Is it possible to fall out of God the Father's love? What do you think?

[Oldmantook]

I’m not ignoring any of it. I just have a more solid understanding. And I refuse to live in fear of losing my salvation. I believe God and His promises.

You ignored James 5:19-20. You either deal with it or continue to ignore it. Here's a promise for your understanding:
But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. 1 Jn 1:7
"If" denotes a condition that must be met (walking in the light) in order for the result (cleansing from sin) to occur. Thus if a Christian's lifestyle is not characteristic of walking in the light, he/she is not assured of the being cleansed of all sin.

 

[Hammster]

You ignored James 5:19-20. You either deal with it or continue to ignore it. Here's a promise for your understanding:
But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. 1 Jn 1:7
"If" denotes a condition that must be met (walking in the light) in order for the result (cleansing from sin) to occur. Thus if a Christian's lifestyle is not characteristic of walking in the light, he/she is not assured of the being cleansed of all sin.

Sorry if you thought I was ignoring James.


19 My brothers, if anyone among you wanders from the truth and someone brings him back,
20 let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from his wandering will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins. (James 5:19, ESV)

Notice that he doesn’t say that if a brother wanders, or any other terminology used to describe someone who is in Christ. He refers to them as sinner. Believers are never referred to as sinners.

We are told in a few places that there will be some in our churches who aren’t true believers. Wheat and tares is one example. The parable of the soil and seeds is another. So James is describing a tare. It’s someone who has been in the church, heard the teachings, and probably even had a surface behavior that made them look like a believer. But they wandered. Thinks of the second and third soils. If you bring them back in to the church, you’ve done a good thing.

 

[Hammster]

Here's a promise for your understanding:
But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. 1 Jn 1:7
"If" denotes a condition that must be met (walking in the light) in order for the result (cleansing from sin) to occur. Thus if a Christian's lifestyle is not characteristic of walking in the light, he/she is not assured of the being cleansed of all sin.

Context


This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with Him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth; but if we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin.
— 1 John 1:5-7

He’s comparing and contrasting believers and unbelievers. Nothing else.

 

[Oldmantook]

Sorry if you thought I was ignoring James.


19 My brothers, if anyone among you wanders from the truth and someone brings him back,
20 let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from his wandering will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins. (James 5:19, ESV)

Notice that he doesn’t say that if a brother wanders, or any other terminology used to describe someone who is in Christ. He refers to them as sinner. Believers are never referred to as sinners.

We are told in a few places that there will be some in our churches who aren’t true believers. Wheat and tares is one example. The parable of the soil and seeds is another. So James is describing a tare. It’s someone who has been in the church, heard the teachings, and probably even had a surface behavior that made them look like a believer. But they wandered. Thinks of the second and third soils. If you bring them back in to the church, you’ve done a good thing.

It says what it says. It plainly states: My brothers (Christians); among you (Christians) - wanders from the truth. It is ludicrous for you to claim otherwise. Your excuses don't even follow the text. Nor are they logical. How can an unbelieving sinner wander from the truth since he was never in the truth to begin with? Only believers can wander from the truth - and thus incur the death of their souls.

 

[Oldmantook]

Context


This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with Him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth; but if we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin.
— 1 John 1:5-7

He’s comparing and contrasting believers and unbelievers. Nothing else.

Incorrect. WE indicates believers!

 

[Hammster]

It says what it says. It plainly states: My brothers (Christians); among you (Christians) - wanders from the truth. It is ludicrous for you to claim otherwise. Your excuses don't even follow the text. Nor are they logical. How can an unbelieving sinner wander from the truth since he was never in the truth to begin with? Only believers can wander from the truth - and thus incur the death of their souls.

You ignored the distinction that’s there. Brothers/sinner. And scripture never calls believers “sinners”.

 

[Hammster]

Incorrect. WE indicates believers!

The distinction isn’t “we”. Look closer. The distinction is “if we say” versus “if we walk”. It’s a said faith as opposed to a true faith. It’s the same argument that James makes in chapter 2 of his epistle.

 

[Oldmantook]

You ignored the distinction that’s there. Brothers/sinner. And scripture never calls believers “sinners”.

Baloney. The lost sheep who was originally part of the flock that NEEDED NO REPENTANCE is called a sinner by Jesus himself.

 

[Oldmantook]

The distinction isn’t “we”. Look closer. The distinction is “if we say” versus “if we walk”. It’s a said faith as opposed to a true faith. It’s the same argument that James makes in chapter 2 of his epistle.

By "we" the Apostle John is including himself in the group. John was a believer, therefore he is referring to we Christians/believers. That is how the English language works.

 

[Hammster]

Baloney. The lost sheep who was originally part of the flock that NEEDED NO REPENTANCE is called a sinner by Jesus himself.

You lost me.

 

[Hammster]

By "we" the Apostle John is including himself in the group. John was a believer, therefore he is referring to we Christians/believers. That is how the English language works.

Does he say, though, that salvation is lost?

 

[Oldmantook]

You lost me.

You claimed - a believer/Christian is never referred to as a sinner. I pointed out to you that in Luke 15 in the story of the lost sheep, the lost sheep is called a "sinner" by Jesus. This lost sheep originally belonged to the flock that "needed no repentance" indicating a flock/group of believers. Thus the lost sheep was a believer - not an unbeliever. The sheep was lost when he/she strayed from the flock of believers and thus according to Jesus became a sinner. Thus believers can become sinners when they stray away from the Shepherd.

 

[Hammster]

You claimed - a believer/Christian is never referred to as a sinner. I pointed out to you that in Luke 15 in the story of the lost sheep, the lost sheep is called a "sinner" by Jesus. This lost sheep originally belonged to the flock that "needed no repentance" indicating a flock/group of believers. Thus the lost sheep was a believer - not an unbeliever. The sheep was lost when he/she strayed from the flock of believers and thus according to Jesus became a sinner. Thus believers can become sinners when they stray away from the Shepherd.

I just read it. The sheep is never referred to as a sinner.

 

[Oldmantook]

Does he say, though, that salvation is lost?

What do you suppose not having your sins cleansed means? Do you still have your salvation?

 

[Oldmantook]

I just read it. The sheep is never referred to as a sinner.

Oh my!
I tell you, in the same way there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous people who have no need of repentance. Lk 15:7
The one sinner refers to the one lost sheep who was originally part of the flock of 99 other sheep who need no repentance.

 

[Hammster]

What do you suppose not having your sins cleansed means? Do you still have your salvation?

John was present during the foot washing. What do you suppose he learned?

 

[Hammster]

Oh my!
I tell you, in the same way there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous people who have no need of repentance. Lk 15:7
The one sinner refers to the one lost sheep who was originally part of the flock of 99 other sheep who need no repentance.

Well, first off, he doesn’t say the the sheep was the sinner. But let’s look at it as if He was. Why would you assume that the sheep represents someone who is saved? All of His sheep will be saved. But not all are saved yet.

 

[Oldmantook]

Well, first off, he doesn’t say the the sheep was the sinner. But let’s look at it as if He was. Why would you assume that the sheep represents someone who is saved? All of His sheep will be saved. But not all are saved yet.

Who is the sinner then if not for the lost sheep?? The subject is the lost sheep - not anyone else. Wasn't the sheep originally a part of the flock who NEEDED NO REPENTANCE? What does that mean??

 

[Hammster]

Who is the sinner then if not for the lost sheep?? The subject is the lost sheep - not anyone else. Wasn't the sheep originally a part of the flock who NEEDED NO REPENTANCE? What does that mean??

My question is, why do you think the lost sheep was saved prior to wandering? Nothing in the parable indicates that.

So this sinner is the lost sheep, not a saved sheep.

 

[Oldmantook]

My question is, why do you think the lost sheep was saved prior to wandering? Nothing in the parable indicates that.

So this sinner is the lost sheep, not a saved sheep.

Can you not read?
“What man of you, having a hundred sheep, if he has lost one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the open country, and go after the one that is lost, until he finds it? Lk 15:4

Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance. Lk 15:7

Do the math. 100 - 1 = 99
The lost sheep was saved because he/she was originally part of the other NINETY-NINE RIGHTEOUS PERSONS who NEED NO REPENTANCE. Does "need no repentance" sound like saved or unsaved persons to you? The lost sheep was originally of the saved flock who need no repentance, thus he/she was a saved person.
100 righteous persons who are saved; who need no repentance minus 1 person who becomes lost and is now a sinner = 99 righteous persons.
Get it?