
G3845
parabainō

1. to go by the side of
2. to go past or pass over without touching a thing
3. to overstep, neglect, violate, transgress
4. so to go past as to turn aside from
a. to depart, leave, be turned from
5. one who abandons his trust

That verse does not have to be translated as fall but can also be translated as turned aside or even rejected.

“And they prayed and said, “You, Lord, who know the hearts of all people, show which one of these two You have chosen to occupy this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside to go to his own place.””
‭‭Acts‬ ‭1:24-25‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

The idea is one cannot fall if he is already fallen. If I fall out of a tree then the logical implication is I must first be in the tree in order to fall from it. Judas must have been in a saved state and fell from it transgression.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Matthew 19:26-29 if Judas was a "faker", I do not see a faker to have "forsaken all, and followed thee"

“And looking at them, Jesus said to them, “With people this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” Then Peter responded and said to Him, “Behold, we have left everything and followed You; what then will there be for us?” And Jesus said to them, “Truly I say to you, that you who have followed Me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man will sit on His glorious throne, you also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭19:26-28‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

This does not necessarily apply to Judas. Jesus is addressing “to you who have followed Me”. If Judas was still reprobate that statement would not apply to him.

 

[BNR32FAN]

It does not say Judas was always a devil.

Yes I realize that but it does show that Judas was a devil very close to the same period when Jesus appointed the twelve seeing that He appointed them at Caernaum and He said that Judas was a devil also at Capernaum during the beginning of His ministry.

Or I should say close to the beginning of His ministry.

 

[Butterball1]

“And looking at them, Jesus said to them, “With people this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” Then Peter responded and said to Him, “Behold, we have left everything and followed You; what then will there be for us?” And Jesus said to them, “Truly I say to you, that you who have followed Me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man will sit on His glorious throne, you also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭19:26-28‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

This does not necessarily apply to Judas. Jesus is addressing “to you who have followed Me”. If Judas was still reprobate that statement would not apply to him.

Judas was among those there Jesus was speaking to.
Can't just eliminate Judas based on bias.

 

[BNR32FAN]

The idea is one cannot fall if he is already fallen. If I fall out of a tree then the logical implication is I must first be in the tree in order to fall from it. Judas must have been in a saved state and fell from it transgression.

I just showed that “fall” is not the only definition of that word.

 

[Butterball1]

Yes I realize that but it does show that Judas was a devil very close to the same period when Jesus appointed the twelve seeing that He appointed them at Caernaum and He said that Judas was a devil also at Capernaum during the beginning of His ministry.

Or I should say close to the beginning of His ministry.

The idea is Judas BECAME a devil, he BECAME a thief, he was not ALWAYS a devil nor always a thief. He was a true beleiver a true disciple they trusted but later Judas fell away.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Judas was among those there Jesus was speaking to.
Can't just eliminate Judas based on bias.

Your quoting Matthew 19 as evidence that Judas at that time was a follower when Matthew 19 took place after John 6:70-71.

 

[Butterball1]

I just showed that “fall” is not the only definition of that word.

But you did not explain away the logic...one cannot fall it he was always fallen...one cannot become lost if he was always lost, one cannot turn from Christ if he was always turned from Christ, one cannot depart/leave/abandon Christ if he was never of Christ.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Judas was among those there Jesus was speaking to.
Can't just eliminate Judas based on bias.

John 6 takes place the day after the sermon on the mount which takes place in Matthew 4.

 

[BNR32FAN]

But you did not explain away the logic...one cannot fall it he was always fallen...one cannot become lost if he was always lost, one cannot turn from Christ if he was always turned from Christ, one cannot depart/leave/abandon Christ if he was never of Christ.

One can past or pass by without ever touching.


1. to go by the side of
2. to go past or pass over without touching a thing
3. to overstep, neglect, violate, transgress
4. so to go past as to turn aside from
a. to depart, leave, be turned from
5. one who abandons his trust

 

[Brightfame52]

butterall

This verse does not say Judas was of those who belived not,

It strongly implies it, so much so, I believe it does implicate him as a unbeliever, a devil Jn 6:70 and he is called a thief Jn 12:4-6

4 Then saith one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, which should betray him,

5 Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor?

6 This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein.

 

[Brightfame52]

You are very confused.
I suggest you READ through the thread CAREFULLY to see:


(1) How the SCRIPTURES contradict your "theory" about the
disciples being "indwelt" by the Holy Spirit before Pentecost and


(2) How the SCRIPTURES contradict your "theory" that everyone
who "believes" in the name of Jesus is saved, because Satan and
the Demons "believed" Jesus was the Son of God.


I cannot take you seriously any longer and, therefore, I cannot
waste any more time showing you SCRIPTURE which you IGNORE
in order to protect your "theory" about John 1:12-13, which is
contradicted by 6-7 SCRIPTURES I already GAVE YOU.


Now... just so you understand. I am not saying John 1:12-13
is not true. I am ONLY saying your "interpretation" of the verse
contradicts a half-dozen RELATED SCRIPTURES which PROVES
(beyond any shadow of doubt) that your THEORY is incorrect.


Again, John 1:12-13 is not incorrect,
your THEORY about what it means is incorrect
because your THEORY contradicts at least a half dozen Scriptures
which I have already given you.


Now I am done with you.
I cannot waste any more time with someone who
IGNORES Scriptures that contradict their THEORIES.


Jim

Show me where it specifically said the apostles were indwelt on the day of pentecost.

 

[Butterball1]

One can past or pass by without ever touching.


1. to go by the side of
2. to go past or pass over without touching a thing
3. to overstep, neglect, violate, transgress
4. so to go past as to turn aside from
a. to depart, leave, be turned from
5. one who abandons his trust

How can one fall from a tree if he was never in the tree (never touched the tree)?

Can't fall from salvation if one was never saved.

 

[Butterball1]

John 6 takes place the day after the sermon on the mount which takes place in Matthew 4.

But Judas was of those being spoken to. Those spoken words apply to Judas as they would to the other 11.

 

[Butterball1]

Your quoting Matthew 19 as evidence that Judas at that time was a follower when Matthew 19 took place after John 6:70-71.

No indication Judas was not a follower in Matthew 19. "One of you is a devil" does NOT means Judas was ALWAYS a devil. Jesus had foreknowledge of what Judas would BECOME. Nor does it mean Judas was a devil at the time Jesus chose him to be an Apostle. Judas later fell by transggression therefore never received the promise of Matt 19. Had he not fallen away but remained faithful he would have received a 'throne'

The points I made earlier from Matt 10 CANNOT be true if Judas was a lost unbelieving unforgiven reprobate.

 

[BNR32FAN]

How can one fall from a tree if he was never in the tree (never touched the tree)?

Can't fall from salvation if one was never saved.

I never said he fell. That’s been my point the whole time that he simply passed it by having never touched it.

 

[BNR32FAN]

How can one fall from a tree if he was never in the tree (never touched the tree)?

Can't fall from salvation if one was never saved.

Are you still ignoring that every single scripture you quoted took place after John 6 when Jesus said he is a devil?

 

[BNR32FAN]

No indication Judas was not a follower in Matthew 19. "One of you is a devil" does NOT means Judas was ALWAYS a devil. Jesus had foreknowledge of what Judas would BECOME. Nor does it mean Judas was a devil at the time Jesus chose him to be an Apostle.

The points I made earlier from Matt 10 CANNOT be true if Judas was a lost unbelieving unforgiven reprobate.

John 6 took place around Matthew 5.