Temporal Salvation?

[FreeGrace2]

That argument is incoherent because it divides the internal consistency of the body of Christ. It argues that a person is a part of the body of Christ, and thus in heaven, but that this particular portion of the body of Christ is not reigning with the rest of the body.

So you can't picture ranking in heaven?? Why not? It's sure evident on earth.

1 Cor 11:19 No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God’s approval.

Since this is true on earth, why won't it be true in heaven as well?

And why can't you accept reward for faithful service? Jesus taught reward for faithful service in some of His parables.

Luke 19:17 - And he said to him, ‘Well done, good servant! Because you have been faithful in a very little, you shall have authority over ten cities.

"having authority over..." is another way to communicate "reigning with...". Or prove me wrong.

It compromises the internal integrity of unity in the body of Christ.

What does this mean? What is "internal integrity"?

All believers WILL BE in heaven. There's your "unity". Beyond that, there will be differences to show who had God's approval. 1 Cor 11:19.

Reigning with Christ is not an individual "reward" for personal faithfulness of working for the Kingdom's cause

Says you. The Bible says otherwise.

it is a characteristic truth about all the sons of God, just like having eternal life is a characteristic of all who are found in the book of life.

This is the major problem with those who think salvation can be lost. They have conflated rewards with entrance into the kingdom. They can't discern any difference, even though the Bible does clearly.

Being "a ruler" with Christ, who is also a ruler, is what we are, not what we possess differently than somebody else!
Doug

It's earned, as 2 Tim 2:12 very clearly states. IF IF IF we endure, we shall reign.

It's a condition. Now, if Paul had written IF IF IF we endure, we SHALL ENTER the kingdom, then you'd have a point.

 

[TibiasDad]

No. Instead, you are ADDING to the "equation".

One plus one equals two. Quite trying to make this simple equation become some complicated algebra.

1) You are correct:
1 (those who are believers) + 1 (God gives those who are believers eternal life)= 2 (a child of God)
Or,
1 (if A is true) + 1 (and B is true)=2 (C=the result of A +B) is also true necessarily. Thus, if A is "Those who are believers", and B is " only those who are believers will have eternal life and be a part of God's eternal Kingdom" then that means/= all believers and only believers will have eternal life and be a part of God's eternal Kingdom. It is not algebraic, it is simple 1st grade math!

Here is another simple example of such an equation:

1+1=2
1 (“Whoever (if/when someone) acknowledges me before others... ") + 1 (I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven) =2 (said person is acceptable to both Christ and the Father) however, the opposite equation is also true, namely,
1 (But whoever ( if/when someone) disowns me before others) + 1 (I will disown before my Father in heaven) =2 (said person is not accepted by either the Son of the Father)

Your argument, however, becomes algebraic because it introduces a variable component not germane to the simple 1+1=2 equation. Those who deny Christ are not necessarily denied before the Father, because if they ever acknowledged the Son at any point in time prior to their denial, then they are acceptable regardless of their subsequent denial. That is not simple addition! You have to assume an either/or variable to reach an accurate conclusion.

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

It's okay, but not understanding you here.

What don't you understand?

Doug

 

[FreeGrace2]

1) You are correct:
1 (those who are believers) + 1 (God gives those who are believers eternal life)= 2 (a child of God)

How 'bout that! We agree. And those who possess ETERNAL life cannot perish. Ever.

Or,
1 (if A is true) + 1 (and B is true)=2 (C=the result of A +B) is also true necessarily. Thus, if A is "Those who are believers", and B is " only those who are believers will have eternal life and be a part of God's eternal Kingdom" then that means/= all believers and only believers will have eternal life and be a part of God's eternal Kingdom. It is not algebraic, it is simple 1st grade math!

To be specific, those who have believed have eternal life. Jesus gives eternal life to believers. When they believe. Once given eternal life, the recipients SHALL NEVER PERISH.

Your argument, however, becomes algebraic because it introduces a variable component not germane to the simple 1+1=2 equation. Those who deny Christ are not necessarily denied before the Father, because if they ever acknowledged the Son at any point in time prior to their denial, then they are acceptable regardless of their subsequent denial.

Don't be unbiblical. God seals those who have believed with the Holy Spirit, marking them as His own possession, and GUARANTEES their inheritance for the day of redemption.

Eph 1-
13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit,
14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.

What isn't ETERNAL security here?

 

[WordSword]

If the giving is contingent then that which is given is necessarily contingent!

Let's try, "the giving is contingent on the only Source that will will never allow it to be removed," if I have the right idea of what you're trying to say. We'll keep plugging if not!

 

[TibiasDad]

So you can't picture ranking in heaven?? Why not? It's sure evident on earth.

We have sex on earth, why wouldn't we in heaven? You commit yet another logical error of a false dichotomy: just because something occurs in one place does not mean that it necessarily occurs in another.

1 Cor 11:19 No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God’s approval.

Since this is true on earth, why won't it be true in heaven as well?

1) Okay, let's see why I find your cherry picking proof texting inadequate:

• This is referring to specific practices by specific people within the Corinthian local church, and does not set a universal principle beyond the distinction of the things right and wrong in their particular behaviors.
• These behaviors are what marks the differences which show God's approval: Good behavior/properly doing the Lord's supper v.s. bad behavior/improperly doing the Lord's supper.
• These distinctions are not about rewards in heaven, but correct and incorrect behaviors and how they represent the ideals of the conduct of believers and teachings of the Church.
• Paul has nothing positive to say with regard to any of the behaviors so this cannot be about rewards, merely consequences.
• So this has absolutely no relationship to the various rewards of differing types and values in heaven. Yes, there are different rewards based on the value of our earthly efforts (using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or stubble. 1 Cor 3:12), but, as your own citation demonstrates, "And he said to him, ‘Well done, good servant! Because you have been faithful in a very little, you shall have authority over ten cities" (Luke 19:17) , but these are representing final rewards, and the only one not given cities to rule over are the ones "who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.’ ” (Luke 19:27) That is not just a loss of reward, that is a loss of life!

2) Refer to my first answer at the top of this post!


Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

Let's try, "the giving is contingent on the only Source that will will never allow it to be removed," if I have the right idea of what you're trying to say. We'll keep plugging if not!

The contingency is not based on God, but rather set by God for man to do: God's giving is contingent on man's believing. God's acceptance of man is contingent upon man's acceptance of God. God's denial of us is contingent on our denial of him!

Doug

 

[WordSword]

The contingency is not based on God, it but rather set by God for man to do: God's giving is contingent on man's believing. God's acceptance of man is contingent upon man's acceptance of God. God's denial of us is contingent on our denial of him!

Doug

Just appears that we understand this issue differently.

 

[TibiasDad]

Just appears that we understand this issue differently.

While this is an obvious truth, what is your reasoning for your difference of opinion? What specifically is the turning point of your reasoning that makes my perspective less convincing?

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

To be specific, those who have believed have eternal life. Jesus gives eternal life to believers. When they believe. Once given eternal life, the recipients SHALL NEVER PERISH.

No, only those who are active believers at the time of judgement will be in the book of life.

Don't be unbiblical. God seals those who have believed with the Holy Spirit, marking them as His own possession, and GUARANTEES their inheritance for the day of redemption.

Eph 1-
13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit,
14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.

What isn't ETERNAL security here?

More proof texting... Paul also said to the Corinthian church, "By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain." Berean Study Bible 1 Cor 15:2

If you care to be objective, you will note that, a) we are actively being saved by the Gospel, which means it isn't yet completely accomplished, and that b) Paul stresses that belief in the message preached to them must be continually held onto "firmly", for c) "Otherwise, you have believed in vain." " Believed" is the same aorist tense that you point to as proof in Eph 1, but here Paul says clearly that their completed act of faith in the past is "vain" (Greek, εἰκῇ, "in vain; without success or effect: 1 Corinthians 15:2; Galatians 3:4; Galatians 4:11. (From Xenophon, Aeschylus down.)" Thayer) ( bold emphasis mine) if they do not continue to actively hold to the gospel that was preached to them.

That is being biblical, QED!

Doug

 

[GDL]

It’s too bad that these discussions always go back to the osas battles, which IMO is counter-productive to what it means to be a dedicated Christian striving for the high-calling.

Since we’re looking at 2Tim2, I think we’d all be well-advised in these discussions to heed 2Tim2:14—17.

2Tim2

:8 Remember that Jesus Christ, the Davidic King, was resurrected according to Paul’s gospel

:9 Paul suffers for his gospel & God’s word is not encumbered

:10 Paul therefore ENDURES all things for the Elect’s benefit, so they may hit with eternal glory the mark of Salvation in Christ Jesus

:11 A faithful saying:

- Assuming we died together, then we will live together

- Assuming we ENDURE, then we will also reign together

- Assuming we deny/disown/repudiate, then that man will deny/disown/repudiate

- Assuming we are unfaithlful, that man remains faithful; he is not able to deny/disown/repudiate himself

:19 God’s solid foundation stands & guarantees: The Lord knows who are His, and everyone who names the name of Christ is commanded to depart/revolt from unrighteousness

:20 In a large/great house there are vessels for honor & dishonor

:21 IF someone cleanses himself from the dishonorable things, then he will be a vessel for honor, having been made sanctified/holy, a useful thing to the despot, having been prepared for all good work

:22 Commands: Flee from/shun youthful passions – pursue righteousness, faith, love, peace with those who call upon the Lord from a clean heart


A few observations:

1. In 2:10 Paul is ENDURING whatever he has to go through to assist the ELECT so they also can hit the mark of Salvation in Christ Jesus with eternal glory – there is an eternally glorious goal for God’s Elect to achieve in Salvation

2. God’s Elect have this foundation & guaranty: The Lord knows those who are His – coupled with this, they are commanded to revolt from sin. These 2 things are joined: The Lord commands His Elect to revolt from sin (which at its base is disobedience to Him / repudiating His authority) & He knows those who are His. He knows who His Elect are & they don’t repudiate Him.

3. Paul elaborates on the concept: A vessel for honor cleanses himself from dishonorable things, is made holy, is prepared for all good work and so becomes useful to the Master/Owner. So, the Apostolic command to flee from youthful passions & pursue righteousness, faith, love, peace with a clean heart.

4. All of this is in the context of the faithful saying with its 4 assumptions for the sake of argument. Stating them all in the positive:

- We die together > we will live together

- We endure > we will reign together

- We continue to confess/acknowledge Him > He will confess/acknowledge us

- We remain faithful just as does


What’s the point of ripping this apart to make it fit some osas agenda?

It’s about God’s Elect attaining eternal glory in Salvation in Jesus Christ.

The only way to attain this is to deny self, take up our cross [daily] & endure in following Him / never repudiating Him (Luke9, et.al.) and if we err, then acknowledge it as commanded (1J1) & get back on track (as Peter seems he did).

He says that those who confess to know God & deny/repudiate Him in works are disgusting (Titus1:16)

Apart from a strange obsession with some osas agenda, we can just as easily tie the 1st Assumption to the 3rd as we can the 2nd. We don’t deny self & die with Him as commanded, by repudiating Him, and if we don’t endure as commanded, then we certainly repudiate Him.

We die > we will live > we endure > we will co-reign. If you want to step into these statements and divide them to say that the repudiation just effects our rewards, then feel free to undermine & deny the importance & potential for glory that is presented here, and give excuse not to see the commands for honor, righteousness, revolting from sin, self-cleansing, holiness, pure hearts, faith, love, peace, etc., that identify the enduring Elect of God. If one repudiates Him, then how does this one claim to have died with Him – how does one claim to believe who He is? Why is death stated as an assumption and not a fact? Is it just for form? If you're not at some point seeking to be for honor, to be obedient to all the commanded things here, working to endure & co-reign, maybe you never did die - so let's talk about it in assumption.

Why reduce the humility re: the potential of being denied by Him?

2Tim2:15.

 

[GDL]

If you care to be objective, you will note that, a) we are actively being saved by the Gospel, which means it isn't yet completely accomplished, and that b) Paul stresses that belief in the message preached to them must be continually held onto "firmly", for c) "Otherwise, you have believed in vain." " Believed" is the same aorist tense that you point to as proof in Eph 1, but here Paul says clearly that their completed act of faith in the past is "vain" (Greek, εἰκῇ, "in vain; without success or effect: 1 Corinthians 15:2; Galatians 3:4; Galatians 4:11. (From Xenophon, Aeschylus down.)" Thayer) ( bold emphasis mine) if they do not continue to actively hold to the gospel that was preached to them.

Thanks for this work. Firstly, "being saved" as you noted IMO is the proper translation here & is the same present passive construction Paul uses in the participle in 1:18. Secondly, the "without effect" is what I found some time ago to be one of the best translations here. It can also go into w/o purpose, w/o result (Liddell Scott). He's telling them he instructed them before and their belief may well have been w/o effect/purpose/result if they're not sticking with the truth he taught them. I think this is a very good statement to understand re: Biblical Faith & how vital it is to be placed in accurate instruction & then retained & accurately built upon (1Cor3).

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said this:
"So you can't picture ranking in heaven?? Why not? It's sure evident on earth."

We have sex on earth, why wouldn't we in heaven?

What??! Are you serious? I asked about ranking and you come up with sex?? Are you OK? Or are you just trying to change the subject because you know that I'm right?

You commit yet another logical error of a false dichotomy: just because something occurs in one place does not mean that it necessarily occurs in another.

The NT speaks of reward frequently. So I'm not speaking from an opinion, but from what the Word of God has already said.

Then I said:
"1 Cor 11:19 No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God’s approval.

Since this is true on earth, why won't it be true in heaven as well?"

1) Okay, let's see why I find your cherry picking proof texting inadequate:

• This is referring to specific practices by specific people within the Corinthian local church, and does not set a universal principle beyond the distinction of the things right and wrong in their particular behaviors.
• These behaviors are what marks the differences which show God's approval: Good behavior/properly doing the Lord's supper v.s. bad behavior/improperly doing the Lord's supper.
• These distinctions are not about rewards in heaven, but correct and incorrect behaviors and how they represent the ideals of the conduct of believers and teachings of the Church.
• Paul has nothing positive to say with regard to any of the behaviors so this cannot be about rewards, merely consequences.

A reward IS a "mere consequence".

• So this has absolutely no relationship to the various rewards of differing types and values in heaven.

Your opinion is totally divorced from reality. Of course it does.

• Yes, there are different rewards based on the value of our earthly efforts (using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or stubble. 1 Cor 3:12), but, as your own citation demonstrates, "And he said to him, ‘Well done, good servant! Because you have been faithful in a very little, you shall have authority over ten cities" (Luke 19:17) , but these are representing final rewards, and the only one not given cities to rule over are the ones "who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.’ ” (Luke 19:27) That is not just a loss of reward, that is a loss of life!

So, you agree in the first sentence, and then disagree after that. That is disconnected from reality.

 

[FreeGrace2]

The contingency is not based on God, but rather set by God for man to do: God's giving is contingent on man's believing. God's acceptance of man is contingent upon man's acceptance of God. God's denial of us is contingent on our denial of him!

Doug

What confusion. 2 Tim 2:13 says that God cannot "deny Himself". And since He puts the Holy Spirit INTO the believer, He CANNOT deny Himself.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"To be specific, those who have believed have eternal life. Jesus gives eternal life to believers. When they believe. Once given eternal life, the recipients SHALL NEVER PERISH."

No, only those who are active believers at the time of judgement will be in the book of life.

Your opinions are getting in the way of reality. You haven't shown ANY verse that supports your opinion here.

Here are the FACTS:

1. When a person believes in Christ, they possess eternal life.
2. Eternal life, by definition, means life that CANNOT PERISH.
3. Jesus said recipients of eternal life shall NEVER PERISH.
4. Reasonable and rational people understand that "cannot perish" and "never perish" mean the same thing.
5. So, once given eternal life, the recipient cannot and never will perish.

More proof texting... Paul also said to the Corinthian church, "By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain." Berean Study Bible 1 Cor 15:2

This is just more eisegesis. Not even close to exegesis. The English words "hold firmly" is 1 word in the Greek, and means to possess. It's not something that the believer must keep a firm grip on. Those who have believed the gospel POSSESS salvation and eternal life.

And the word "vain" means "without reason". So, believing "in vain" means to believe something apart from evidence.

What the verse doesn't mean in any sense is that salvation can be lost.

If you care to be objective, you will note that, a) we are actively being saved by the Gospel, which means it isn't yet completely accomplished

Those WITH objectivity already KNOW that at the moment of saving faith, the believer IS saved, possesses eternal life, IS indwelt with the Holy Spirit, IS sealed for the day of redemption as God's possession.

So don't give me any of this "actively BEING saved".

and that b) Paul stresses that belief in the message preached to them must be continually held onto "firmly", for c) "Otherwise, you have believed in vain." " Believed" is the same aorist tense that you point to as proof in Eph 1, but here Paul says clearly that their completed act of faith in the past is "vain" (Greek, εἰκῇ, "in vain; without success or effect: 1 Corinthians 15:2; Galatians 3:4; Galatians 4:11. (From Xenophon, Aeschylus down.)" Thayer) ( bold emphasis mine) if they do not continue to actively hold to the gospel that was preached to them.

See above for refutation of your opinion.

 

[WordSword]

What specifically is the turning point of your reasoning that makes my perspective less convincing?

It's not singly your opinion but the general misunderstanding among many concerning the word "believe." I cannot make any sense of how one can say he truly believes in Christ and eventually say he truly doesn't. We can believe in a person and possibly no longer believe in him if he has done something to cause it. But of course it can never be said of God to do anything that would cause one to ever disbelieve.

To me, the only sense in such a concept is in the "saying" or "professing" one believes, which can be false or true, e.g. "A man may say" (Jam 2:18) he has faith, but an absence of the unceasing fruit of the Spirit (works) prevents the profession from ever being genuine, and is how we determine if we are hypocritical, which is always somewhere present with the genuine.

 

[GDL]

It's not singly your opinion but the general misunderstanding among many concerning the word "believe." I cannot make any sense of how one can say he truly believes in Christ and eventually say he truly doesn't.

FWIW:

Have you ever spoken to people who seriously affirm this very thing? I have & it's quite the discussion. One I recall most vividly was with a man who stated he was a very serious believer for many years in the past, was very active in church for years, among the elders & teaching (as I recall), obviously knowledgeable about Scripture as we talked, and no matter what angle or verses we discussed from, he was adamant that he reached the point where he did not believe, wanted nothing do with Christ, nor Church, nor people who wanted to talk to him about either (he was being courteous with me & I with him, but it was written all over him that the discussion was not what he wanted to be doing). There's no way I could get him to agree that he never believed, nor that he was just on some hiatus from belief for whatever reason. Admittedly I have no clue if he remained in his proclaimed unbelief, or returned. All I can tell you is that he was unemotional, very objective, more knowledgeable about Scriptures than many, and gave no indication he would change his mind - but who knows...

A few Scriptures to consider:

NKJ Luke 8:13 "But the ones on the rock are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, who believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away.

(Col. 1:21-23 NKJ) 21 And you, who once were alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now He has reconciled 22 in the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy, and blameless, and above reproach in His sight-- 23 if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.

(1 Jn. 5:13 NKJ) 13 These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God. (1 Jn. 5:13 NKJ)

My notes re: 1J5:13: I'm putting this one forward for consideration. There is a textual variant in Greek manuscripts and this last highlighted clause is not in all manuscripts. At the moment I have 2 manuscripts & 6 translations on screen & the translations = 3 include the clause & 3 do not. From what I recall of the manuscript evidence, I went with the inclusion. In addition, "continue to" is an insertion because of the wording: "you who believe" and then "that you may believe" per the actual Greek. Also, 1John speaks of abiding, which means remaining, staying, about 17 times - NKJ 1 John 2:24 Therefore let (this "let" language is a command) 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 - In context this is speaking about acknowledging/believing Jesus is the Christ. Some of the fairly extensive abiding/remaining instruction has to do with our belief & our obedience, which is directly related to our belief, if not virtually synonymous with it the way the writers and thus the Spirit of God speak of belief.

I can make sense of someone who says they truly believe in Christ and then says they don't. Scripture seems to clearly say this can happen. Also, Biblical Belief has a lot of characteristics (such as it remains). Someone can think & thus say they truly believe in Christ, but then prove, or have it proven to them, that they do not & maybe never did. Belief is a decision & one can undecide.

 

[TibiasDad]

Thanks for this work. Firstly, "being saved" as you noted IMO is the proper translation here & is the same present passive construction Paul uses in the participle in 1:18. Secondly, the "without effect" is what I found some time ago to be one of the best translations here. It can also go into w/o purpose, w/o result (Liddell Scott). He's telling them he instructed them before and their belief may well have been w/o effect/purpose/result if they're not sticking with the truth he taught them. I think this is a very good statement to understand re: Biblical Faith & how vital it is to be placed in accurate instruction & then retained & accurately built upon (1Cor3).

Thank you, my brother! I didn't have my BDAG available when I wrote this, but I cannot imagine it to be any different in its definition. It is very straightforward after all.

Doug

 

[WordSword]

I can make sense of someone who says they truly believe in Christ and then says they don't. Scripture seems to clearly say this can happen. Also, Biblical Belief has a lot of characteristics (such as it remains). Someone can think & thus say they truly believe in Christ, but then prove, or have it proven to them, that they do not & maybe never did. Belief is a decision & one can undecide.

Hi, and appreciate your input! To me, one of the strongest conclusions concerning faith is that those who eventually manifest a permanent disinterest in God confirm they have never been indwelt by His Spirit (regardless of the professions), because God never stops "working" within those who are His (Phl 2:13).

 

[GDL]

BDAG:

2254 εἰκῇ
• εἰκῇ adv. (Xenophanes et al.; ins, pap; Pr 28:25; TestJob 39:11; Just; for the spelling εἰκῆ s. B-D-F §26; W-S. §5, 11 n. 22; Rob. 295f).

1. pert. to there being no cause or reason, without cause (Xenophanes, fgm. B 2, 13 Diels; Artem. 2, 60; UPZ 106, 15; 107, 17; 108, 14 and 24 [all I BC]) Mt 5:22 v.l. (PWernberg-Møller, NTS 3, ’56/57, 71-73); εἰ. φυσιούμενος puffed up without cause Col 2:18.

2. pert. to being without success or result, to no avail (TestJob 39:11; Lucian, Anach. 19) πάσχειν experience Gal 3:4. κοπιάζειν work 4:11.

3. pert. to being without purpose, to no purpose (Lucian, Jupp. Tr. 36; EpArist 161; 168; Just., A II, 4, 2 and D. 97, 1) of the government τὴν μάχαιραν φορεῖν carry the sword to no purpose Ro 13:4.

4. pert. to being without careful thought, without due consideration, in a haphazard manner (Heraclitus fgm. 47 Diels; Epict. 1, 6, 7; 1, 28, 28; Arrian, Anab. 6, 3, 2; Apollon. Dysc.: Gramm. Gr. II/2 p. 215, 1 U.; Sb 5675, 12 [II BC]; PLips 104, 29 [I BC]; POslo 159, 9 [III AD]; Pr 28:25; EpArist 51; 162; Jos., C. Ap. 2, 234) w. ἀτάκτως thoughtlessly (perh. at random) and in disorder 1 Cl 40:2. πιστεῦσαι 1 Cor 15:2 (here mng. 3 is also prob.).—DELG s.v. εἰκῇ. New Docs 2, 81. M-M. TW.

Louw-Nida

1920 εἰκῇ
(a) without reason 89.20
(b) with no result 89.54
(c) for no purpose 89.63

BDAG's take for 1Cor15:2 is also interesting & goes along with another similar way I view The Faith as it is Biblically. It's like saying up front: Are you sure you want to join this Family? It's not as easy as some try to make it seem! Or afterward as with what Paul is dealing with: Maybe you agreed to all of this without thinking it through & now........... I think you believed haphazardly & without a purpose in mind, but that's not what I taught you & now you're being lead astray.

I can also see making such a case pre-baptism based on some of the things I see mainly between Peter & Hebrews. IOW here's where you're headed with what God your new Father will be taking you through to accomplish in you the goal He has for His Children. I want you to understand this & hear your affirmation before I take you out & dunk you.