And Rom 11:29 says that God's gifts are irrevocable. And Paul never excluded the gift of eternal life from the gifts that are irrevocable.
We have been over this before: Paul does give us the exception Gal. 6:7-9 and we agree all exceptions may not be addressed in one passage and found in other passages.
Second, quenching the Spirit, sin and even giving up has NO EFFECT on our salvation. If it did, salvation would be up to us. But it isn't up to us. It's up to God. And His plan is to save forever those who believe. Heb 7:25
We agree that salvation is a gift from God and we have nothing to do with that gift just as Esau himself had nothing to do with obtaining his birthright, but that does not mean we like Esau cannot give our salvation away.
Because the Bible never says that you can. In fact, the Bible says that we are held IN God's hands. Not the other way around. And that those Jesus gives eternal life, WILL NEVER PERISH. Quite straight forward.
Again Gal. 6:7-9 says we can give our harvest away and the Hebrew writer Heb. 12: 16 See that no one is sexually immoral, or is godless like Esau, who for a single meal sold his inheritance rights as the oldest son. The Hebrew writer is saying we can do the same as Esau did with his inheritance and the only inheritance talked about Christians having includes eternal life.
The context is v.12a. And what it means is that Christ WILL deny the believer the privilege of reigning with Him.
To reign with Christ is NOT any kind of gift. It MUST be earned by enduring, just as v.12a SAYS.
And those who deny Him have NOT endured, and will therefore NOT reign with Him.
Very straightforward.
No that is not a good exegesis, we are told not to deny (or disown) Jesus or he will deny (or disown) us. You are suggesting “denying” (disowning) Jesus would result in a slap on the hand (losing some exalted position in heaven) while Jesus has said specifically: Matt. 10: 33 But whoever disowns me before others, I will disown before my Father in heaven.
How is denying Christ not the same as disowning Christ since the Greek word is used either way?
Simple claim. Please provide a thorough explanation of your point. I'm not buying simple claims.
Your opinion about the verse is refuted by the PLAIN WORDS OF THE VERSE.
You need to go back to the Greek, do you have any Greek scholars giving your interpretation?
In order to reign with Christ, one MUST endure. In v.12b, the one who denies Christ shows that he hasn't endured. So the connection is clear:
endure and reign with Christ
deny Him (by not enduring) and He will deny reigning with Him.
Same Greek word as in 2 Tim 2:12. And I've provided a very logical and reasonable explanation for WHY the denial is about reigning with Christ and NOT about losing salvation.
Salvation isn't even in the discussion here.
1 John 2 22 Who is a liar but he who
denies that Jesus is the Christ?
He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son.
23 Whoever
denies the Son does not have the Father either; he who acknowledges the Son has the Father also.
So can an antichrist be “saved”, because that is what you are saying?
This is completely different. Recall that Adam's sin in Gen 2:17 became "the one man's offense" by which "death reigned". (Rom 5:12-14)
iow, men were ruled by death through the power of sin in their lives that resulted in a death-oriented experience (6:23).
By contrast, those who receive abundance (v.15) of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reighn IN LIFE through the One, Jesus Christ.
Death has automatic dominion over those born of Adam. Yet those who will reign in life are those who receive the gift of righteousness.
This verse has no relevance to reigning with Christ in the Millennium or in eternity beyond the Millennium. Context makes that clear, as I've pointed out.
We know how we are to reign (Jesus washed the feet of his disciples including Judas), so what glorious heavenly “things” are you “working” for while here on earth?
God being the epitome of Love would mean He is a perfect giver and we as His created beings could not really “do” anything for Him to earn anything from Him. We could respond out of pure gratitude, but that would not be in any way to earn something extra?
In the spiritual realm the only “work” we can do is in having “faith”, but faith is not something you can work to obtain and really is the opposite of working for it, because you are trusting in Him and He is a giver. Do you think Paul even in part did all he did in order to gain something in heaven and if so where does he suggest such a thing?
Everything “good” I have done was done through me and in spite of me, but I did allow it to happen.
How is this ruling with Christ?
I will not conflate the two. There is no basis for it.
The big problem with your view here is that there is absolutely NO evidence for anything related to "gifts to Jews only". Paul specifically described 3 things that are gifts of God before he got to Rom 11:29, and there is NO EVIDENCE in the context of ch 9-11 that Paul was excluding any of those 3 specific gifts from 11:29.
It is irrational to try to exclude any of the 3 gifts from 11:29.
You've not shown that Paul was describing ANY "irrevocable gift" to Jews only.
No, to all Jews. Not just saved ones.
Please identify WHERE Paul indicated and specified any such "irrevocable gifts" to Jews only.
Nope. Just the saved ones.
Because Paul specifically described those 3. And there is no reason at all to claim that any of them should be excluded from Rom 11:29.
When Paul spoke of "rejecting the gift" he clearly meant that they refused to believe in the first place. He NEVER meant that anyone who HAD the gift rejected it.
Second, where in the Bible did Paul teach or claim that some have given away the gift of eternal life???
Gal. 6: 7-9
