Temporal Salvation?

[FreeGrace2]

I don't see any sign of "classes of conditions".

Please explain what this mumbo jumbo wording means.

And your mumbo jumbo is nonsensical, calling verse 11 both a "first class condition," and a "2st class condition".

Since there is no such thing as a "2st" anything, apparently you've never heard of a typo, huh. Or you're just trying real hard to not understand anything. Most people would have easily understood.

Furthermore, you cannot focus on verse twelve without verse eleven because they are a singular thought grammatically, thus if life is not a reward, hermeneutically we must treat reigning with him in the same manner.

This is a good example of mumbo jumbo.

v.11 is a factual statement. ALL believers HAVE died with Christ. Or can you prove otherwise?

v.12 is a conditional statement; maybe yes, maybe no. And consequences for either condition.

And you cannot prove otherwise.

The second portion of verse twelve, is the beginning of a new thought that is completed in the thirteenth verse. Both sets of couplets are pointing to a final state of reality. That's why Paul says "we will live/reign with him" or that God "will disown us".

You simply don't know what you are talking about.

This said, what is meant by "if we died with him"? Certainly Paul's words in both Romans and Galatians about being "crucified with him" come to mind and are very apropos. But given the contextual pairing of the concept of dying and denying, my mind goes to another pairing of these two concepts.

I have no doubt that your "mind goes to another pairing".

In Matthew 16, we read Jesus's words to Peter, right after both Peter's declaration of Jesus being the Messiah, and Peter being called Satan by Jesus, saying;

"24Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. 25For whoever wants to save their life f will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it. 26What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul? 27For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what they have done.

I see several interesting points here:

• A disciple must deny himself and pick up his own cross and follow Jesus: this meaning that one who actively denies Christ/God cannot be/is not a disciple, and the pick up of his cross is a "till death" commitment.
• That only a life lost for Christ will be found.
• That Jesus clearly places the finding of life in the same train of thought in which he speaks of rewarding all people at the judgement when he returns. The only thing that rewards can be grammatically predicated to is either gaining/finding or losing/forfeiting their life/soul!
• This reward is based on, and I quote Jesus, "according to what they have done." This does not mean that it is not based on Grace, but it does define a working relationship between the grace of God which is unmerited, and the necessity of human response in a particular manner.
• Thus we must deny (die to) ourselves (not deny God) and take up our own cross and follow (human action that is necessary) to the logical end of our lives (enduring to the end of our time in earth)

Doug

The problem is your agenda keeps getting in the way of understanding very simple Scripture. You see everything as how to stay saved or how to lose salvation.

Yet, you've NEVER cited or quoted ANY verse that says so plainly. In EVERY case, one must "read between the lines" to come up with your views.

But Jesus was crystal clear about those He gives eternal life. He said, THEY SHALL NEVER PERISH. But you obviously don't believe that.

 

[Gr8Grace]

The problem is your agenda keeps getting in the way of understanding very simple Scripture. You see everything as how to stay saved or how to lose salvation.

So true and so sad. We can use the very verses in question to expound on this very true statement. One can't help to not miss the irony.

If we have died with Him(And we Have. First class condition) we WILL live with Him( We have his very life/ we are His body/we are IN Christ.) Eternal security at it's finest.

And what does "loss of salvation" belief do to Him? It DENIES Him. And denies the very truth and trustworthy statement in Vs 11 AND vs 13!

And since they deny His FREE Grace and have not a clue of fellowship and living the Spirit filled life.......They are not enduring in the Christian way of life. The very ones who falsely teach that one must 'endure' to be saved/stay saved/maintain salvation are not enduring in the Christian way of life. They don't even understand how to accomplish it...........Religion and moral degeneracy>>>>satans ace trump and has many believers hook, line and sinker.

 

[FreeGrace2]

So true and so sad. We can use the very verses in question to expound on this very true statement. One can't help to not miss the irony.

If we have died with Him(And we Have. First class condition) we WILL live with Him( We have his very life/ we are His body/we are IN Christ.) Eternal security at it's finest.

And what does "loss of salvation" belief do to Him? It DENIES Him. And denies the very truth and trustworthy statement in Vs 11 AND vs 13!

And since they deny His FREE Grace and have not a clue of fellowship and living the Spirit filled life.......They are not enduring in the Christian way of life. The very ones who falsely teach that one must 'endure' to be saved/stay saved/maintain salvation are not enduring in the Christian way of life. They don't even understand how to accomplish it...........Religion and moral degeneracy>>>>satans ace trump and has many believers hook, line and sinker.

So well said!!

 

[WordSword]

Bless you friend but there are also some who walk in the Way for a while but then stray from Him.

I think I may see what you mean, "stray" from what they thought was a pursuit of faith but not a possession of it. If we truly desire the Lord Jesus we will seek Him and inevitably be "drawn" to Him.

 

[TibiasDad]

This is a good example of mumbo jumbo.

v.11 is a factual statement. ALL believers HAVE died with Christ. Or can you prove otherwise?

v.12 is a conditional statement; maybe yes, maybe no. And consequences for either condition.

And you cannot prove otherwise.

The "if" at the beginning of verses 11, 12, 12b, and 13 makes them all suppositional, conditional statements. An "if" statement is not a factual statement, it is a hypothethical. Again, hermeneutically speaking, you have to interpret the "if" identically, so there cannot be "a factual if" (which is an absurdity) and a conditional statement. Your assertion that "v.11 is a factual statement. ALL believers HAVE died with Christ. Or can you prove otherwise? v.12 is a conditional statement; maybe yes, maybe no. And consequences for either condition" , is a logical absurdity, a grammatical absurdity, and a hermeneutical absurdity.

So I have now proven otherwise, QED, ipso facto!

Doug

 

[Gr8Grace]

The "if" at the beginning of verses 11, 12, 12b, and 13 makes them all suppositional, conditional statements. An "if" statement is not a factual statement, it is a hypothethical. Again, hermeneutically speaking, you have to interpret the "if" identically, so there cannot be "a factual if" (which is an absurdity) and a conditional statement. Your assertion that "v.11 is a factual statement. ALL believers HAVE died with Christ. Or can you prove otherwise? v.12 is a conditional statement; maybe yes, maybe no. And consequences for either condition" , is a logical absurdity, a grammatical absurdity, and a hermeneutical absurdity.

So I have now proven otherwise, QED, ipso facto!

Doug

Total nonsense. Verse 11 IS a factual statement. It is a first class condition and states a simple FACT (we died with Him )for the sake of the argument..........We WILL CERTAINLY live with Him.
Col 3:3~~ New American Standard Bible
For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God.

The main verb In the protasis Of verse 11 in 2 Tim 2 is 'died' and in the indicative mood.....making it a first class condition or stating a simple FACT. And here is a link to prove this simple FACT.

Greek Conditional Sentences

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"v.11 is a factual statement. ALL believers HAVE died with Christ. Or can you prove otherwise?

v.12 is a conditional statement; maybe yes, maybe no. And consequences for either condition.

And you cannot prove otherwise."

The "if" at the beginning of verses 11, 12, 12b, and 13 makes them all suppositional, conditional statements.

I thought you claimed you've had Greek classes. But you don't recognize a first class condition in the Greek? It is an "assumed to be true" statement, so it is NOT a conditional clause. Since Paul was addressing Timothy directly, a saved person, OF COURSE both he and Paul HAD died with Christ. So it IS true. And SINCE they both DIED with Him, they will BOTH LIVE WITH HIM. Guaranteed.

Now, it should be obvious to any legitimate student of the Word that Paul would "endure", but for the rest of Christendom, it is not either obvious or guaranteed that all would endure, and there is a consequence for those who do not endure.

But twisting v.12 into a statement about lifestyle determining eternal destiny is to deny the sufficiency of the cross and ignore what Christ on our behalf.

An "if" statement is not a factual statement, it is a hypothethical.

So you don't have any understanding of the various conditional classes, then?

Again, hermeneutically speaking, you have to interpret the "if" identically, so there cannot be "a factual if" (which is an absurdity) and a conditional statement. Your assertion that "v.11 is a factual statement.

Please prove that ALL "if" statements in the Greek are "interpreted identically". That is just so absurd for someone who claims to have had Greek training.

ALL believers HAVE died with Christ. Or can you prove otherwise? v.12 is a conditional statement; maybe yes, maybe no. And consequences for either condition" , is a logical absurdity, a grammatical absurdity, and a hermeneutical absurdity.

So I have now proven otherwise, QED, ipso facto!

Doug

No, you have not. Instead, you have made some absurd statements that indicate that you have no understanding of Greek conditional clauses.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Total nonsense.

Rather amazing for someone who claimed to have Greek training. And there was no evidence of knowledge of any of the classes of conditions!!

Verse 11 IS a factual statement. It is a first class condition and states a simple FACT (we died with Him )for the sake of the argument..........We WILL CERTAINLY live with Him.
Col 3:3~~ New American Standard Bible
For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God.

Amen! And, what a statement about eternal security!

The main verb In the protasis Of verse 11 in 2 Tim 2 is 'died' and in the indicative mood.....making it a first class condition or stating a simple FACT. And here is a link to prove this simple FACT.

Greek Conditional Sentences

I love that web link. I've learned a great deal from the wealth of knowledge there!

 

[TibiasDad]

If we have died with Him(And we Have. First class condition) we WILL live with Him( We have his very life/ we are His body/we are IN Christ.) Eternal security at it's finest.

I will say the same thing to you as I did FG2: if statements a) are always hypothetical never absolute statements of reality. Paul would have said "Since we have died we will live" or "we have died with and will live with him"--but he said "if" we had died...! The "if"'s establish that all the particulars, the died, live, endure and reign etc, are contingencies, not realities.

You are sticking your head in the sand to avoiding that which disturbs your idyllic notions. Speaking of which, why would I speak out against something that would be a wonderful thing to be true? I wish that I could believe that once I believed that nothing else I ever did, or no lifestyle choices could ever derail my eternal destiny. But the plain reading of scripture will not allow me such a luxury. Don't get me wrong, I am very secure and confident that God will finish what he's started, that I will indeed live with him, but I also must endure to the end, I must "press toward the mark"!
You can't have it both ways, which is what FG2 is arguing for, that one can have eternal life and nothing can change that, and yet you must necessarily endure to the end as an active believer! You might as well say you can be completely male and completely female at the same time!

Doug

 

[GDL]

First Class Condition - Is considered the 'Simple Condition' and assumes that the premise (protasis) is true for the sake of argument. The protasis is formed with the helping word ei ('if') with the main verb in the indicative mood, in any tense; with any mood and tense in the apodosis.

The above is from the Greek instruction link provided in the link in #206. The underlined bold is my highlight. Conditional sentences are not to be taken as any more than assumptions for the sake of argument. So, if, and let's assume it to be true for the sake of argument that _______________, then _______________. This makes no statement that the hearers fit the condition in the "if" clause.

There is much more detailed instruction available re this, than that provided on the supplied link.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Speaking of which, why would I speak out against something that would be a wonderful thing to be true? I wish that I could believe that once I believed that nothing else I ever did, or no lifestyle choices could ever derail my eternal destiny. But the plain reading of scripture will not allow me such a luxury.

What an absurd claim!! Jesus couldn't have been more clear when He said that those He gives eternal life, which is at the very MOMENT they believe in Him for salvation, that they shall NEVER PERISH.

By your placing 'lifestyle' in the mix, you've blasphemed the work of Christ completely.

Don't get me wrong

You have gotten the Bible WRONG.

I am very secure and confident that God will finish what he's started, that I will indeed live with him, but I also must endure to the end, I must "press toward the mark"!

The chink in your "armor" is that you have NO guarantee that you will endure to the end. That's just an arrogant claim.

In fact, by your "but I also must endure to the end", you have inserted yourself as savior. iow, IF you don't endure, you won't be saved, but IF you do endure, you'll be saved. It's ALL about YOU. Wrong.

It's all about Christ. And that is GRACE. God's Riches At Christ's Expense.

What you believe is God's Riches At Doug's Expense. GRADE.

If Doug endures (that's an expense) Doug will be saved. There is NO grace in that. Only Doug. And you're no savior. You're a sinner. You can't save yourself no matter how much you think you are.

You can't have it both ways, which is what FG2 is arguing for, that one can have eternal life and nothing can change that, and yet you must necessarily endure to the end as an active believer!

You are the one trying to have it both ways. You have "faith in Christ", but also you also have "faith in Doug" to endure to the end to be saved.

Again, you're a sinner, not your own savior.

The ONLY verses that state "endure to the end to be saved" is in the context of the 7 year Tribulation. It has NOTHING to do with eternal salvation.

You might as well say you can be completely male and completely female at the same time!
Doug

It is your view that contradicts the very words of Jesus. He said recipients of eternal life shall never perish, not me.

I'm defending what Jesus said. You are trying to destroy what Jesus said.

And I know the reason. You have no grasp of grace. You don't understand it at all.

If you did, it would be easy to fully embrace Johnb 10:28. As it is, you don't even believe it. In fact, you are contradicting it.

So your argument is with Jesus Himself. It's His words that I quote and defend.

Where the Bible says that the devil deceives the whole world, it isn't kidding. Even believers are being deceived by the devil's lies.

 

[TibiasDad]

Total nonsense. Verse 11 IS a factual statement. It is a first class condition and states a simple FACT (we died with Him )for the sake of the argument..........We WILL CERTAINLY live with Him.
Col 3:3~~ New American Standard Bible
For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God.

The main verb In the protasis Of verse 11 in 2 Tim 2 is 'died' and in the indicative mood.....making it a first class condition or stating a simple FACT. And here is a link to prove this simple FACT.

Greek Conditional Sentences

It is making an argument based on assumed conditions! Assumed conditions for the sake of argument are not necessarily real in actuality. If A is true then B is also true. This must be applied to all the "if" clauses in the two couplets in 2 Tim 2:11-13:
If A (we died with him) is true, then B (we will also live with him) is true as well
If A (we endure) is true, then B (we will also reign with him) is also true
If A (deny/disown him) is true, then B (God will disown us) is also true
If A (we are faithless) is true, then B (God will remain faithful to himself) is also true!

Any of these may or may not be true at the end of our lives and whatever condition we are in, that reality will become our actual reality.

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

First Class Condition - Is considered the 'Simple Condition' and assumes that the premise (protasis) is true for the sake of argument. The protasis is formed with the helping word ei ('if') with the main verb in the indicative mood, in any tense; with any mood and tense in the apodosis.

The above is from the Greek instruction link provided in the link in #206. The underlined bold is my highlight. Conditional sentences are not to be taken as any more than assumptions for the sake of argument. So, if, and let's assume it to be true for the sake of argument that _______________, then _______________. This makes no statement that the hearers fit the condition in the "if" clause.

There is much more detailed instruction available re this, than that provided on the supplied link.

Amen! I was writing my post to the same point when you posted this.

Doug

 

[FreeGrace2]

It is making an argument based on assumed conditions! Assumed conditions for the sake of argument are not necessarily real in actuality. If A is true then B is also true. This must be applied to all the "if" clauses in the two couplets in 2 Tim 2:11-13:
If A (we died with him) is true, then B (we will also live with him) is true as well
If A (we endure) is true, then B (we will also reign with him) is also true
If A (deny/disown him) is true, then B (God will disown us) is also true
If A (we are faithless) is true, then B (God will remain faithful to himself) is also true!

Any of these may or may not be true at the end of our lives and whatever condition we are in, that reality will become our actual reality.

Doug

What you can't get around is the FACT (that means REALITY) is that when Jesus gives the gift of eternal life, which is the very MOMENT of saving faith in Him, the believer shall never perish. John 10:28 couldn't be any more clear.

Nor can 2 Tim 2:11 be any more clear. If we died with Him, and YES all believers have, then all believers WILL LIVE with Him.

And how about Eph 1:13,14? "Having believed" (aorist tense; in a point in past time), the believer IS presently sealed with the Holy Spirit, a deposit GUARANTEEING the believer an inheritance as God's possession, for the day of redemption.

And, you can't get around the FACT that there are no verses that state loss of salvation in plain language. All your verses DEMAND "reading between the lines". That's NOT how the Holy Spirit communicates the truth.

 

[TibiasDad]

What an absurd claim!! Jesus couldn't have been more clear when He said that those He gives eternal life, which is at the very MOMENT they believe in Him for salvation, that they shall NEVER PERISH.

By your placing 'lifestyle' in the mix, you've blasphemed the work of Christ completely.

You quote John 10:28 in a vacuum! The rest of the New Testament begs to differ!

• Salvation is only for active, present tense believers
• A plethora of scriptures have been put forth, including 2 Tim 2:12, that demonstrate the necessity of enduring, walking continually, and consistently growing in the grace shown us in order to experience the promises of God.
• That these promises are always future in reality of actual experience and are
• always possessed by faith, from first to last! For we do not hope for that which we already have, but "we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies. For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what they already have? But if we hope for what we do not yet have, we wait for it patiently." (Rom 8:23-25)
• And the kicker verse that proves the point that GDL and I have been making: We have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original conviction firmly to the very end. Heb 3:14

Doug

 

[GDL]

RE: Rom8 - 2 inheritances:

Having been educated doctrinally under Free Grace ("FG"), attending seminary under FG advocates mainly to learn languages, being ordained in a FG Church, I understand the FG positions well. After years of study in the Greek texts, I just no longer agree with them.

FG MUST interpret & categorize most everything negative after an initial eternally saving event into divine discipline & loss of rewards, or it cannot maintain its foundational premise.

In having come from this interpretative camp, I try to remain very wary to watch all interpretative arguments as objectively as I can.

Case in point:

FG2 is adamantly arguing for 2 inheritances in Rom8:16-17:

NKJ Rom8:16-17: 16 The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, 17 and if children, then heirs-- heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him, that we may also be glorified together. (I'm using NKJ just out of habit for simplicity & do acknowledge that this translation by its use of "--" near the beginning of v.17 does seem to use all words thereafter to after speak of the "heirs of God" - so 1 inheritance).

Here's another translation and its notes:

NET Rom. 8:16-17 16 The Spirit himself bears witness to our spirit that we are God's children.
17 And if children, then heirs (namely, heirs of God and also fellow heirs with Christ)– if indeed we suffer with him so we may also be glorified with him.

NET Notes (Rom 8:17)

22 tn Grk "on the one hand, heirs of God; on the other hand, fellow heirs with Christ." Some prefer to render v. 17 as follows: "And if children, then heirs - that is, heirs of God. Also fellow heirs with Christ if indeed we suffer with him so we may also be glorified with him." Such a translation suggests two distinct inheritances, one coming to all of God's children, the other coming only to those who suffer with Christ. The difficulty of this view, however, is that it ignores the correlative conjunctions μέν…δέ (men…de, "on the one hand…on the other hand"): The construction strongly suggests that the inheritances cannot be separated since both explain "then heirs." For this reason, the preferred translation puts this explanation in parentheses.

I looked at 8 English translations and 1 of the 8 (the NASB) translated in a more nebulous way:

NAS Romans 8:17 and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him in order that we may also be glorified with Him.

A few points for consideration:

1) I was taught to interpret this as 2 inheritances, which fit the FG system.

2) After years of study & work in the Greek texts, I came to disagree with the 2 inheritances. Although we could find reason to translate a specific clause structure used in v.17 in different ways, thus allowing for the 1 or 2 inheritances discussed in the NET notes above, I came to the same grammatical conclusion NET did - there is one inheritance here.

3) I just quickly looked through 10 Greek Lexicons to see if any of them discussed Rom8:17 in regards to the specific grammatical construction used (men…de). Only Thayers picked up my inquiry & highlighted Rom8:17 - it says the translation should be distributive, “both heirs of God and joint heirs of Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him….” IOW 1 inheritance.

4) Rom8 is speaking about 1 description of Christians, not 2. Its speaking of the true Christians—the Sons of God who are being led by the Spirit to put to death the actions of the body, to become what Rom6 says are those who are slaves to righteousness for holiness. Anyone not thinking spiritual things, not walking in Spirit, not led by the Spirit to put to death the actions of the body, don’t belong to Christ.

5) Christ is heir of all things per Heb1:2. To have an inheritance of God, we must share in Christ’s inheritance = heirs of God & co-heirs with Christ.

6) In 1Cor6 & Gal 5 Paul deals more with inheritance and makes it abundantly clear that those who remain in sin (thus do not put to death the sins of the body as in Rom8), will not inherit the Kingdom of God. He also makes it clear that those led by the Spirit will have the fruit of the Spirit produced in them (opposite of sin) & says those who are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with its passions & desires (again Rom8 put to death the actions of the body). Eph5 also addresses this inheritance in a similar manner.

Apart from a theological system of interpretation like FG, this 2-inheritance theory seems to have little substantiation.

 

[TibiasDad]

And how about Eph 1:13,14? "Having believed" (aorist tense; in a point in past time), the believer IS presently sealed with the Holy Spirit, a deposit GUARANTEEING the believer an inheritance as God's possession, for the day of redemption.

We've dealt with this before: no Greek tense says anything beyond the present tense moment being written about! The aorist tense (a completed punctiliar action) only tells us of the truth in that moment, it does not, indeed cannot project anything about whether that state of belief will continue. Likewise with the seal "guarantee", they are only guaranteed if there is belief; there is no change to the guarantee only the state of belief to which it is predicated. As long as there is belief, there is a seal of guarantee. No belief, no seal of guarantee! The present tense giving of the seal says nothing not can say anything about the future state of that deal in itself.

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

RE: Rom8 - 2 inheritances:

Having been educated doctrinally under Free Grace ("FG"), attending seminary under FG advocates mainly to learn languages, being ordained in a FG Church, I understand the FG positions well. After years of study in the Greek texts, I just no longer agree with them.

FG MUST interpret & categorize most everything negative after an initial eternally saving event into divine discipline & loss of rewards, or it cannot maintain its foundational premise.

In having come from this interpretative camp, I try to remain very wary to watch all interpretative arguments as objectively as I can.

Case in point:

FG2 is adamantly arguing for 2 inheritances in Rom8:16-17:

NKJ Rom8:16-17: 16 The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, 17 and if children, then heirs-- heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him, that we may also be glorified together. (I'm using NKJ just out of habit for simplicity & do acknowledge that this translation by its use of "--" near the beginning of v.17 does seem to use all words thereafter to after speak of the "heirs of God" - so 1 inheritance).

Here's another translation and its notes:

NET Rom. 8:16-17 16 The Spirit himself bears witness to our spirit that we are God's children.
17 And if children, then heirs (namely, heirs of God and also fellow heirs with Christ)– if indeed we suffer with him so we may also be glorified with him.

NET Notes (Rom 8:17)

22 tn Grk "on the one hand, heirs of God; on the other hand, fellow heirs with Christ." Some prefer to render v. 17 as follows: "And if children, then heirs - that is, heirs of God. Also fellow heirs with Christ if indeed we suffer with him so we may also be glorified with him." Such a translation suggests two distinct inheritances, one coming to all of God's children, the other coming only to those who suffer with Christ. The difficulty of this view, however, is that it ignores the correlative conjunctions μέν…δέ (men…de, "on the one hand…on the other hand"): The construction strongly suggests that the inheritances cannot be separated since both explain "then heirs." For this reason, the preferred translation puts this explanation in parentheses.

I looked at 8 English translations and 1 of the 8 (the NASB) translated in a more nebulous way:

NAS Romans 8:17 and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him in order that we may also be glorified with Him.

A few points for consideration:

1) I was taught to interpret this as 2 inheritances, which fit the FG system.

2) After years of study & work in the Greek texts, I came to disagree with the 2 inheritances. Although we could find reason to translate a specific clause structure used in v.17 in different ways, thus allowing for the 1 or 2 inheritances discussed in the NET notes above, I came to the same grammatical conclusion NET did - there is one inheritance here.

3) I just quickly looked through 10 Greek Lexicons to see if any of them discussed Rom8:17 in regards to the specific grammatical construction used (men…de). Only Thayers picked up my inquiry & highlighted Rom8:17 - it says the translation should be distributive, “both heirs of God and joint heirs of Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him….” IOW 1 inheritance.

4) Rom8 is speaking about 1 description of Christians, not 2. Its speaking of the true Christians—the Sons of God who are being led by the Spirit to put to death the actions of the body, to become what Rom6 says are those who are slaves to righteousness for holiness. Anyone not thinking spiritual things, not walking in Spirit, not led by the Spirit to put to death the actions of the body, don’t belong to Christ.

5) Christ is heir of all things per Heb1:2. To have an inheritance of God, we must share in Christ’s inheritance = heirs of God & co-heirs with Christ.

6) In 1Cor6 & Gal 5 Paul deals more with inheritance and makes it abundantly clear that those who remain in sin (thus do not put to death the sins of the body as in Rom8), will not inherit the Kingdom of God. He also makes it clear that those led by the Spirit will have the fruit of the Spirit produced in them (opposite of sin) & says those who are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with its passions & desires (again Rom8 put to death the actions of the body). Eph5 also addresses this inheritance in a similar manner.

Apart from a theological system of interpretation like FG, this 2-inheritance theory seems to have little substantiation.

Thanks for the information, GDL, as I had never even considered the 2 inheritance -theory, the natural reading is a singular inheritance that formally belongs to Christ his Son and graciously to us, Christ's adoptive brothers and sisters. heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ does not show two inheritances, but two sets of heirs for a singular inheritance.

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

So your argument is with Jesus Himself. It's His words that I quote and defend.

As I've said to you once before, I've talked with Jesus about it, and He says I'm fine!

Doug

 

[GDL]

RE: Denial vs. Confession, and Eternal Life

From all the “deny” (arneomai) verses I listed earlier, it’s easy to see that denying God, denying Christ is not a minor matter.

It’s also easy to see that denying Him can be by word (speaking or not speaking), or action.

Also, it’s easy to see that denial is opposite to confession/acknowledging.

The Titus1:16 statement that those who confess to know Him, but deny Him in works, are disgusting…, I find to be extremely strong. This goes with our Lord’s statement against calling Him, Lord, Lord, but not doing what He says (Luke6:46). The issue here is that the Scripture ties together our belief that Jesus is the Christ, with our words and actions over time.

So, when John says: NKJ 1 Jn. 2:22-25 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. 24 Therefore let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father. 25 And this is the promise that He has promised us-- eternal life.

Since denial of Him can be by word, or work, and since denial of Him is the opposite of confessing Him, how does one who denies Him believe (at that point) that He is the Christ? What if the denial is not repented of?

The Text says a denying person does not have the Father or the Son. The Text ties Eternal Life to having what we heard in the beginning (at minimum here the Gospel that Jesus is the Christ) remain in us vs. denying that He is the Christ.

There are a couple sections of the NewCov (“NC”) Scripture I see that tell us something very important about what Eternal Life is, that ties with the above in 1 John:

NKJ 1 John 5:20 And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us an understanding, that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.

NKJ John 17:1 Jesus spoke these words, lifted up His eyes to heaven, and said: "Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You, 2 "as You have given Him authority over all flesh, that He should give eternal life to as many as You have given Him. 3 "And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.

Depending how we take 1J5:20 Jesus Christ and/or God the Father is Eternal Life. Either/or/and works for me & John’s writing is full of such interpretive issues that blur the Father with Jesus Christ.

SO, God is Eternal Life AND Eternal Life for us is knowing & having God the Father & Jesus Christ.

NKJ 1 John 2:1 My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. 2 And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world. 3 Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. 4 He who says, "I know Him," and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. (1 Jn. 2:1-4 NKJ)

If we do not obey Jesus Christ/God, then we do not know Jesus Christ/God. Since Eternal Life is to know God & Jesus Christ, which is to obey God & Jesus Christ, how do the disobedient have Eternal Life, which is God/Jesus Christ?

Some use 1J5:13 to says we can know we have Eternal Life. In 1 John, John details, clarifies, and elaborates on many things that he wrote about what Jesus did & said. By the time we reach 1J5:13, John is saying that virtually all he wrote in 1John is to be understood so we could know we have Eternal Life. There is a lot of intense detail in 1John.

We can go along with these simplistic uses of verses to make doctrines, or we can take in all the counsel of the Text. Let alone getting through all of Paul’s uses of denial, by the time we get through 1 John, this denial issue is even more telling. Dealing with both Paul & John, we are liars if we deny Jesus is the Christ by word or works. We are commanded to believe Jesus is the Christ, and to remain in such belief/confession by word & works. Only then do we have Him & know Him, which is to have & know Eternal Life, which He is.

All the rest of this simplistic stuff is to be grown out of by using the Text, not adhering to a system. By the time we look at all this other detail, the 2Tim denial issue seems simple - to deny Him there is no Life, and certainly no Reigning with Him.

This FG system in my view becomes potentially very harmful. We best be making certain that people understand that belief that Jesus is the Christ needs to be continued in word & work. Anything else is a denial of who He is & thus a denial of God the Father who says & evidenced who He is. If we err, then we need to confess it & get back into the commanded obedience & remaining status, which, over time & via His Spirit, we get better & stronger at. There is security in such belief of who He is.