Once Saved Always Saved - Why is it so hard?

[ToBeLoved]

You really didn't grow up in Biblical times to confirm such a thing as being true.

...

who alive today did?

 

[ToBeLoved]

In most cases, the context determines the type of love being spoken about. Oh, and yes. This is old news for me.

"The dog's bark could be heard all the way down the street, He scratched his paws against the bark of tree at the squirrel up in the tree (hoping to get the little guy)."​

As you can see there are two words spelled as "bark" but yet they have two different meanings. These are called homonyms and they do exist in the Bible (as I am sure you aware of).
...

This is not even a Biblical example? You must have something Biblical? No.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

who alive today did?

That's kind of the point.


...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

This is not even a Biblical example? You must have something Biblical? No.

So you don't think homonyms exist in the Bible? For the point I was making was in regards to homonyms in the Bible.


...

 

[ToBeLoved]

That's kind of the point.


...

Your reasoning is not understandable. nor does it make sense Biblically.

I think I'll let someone else try.

 

[Aldebaran]

In most cases, the context determines the type of love being spoken about. Oh, and yes. This is old news for me. I am aware of the different Greek words on love and I have done Greek studies before. But again, you do not need to know this in the Greek because the context in English helps you to determine what kind of "love" the Bible is talking about. For example: I can say that,

"The dog's bark could be heard all the way down the street, He scratched his paws against the bark of tree at the squirrel up in the tree (hoping to get the little guy)."​

As you can see there are two words spelled as "bark" but yet they have two different meanings. These are called homonyms and they do exist in the Bible (as I am sure you aware of).

Anyways, Pastor Mike Hoggard used to study the Greek because he went to Bible school. He makes a good case in his videos for how just having a KJV Bible in English is all you need to understand God and His plan for your life. This is a guy who was into the whole idea that you cannot understand the Bible without studying the Greek, but he later came to the conclusion that you do not even need to know Greek to understand the Bible. Check out his videos on YouTube. He is very knowledgeable Pastor.


...

You completely missed what I said. There is no "context" to understand in the example I gave you that would indicate that the word Love was actually meant in 2 different ways. Nobody simply reading it in English would be readily able to see that! When Jesus asked Peter the first time if Peter loved Him, and Peter responded that he did love Him, how can you believe that the reader is going to readily understand that 2 completely different words were actually used?

 

[Aldebaran]

The poor man who only has the Bible in English and does not have access to the internet or to other biblical resources is going to be condemned for not truly knowing what God's Word says because He does not have access to the Hebrew and Greek. Too bad for him. He is poor. But Jesus said, "Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?" (James 2:5).

Jesus said, "beware of the Scribes." (Luke 20:46). The scribes are those who trans-SCRIBED the Scriptures. These are the Bible scholars of our day.

Think about it.

...

We're not talking about basic biblical knowledge to be saved from our sin. We're talking about deeper understanding that we get through studying the Word, and then sharing that understanding with others who don't have the same access to Hebrew and Greek.

 

[Bigmike424]

Let me begin by saying I do not want to prove any point of view. When I want to know the true interpretation of a controversial theology, I read both sides. It upsets me when one side is clearly argumentative and trying to prove that they're right instead of considering both sides of the argument.

So I have read both sides thoroughly, and the problem is this: the side that believes "once saved always saved", I think, has the superior holistic view of all Scripture. The problem is that there are so many people convinced that believing in OSAS will result in many people going to hell, so the risk of believing OSAS is the greatest so you'd better be right. The other problem is that no matter how you feel about what God should do - it's irrelevant - whether you think something is right or not doesn't make it true. If you are confronted by God and God tells you you're wrong, you do not have the luxury of arguing with Him. Too many people believe in an interpretation based on what they feel is right.

Lastly: people need to realize that whatever you believe is just an interpretation of the Word - it doesn't mean it IS the Word, even though you quote the Bible. Both sides of the debate quote the SAME VERSES, but have different interpretations. It disappoints me when I read a website quoting all these verses as if their interpretation is correct without bothering to address the other side's interpretation of those same verses (and acting as if the other side has never seen those verses before).

I believe this is a difficult subject and therefore we must carefully and prayerfully ask God to give us the complete understanding of salvation.

So what do I want? I want a careful discussion of the controversial verses of salvation and whether you can lose it. And by careful I mean - let's not approach this with a presupposition and refuse to budge from it. Let's approach it from an attitude of seeking the truth realizing that we may be on the wrong side of it.

I think this is the most important subject in this entire site. There's no point in debating theology if we're not truly saved, therefore we should really really get this theology right.

I will begin stating my opinions in the next post. Thanks.

Thank you for your honesty and openness with this post. I too believe in once saved always saved. Jesus gives a few accounts of it, no man can pluck them out of my hand, no man can pluck them out of my fathers hand, being confident of this very thing that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ, and many others. I know of some, for example that use like the parable of the talents as a message that one can fall from GOD's grace. This parable, and this is as I believe, is written to three servants. It doesn't differ them in any way but what they do with their free gift. Two multiply their masters investment and one hid it. The two that multiplied were rewarded with entering into the joy of the Lord while the one that buried his was cast into outer darkness and gnashing of teeth. Is this hell eternal? I do not believe so. I believe these are three of the same type of people, three christians. Jesus himself warns his disciples in the gospel of Peter when asked of the signs of the times that they should pray that they would be counted worthy to escape all these things when they come to pass. Can anyone show me in the Bible where Jesus saves us from the tribulation period? And if so who are those entering heaven after the rapture that John described in the Revelation? And yes, I am a pre-tribulation guy but that's a whole new direction. But I believe Jesus is our Saviour that saves us from the devils hell. I do believe obedience to the Holy Spirit and living by GOD's inerrant word is what saves us from the tribulatory period. Have you ever read in the Revelation that there seems to be a social structure in Heaven? Jesus labels some as greater and having a new name that they may enter the temple day or night and refers to them as pillars. He also said about John the Baptist that there was no greater than he born of woman but he was lesser than the least in the kingdom of Heaven.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You completely missed what I said. There is no "context" to understand in the example I gave you that would indicate that the word Love was actually meant in 2 different ways. Nobody simply reading it in English would be readily able to see that! When Jesus asked Peter the first time if Peter loved Him, and Peter responded that he did love Him, how can you believe that the reader is going to readily understand that 2 completely different words were actually used?

Do you honestly think a person can be confused on what type of love Jesus was talking about without knowing the Greek in John 21:17? It wouldn't make any sense if Jesus was asking Peter if He loved ("liked" or "loved"- i.e. φιλέω - phileō) Him just as a friend repeatedly? That is just silly. Why would Jesus ask Him such a thing? Agape is clearly in focus to all forms of Godly love. Jesus was always concerned with the highest form of love when using what we would understand as the English word as "love." Again, the context makes it unmistakable. Jesus repeats whether or not Peter loves Him repeatedly and then Jesus says if you love me, feed my sheep. Then the following context, makes it unmistakeable that this is a Godly kind of love and not a friendship kind of love and not a family kind of love.

18 "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not.
19 This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me."

20 "Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved (agapaō) following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee?"

Again, I do not need to know the Greek on the English word "love" to get a deeper understanding. The context helps me to see what kind of love is being talked about here.

For example: Rick can say that he loves cats because he owns five of them and he collects cat pictures, documentaries, stuffed animals, etc. Clearly this is the kind of "love" that is not a Godly kind of love where one is being 100% selfless. An example of a Godly kind of love for a cat would be: And Rick seeing the cat sick and hurt had loved the cat back to health and found it's owners and gave the cat back to them. Clearly this second form of "love" is a Godly kind of love. There is no need for me to say if this is a Phileo or an Agape kind of love going on here. The context determines what kind of love is being spoken about. For example: I can say, you are "cool" man! You do like all kinds of cool stuff like doing backflips thru hoops on fire and like not flinching when poodles bite your finger tips as they dance around you. The word "cool" is in reference to being "hip, fashionably impressive, etc." But if I said, I felt "cool" because there was a cool wind blowing on me, then we would understand that this is a different kind of "cool" being spoken about here. So again, your case that a deeper understanding is gained by us having to know the Greek is simply not true. We can know what kind of "love" is being spoken about in the Bible by simply looking at the context.

For example, Matthew 6:5 says,

"And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward."

Obviously this is not a Godly form of love because the hypocrites form of love is a selfish version of love. For they love to pray so as to be seen by men. This is a selfish love and not a selfless kind of love. Again, the context tells us that this is a different kind of love (i.e. Phileo). But I did not need to know the Greek to know this. The surrounding context already tells me what kind of love that it is. I do not need to be held by the hand and hit over the head of what certain words mean by looking to the Greek.

I believe most (and not all) today use the Greek as a smokescreen to change God's Word into defending Once Saved Always Saved when His Word does not clearly teach such a thing. For seeing there are many verses in the English that disturbs them, they run to the Greek acting like they are experts in a dead language (When they are not).


...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Thank you for your honesty and openness with this post. I too believe in once saved always saved.

If "Once Saved Always Saved" was true, then God would have to agree with sin and that is not possible. For if God saves you automatically from your future sin that means God has to agree to reward you with Heaven despite what any evil you are going to do. The Jews slanderously thought Paul and the followers of Jesus Christ were not obeying God and that they were doing evil so that good may come. This is why Paul says,

"And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just." (Romans 3:8).

Yet, this is exactly what Once Saved Always Saved is about. Let us do evil that good may come. I am Once Saved Always Saved and no amount of sin or evil can separate me from the good that will come upon me. I got my ticket to Heaven so I can keep on sinning (if I wanted to). But some will say that no true child of God will think like that. Then why do OSAS Proponents say that 1 John 1:8 is a declaration that the believer is always in sin or that they are always found as sinners according to Galatians 2:17?

Paul says,
"If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; He is proud, knowing nothing, ..." (1 Timothy 6:3-4).

So Paul says here that if any man speaks contrary to the words of Jesus and the doctrine according to Godliness is proud and knows nothing.

Godliness is righteous living. For he that does righteousness is righteous (1 John 3:7). If I can tell a person that they can sin and still be saved, they are not going to be led into Godliness or righteous living. They are going to think they have a license to sin (Whether I want that to happen or not).

Anyways, 1 Timothy 6:3-4 tells us that if any man speaks contrary to the doctrine of Godliness is proud. Can a person be proud and receive grace? Not according to God's Word.

"But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble." (James 4:6).​

Did you catch that? It says God resists the proud and gives grace to the humble. Obviously those who think they can sin and still be saved are not acting humbly.

Jesus gives a few accounts of it, no man can pluck them out of my hand, no man can pluck them out of my fathers hand,

I am surprised Once Saved Always Saved Proponents still use this verse to defend their doctrine when the context clearly refutes them easily on this one.

27 "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand."

So clearly we see in the context of the type of sheep that will never perish or be plucked out of His hand are the type of sheep who FOLLOW Jesus. This is not talking about lazy or rebellious sheep (being dragged by their necks on leashes) here.

being confident of this very thing that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ,

This is not talking about Justification with you having a belief on Jesus. This is talking about Sanctification with Jesus doing the good work in your life so as to help you to stop sinning. 1 John 3:8 says Jesus was manifested to destroy the works of the devil. 1 John 3:10 says, "In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother."

Anyways, when you read Philippians 1:6, you also have to read verse 11 that says, "Being filled with the fruits of righteousness, which are by Jesus Christ, unto the glory and praise of God." (Philippians 1:11). In other words, the context is talking about being filled with the FRUITS of righteousness by Jesus Christ. This is not talking about a belief on Jesus alone with some kind of sin and still be saved kind of garbage going on here.

and many others.

There are no verses that defend OSAS. OSAS is simply read into key select verses while the context goes ignored in favor of a belief that minimizes sin or treats sin no more dangerous as say a fluffy kitten.

I know of some, for example that use like the parable of the talents as a message that one can fall from GOD's grace. This parable, and this is as I believe, is written to three servants. It doesn't differ them in any way but what they do with their free gift. Two multiply their masters investment and one hid it. The two that multiplied were rewarded with entering into the joy of the Lord while the one that buried his was cast into outer darkness and gnashing of teeth. Is this hell eternal? I do not believe so. I believe these are three of the same type of people, three christians. Jesus himself warns his disciples in the gospel of Peter when asked of the signs of the times that they should pray that they would be counted worthy to escape all these things when they come to pass.

No. Gnashing of teeth is what wolves do.

See this image here by clicking on the following spoiler button:

Spoiler

These are the kind of words used by Stephen's accusers before they stoned him. They were mad at him. This is what unprofitable servants will do to God when they are faced with the final Judgment of being erased from existence with the Lake of Fire. They will gnash their teeth at God or be angry with Him. Others will weep and wished they had chosen to believe the right way by standing up for what they know to be good and right.

Also, the Parable of the Unprofitable Servant is followed by the Sheep and Goats Parable which is also unmistakeable of the fate of those believers who believe they do not have to help the poor in this life and also say they are lovers of God. This is not to say that works in and of themselves alone saves us. This is merely saying that Jesus (who is the source of our salvation - 1 John 5:12) does the good work thru you. For if Jesus lives in you, then good fruit and not bad fruit will be evident in your life.

"And cast the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth" (Matthew 25:30).
He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. (Matthew 12:48).
"The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity."
(Matthew 13:41).
"And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity."
(Matthew 7:23).
"Not every one that says unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that does the will of my Father [God] who is in heaven."
(Matthew 7:21).
"God's will is for you to be holy," (1 Thessalonians 4:3 NLT).
Without holiness no man shall see the Lord (Hebrews 12:14).
"26 And every one that hears these sayings of mine, and does them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, who built his house upon the sand:
27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it."
(Matthew 7:26-27).

7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man sows, that shall he also reap.
8 For he that sows to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that sows to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.
9 And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.
(Galatians 6:7-9).

"but if you will enter into life, keep the commandments."
(Matthew 19:17).
"If you love me, keep my commandments."
(John 14:15).
"He that loves not knows not God; for God is love."
(1 John 4:8).
"He that has the Son has life; and he that has not the Son of God has not life."
(1 John 5:12).

1 John 2:3-6 says,
3 "And by this we know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
4 He that says, I know him, and keeps not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
5 But whoever keeps his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: by this we know that we are in him.
6 He that says he abides in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked."

Can anyone show me in the Bible where Jesus saves us from the tribulation period? And if so who are those entering heaven after the rapture that John described in the Revelation? And yes, I am a pre-tribulation guy but that's a whole new direction. But I believe Jesus is our Saviour that saves us from the devils hell. I do believe obedience to the Holy Spirit and living by GOD's inerrant word is what saves us from the tribulatory period. Have you ever read in the Revelation that there seems to be a social structure in Heaven?

Not sure what you are talking about, my friend; But I created an extensive End Times Chronology (Including the Pre-Trib Rapture, the 7 Year Tribulation, the Millennium, the Judgment, and the Final New Earth). If you are interested, just click on the following link here:

End Times Chronology

Jesus labels some as greater and having a new name that they may enter the temple day or night and refers to them as pillars. He also said about John the Baptist that there was no greater than he born of woman but he was lesser than the least in the kingdom of Heaven.

The Least in the Kingdom of Heaven is the greatest within Matthew 11:11. For the Least in Matthew 11:11 is the one who accepts, loves, and ministers to all people including children and they are a servant (i.e. least) to all people in humbleness. Those who behave as though they are lesser or least in the Kingdom are ACTUALLY the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven (By being servant to all). For those who serve in God’s Kingdom in the New Covenant by loving others is better than the greatest of the prophets such as John the Baptist. For John followed the Old Covenant ways. For John was the last of the Old Testament prophets. Yet, the New Covenant believer is greater than John because the New Covenant saint (who is least) is a servant to all men.

However, the "Least" in Matthew 5:19 are those who break God’s commands and teach others are Least in a bad way.

How so? The rest of Scripture gives us the testimony that breaking God’s Commandments is bad and not good.

John says,
“He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him” (1 John 2:4).

"For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved" (John 3:20).

"He that committeth sin is of the devil." (1 John 3:8).

As for the pillars in Revelation 3:
Well, we also to realize that Jesus says to another church,

"So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth" (Revelation 3:16).

I cannot imagine a person being saved and yet spit out of Jesus's mouth. That does not add up.

Anyways, I hope you pray over the verses I provided here.
And ask God to show you the truth on this matter some more.

Peace be unto you.
And God bless you.


...

 

[RC1970]

Wow, with well over 1000 posts on this thread and we still have people debating.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Once Saved Always Saved has always been a very hotly debated topic on the internet. Why? Because the issue of defending the morality or God's goodness (and His Word) is a very important thing.


...

 

[ToBeLoved]

Wow, with well over 1000 posts on this thread and we still have people debating.

A lot of untrue theology has been refuted also. Not all of this debate is even about OSAS but some seems to be correction.

 

[Geralt]

hard only for those who have not experienced regeneration.

Let me begin by saying I do not want to prove any point of view. When I want to know the true interpretation of a controversial theology, I read both sides. It upsets me when one side is clearly argumentative and trying to prove that they're right instead of considering both sides of the argument.

So I have read both sides thoroughly, and the problem is this: the side that believes "once saved always saved", I think, has the superior holistic view of all Scripture. The problem is that there are so many people convinced that believing in OSAS will result in many people going to hell, so the risk of believing OSAS is the greatest so you'd better be right. The other problem is that no matter how you feel about what God should do - it's irrelevant - whether you think something is right or not doesn't make it true. If you are confronted by God and God tells you you're wrong, you do not have the luxury of arguing with Him. Too many people believe in an interpretation based on what they feel is right.

Lastly: people need to realize that whatever you believe is just an interpretation of the Word - it doesn't mean it IS the Word, even though you quote the Bible. Both sides of the debate quote the SAME VERSES, but have different interpretations. It disappoints me when I read a website quoting all these verses as if their interpretation is correct without bothering to address the other side's interpretation of those same verses (and acting as if the other side has never seen those verses before).

I believe this is a difficult subject and therefore we must carefully and prayerfully ask God to give us the complete understanding of salvation.

So what do I want? I want a careful discussion of the controversial verses of salvation and whether you can lose it. And by careful I mean - let's not approach this with a presupposition and refuse to budge from it. Let's approach it from an attitude of seeking the truth realizing that we may be on the wrong side of it.

I think this is the most important subject in this entire site. There's no point in debating theology if we're not truly saved, therefore we should really really get this theology right.

I will begin stating my opinions in the next post. Thanks.

 

[ToBeLoved]

hard only for those who have not experienced regeneration.

Regeneration in this context is Calvin's/man's word.

Regeneration is the entire process of becomeing saved and being transformed into a new creation. That we were something and have since been regenerated into something else, a new creation.

Calvin perverted that word from what it really means and TULIP has done the same. Changing the meanings of God's words used in His Word.

That is a crime against holiness.

 

[Geralt]

'becoming saved', ridiculous. it is completed event, not a process.

Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,

but of course, the unregenerate would prefer something which they can contribute. always has been.​

Regeneration in this context is Calvin's/man's word.

Regeneration is the entire process of becoming saved and being transformed into a new creation. That we were something and have since been regenerated into something else, a new creation.

Calvin perverted that word from what it really means and TULIP has done the same. Changing the meanings of God's words used in His Word.

That is a crime against holiness.

 

[Aldebaran]

Do you honestly think a person can be confused on what type of love Jesus was talking about without knowing the Greek in John 21:17? It wouldn't make any sense if Jesus was asking Peter if He loved ("liked" or "loved"- i.e. φιλέω - phileō) Him just as a friend repeatedly? That is just silly. Why would Jesus ask Him such a thing? Agape is clearly in focus to all forms of Godly love. Jesus was always concerned with the highest form of love when using what we would understand as the English word as "love." Again, the context makes it unmistakable. Jesus repeats whether or not Peter loves Him repeatedly and then Jesus says if you love me, feed my sheep. Then the following context, makes it unmistakeable that this is a Godly kind of love and not a friendship kind of love and not a family kind of love.

You forgot to address the third time when Jesus asked Peter if he loved Him. The word went from Agape to Phileo. That's not apparent in the English.

20 "Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved (agapaō) following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee?"

Again, I do not need to know the Greek on the English word "love" to get a deeper understanding. The context helps me to see what kind of love is being talked about here.

Untrue! I've had people suggest to me that this verse indicates a gay relationship between Jesus and John. That's what can happen when it's only read in the English without an understanding that comes from knowing what it says in the original language.

For example: Rick can say that he loves cats because he owns five of them and he collects cat pictures, documentaries, stuffed animals, etc. Clearly this is the kind of "love" that is not a Godly kind of love where one is being 100% selfless. An example of a Godly kind of love for a cat would be: And Rick seeing the cat sick and hurt had loved the cat back to health and found it's owners and gave the cat back to them. Clearly this second form of "love" is a Godly kind of love. There is no need for me to say if this is a Phileo or an Agape kind of love going on here. The context determines what kind of love is being spoken about. For example: I can say, you are "cool" man! You do like all kinds of cool stuff like doing backflips thru hoops on fire and like not flinching when poodles bite your finger tips as they dance around you. The word "cool" is in reference to being "hip, fashionably impressive, etc." But if I said, I felt "cool" because there was a cool wind blowing on me, then we would understand that this is a different kind of "cool" being spoken about here. So again, your case that a deeper understanding is gained by us having to know the Greek is simply not true. We can know what kind of "love" is being spoken about in the Bible by simply looking at the context.

Now you're just using English to English examples. It doesn't relate to what we're talking about here, which is a translation from ancient Greek and Hebrew to modern day english.

For example, Matthew 6:5 says,

"And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward."

Obviously this is not a Godly form of love because the hypocrites form of love is a selfish version of love. For they love to pray so as to be seen by men. This is a selfish love and not a selfless kind of love. Again, the context tells us that this is a different kind of love (i.e. Phileo). But I did not need to know the Greek to know this. The surrounding context already tells me what kind of love that it is. I do not need to be held by the hand and hit over the head of what certain words mean by looking to the Greek.

Maybe not in every case, but there are some (such as the one I showed you) where a deeper study is needed for a true understanding.

I believe most (and not all) today use the Greek as a smokescreen to change God's Word into defending Once Saved Always Saved when His Word does not clearly teach such a thing. For seeing there are many verses in the English that disturbs them, they run to the Greek acting like they are experts in a dead language (When they are not).

Smokescreen? Studying to find out what the exact meaning of a word was when it was originally written is hardly creating a smokescreen. In fact, it clears things up!

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You forgot to address the third time when Jesus asked Peter if he loved Him. The word went from Agape to Phileo. That's not apparent in the English.


Untrue! I've had people suggest to me that this verse indicates a gay relationship between Jesus and John. That's what can happen when it's only read in the English without an understanding that comes from knowing what it says in the original language.

Now you're just using English to English examples. It doesn't relate to what we're talking about here, which is a translation from ancient Greek and Hebrew to modern day english.

Maybe not in every case, but there are some (such as the one I showed you) where a deeper study is needed for a true understanding.

Smokescreen? Studying to find out what the exact meaning of a word was when it was originally written is hardly creating a smokescreen. In fact, it clears things up!

No. It doesn't clear things up because you did not grow up in the Biblical Greek world to truly know how these words were truly used. You are going off what other scholars think it means based upon their biased presuppositions due to their belief in Once Saved Always Saved. You obviously do not like what the Bible says in English (because it condemns Eternal Security), so you are looking elsewhere to change the meaning of God's Word to fit your belief.

As for John 21:17:

Well, the difference between the words "Agape" and "Phileo" in John 21:17 is a matter of grammar and it not a significant change in meaning here. For do you honestly think Peter was confused as to what Jesus said in regards to the word "love"? For if Peter was thinking he was talking about friendship love, then the situation between Jesus and Peter would sound like this.

Jesus: Peter do you love me more than they do?
Peter: Lord you know I love you as a friend.
Jesus: No Peter. I am not talking about whether you love me as a friend.
I am talking about do you love me as the Son of God.
Peter: Oh, sorry, my Lord. Yes, yes. You know that I love you like that.
Jesus: Feed my lambs.

But did Jesus correct Peter on his use of the word "love"? No. Nor did Jesus make a point about Godly love vs. friendship love in this particular instance, either.

Side Note:

Also, it is ridiculous to assume that Peter is talking about a different kind of love than the love that Jesus is talking about. For example: Macho American Friends can hug each other and say things like, "I love you, bro." But we do not see anything like this in the text within John 21. Peter's love for Jesus was not some kind of straight bromance. Peter was not thinking of Jesus as being best buds here. Peter wanted to love Jesus as the Son of God because Peter himself had declared that Jesus was the Son of God at another point in time.


...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

'becoming saved', ridiculous. it is completed event, not a process.

Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,

but of course, the unregenerate would prefer something which they can contribute. always has been.​

Ephesians 2:8-9 and Titus 3:5 are talking about Initial Salvation (or Ultimate Salvation) (i.e. Justification) and they are not talking about Continued Salvation or Sanctification. The Bible also does teach about Sanctification and how it is also a part of the Salvation Process. To deny this is to deny the rest of Scripture. For James says, "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only." (James 2:24). "Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone." (James 2:17). Paul says, "They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate." (Titus 1:16). The author Hebrews says, "And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;" (Hebrews 5:9). But what about salvation being a gift thru grace? Well, a person is initially saved by God's grace and not of themselves when they first come to Christ. A person is ultimately saved by God's grace as a gift because if they sin, they can get clean thru repentance (i.e. confessing their sin - See 1 John 2:1, and 1 John 1:9) and not by going out and doing another good work. That is why salvation is ultimately a gift. However, people are confused as to what the gift actually is. The gift from God is Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 9:15) (John 3:16). While Jesus can set us free by forgiving us of our past sins by His death and resurrection; Jesus also sets us free from being a slave to sin, too. For Jesus was manifested to destroy the works of the devil (1 John 3:8). Jesus will not only save a person initially by His work on the cross and by His resurrection, but Jesus can save a person from their life of sin, too. Regeneration is not a true regeneration if there is no spiritual transformation in a person's life.

For Jesus is in the life changing business. For Jesus has fixed up broken homes (or familes). Jesus has drawn the alcoholic away from the bottle. Jesus has helped the gambler to put down his cards and walk away from the game. Jesus has helped the drug addict from the power of the needle. Jesus has helped the harlot from being a slave to sexual sin and money. For Jesus Christ changes lives. Jesus changed my life and He continues to change lives today (Making them new creations in His image).

"Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new."
(2 Corinthians 5:17).

Anyways, we know that Sanctification is also a process of salvation, because the Scriptures also say,

1 John 3:7 says, "let no man deceive you: he that does righteousness is righteous,"
1 John 1:7 says, "But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin."
1 John 3:8 says, "he that commits sin is of the devil"
John 3:20 says, "For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved."
Hebrews 10:26 says, "For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins."

1 John 2:3-6 says,
3 "And by this we know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
4 He that says, I know him, and keeps not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
5 But whoever keeps his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: by this we know that we are in him.
6 He that says he abides in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked."

1 John 5:12 says, "He that has the Son has life; and he that has not the Son of God has not life."
Romans 11:22 says, "Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off."

"....and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death." (Revelation 21:8).
"And cast the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth" (Matthew 25:30).
He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. (Matthew 12:48).
"The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity."
(Matthew 13:41).
"And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity."
(Matthew 7:23).
"Not every one that says unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that does the will of my Father [God] who is in heaven."
(Matthew 7:21).
"God's will is for you to be holy," (1 Thessalonians 4:3 NLT).
Without holiness no man shall see the Lord (Hebrews 12:14).
"26 And every one that hears these sayings of mine, and does them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, who built his house upon the sand:
27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it."
(Matthew 7:26-27).

7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man sows, that shall he also reap.
8 For he that sows to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that sows to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.
9 And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.
(Galatians 6:7-9).

"If any speaks contrary to the words of Jesus Christ and the doctrine of Godliness, he is proud and he knows nothing"
(1 Timothy 6:3-4).
"God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble."
(James 4:6).

"but if you will enter into life, keep the commandments."
(Matthew 19:17).
"If you love me, keep my commandments."
(John 14:15).
"He that loves not knows not God; for God is love."
(1 John 4:8).
"Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him." (1 John 3:15).
"In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother." (1 John 3:10).



...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

...