NBF said:
Everybody's a comedian....
Well, everyone may
try; but it's the
audience who determines success or failure...
How many times have you been tempted in your life, Ben, to give up your faith and quit the struggle? Do these verses offer encouragement to you in such times? I would hope so.
That's not the right question. The question remains, "do these verses really present 'falling', as
possible?"
The answer is "yes"...
If they're not sons, they're not saved. Seems pretty simple to me.
You are
100% right. Now, please read the context.
"If YOU are without discipline, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate ...and not sons. SHALL we nut much rather BE subject to (the discipline of) the Father of spirits, AND LIVE?" A clear choice, isn't it? Being subject to His discipline, being sons and living; or not being subject, and not being sons.
Any way to deny these words?
The understood part of that is that those who are undergoing the discipline need to realize that they are doing so because they are sons, and to not resist and complain about it, but accept it and be perfected by it.
Can one resist Him, or not?
He's saying that there is "no way out", which would allow one to be a son, yet not undergo discipline..
Correct; to continue in your paradigm, you would either have to assert that "refusing God's discipline is not really possible", or that "it's an
effective means by which God
ensures the predestined WILL NOT resist Him."
Do you hold to one of those, or do you have a third?
Ben obviously doesn't believe that there are such things as "nominal Christians", who profess with the mouth but their hearts are not converted. For Ben, it's all black, or all white, no shades of gray or such a thing as a person calling themselves a Christian when they are not truly converted. Scripture proves you wrong, Ben.
Sorry --- it says "
KNOWN by God". Ruins your citing of Matt7, "I never knew you".
They were saved,
their hearts WERE converted.
Not at all, because Paul wasn't saying that they had already lost, he was warning them of the potential for loss should they continue down the same road. You can view this as God's Grace being applied to the Galatians through Paul to correct them, to halt their slide to falling from grace.
OK, explain to me exactly what they were doing
to be "sliding". Somehow they were "sliding, but not-yet-unsaved". What were they doing?
You and your bogus "five-way" baloney....
The Five-Ways are valid.
1. Subjects weren't REALLY saved in the FIRST place
2. Subjects didn't REALLY fall
3. Two groups; one ALWAYS saved, second NEVER saved
lurking AMONGST the saved
4. Hypothetical; fatherly advice, "effective means", but can't REALLY happen
5. Dispensation --- applies to them back THEN, but not to us TODAY
...each Five-Way, is actually asserting "not really"...
You have no understanding of the forbearance of Grace...
The thread topic, is "Rom2"; Paul says
"You count on God's patience and kindness and FOREBEARANCE, not knowing that the patience of God leads you to repentance; but by your hard and unrepentant heart you are storing up WRATH for yourself..."
IOW, "God's patience, kindness, and forebearance is MEANT to lead you to REPENTANCE; but your
stubborn unrepentance is making God MAD".
Seems I'm understanding God's forebearance, perfectly...
and how Grace bridges the gap between sinning and repentance.
And that happens ...THROUGH FAITH...
The Galatians were in danger, but they had not apostasized, and your theology requires you to believe that the Galatians were already apostate when Paul wrote to them. If they were already apostate, Paul wouldn't have wasted his time, nor would the Holy Spirit.
They were "hindered", they were "turning back to Law, rather than Grace"; they WERE severed from Christ, and HAVE fallen from grace.
Shall we discuss the tense of verse 5:7? "You WERE running well; who DID hinder you from obeying the truth?"
Stating the obvious, aren't we?
Simply showing that both verses are conditional.
"SO THEN (conditional condemnation), EVEN SO (conditional justification)."
Those who are in Christ, because they have been born of the spirit, are those who are justified.
Not what it says. It says
"Those WHO receive the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness..."
You make "receive" into an active verb, when scripture teaches that it is "not by the man who wills, or the man who runs, but by God who shows mercy". Who is active in salvation? It is God first.
We've discussed Rom9; first, Rom11:32 says
God shows mercy on ALL. Second, "not by the man who wills", parallels Jn1:13. In context, verse 13 says "begottenness is not of men's will nor of man's blood, but of God" ---
but verse 12 says "those who RECEIVE Jesus, who believe on His name are given the right to become begotten".
Begottenness is of God, and nothing of us;
becoming begotten is by "believing/receiving Jesus".
It's getting clearer and clearer, isn't it?
Again, stating the obvious, as though it were some huge revelation.
We have to establish "common grounds", even on basic points. Thank you.
You demand that God must spell it out in just so many words, or it isn't true. One cannot receive or believe until they are born again (regenerated). Notice, Ben, that I define born again as regeneration. You MUST understand how I define the words if you are to truly understand what I say.
Oh I understand it. Now please show me that concept
anywhere in Scripture.
The point isn't addressing how they believe, only that they do believe to receive and be justified. That does not defeat my view, nor does it establish your view regarding how one believes, and who does the action. The conflicting views aren't being addressed here.
It places "belief", as
causal. Belief is the condition of justification; just as sin is the condition of condemnation.
The point of discussing Rom5, is showing that
justification came to the exact same people as came condemnation.
"SO THEN (condemnation) ALL, EVEN SO (justification) ALL". Then verse 19 says "SO THEN many, EVEN SO many".
Exact equality; cannot be understood "SO THEN all, EVEN SO few-elect".
But you cannot escape the fact that while all were made sinners, not all will be made righteous. So it's not an equation, but a comparison, which does not require balance on both sides.
Condemation came to
every last man. And all men ARE condemned, verse 12 clearly says so.
Justification came to
every last man; those WHO believe, reign/are-justified. You cannot say "Well, of course only those who believe are justified,
but God decides who believes". If that's true,
then justification didn't really COME to "all/many" (the same "all/many" that condemnation came to).
Justification CAME to all men; only those who believe are saved. God controlling belief, would mean that justification only came to
those whom He caused to believe. That's a contradiction...