Temporal Salvation?

[FreeGrace2]

And so when I ask for HOW you factually know, what hermeneutical principle is used to determine, that it is a "policy statement" and not a run of the mill PAI, it's okay to sluff it off, but now it is a necessary distinction for GDL.
Doug

Problem ALREADY solved, Doug.

GDL has admitted that the description statement about what Jesus' sheep DO doesn't mean 100% of the time, but rather an ongoing action with "occasional breaks" or something like that.

So he's admitting that v.27 cannot mean full compliance, but is a statement about what Jesus' sheep GENERALLY do. Not ALL the time, but generally.

And, I agree with this. So, it is STILL not a conditional clause about anything. It's just a description about what Jesus' sheep generally do. But not all the time.

So you still have no point. You both have been trying to force v.27 into being some kind of conditional clause that makes "hearing and following" a condition for becoming a sheep of Jesus, and therefore, for receiving eternal life.

But no dice. The condition for becoming one of Jesus' sheep is found in John 10:9. By "entering through Me", where Jesus used the metaphor of being a gate that those who enter through will be saved. So, the metaphor of entering through Him refers to believing in Him. And I've arleady given you a long list of verses that clearly state that eternal life is received through believing in Jesus. 1 Tim 1:16 is one such verse.

So, Once Belief, Recipients Shall Never Perish.

Or, OB,RSNP.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Again, too much unimportant nonsense to respond to.

That's been pretty much how I've viewed all your expert Greek posts. And you STILL can't explain HOW you differentiate between customary and gnomic. As well as any scholar. And there is disagreement among them.

I was ignoring you completely after a process that took me from reading your posts to just glancing through them to see what verses you were butchering.

OK, I challenge you to point to ANY post where I have supposedly "butchered" any verse. Your blatantly false claims are really a hoot.

I'm back to just glancing through your posts to see where you are and maybe pick up some of your extensive dishonesty here & there, or a point of avoidance, of which there are many.

Well, you DO know how to throw ad hominem around.

Soon back to ignoring you and just looking at Scriptures discussed. You're just too messed-up to pay any close attention to. The only real exercise here is looking at & reasonably discussing Scripture. Until Heaven and earth pass away, we can be sure you'll be ignoring all exegesis and repeating your errors as if nothing was ever said in response.

You have totally discredited yourself by FAILING to explain HOW you differentiate between customary and gnomic presents. You can't do it. Nor can any scholar, apparently, from what Wallace admitted.

To repeat re Biblical Belief: "As for Gnomic vs. Customary in John10:27

I'll stop here in your mid-sentence to remind you that there is NO mention of belief in that verse. What what in the world are you thinking?

either is ongoing, so either one defeats your no-matter-if-it's-temporary view" (= it's still saving faith even if temporary faith).

OK, so you've said this more than once. Where is your proof? Regarding "hearing and following", you have now admitted that the action doesn't have to be 100% all the time.

So, v.27 CANNOT be a condition for receiving eternal life. In fact, the gnomic supports the view that v.27 is a description of what Jesus' sheep generally do.

To be clear Luke8:13 is not Biblical Belief, because, from the information we're given, it is not ongoing.

Sure it was. Until the time of testing/temptation came along. But you HAVE TO punt here to defend your failed theology about "ongoing". Whey DID believe for a while. Jesus used the PIA and you and Doug have been repeatedly making the point that saving faith is PIA. So you might as well give up on your opinion. The second soil was saved WHEN they believed. John 5:24 and 6:47 refute your opinions.

That's the point of that parable: only the 4th soil was productive and such productivity to varying degrees was all that was indicative of ongoing belief, which I'm calling Biblical Belief - the only saving Belief - to differentiate it from your simplistic, undefined Biblically, straight out of the Greek language pisteuo.

All you've shown here is the whole point of the parable; it's about production, not salvation. In fact, from the seed, plants were produced in 3 of 4 soils. But only one produced. The parable is about bearing fruit, not getting saved.

Jesus was teaching how saved people end up not bearing fruit. He did that with the 2nd and 3rd soil.

So again:

- Acts16:31 responded to in-depth and no meaningful referenced response from FG2.

No, you ignored the aorist tense use of 'believe' that results in salvation.

- John10:26-28 responded to in-depth and no meaningful referenced response from FG2.

No, you still can't even understand what the verses say, much less mean.

Save me some glancing - what verse do you want to distort next?

Since you have totally failed to back up your ridiculous claims, and in fact are guilty of what you claim I have done, why do you even bother with more posts?

Your eisegesis & ridicule of all exegesis is expected.

Oh right. Said the one who CAN'T even explain HOW to differentiate between customary and gnomic presents, and yet thinks his opinion is the right one. Even Wallace wasn't that bold.

Rebounding from what Id like to say to you...............OK, all done, forgiven, cleansed, all as part of my ongoing Belief - the only Biblical Belief

So then, you disagree with the apostle Paul by using the aorist tense in Acts 16:31 and Rom 10;9?? Pretty bold, I'd say.

The point of the aorist tense is that from THAT point in time belief (moment of belief), a person is saved and given etenral life. You know the verses.

If this idea of "ongoing belief" were necessary for salvaation, then Paul COULD NOT HAVE SAID what he said to the jailer. Yet, he did. So you are wrong.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Throw a bunch at him or her and more hypocrisy and nonsense is revealed.

I'm still waiting for ANY evidence that backs up your empty claims. Got any?

 

[FreeGrace2]

He who says, “I know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. 1 John 2:4
JLB

Haven't you ever heard of IGNORANT believers? There are many. Even Paul was concerned about ignorance among believers.

Rom 1:13 - Now I would not have you ignorant, brethren, that oftentimes I purposed to come unto you, (but was let hitherto,) that I might have some fruit among you also, even as among other Gentiles.

Rom 11:25 - For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

1 Cor 10:1 - For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers and sisters, that our ancestors were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea.

1 Cor 12:1 - Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.

1 Cor 15:34 - Come back to your senses as you ought, and stop sinning; for there are some who are ignorant of God —I say this to your shame.

2 Cor 1:8 - For we would not, brethren, have you ignorant of our trouble which came to us in Asia, that we were pressed out of measure, above strength, insomuch that we despaired even of life:

1 Thess 4:13 - But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.

And Peter, who referred to Paul's writings:
2 Peter 3:16 - He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

I'll leave you with this verse to meditate on:

1 Cor 14:38 - But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.

 

[GDL]

There are two eternal life’s mentioned in this passage.

Interesting take. Simplifying. The now & later considered as two.

There's a similar concept in Phil3 re: perfection. 1 in the sense of maturity & a 2nd in the sense of resurrection - so 2 perfections:

NKJ Phil. 3:11-15 if, by any means, I may attain to the resurrection from the dead. 12 Not that I have already attained, or am already perfected (teleioō); but I press on, that I may lay hold of that for which Christ Jesus has also laid hold of me. 13 Brethren, I do not count myself to have apprehended; but one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind and reaching forward to those things which are ahead, 14 I press toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. 15 Therefore let us, as many as are mature (teleios), have this mind; and if in anything you think otherwise, God will reveal even this to you.

Not to drag up the dead horse of where this thread has been, but there are a lot of things being said in this area of Phil3. Paul is not speaking of resurrection in the believe in Jesus once & automatically die & go to Heaven concept. He's obviously speaking of the Ongoing Biblical Faith towards a goal. So first it's infancy to maturity (perfection 1) and after maturity it's onward to resurrection (perfection 2). And note how God is in view continually working on our thinking, which takes us back to Phil2:12-13 where God is working/energizing in us both to will & do what pleases Him & we are commanded to accomplish our Salvation by work in fear & trembling.

The warning type instruction Paul proceeds to give concerning enemies of the cross in this context I see as his telling us that whoever is not on this track is ultimately an enemy of what Christ died for. His death was accomplished to provide the true Salvation that is so much more comprehensive in scope & process than the undefined believe once & die & go to heaven no matter what stuff.

Thanks JLB. I'm going to be considering this more. If Doug chimes in, it'll be interesting to see his thoughts, since I think I recall that he brought out the concept of eternal being a quality, or something similar.

 

[FreeGrace2]

For GDL or Doug:

Exegete Heb 10:14 - For by one sacrifice he has made perfect (PIA) for ever those who are being made holy.

Explain "has made perfect forever" in the perspective of your possibility of losing salvation.

Thanks.

 

[TibiasDad]

Problem ALREADY solved, Doug.

GDL has admitted that the description statement about what Jesus' sheep DO doesn't mean 100% of the time, but rather an ongoing action with "occasional breaks" or something like that.

The key here is that it is ongoing, not a complete cessation! Sheep keep following, keep listening. They do not cease to follow and listen! There is no such thing a one of Jesus's flock that does not keep following. You cannot be a part of the flock and not listen to the Shepherd and follow in obedience.

So he's admitting that v.27 cannot mean full compliance, but is a statement about what Jesus' sheep GENERALLY do. Not ALL the time, but generally.

So which is it, FG2? Is a statement about what they generally do, or a policy statement (assuming for the sake of argument that this is a real thing) about what they "should" be doing without any reference to the reality of what they are actually doing? You can't have it both ways!

And, I agree with this. So, it is STILL not a conditional clause about anything. It's just a description about what Jesus' sheep generally do. But not all the time.

Again, this is not a conditional clause; it is a statement of reality from the perspective of the speaker, Jesus. It may be expressed, however, as a conditional clause, but it is not stated as such in John 10.

So you still have no point. You both have been trying to force v.27 into being some kind of conditional clause that makes "hearing and following" a condition for becoming a sheep of Jesus, and therefore, for receiving eternal life.

For the last time, 1) it is not a conditional clause, and 2) nobody is saying that this is about becoming one of his sheep! Your making this argument proves that it is a strawman you are attacking!

But no dice. The condition for becoming one of Jesus' sheep is found in John 10:9. By "entering through Me", where Jesus used the metaphor of being a gate that those who enter through will be saved. So, the metaphor of entering through Him refers to believing in Him. And I've arleady given you a long list of verses that clearly state that eternal life is received through believing in Jesus. 1 Tim 1:16 is one such verse.

So, Once Belief, Recipients Shall Never Perish.

Or, OB,RSNP.

Logically, believing happens prior to entering. Entering is the act of obedience that follows believing.

I'm not sure how 1 Timothy 1:16 proves anything that is not already established. Nobody denies that "eternal life is received through believing in Jesus." The entire question is whether one who stops believing still has eternal life.

Doug

 

[GDL]

Logically, believing happens prior to entering. Entering is the act of obedience that follows believing

As I see it, belief and obedience are the proverbial 2 sides of the same coin.

1John3:23 commands to believe in the name of His Son Jesus Christ. So, when we believe, we also obey the command to believe. Believing is obeying.

I see also that this is why we believe the Gospel (Mark1:15) and obey the Gospel (Rom10:16; 2Thes1:8; 1Pet4:17)

We believe to be saved and we obey to be saved:

NKJ 1 Corinthians 1:21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.

NKJ Hebrews 5:9 And having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him,

Paul & the writer of Hebrews use belief & obedience interchangeably:

NKJ Romans 10:16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, "Lord, who has believed our report?"

NKJ Heb. 3:18-19 And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who did not obey? 19 So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.

I also see this being what Paul is saying in Rom that his service is about - bringing the nations to Obedience of the Faith, or Faith-Obedience (Rom1:5; 16:26 - note how Paul basically bookends Romans with this),

This is part of the defining our Text does to explain Biblical Belief.

This is another proof for Biblical Belief to only be Ongoing. How does it make any sense to walk or fall away from the One with all authority in Heaven and on earth, stop believing in Him - which is to stop obeying Him, or stop obeying Him - which is to stop believing in Him?

God is resolving the sin problem via willing Faith-Obedience. At the end of the day sin is disobedience to God (lawlessness & unrighteousness). It makes no sense (to me anymore) for Him to save us via Faith-Obedience and let us fall away back into sin/lawlessness/disobedience/unbelief and still call us saved.

Ongoing Faith-Obedience.

 

[FreeGrace2]

The key here is that it is ongoing, not a complete cessation! Sheep keep following, keep listening. They do not cease to follow and listen!

OK, let's test your theory here.

King David: when he raped Bathsheba and then murdered her husband to cover up the rape, was he hearing and following the Lord?

There is no such thing a one of Jesus's flock that does not keep following.

You may want to pass some IM's bac and forth with GDL. He disagrees with you here. He admitted that the verbs in v.27 weren't 100% continual, but included "brief periods of interruption" or some such thing.

Again, I'm waiting for your answer about King David.

You cannot be a part of the flock and not listen to the Shepherd and follow in obedience.

Since the Bible uses "sheep" as a metaphor for believers, I recommend you find a sheep herder and ask him about his sheep. And, how well they follow the shepherd.

What you'll find is that sheep are STUPID. They get lost all the time. That's why shepherds have a crook. To pull the STUPID sheep out of the brambles and such.

So which is it, FG2? Is a statement about what they generally do, or a policy statement (assuming for the sake of argument that this is a real thing) about what they "should" be doing without any reference to the reality of what they are actually doing?

You have missed the point, Doug. Doesn't matter. If a customary, it means the action is usually iterative, or repeated but not without interruption (of the action). The usage is quite common. However, this doesn't fit the idea of belief, since a person believes something UNTIL something changes their mind. Belief isn't an on and off kind of thing.

And Wallace introduces the customary as a "habitual or general" present. Habits aren't actions that are continuous or steady state. They occur over and over.

Do you believe like that: over and over? Or is your belief a steady state action?

So, v.27 shows that hearing and following DO HAVE interruptions in the action. According to the customary. Yet, this still doesn't create a conditional clause for how to never perish, which is your claim.

If the hearing and following are a gnomic present, according to Wallace, it makes a statement of a general timeless fact. It does not say that something is happening, but that something DOES happen. This doesn't support the notion that the action is "on-going" in the sense of continuous action. There is a clear difference between "does happen" and "is happening".

You can't have it both ways!

You just don't realize that it doesn't matter either way. They aren't opposite ideas. And both the customary and the iterative do NOT present a steady state action that is on going, but rather action that occurs over and over. That cannot be applied to belief.

Again, this is not a conditional clause; it is a statement of reality from the perspective of the speaker, Jesus. It may be expressed, however, as a conditional clause, but it is not stated as such in John 10.

Nice opinion, Doug. You say "this is not a conditional clause" and then conclude "it may be expressed as a conditional clause". Are you OK? You couldn't be more self contradictory.

For the last time, 1) it is not a conditional clause, and 2) nobody is saying that this is about becoming one of his sheep! Your making this argument proves that it is a strawman you are attacking!

I invite you to review all the way back. And then eat your words. Of course you were.

I'm not sure how 1 Timothy 1:16 proves anything that is not already established. Nobody denies that "eternal life is received through believing in Jesus." The entire question is whether one who stops believing still has eternal life.
Doug

There is no question, Doug. Jesus said He gives eternal life to His sheep. He means believers, ok? And then He says, THEY (His sheep, believers) shall never perish.

OK? Veryu clear and straightforward. Eternal life is given to those who believe. It should be obvious that the giving occurs WHEN a person first believes, because the MOMENT one believes, they ARE a believer at that MOMENT and John 5:24 and 6:47 say that those believing possess eternal life.

So, John 10:28 clearly shows that from the MOMENT one believes they are given eternal life, and from that same MOMENT, they shall never perish.

Couldn't be any more clear.

 

[FreeGrace2]

As I see it, belief and obedience are the proverbial 2 sides of the same coin.

Yes, another one of your opinions. However, if that were true, then there would be no need for any commands for obedience.

iow, when a person believes, they WILL obey. That is the claim of the Lorship salvationists. However, given all the commands for obedience throughout the Bible, and the warnings about discipline, it should be obvious to all that obedience isn't automatic.

We believe to be saved and we obey to be saved:

Maybe you just don't see it, but your statement here inserts human effort (obey) to be saved. Your 2 step process of salvation cannot be found in Scripture.

NKJ 1 Corinthians 1:21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.

There's no obeidence mentioned here. So why did you include it?

NKJ Heb. 3:18-19 And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who did not obey? 19 So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.

Maybe you forgot to check the context for these verses, but you should have. Do you not realize that Moses "could not enter" the promised land because of his own unbelief.

Were you aware of that? Probably not.

This is another proof for Biblical Belief to only be Ongoing.

Why haven't you understood my posts? Of course belief is an ongoing action. No one yo-yo's between belief and unbelief. Only the very unstable do that.

When a person beieves something, they continually believe that UNTIL something occurs to change their mind. And Jesus gave us a clear example of that with the second soil, who believed for a while, until testing/temptation came and they fell away.

I can think of one example about yo-yoing belief. A young child believes in Santa Claus and writes a letter to him before Christmas. If he doesn't get what he asked for, he concludes that Santa doesn't exist. But by next year, after his folks keep getting on him to obey them, do his chores, etc, or "Santa won't bring you what you want", he again believes in him and even writes another letter. But if he doesn't get what he asks for in his letter (and his parents weren't aware of what he wrote) and he doesn't get what he asked for again, he again concludes that Santa doesn't exist.

But adults don't yo-yo in their beliefs. It is on-going. Unless something jars them into changing their mind.

How does it make any sense to walk or fall away from the One with all authority in Heaven and on earth, stop believing in Him - which is to stop obeying Him, or stop obeying Him - which is to stop believing in Him?

This is quite a naive question, since Jesus gave us a clear example. Yes, it doesn't make sense, but people DO it all the time.

Chuck Templeton did it. After being an evangelist for aout a decade, I believe, and even mentoring a young Billy Graham when he started out as an evangelist.

God is resolving the sin problem via willing Faith-Obedience.

Actually, He already resolved the sin problem. Christ died for all sin.

2 Cor 5:19 - that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation.

At the end of the day sin is disobedience to God (lawlessness & unrighteousness). It makes no sense (to me anymore) for Him to save us via Faith-Obedience and let us fall away back into sin/lawlessness/disobedience/unbelief and still call us saved.

The reason it makes no sense to you because you don't understand God's grace.

 

[TibiasDad]

As I see it, belief and obedience are the proverbial 2 sides of the same coin.

1John3:23 commands to believe in the name of His Son Jesus Christ. So, when we believe, we also obey the command to believe. Believing is obeying.

I see also that this is why we believe the Gospel (Mark1:15) and obey the Gospel (Rom10:16; 2Thes1:8; 1Pet4:17)

We believe to be saved and we obey to be saved:

NKJ 1 Corinthians 1:21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.

NKJ Hebrews 5:9 And having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him,

Paul & the writer of Hebrews use belief & obedience interchangeably:

NKJ Romans 10:16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, "Lord, who has believed our report?"

NKJ Heb. 3:18-19 And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who did not obey? 19 So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.

I also see this being what Paul is saying in Rom that his service is about - bringing the nations to Obedience of the Faith, or Faith-Obedience (Rom1:5; 16:26 - note how Paul basically bookends Romans with this),

This is part of the defining our Text does to explain Biblical Belief.

This is another proof for Biblical Belief to only be Ongoing. How does it make any sense to walk or fall away from the One with all authority in Heaven and on earth, stop believing in Him - which is to stop obeying Him, or stop obeying Him - which is to stop believing in Him?

God is resolving the sin problem via willing Faith-Obedience. At the end of the day sin is disobedience to God (lawlessness & unrighteousness). It makes no sense (to me anymore) for Him to save us via Faith-Obedience and let us fall away back into sin/lawlessness/disobedience/unbelief and still call us saved.

Ongoing Faith-Obedience.

I don't think I am at odds with you, they are so closely related that the tandem cannot be easily separated, and thus, pragmatically, they are often interchangeable. There is a distinction between the two, however, and obedient action is the logical offspring of belief in Christ being exercised. Being obedient is the outward expression and thus visible proof of our belief!

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

OK, let's test your theory here.

King David: when he raped Bathsheba and then murdered her husband to cover up the rape, was he hearing and following the Lord?

Not at the time, but he repented and turned from acting in the same way again. Psalm 51 is the written proof of this fact. True belief might get sidetracked, even badly as with David, but it must return to be valid once again. This is why Heb 6 says it is impossible to be renewed to repentance while they are actively crucifying Christ again and putting him to public shame.

You may want to pass some IM's bac and forth with GDL. He disagrees with you here. He admitted that the verbs in v.27 weren't 100% continual, but included "brief periods of interruption" or some such thing.

I never said true believers are incapable of sinning, or that a believer will never sin. I have acknowledged that believers can be and are susceptible to sinning, but that this susceptibility is able to be overcome and conquered more and more consistently so that the habitual results become more and more predictable in their outcomes. That is to say, we sin less and less as we continue to grow in Christ. As John says, "No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him." (1 John 3:6)

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

The reason it makes no sense to you because you don't understand God's grace.

Your understanding lessens the sinfulness of sin and cheapens the grace of God. Grace is only as amazing as the despicableness and ugliness of sin. The love of the Father for us does not disdain the love for the Son by simply ignoring how his children live. He demands his children live as the Son he gave lived. Again, John says, "Whoever claims to live in him must live as Jesus did." (1 John 2:6)

Doug

 

[GDL]

I don't think I am at odds with you, they are so closely related that the tandem cannot be easily separated, and thus, pragmatically, they are often interchangeable. There is a distinction between the two, however, and obedient action is the logical offspring of belief in Christ being exercised. Being obedient is the outward expression and thus visible proof of our belief!

Doug

Yes, it's clear they are different words & have different meanings. I'm probably a bit tighter than you at the moment, the way I understand you. I think obedient action is faith in action.

The logic of being commanded to believe, or being commanded to love (as another example), leaves me with the understanding that we really cannot believe or love Biblically without being obedient. God has simply structured it this way and covered these vital things with commands.

Re: the differentiation, there are times when our Lord did emphasize one over the other - thereby differentiating them. When His disciples failed Him at times He called them "little faiths" - emphasizing faith. And I'm going to throw this one at you for consideration of another time when His disciples want to make it a matter of needing more faith and He seems to just tell them to do what He commands - emphasizing obedience:

NKJ Lk. 17:3-9 "Take heed to yourselves. If your brother sins against you, rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him. 4 "And if he sins against you seven times in a day, and seven times in a day returns to you, saying,`I repent,' you shall forgive him." And the apostles said to the Lord, "Increase our faith." 6 So the Lord said, "If you have faith as a mustard seed, you can say to this mulberry tree,`Be pulled up by the roots and be planted in the sea,' and it would obey you. 7 "And which of you, having a servant plowing or tending sheep, will say to him when he has come in from the field,`Come at once and sit down to eat '? 8 "But will he not rather say to him,`Prepare something for my supper, and gird yourself and serve me till I have eaten and drunk, and afterward you will eat and drink '? 9 "Does he thank that servant because he did the things that were commanded him? I think not.

Jesus issues 4 commands here. His disciples seem to think this is a tough task and ask Him to increase their faith. His answer seems to be that this is not about faith and a servant is just to do what his master commands him to do and not even to expect to be thanked for doing it.

For me this just says obedience is expected. Sometimes He'll work on our faith so we'll come to obey. Sometimes He'll just tell us to do what He commands. The core issue of either and both is obedience. Think of all the vital concepts tied to obedience - Love for God is keeping His commandments (obedience) - as JLB has been pointing out: knowing God is keeping His commandments (obedience - and BTW eternal life is knowing God so reason the logic here & see another concept tied to obedience) - Children of God do righteousness & keep God's commandments/love God (obedience). There are many more of these.

Your screen name is TibiasDad, so I assume you're a father. Sometimes we instruct. Sometimes we just tell the child to do what they're told to do. At some point the instruction is imbedded and the task is just done naturally (at least with God's Children as we looked at recently). Think laws written on hearts, trained consciences, obedience ultimately being natural.

So, you're right, of course, they are different. And both need to be developed to work properly. But I think the overlap is supposed to be 100% and I think this is what the Scriptures I gave you are showing us (this is probably my main point, as I don't think I need to convince of the importance of obedience). While being developed, sometimes we need our faith to be strengthened, and sometimes we just need to do what we're told.

In the end with His perfect parenting and disciplinary training, Faith-Obedience becomes the grown-up condition. And Faith-Obedience, when you reason this through enough, just seems to blend into one word - Faithful - sons of faithful Abraham - and siblings of our faithful first-born Brother & Lord.

NKJ Hebrews 3:1-2 Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, Christ Jesus, 2 who was faithful to Him who appointed Him, as Moses also was faithful in all His house.

That's my take.

 

[TibiasDad]

OK? Veryu clear and straightforward. Eternal life is given to those who believe. It should be obvious that the giving occurs WHEN a person first believes, because the MOMENT one believes, they ARE a believer at that MOMENT and John 5:24 and 6:47 say that those believing possess eternal life.

Yep, and the moment they abandon the faith and leave it behind without repenting of and ceasing that sin they give up eternal life! It's not only about the moment we believe, it is about every moment afterward as well. That's why scripture says without ambiguity, "if indeed we hold firmly to our confidence and the hope in which we glory" (Heb 3:6), and again, "We have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original conviction firmly to the very end." (Heb 3:14)

Doug

 

[GDL]

Not at the time, but he repented and turned from acting in the same way again. Psalm 51 is the written proof of this fact. True belief might get sidetracked, even badly as with David, but it must return to be valid once again. This is why Heb 6 says it is impossible to be renewed to repentance while they are actively crucifying Christ again and putting him to public shame

Correct.
Ultimately the man after God's own heart - who will do all God's will.
And 2Tim2:25 says God is ultimately the one who allows repentance.

I never said true believers are incapable of sinning, or that a believer will never sin. I have acknowledged that believers can be and are susceptible to sinning, but that this susceptibility is able to be overcome and conquered more and more consistently so that the habitual results become more and more predictable in their outcomes. That is to say, we sin less and less as we continue to grow in Christ. As John says, "No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him." (1 John 3:6)

And I agree with this and all of this growth out of sin is in Christ in Ongoing Biblical Faith as has been explained and detailed.

 

[TibiasDad]

Yes, it's clear they are different words & have different meanings. I'm probably a bit tighter than you at the moment, the way I understand you. I think obedient action is faith in action.

The logic of being commanded to believe, or being commanded to love (as another example), leaves me with the understanding that we really cannot believe or love Biblically without being obedient. God has simply structured it this way and covered these vital things with commands.

Re: the differentiation, there are times when our Lord did emphasize one over the other - thereby differentiating them. When His disciples failed Him at times He called them "little faiths" - emphasizing faith. And I'm going to throw this one at you for consideration of another time when His disciples want to make it a matter of needing more faith and He seems to just tell them to do what He commands - emphasizing obedience:

NKJ Lk. 17:3-9 "Take heed to yourselves. If your brother sins against you, rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him. 4 "And if he sins against you seven times in a day, and seven times in a day returns to you, saying,`I repent,' you shall forgive him." And the apostles said to the Lord, "Increase our faith." 6 So the Lord said, "If you have faith as a mustard seed, you can say to this mulberry tree,`Be pulled up by the roots and be planted in the sea,' and it would obey you. 7 "And which of you, having a servant plowing or tending sheep, will say to him when he has come in from the field,`Come at once and sit down to eat '? 8 "But will he not rather say to him,`Prepare something for my supper, and gird yourself and serve me till I have eaten and drunk, and afterward you will eat and drink '? 9 "Does he thank that servant because he did the things that were commanded him? I think not.

Jesus issues 4 commands here. His disciples seem to think this is a tough task and ask Him to increase their faith. His answer seems to be that this is not about faith and a servant is just to do what his master commands him to do and not even to expect to be thanked for doing it.

For me this just says obedience is expected. Sometimes He'll work on our faith so we'll come to obey. Sometimes He'll just tell us to do what He commands. The core issue of either and both is obedience. Think of all the vital concepts tied to obedience - Love for God is keeping His commandments (obedience) - as JLB has been pointing out: knowing God is keeping His commandments (obedience - and BTW eternal life is knowing God so reason the logic here & see another concept tied to obedience) - Children of God do righteousness & keep God's commandments/love God (obedience). There are many more of these.

Your screen name is TibiasDad, so I assume you're a father. Sometimes we instruct. Sometimes we just tell the child to do what they're told to do. At some point the instruction is imbedded and the task is just done naturally (at least with God's Children as we looked at recently). Think laws written on hearts, trained consciences, obedience ultimately being natural.

So, you're right, of course, they are different. And both need to be developed to work properly. But I think the overlap is supposed to be 100% and I think this is what the Scriptures I gave you are showing us (this is probably my main point, as I don't think I need to convince of the importance of obedience). While being developed, sometimes we need our faith to be strengthened, and sometimes we just need to do what we're told.

In the end with His perfect parenting and disciplinary training, Faith-Obedience becomes the grown-up condition. And Faith-Obedience, when you reason this through enough, just seems to blend into one word - Faithful - sons of faithful Abraham - and siblings of our faithful first-born Brother & Lord.

NKJ Hebrews 3:1-2 Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, Christ Jesus, 2 who was faithful to Him who appointed Him, as Moses also was faithful in all His house.

That's my take.

I think we are on the same page. I have used "faith in action" and "faith without works" phraseology many times through the years. I have no fight with your thinking. Any difference is a matter of nuance not principle!

Doug

 

[GDL]

He demands his children live as the Son he gave lived. Again, John says, "Whoever claims to live in him must live as Jesus did." (1 John 2:6)

I'm a little hesitant to bring this up, but here we go:

I'm not a big fan of the NIV, mainly because of translations like this one, which makes it difficult to see that John is using meno here. However, I do like that they translated ofeilo as "must," which better expresses the "obligation" meaning of ofeilo than "ought" does. When I'm translating verses like this that use ofeilo, I just go straight to "obligation."

Literal: The one who says/claims (or is saying/claiming) to abide/remain in Him is obligated, just as that man (Jesus Christ) walked, he himself also to walk in this manner

The person claiming to abide in Christ is obligated to walk just as Jesus walked.

I would probably use "must" for dei, as "necessity" is the root of what dei means. "Obligation" (owing) is the root meaning of ofeilo.

As for "ought," which several English translation use for ofeilo (also for dei), the reason I don't like to use it is because of the "advisable" concepts contained within it, so there's is contingency to it.

Although there's a contingency as to whether one walks or does not walk as Jesus did, there is nevertheless the obligation to walk as He walked to meet the reality of abiding, and this is what John1:6 is speaking of, the obligation. So, if we're going to be saying we abide in Christ, then we are obligated to be walking (or living as the NIV correlates) as Jesus did.

The point being there is a reality to abiding and an obligation to be met - or as the NIV says, [an obligation] we "must" meet.

It's like saying, I'm sorry but you cannot come in - you are obligated to have a ticket first, you don't have one, and you're not coming in. There's really no discretion on the part of the doorkeeper - you're either ticketed & coming in or not ticketed & not coming in.

If I say, I'm sorry but you ought to have a ticket before you come in, IMO, because "ought" can mean "it's advisable," then the doorkeeper might let you in anyway.

We're obligated to walk as Jesus walked in order to be abiding in Him. And this assists us in understanding what Jesus was talking about in John15. Abiding in Him is walking/living as He did (1John1) and per John15 keeping His commandments is abiding in His Love. It also assists us in proofing the Ongoing reality of Biblical Faith. Walking is a process going somewhere to some destination. Living is a lifestyle. Neither is a one-time momentary concept and then reverting back to where we began or to how we previously lived.

Anyway, you can probably clean this up, but the overall concept is here.

I do agree with the point you made when you referenced this verse.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I don't think I am at odds with you, they are so closely related that the tandem cannot be easily separated, and thus, pragmatically, they are often interchangeable.

When the word for obey is 'pietho' it means to believe, as 'apietho' as used in John 3:36 means to disbelieve. Only then is obey and believe interchangeable.

The Bible is clear believing results in salvation, while obeying (following God's commands and will) results in blessing and reward.

There is a distinction between the two, however, and obedient action is the logical offspring of belief in Christ being exercised.

Right. It is the logial expectation for saved people.

Being obedient is the outward expression and thus visible proof of our belief!
Doug

While it is, lack of obedience doesn't prove lack of salvation. That's where so-called "theologicans" get off the track.

Here is the deal. It is believers that are commanded to obey. Obedience for unbelievers is useless and won't result in salvation.

No one receives eternal life on the basis of obedience.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"OK, let's test your theory here.

King David: when he raped Bathsheba and then murdered her husband to cover up the rape, was he hearing and following the Lord?"

Not at the time, but he repented and turned from acting in the same way again.

Do you believe that David was unsaved during his rape and murder spree?

Psalm 51 is the written proof of this fact. True belief might get sidetracked, even badly as with David, but it must return to be valid once again. This is why Heb 6 says it is impossible to be renewed to repentance while they are actively crucifying Christ again and putting him to public shame.

Obviously. However, does "impossible to be renewed to repentance" mean loss of salvation to you?

I never said true believers are incapable of sinning, or that a believer will never sin.

I sure hope you never did.

I have acknowledged that believers can be and are susceptible to sinning, but that this susceptibility is able to be overcome and conquered more and more consistently so that the habitual results become more and more predictable in their outcomes.

Only by obedience to what the Bible says about spiritual growth. The believer must NOT grieve (Eph 4:30) the Spirit or quench (1 Thess 5:19) the Spirit, but rather be filled (Eph 5:18) with the Spirit and walk by means of the Spirit (Gal 5:16).

That is to say, we sin less and less as we continue to grow in Christ.

Yes. See above for the details of how to do that. Most Christians have no idea.

As John says, "No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him." (1 John 3:6)
Doug

What does this verse mean to you?