Verses of single soteriological meaning; barrier to "Predestination"

[Ben johnson]

No one's denied movement. Reformed though denies entrance into "saved" and then exit.

You can't have it both ways, Mike --- either they were "never saved" (and thus no movement), or they moved.

"They went out from us to show they were not truly of us."

We've discussed this before; that was one specific incident, when certain "antichrists left"; likely they were never saved.

...but can we assert that "example sets POLICY"? In other words, do ALL who "go out from us", never belong with us"? In 2Jn1:7-9, is a clear case of those who "go out from us" (the wording says "goes too far", or "goes on ahead"), but it's specifically addressed TO the undeniably saved. One more warning against deception; warning us to "guard against deceivers, that we not loose what was wrought" --- what do you think was wrought, Mike? The next verse repeats the idea of "loosing", clearly defining it as "going too far and not abiding in the teachings of Christ, so as to not have God".

Undeniable movement, Mike --- from "with us", to "deceived to going too far (out from us) and forsaking Jesus and His teachings". John is really clear, isn't he?

Not static, but not recipients of salvation.

"Static" means "no movement"; if you're asserting "were-never-saved" (and you are), then you're saying "stayed not-saved".

Static.

Saved is a passive tense. People receive salvation. People receive salvation to eternal life. Faith is an instrument the Spirit uses to declare a person justified in God's sight. Salvation is accomplished by God for a person, and given to that person.

Becoming saved is active, Mike. In Matt7:24-27, Jesus says "Everyone who hears My words and ACTS UPON THEM.... and everyone who hears My words and does NOT act upon them..."

If you'll notice in Jn6:29, our belief is God's work; but in verses 27-28, that work is His work that we DO.

Things which can be associated directly to conclude salvation: new creation; eternal life; resurrection to life; peace with God; justification by God, born of the Spirit; regeneration by the Spirit.

Notice that those things found on "if anyone be IN CHRIST..." (2Cor5:17) --- there's the question, isn't it? And Paul warns us to "examine ourselves to see if we are (still) in Christ". 2Cor13:5

It is as Paul wrote in Rom11; we can be cut off by our own unbelief any time we want. See Jesus' words in John15:2, 6.

Jesus already mentioned,
When he puts forth all his own, he goes ahead of them, and the sheep follow him because they know his voice. A stranger they simply will not follow, but will flee from him, because they do not know the voice of strangers. John 10:4-5

The idea that a sheep can leave its ownership without the shepherd's notice doesn't even make sense in the imagery provided.

You are correct; the "sheep" cannot leave their "Master". But Scripture asserts that by believing/entering one BECOMES His sheep (Jn10:9), and by disobedience and unsubmission (which is unbelief), we are NOT children but ILLEGITIMATE. Heb12:7-9

But where Paul speaks directly in Romans 8, it's clear that nothing separates me from Him -- not my continued living, not my dying, nor any created thing.

First, please re-read Rom8:12-14; when he says "obligation", is there any way he doesn't mean "volition"? Now please re-visit Rom6; when he says "do not go on presenting your members as instruments of unrighteousness", and "consider yourselves dead to sin but alive to God through Christ Jesus", is there anything in there that opposes "continued living in Him, continued dying to sin"?

Doesn't 2Tim2:11-13 present the idea of "if I died, I shall reign; (but) if I deny Him (and am faithless) He will deny me, even though HIS faithfulness remains"?

Look at Col2:6-8. We are admonished to "Walk in Him as we have received Him." What's the next two verses about? Admonishment to guard ourselves against deceivers, not to be taken captive by empty philosophy and worldly deception rather than according to Christ!

What part of that is not a true admonishment "not to be deceived to unbelief away from Jesus"?

 

[cygnusx1]

You can't have it both ways, Mike --- either they were "never saved" (and thus no movement), or they moved.
We've discussed this before; that was one specific incident, when certain "antichrists left"; likely they were never saved.

...but can we assert that "example sets POLICY"? In other words, do ALL who "go out from us", never belong with us"? In 2Jn1:7-9, is a clear case of those who "go out from us" (the wording says "goes too far", or "goes on ahead"), but it's specifically addressed TO the undeniably saved.

no it is not!

One more warning against deception; warning us to "guard against deceivers, that we not loose what was wrought" --- what do you think was wrought, Mike? The next verse repeats the idea of "loosing", clearly defining it as "going too far and not abiding in the teachings of Christ, so as to not have God".

say ben why don't you assume your conclusion and then read it back into the text .............. oh , sorry , I see you can do no other.

Undeniable movement, Mike --- from "with us", to "deceived to going too far (out from us) and forsaking Jesus and His teachings". John is really clear, isn't he?
"Static" means "no movement"; if you're asserting "were-never-saved" (and you are), then you're saying "stayed not-saved".

the only movement I can see is you from poster to poster , each telling you you have contradicted yourself over those who were entering and being obstructed from entering meaning they got saved then lost .... and it didn't even involve their own free-will ......... this time!

Static.
Becoming saved is active, Mike. In Matt7:24-27, Jesus says "Everyone who hears My words and ACTS UPON THEM.... and everyone who hears My words and does NOT act upon them..."

If you'll notice in Jn6:29, our belief is God's work; but in verses 27-28, that work is His work that we DO.
Notice that those things found on "if anyone be IN CHRIST..." (2Cor5:17) --- there's the question, isn't it? And Paul warns us to "examine ourselves to see if we are (still) in Christ". 2Cor13:5

Why would anyone need to examine themselves ben ...... why would anyone need to see if they are elect ben ? What are the BENEFITS of doing that ben

It is as Paul wrote in Rom11; we can be cut off by our own unbelief any time we want.

errr , no that little doozy does not fit into the majestic passage at all ......... you forgot , on purpose , to mention God hardened them , which certainly undercuts your little 'flower arrangement' , all that is left is stalks.

 

[heymikey80]

You can't have it both ways, Mike --- either they were "never saved" (and thus no movement), or they moved.

ROFL! I daresay you move every day. But that doesn't mean you move into and out of salvation every day. I drive near a city and away from a city most days -- and never enter it. It just plays havoc on your view, on realism itself, to be so sure that everything refers to salvation.

By forcing everything to refer to soteriology, your position has reached a standstill.

Ah, the paradox you get from assuming both are soteriological: "they went out from us"; "they were never with us".

And what're you complaining about? Exactly this paradox.

Apparently there would be "no movement" in this instance, to your interpretation. "And yet ... it moves." "They went out from us." So even Scripture denies your stasis for the very people who "were never of us".

And of course Reformed theology denies your whole argument about stasis. Movement. Far more movement than you allow. But not movement into & out of God's own promises. Is a promise a promise? Or is it just a wishful end?

We've discussed this before; that was one specific incident, when certain "antichrists left"; likely they were never saved.
...but can we assert that "example sets POLICY"? In other words, do ALL who "go out from us", never belong with us"? In 2Jn1:7-9, is a clear case of those who "go out from us" (the wording says "goes too far", or "goes on ahead"), but it's specifically addressed TO the undeniably saved. One more warning against deception; warning us to "guard against deceivers, that we not loose what was wrought" --- what do you think was wrought, Mike?

Wait ... you don't think this is salvation, do you?

Watch yourselves, so that you may not lose what we have worked for, but may win a full reward. 2 Jn :8
​

You think we work for salvation and win salvation from that work? I thought you just said you didn't think that. But I guess your action demands work -- forcing human action to the forefront of your salvation must give it more significance than Paul did: "[salvation -- your interpretation] not out of works" Ep 2:9

Which is it? Work to win salvation? Or salvation not a result of works?

John's talking about the things we are accomplishing for Jesus as His Body, the church, and as His ambassadors for His Kingdom. On those things He rewards us for our work.

The next verse repeats the idea of "loosing", clearly defining it as "going too far and not abiding in the teachings of Christ, so as to not have God".

John makes the point just fine.

Everyone who goes on ahead and does not remain in the teaching of Christ, does not have God.Whoever remains in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. 2 Jn :9
​

Note the word: they "remain" in the teaching. They have both; those who don't remain in the teaching don't have God. The word is defined "not leave". It's clear that not merely entering, but remaining in the teaching, is critical to having the Father.

Does someone who enters, then leaves, then enters -- does that person leave? Yep. Does that person "not remain"? That person does not remain. What does 2 Jn :9 say about that person?

What do I find in Reformed theology? Those who have God don't leave.

Ah. So what do you find in your theology?

So why's John tell those he presumes are saved? First -- this is a presumption. John can caveat his teaching on assumptions he knows may not be completely true. But second, John writes in third person. He's not saying, "you der. You who don't go on ahead, get out." John's writing generally here. This is a rule for discerning who has God and who doesn't. The Gnostics were constantly claiming to have God. Here's John's test -- a nice, Reformed test. "Stick around -- you'll see." And those who believe have a responsibility for perceiving who is teaching and working aright in the church, and who are wolves among the sheep. They are going to work to keep the flock together for Christ Jesus.

 

[Ben johnson]

no it is not!

Yes, it is. The verse says "to the chosen lady and her children --- loved by all who know the truth. I was very glad to find some of your children walking in the truth... this is love that we walk according to His commandments.... many deceivers have gone into the world ...WATCH yourselves that you do not lose what was WROUGHT... everyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teachings of Christ has not God... he who abides has the Father and the Son..."

There is no "disconnect" in the passage; he's writing to "the chosen lady and her children who are walking in the truth". He warns against deceivers, and presents the danger --- losing what was wrought, going too far and not abiding in Jesus.

What was wrought, Cygnus? Their faith. Faith abides in His commandments, faith abides in Him. "Go too far" is the refutation of Jn2:19, "go out from us". It means "succumb to deception and lose wrought-faith and CEASE abiding in Christ and His teachings". There's no way to change what John wrote.

say ben why don't you assume your conclusion and then read it back into the text .............. oh , sorry , I see you can do no other.

The context is continuous; it does not "break" or "jump". RT needs it to read:

"Watch yourselves, that you not lose (crowns and rewards once you get to Heaven) what was wrought, but that you may receive full reward (heavenly crowns and rewards); anyone who GOES TOO FAR (uhm, anyone who WAS ALWAYS 'too far') and does not abide in the teachings of Christ (uhm, has NEVER abided in His teachings!) has not God (well, duh, if they've NEVER abided then they NEVER had God!)."

And that's not what it says --- it speaks of "deceivers", and "losing what was wrought", then without subject-break he explains "whoever goes too far and does not abide in Christ's teachings has not God".

Deceivers deceive us to unbelief, away from Christ. 2Cor11:3, Col2:6-8, many verses are very clear.

Away from Christ.

We are to "guard what has been entrusted to us". 2Tim1:12-14, because we CAN be deceived away FROM it and lose our faith that was wrought!

Reformed Theology must insert a subject change between 2Jn1:8, and 9; there is no subject change. "Go too far", is the consequence of being deceived by deceivers --- the consequence we are to WATCH, that we AVOID.

the only movement I can see is you from poster to poster , each telling you you have contradicted yourself over those who were entering and being obstructed from entering meaning they got saved then lost .... and it didn't even involve their own free-will ......... this time!

The movement is from "salvation", to "unsalvation". Go too far and not abide in His teachings; one cannot GO too far, if one has always BEEN "too far"...

Why would anyone need to examine themselves ben ...... why would anyone need to see if they are elect ben ? What are the BENEFITS of doing that ben

Only one --- to see if we are still "in Christ".

The warning is identical to the one written by Peter, in 2:1:5-10. We are to look at our attributes --- if we LACK godliness/morality/self-control/kindness/love, then we are "blind short-sighted, FORGOTTEN former purification from sins!" You ask what the benefit of examining ourselves? In Peter's words:

"SO THAT the gates of Heaven will BE provided to you!"

errr , no that little doozy does not fit into the majestic passage at all ......... you forgot , on purpose , to mention God hardened them , which certainly undercuts your little 'flower arrangement' , all that is left is stalks.

Where does God harden them apart from their unbelief? Paul very clearly says "do not be conceited, but fear; you stand by faith, they were cut off for unbelief. If God did not spare the natural branches, neither will He spare YOU! Behold then the kindness and severity of God --- to you kindness, if you CONTINUE in His kindness (in belief), else you too will be cut off! And if they do not continue in their unbelief, they will be grafted in again...."

No contradiction, Cygnus; perfect harmony, cognizance, continuity. The only way to dismiss what they all said, is to think that "instant subject changes occur" (like the one between 2Jn1:8 & 9).

The text, all of it, fully overturns "predestined salvation"; unless it's changed subjects reassigned...

 

[Ben johnson]

ROFL! I daresay you move every day. But that doesn't mean you move into and out of salvation every day. I drive near a city and away from a city most days -- and never enter it. It just plays havoc on your view, on realism itself, to be so sure that everything refers to salvation.

By forcing everything to refer to soteriology, your position has reached a standstill.

Ah, the paradox you get from assuming both are soteriological: "they went out from us"; "they were never with us".

And what're you complaining about? Exactly this paradox.

Apparently there would be "no movement" in this instance, to your interpretation. "And yet ... it moves." "They went out from us." So even Scripture denies your stasis for the very people who "were never of us".

And of course Reformed theology denies your whole argument about stasis. Movement. Far more movement than you allow. But not movement into & out of God's own promises. Is a promise a promise? Or is it just a wishful end?

The movement clearly is from "saved", to "unsaved". Against the static "two groups who did not CHANGE", it's demonstrated that one subject, moves. See my previous post to Cygnus...

1Jn2:19 says "they were never of us" --- speaking spiritually. 2Jn1:9 says "they went out from us", but context clearly says "WERE of us". It's the consequence of the warning.

If you still think 1Jn2:19 "sets doctrine", then you'll be struggling to explain the warning in 1Jn2:26-28 --- we are "to abide in Him, so that we not shrink in shame at His appearing". Any way "abiding", is not optional? Any way "shrink in shame at His second coming", is still saved?

Wait ... you don't think this is salvation, do you?

I don't "think" --- John clearly states it...

Watch yourselves, so that you may not lose what we have worked for, but may win a full reward. 2 Jn :8

"worked-for", is "wrought"; it means "faith".

"Not lose faith".

You think we work for salvation and win salvation from that work?

Philip2:12 says "WORK out your salvation with fear and trembling"....

It is God who works in us to do as He wills, but salvation, His work, we do. Jn6:27-29 is very clear. "What must we do to work the work of God?"
"This is God's work, THAT YOU BELIEVE..."

I thought you just said you didn't think that. But I guess your action demands work -- forcing human action to the forefront of your salvation must give it more significance than Paul did: "[salvation -- your interpretation] not out of works" Ep 2:9

The word in 2Jn9, is "wrought". "Ergazomai" is translated "wrought" in Matt26:10, Mark14:6, John3:21, Acts18:3, 2Thess3:8, Heb11:33, and 2Jn1:8.

John makes the point just fine.

Everyone who goes on ahead and does not remain in the teaching of Christ, does not have God.Whoever remains in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. 2 Jn :9​

Note the word: they "remain" in the teaching. They have both; those who don't remain in the teaching don't have God. The word is defined "not leave". It's clear that not merely entering, but remaining in the teaching, is critical to having the Father.

Right! Watch ourselves that we not lose WROUGHT-FAITH, if we REMAIN in His teachings we have Jesus!

What's unclear about that???

Does someone who enters, then leaves, then enters -- does that person leave? Yep. Does that person "not remain"? That person does not remain. What does 2 Jn :9 say about that person?

He says "anyone who GOES ON AHEAD" --- that means "LEAVES", Mike.

What do I find in Reformed theology? Those who have God don't leave.

Not what he says: IF we go too far (succumbing to deception), THEN we have not God. If we remain, then we do. You're wanting it to say "Watch yourselves against deception that you not lose what was wrought; anyone who goes too far and does not abide in His teachings, was NEVER there, we WHO ARE there WILL watch ourselves and WILL NOT go too far".

And that's not what it says, Mike...

Ah. So what do you find in your theology?

So why's John tell those he presumes are saved? First -- this is a presumption. John can caveat his teaching on assumptions he knows may not be completely true. But second, John writes in third person. He's not saying, "you der. You who don't go on ahead, get out." John's writing generally here. This is a rule for discerning who has God and who doesn't.

A general rule for what? He's issuing a warning --- but for what purpose? You're proposing that "the predestined can NEVER go too far and abandon faith, and those who GO too far never HAD faith". If that's the case, exactly what is he warning about, and who is he addressing the warning, TO?

The Gnostics were constantly claiming to have God. Here's John's test -- a nice, Reformed test. "Stick around -- you'll see." And those who believe have a responsibility for perceiving who is teaching and working aright in the church, and who are wolves among the sheep. They are going to work to keep the flock together for Christ Jesus.

Watch ourselves against deceivers; why, Mike? Because deceivers can expose who is REALLY saved, and who is NOT?

Doesn't that make the presence of deceivers, desireable????

Which is it? Work to win salvation? Or salvation not a result of works?

We work HIS WORK, when we believe. What does John6:27-29 say to you?

John's talking about the things we are accomplishing for Jesus as His Body, the church, and as His ambassadors for His Kingdom. On those things He rewards us for our work.

Please explain a point that seems central to Reformed Theology.

What is the dynamic that can lose us CROWNS/REWARDS, but not eternity itself?

What is it that we would do, to "lose rewards"? How does one "lose rewards"? Is it by "deception"?

Deception to WHAT?

 

[Ben johnson]

errr , no that little doozy does not fit into the majestic passage at all ......... you forgot , on purpose , to mention God hardened them , which certainly undercuts your little 'flower arrangement' , all that is left is stalks.

Heb3:10-14 says "do not harden your (own!) hearts, take care lest you be hardened by deceitful sin to falling away from the living God"...

 

[heymikey80]

Yes, it is. The verse says "to the chosen lady and her children --- loved by all who know the truth. I was very glad to find some of your children walking in the truth... this is love that we walk according to His commandments.... many deceivers have gone into the world ...WATCH yourselves that you do not lose what was WROUGHT... everyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teachings of Christ has not God... he who abides has the Father and the Son..."

There is no "disconnect" in the passage; he's writing to "the chosen lady and her children who are walking in the truth". He warns against deceivers, and presents the danger --- losing what was wrought, going too far and not abiding in Jesus.

What was wrought, Cygnus? Their faith. Faith abides in His commandments, faith abides in Him.

... thus injecting an idea that's nowhere to be found in the entire letter. Don't put words in God's mouth. You've been guilty of doing so with theologies you don't like. But doing it with the Word of God crosses a much more serious line.

 

[cygnusx1]

Heb3:10-14 says "do not harden your (own!) hearts, take care lest you be hardened by deceitful sin to falling away from the living God"...

and what has that got to do with Romans 11 ?

 

[heymikey80]

The movement clearly is from "saved", to "unsaved". Against the static "two groups who did not CHANGE", it's demonstrated that one subject, moves. See my previous post to Cygnus...

That "one subject" of yours is lots of individuals. John didn't have a phone line to God, "OK, all these guys are saved? Oh, cool! Then I can write ... this!" Instead John wrote, "The elect lady and her children" -- ah, so to you all are elect! Just like the children of Israe ... now wait a minute. Not all the children of Israel were elect! (cf. Rom 9). So ... what were you saying about "saved"?

1Jn2:19 says "they were never of us" --- speaking spiritually. 2Jn1:9 says "they went out from us", but context clearly says "WERE of us". It's the consequence of the warning.

1 Jn 2:19 says "they went out from us". By your copious argument before, then, you must conclude by that argument that their "going out from us" means they "were of us." So both must say to you, they "were of us."

But then John contradicts your copious argument "they were never of us." The contradiction must conclude your argument is in error.

If you still think 1Jn2:19 "sets doctrine", then you'll be struggling to explain the warning in 1Jn2:26-28 --- we are "to abide in Him, so that we not shrink in shame at His appearing". Any way "abiding", is not optional? Any way "shrink in shame at His second coming", is still saved?

I've already said some people will be saved and yet shrink at His coming. Or did you miss that? Ah well.

I don't "think" --- John clearly states it... "worked-for", is "wrought"; it means "faith".

Great. John's so clear at stating things, isn't he. Cite where in the letter of 2 John that John states "faith". Then explain how -- from where John mentions "faith" in 2 John , how that mention of faith clearly states what you think.

Or abandon the point, I don't care. I think you're wrong. I don't think John clearly states 2 John :8 means "faith". So produce John's mention of "faith" in 2 John, and relate that clear mention of "faith" -- "pistis" -- to 2 John :8.

"Not lose faith".
Philip2:12 says "WORK out your salvation with fear and trembling"....

Work is a consequence of your salvation. "unto good works" (Ep 2:10). But this very sentence then says "for God is working in you" (Pp 2:13). If that's faith, God's doing it. God. Working. And -- your interpretation -- He's working faith. Can you explain the sudden change of heart? I explected you thought God couldn't work this way; I expected you thought God couldn't give faith.

But I agree Paul thinks God can give faith.

For it has been given to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in him but also suffer for his sake Pp 1:29
​

It is God who works in us to do as He wills, but salvation, His work, we do. Jn6:27-29 is very clear. "What must we do to work the work of God?"
"This is God's work, THAT YOU BELIEVE..." The word in 2Jn9, is "wrought". "Ergazomai" is translated "wrought" in Matt26:10, Mark14:6, John3:21, Acts18:3, 2Thess3:8, Heb11:33, and 2Jn1:8.
Right! Watch ourselves that we not lose WROUGHT-FAITH, if we REMAIN in His teachings we have Jesus!

What's unclear about that???

I've described the problems with 2 John, and I will soon describe the problems in Jn 6.

It's God working in us in Pp 2:12. Nothing's unclear about that. We work in light of His working in us. Ours is an outworking to God's inworking. Ours is a result; His is a cause.

And that is awfully clear in the verse. It's explicitly stated there. Meanwhile, "faith" is not so "clearly stated" by John in 2 John ....

Hm, which one is based on things "clearly stated" by John and Paul? Your theology? Or mine?

He says "anyone who GOES ON AHEAD" --- that means "LEAVES", Mike.

So does "went out from us", at least according to you.

And what does "meno" mean? "remain; not leave". Oooo. "Leave", and "not leave". So poor John's contradicting himself. Either that, or you're wrong.

I think I know which is the case.

Not what he says: IF we go too far (succumbing to deception), THEN we have not God. If we remain, then we do. You're wanting it to say "Watch yourselves against deception that you not lose what was wrought; anyone who goes too far and does not abide in His teachings, was NEVER there, we WHO ARE there WILL watch ourselves and WILL NOT go too far". And that's not what it says, Mike...

I love it when you put words in my mouth.

That's a lie, Ben. I didn't say what you've quoted up there. Lying about those concerned with your prior lies, destroys your credibility further.

Building on what I've said to you before:

Knowledge is not salvation. Not abiding His teachings speaks about those following with the disciples toward the truth. The unsaved are constantly entering and leaving this following.

As John said, the saved are not leaving this following. "Whoever remains in the teaching has both the Father and the Son." 2 Jn :9 That's consistent with Reformed theology on this point.

How's your theology doing? With people constantly entering and leaving salvation, how do you propose that "Whoever remains in the teaching has both the Father and the Son"? When ... they're constantly leaving -- and not remaining?

But these questions I set before. You've tried to vault past them, alleging that Scripture doesn't cross-examine your theology. Whatever. That means to me that you can't answer them, apparently.

A general rule for what? He's issuing a warning --- but for what purpose? You're proposing that "the predestined can NEVER go too far and abandon faith, and those who GO too far never HAD faith". If that's the case, exactly what is he warning about, and who is he addressing the warning, TO?

Let's touch on the warning, since you're so smitten with it. "Watch yourselves ..." -- that's the warning. It's also translated, "Look after yourselves" or "Look to yourselves". 20th Century connotations in a phrase like "hey, watch yourself" don't apply to First Century Greek.

This is constructive direction: look after yourselves, to protect the following of disciples that you built.

Watch ourselves against deceivers; why, Mike? Because deceivers can expose who is REALLY saved, and who is NOT? Doesn't that make the presence of deceivers, desireable????

Nope. Gee, you're really scraping the dregs of the accusatorial barrel, Ben.

If you knew something about why John was writing and the positions of those he was writing against, you'd recognize his counterargument directed at Gnostic "higher knowledge" taught by people who were in the depths of sin.

But instead you've let fly more horrific allegations. "Oh, where must this view lead? Horrors!"

Reformed theology hasn't gone down your alleged road of horrors. When there's more than soteriological reasons to do something, there are all kinds of devotional, ecclesial, assuring, identifying reasons to draw on.

But with the soteriological blinders on, I can see why no other reasons would be apparent to you.

We work HIS WORK, when we believe. What does John6:27-29 say to you?

That Jesus is great at giving the right answer, even when the wrong question is being asked. "Work for what ... the Son of Man will give you ..." That's an easy work, if it's given.

Please explain a point that seems central to Reformed Theology.

I'd have no idea in what context you wish such an explanation. Explain a point that seems central to your theology, as an example.

I don't know what you might consider central. To me, the centrality of Reformed theology starts with the centrality of God and His deserved control over all of His creation. It moves to the depth of God's compassion for His people, which because of His centrality elevates us to a position of high favor which we haven't earned.

What is the dynamic that can lose us CROWNS/REWARDS, but not eternity itself?

Building onto the church with things that don't last, according to Scripture. 1 Cor 3:15.

What is it that we would do, to "lose rewards"? How does one "lose rewards"? Is it by "deception"?

Why should I need to inject detail into a Scripture? So that you see there's one plausible example for what Scripture so obviously says? I would think some may lose rewards through deception. Even if I were wrong that doesn't invalidate what Scripture says.

Deception to WHAT?

Deception toward sin. "You know that he appeared to take away sins" 1 Jn 3:5

 

[heymikey80]

At this point I find the assessment of the Synod of Dordt to be oddly accurate, and that you're continuing, after nearly 400 years of publicly pointing out the error in the opposition, you're continuing to state the same lies over again. I'd suggest if you're going to object to something the Synod of Dordt said ... that you actually read the Canons of Dordt to find what they did indeed say. Then you'll have something to quote, at least.

 

[Ben johnson]

Heb3:10-14 says "do not harden your (own!) hearts, take care lest you be hardened by deceitful sin to falling away from the living God"...

and what has that got to do with Romans 11 ?

We harden our OWN hearts away from God, belief and unbelief are CHOICES.

Rom11 tells us that "WE can be cut off if we come to unbelief". It also tells us that "they can be returned if they return to belief".

 

[Ben johnson]

... thus injecting an idea that's nowhere to be found in the entire letter. Don't put words in God's mouth. You've been guilty of doing so with theologies you don't like. But doing it with the Word of God crosses a much more serious line.

The only thing it "injects", is the idea that "lose-wrought", has continuity with "go too far and not-abide-in-Jesus". Your position is that John changes subject. "Watch yourselves that you not lose wrought-heavenly-treasures; anyone who goes-too-far/not-abide, has NEVER abided and has NEVER had Jesus". This logic reminds me of a childhood "silly", that went: "If a blue monster drank green cool-aid, how many flapjacks can shingle a doghouse? Eight --- because a polar bear is white"...

By reading it as "NO subject change", the idea of "don't lose what was wrought", is then explained by "anyone who goes too far and does not abide" --- so "lose-wrought", is "cease-abiding". And that IS "lose-faith", Mike. There is no subject change between verse 8 and 9.

That "one subject" of yours is lots of individuals. John didn't have a phone line to God, "OK, all these guys are saved? Oh, cool! Then I can write ... this!" Instead John wrote, "The elect lady and her children" -- ah, so to you all are elect! Just like the children of Israe ... now wait a minute. Not all the children of Israel were elect! (cf. Rom 9). So ... what were you saying about "saved"?

He says "Watch YOURSELVES against deceivers". Only those who have something to LOSE, need to watch themselves. Those who have NEVER believed, cannot GO too far --- they cannot go anywhere 'cause they've always been "too far". Monster-polar-bear logic doesn't make sense.

1 Jn 2:19 says "they went out from us". By your copious argument before, then, you must conclude by that argument that their "going out from us" means they "were of us." So both must say to you, they "were of us."

But then John contradicts your copious argument "they were never of us." The contradiction must conclude your argument is in error.

In 1Jn2:19, those people were clearly labelled "antichrists"; likely never were saved. But you're stuck trying to set policy with that incident --- and when 2Jn1:7-9 plainly speaks of some who WERE "of us", but "go out from us and do not abide", you're constrained to insert a subject change to try to make it "those who go on ahead from us, were never OF us". Not only does the "monster-bear" logic not work, you have no explanation for 1Jn2:16-18.
"I've written you concerning those who are trying to DECEIVE you. ...now, ABIDE in Him, SO THAT when He returns you will not SHRINK in SHAME"...

Please tell me how that is not saying the exact same thing. "Deceivers", leading to "not-abiding", so that "shrink-in-shame when He returns". Will you now propose that those who shrink away from Jesus in shame when He returns, are nevertheless STILL SAVED?

Your position is overturned, Mike; the harmony and cognizance is that "deceivers can deceive us away from belief in Christ". This fits perfectly with all the rest of Scripture. Please see Col2:6-8, 2Cor11:3 for instance...

I've already said some people will be saved and yet shrink at His coming. Or did you miss that? Ah well.

You're gonna hafta leave that idea behind. "SAVED", means "FORGIVEN" --- means "Nothing left of which to BE ashamed". We are either "forgiven, ashamed of nothing", or "guilty and ashamed of unforgiven sin".

There is no room in a Christian walk to "shrink in shame away from Jesus".

Or abandon the point, I don't care. I think you're wrong. I don't think John clearly states 2 John :8 means "faith". So produce John's mention of "faith" in 2 John, and relate that clear mention of "faith" -- "pistis" -- to 2 John :8.

I've shown how your position demands a "subject-change", and how "shrink-from-Jesus-in-shame" isn't consistent with a forgiven Christian walk.

When God forgives us for our sins, He forgets that we ever SINNED. "I will remember their sins NO MORE!" Heb8:12
We are either forgiven, or ashamed --- never both.

Work is a consequence of your salvation. "unto good works" (Ep 2:10). But this very sentence then says "for God is working in you" (Pp 2:13).

Correct.

If that's faith, God's doing it. God. Working. And -- your interpretation -- He's working faith.

Incorrect --- in Jn6:27-29, Jesus says "our believing is God's work THAT WE DO". In Matt7:26, Jesus says "Everyone who hears My words AND ACTS UPON THEM..." That means "receive/believe", Mike.

Can you explain the sudden change of heart? I explected you thought God couldn't work this way; I expected you thought God couldn't give faith.

Please tell me where in Heb11:6, God gives "saving-faith". It doesn't say that --- it says "those who come to God BY faith, who SEEK Him, He RECEIVES".

The "sudden-heart-change", is from conviction. Look at the dynamic in Acts2:37...

But I agree Paul thinks God can give faith.
For it has been given to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in him but also suffer for his sake Pp 1:29

Mike --- what you're proposing is that God sits in Heaven and GIVES saving-faith to a FEW, and then condemns the REST for NOT HAVING FAITH! Philip1:29 simply says "granted-made-AVAILABLE". What's the Greek word there for "granted"?

I've described the problems with 2 John,

No you haven't --- you've asserted a "subject change". Blue-monster polar-bear, Mike; there is no subject change. Deceivers deceive us away from Jesus --- hence the warning. Col2:6-8, 2Pet3:17, 2Cor11:3. Plainly stated.

and I will soon describe the problems in Jn 6.

There is no explaining --- they said "what must we DO to work the works of GOD" --- He said "the work of God (that you do) is TO BELIEVE".

It's God working in us in Pp 2:12.

By HIS choice, or by OURS? If by His, then why does it begin "WORK out your salvation with fear and trembling". Could it have anything to do with Jude's admonition, "Keep yourselves in the love of God"?

Yes.

Nothing's unclear about that. We work in light of His working in us. Ours is an outworking to God's inworking. Ours is a result; His is a cause.

What other passages have ideas like "fear and trembling"? How about Acts10:34-35? "There is no partiality with God, but he who FEARS God and does right is WELCOME to God." You're asserting that God is "partial to those whom He elects and GIVES SAVING-FAITH".

...but you ignore the injustice of God then condemning all the rest for not having what He has chosen not to give them (faith!).

And that is awfully clear in the verse. It's explicitly stated there. Meanwhile, "faith" is not so "clearly stated" by John in 2 John ....

Only if you assert "subject-change". I demonstrated it has no subject change.

Blue monster polar bear, Mike.

Hm, which one is based on things "clearly stated" by John and Paul? Your theology? Or mine?

I look forward to hearing how you answer this post; I've shown there is no subject change.

So does "went out from us", at least according to you.

And what does "meno" mean? "remain; not leave". Oooo. "Leave", and "not leave". So poor John's contradicting himself. Either that, or you're wrong.

I think I know which is the case.

Did they leave, or not? You're asserting "not" --- because you're asserting they were never REALLY "in", in the FIRST place. They left, Mike; they did not heed the warning against deceivers.

Knowledge is not salvation. Not abiding His teachings speaks about those following with the disciples toward the truth. The unsaved are constantly entering and leaving this following.

That's not what it says --- it says "go too far and not-abide" --- can you deny that they DID abide in Jesus' teachings?

Let's touch on the warning, since you're so smitten with it. "Watch yourselves ..." -- that's the warning. It's also translated, "Look after yourselves" or "Look to yourselves". 20th Century connotations in a phrase like "hey, watch yourself" don't apply to First Century Greek.

This is constructive direction: look after yourselves, to protect the following of disciples that you built.

Watch ourselves against deceivers? Why? If we cannot be deceived away from Jesus and His teachings, then what is there to WATCH?

Building onto the church with things that don't last, according to Scripture. 1 Cor 3:15.

Deception toward sin. "You know that he appeared to take away sins" 1 Jn 3:5

I wanna end with a discussion of this aspect of your position. You think deceivers can cause us to SIN, and therefore LOSE HEAVENLY REWARDS (but we remain SAVED). How does God deal with sin, Mike? When He forgives us, does He remember the sin He has forgiven? Then why would sin damage our rewards in Heaven?

Either we have sin, and therefore its consequences, or we have repented and been forgiven (1Jn1:9) and the consequences have been removed. There is no provision for "forgiveness, but you're still gonna suffer for what you DID"...

Deceit is away from faith in Jesus --- 2Pet3:17, Col2:6-8, 2Cor11:2. It is not "away from awards in Heaven".

 

[Ben johnson]

Mike --- what you're proposing is that God sits in Heaven and GIVES saving-faith to a FEW, and then condemns the REST for NOT HAVING FAITH! Philip1:29 simply says "granted-made-AVAILABLE". What's the Greek word there for "granted"?

The beginning of this thread is about verses that cannot be re-interpreted towards "predestination". If God GIVES saving-faith,then why does Jesus praise "unseen faith" over "SEEN faith"? That makes no sense.

"You believe because you see? Blessed are those who have NOT seen, and yet believe." Jesus to Thomas, Jn20:29

Why is "unseen" faith better than "seen" faith, if faith is GIFTED to us by God? Doesn't make sense, does it???

 

[heymikey80]

Sorry Ben, but you've done it now once again. I'll explain once again that you're lying about my position, by missing the main point I've persisted in, again and again and again.

Tell you what. Quit alleging of me, "What you really mean is [horrific conclusion] " and I'll consider dealing with other issues. Otherwise I'm not interested in the fantastic hopes that the opposition is battling the Beast with Ten Horns.

The only thing it "injects", is the idea that "lose-wrought", has continuity with "go too far and not-abide-in-Jesus". Your position is that John changes subject.

Nope. You're limiting my view to only two perspectives here again, "saved" and "unsaved", and then expecting the subject to change between them.

That's not John's focus. John's focus is on the "here and now" -- "don't lose what we worked so hard for -- right now -- the discipling ministry of the church". Then John applies the judging principle: "those who walk away from this discipleship don't have God; those who never walk away have God".

Mkay? John's focus is squarely on the church. "The elect lady with her children". It is not squarely on salvation. It admittedly speaks to the salvation of the elect as the people the church is serving.

So I would guess because of your obsessive focus on soteriology, you have to project salvation back into verse 8. And since I don't, it must seem like changing subjects. But when the subject isn't what you say it is ... of course it'll look that way.

By reading it as "NO subject change", the idea of "don't lose what was wrought", is then explained by "anyone who goes too far and does not abide" --- so "lose-wrought", is "cease-abiding". And that IS "lose-faith", Mike. There is no subject change between verse 8 and 9.

ROFL! You see, if you'd got into the view I have of what's being said, you'd see the incredible irony in saying "cease-abiding IS lose-faith". Someone who walks out the door of your church loses faith.

OK? Push soteriology further away -- just for the sake of understanding, I've got to say, do this. A thought experiment. Think about John's predicament, and not ours in the 21st century. It isn't people losing faith. My gosh, if that were the problem don't you think John might mention faith in 2 John? This would be the perfect place! "People are losing faith because of them! Oust these guys!"

But he doesn't. He makes an odd argument that people who leave, don't have God. And that people who stay, have God.

What does that say about a theology of an individual leaving and returning, leaving and returning ...? Did the person stay? Did the person leave?

 

[heymikey80]

The beginning of this thread is about verses that cannot be re-interpreted towards "predestination". If God GIVES saving-faith,then why does Jesus praise "unseen faith" over "SEEN faith"? That makes no sense.

"You believe because you see? Blessed are those who have NOT seen, and yet believe." Jesus to Thomas, Jn20:29

Why is "unseen" faith better than "seen" faith, if faith is GIFTED to us by God? Doesn't make sense, does it???

I don't think your argument has developed from my answer at the beginning of this thread. You deflected it to an argument over whether regeneration precedes faith.

I think greater blessings are on those who undergo greater hardships for their faith.

There are certainly other lines this can take as well, because Jesus doesn't sit down and explain, "This is why I said that." I guess it's the embarrassment of other possibilities that you want to discuss? Isn't it a fact that this is only an argument against predestination if not a single answer applies in the alternate? Do you really want to try to prove an absence?

 

[Ben johnson]

Nope. You're limiting my view to only two perspectives here again, "saved" and "unsaved", and then expecting the subject to change between them.

I don't see, anywhere in Scripture, the idea of "deceived away from anything but belief". Did you look up 2Cor11:3? Col2:6-8?

That's not John's focus. John's focus is on the "here and now" -- "don't lose what we worked so hard for -- right now -- the discipling ministry of the church".

Where in the passage do you see the concept of "discipling-ministry"? I don't see it.

If you're arguing from something "extra-textual", then that cannot be "exegesis", can it?

Then John applies the judging principle: "those who walk away from this discipleship don't have God; those who never walk away have God".

Please tell me why you don't find a connection between "anyone who goes on ahead and does not abide", and "watch yourselves against deceivers". Have you looked up 2Pet3:17, Col2:6-8?

Mkay? John's focus is squarely on the church. "The elect lady with her children". It is not squarely on salvation. It admittedly speaks to the salvation of the elect as the people the church is serving.

What I'd like us to discuss, is the idea of "deceiving". And that includes passages like Col2:6-8, 2Cor11:3, 2Pet3:17.

....btw, while you're in 2Pet3, please read verse 14 --- it connects directly with 1Jn1:26-28 (sorry about the numeric goof above).

So I would guess because of your obsessive focus on soteriology, you have to project salvation back into verse 8. And since I don't, it must seem like changing subjects. But when the subject isn't what you say it is ... of course it'll look that way.

It's not a question of whether you or I assert "this or that", but whether Scripture does...

I don't think your argument has developed from my answer at the beginning of this thread. You deflected it to an argument over whether regeneration precedes faith.

The sequence of "regeneration" and "faith", is important; indeed it is the difference between our views.

...thanx for the link, perhaps I neglected to fully respond...

Reformed thought does not deny that the Spirit uses and indeed brings about new birth with display (in Thomas' case) or preaching (in today's case) the Gospel. In fact the Spirit's regeneration results in the acceptance in faith of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

But I worry you're overpressing your interpretation (and evident dislike) of monergism into a view that monergism does not embrace.

Regeneration is the act of God and of God alone. But faith is not the act of God; it is not God who believes in Christ for salvation, it is the sinner. It is by God's grace that a person is able to believe but faith is an activity on the part of the person and of him alone. In faith we receive and rest upon Christ alone for salvation. "Redemption Accomplished and Applied", Part 2 Ch. 4 par. 2; John Murray, Prof. Systematic Theology, Westminster Seminary, Phila. PA (USA)​

As to the degrees to which Jesus blesses people, well, faith causes different degrees of adversity and challenges for believers in different situations. A believer can certainly be anxious about the reality of the Savior in Whom He trusts. He can question his own actions, his own teachers, his own internal belief. Where that person is wrong about his theology, that person can be racked with doubts -- and yet still believe. Do you think it would be worse for these people who don't know and yet to persevere in their faith? Or would it be better for them to undergo all this stress? Which would Christ Jesus bless the more from His judgement seat: the person for whom belief and following Him is easy, who has lived with the Savior personally, physically? Or the person for whom it is a heavy weight to bear?

Was the girl in Columbine more blessed than Thomas or say, John? Does Jesus account for the adversity of this life, and return us blessings in the next?

The very existence of a difference in Jesus' eyes between "unseen faith", and "seen faith", is highly significant. What difference worth mentioning is there, if both are monergistically-gifted?

But to deal with what you said: we need to figure out what position the Spirit has, WHEN a person is regenerated. Your view asserts "bystander". My view asserts "INDWELLING". For support, I focus on the word "poured" in Titus3:5-6; "He saved US, by washing of regeneration through the Spirit, who WAS poured on us".

Do you deny this verse presents "poured", prior to "regeneration"? Do you deny "poured-us", refers to the same subject (us) as "saved-us by ...regeneration"?

It's the same concept as expressed in passages like 1Cor2:12-14; verse 14 was thought to assert "predestination", until it becomes clear that the "spiritual things" revealed to us in verse 14, are the SAME "spiritual things" revealed by the RECEIVED Spirit in verse 12.

By Acts10:43-48 (11:15&17), "poured" ("ekcheo" ) is "gifted" is "fell-upon" is "RECEIVED". Is "after belief".

So --- to refuse what I just said, you'll hafta find a way to credibly deny that "poured" in Titus3 means "received", and/or that "poured-us" does not precede "regenerated" in the same passage.

Do you have ANY verse/passage that hints at "regeneration BEFORE belief"? Nothing in Eph2 works ("while you were dead, He made you alive") --- the context plainly says "by grace THROUGH faith". Also, passages like Col1:21-23 says that WHILE we were hostile/alien, He reconciled us to God in HIs fleshly body --- and that very reconcilliation conditions on "if indeed we CONTINUE in the faith firmly established and steadfast and not be moved away from JEsus".

I think greater blessings are on those who undergo greater hardships for their faith.

There are certainly other lines this can take as well, because Jesus doesn't sit down and explain, "This is why I said that." I guess it's the embarrassment of other possibilities that you want to discuss? Isn't it a fact that this is only an argument against predestination if not a single answer applies in the alternate? Do you really want to try to prove an absence?

Noooo --- it says nothing about hardship. It speaks of "SEEN faith", and "UNSEEN faith". Those who believe WITHOUT seeing, do not necessarily have greater hardship than Thomas did.

You're fully missing the dynamic of "You believe BECAUSE you see".

Because he saw, Mike; not because God decided.

He saw, he believed; but those who do NOT see and still believe, have greater faith. There is no way to impose "predestined faith" on either (or both) of those.

 

[Ben johnson]

"This is the WILL (thelema-desire) of God, that all who SEE Jesus and believe may be saved"... Jn6:40

 

[heymikey80]

I don't see, anywhere in Scripture, the idea of "deceived away from anything but belief". Did you look up 2Cor11:3? Col2:6-8?

No, because you were so adamant that faith existed where it doesn't. Still awaiting your citation of faith in 2 John.

Again, I see no reason to accept your lack of eyesight for something clearly in Scripture. Deception doesn't exclusively cause unbelief.

Now that I have, I've simply confirmed the fact that your focus is exclusively on soteriology to the exclusion of all else. Neither demands the loss of belief, one doesn't even mention it, and I wonder at your wanting me to look at them for warnings against losing belief. Do you think any mention of faith (even "established in the faith") followed by some kind of warning, says something about losing that faith?

Where in the passage do you see the concept of "discipling-ministry"? I don't see it.

Anyone, see if you can discover why I find the discipling ministry in this passage. It's mentioned twice:

Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. 2 John :9
​

Were you to read 2 John :5-6 you'd also find the very definition of Christian discipleship being applied: "teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you." (Mt 28:20)

Every single verse from :4-:11 has some reference to the discipleship ministry in the church (or in opposition to the corresponding work of the Gnostics' teaching).

So in your first two comments you've called me to attention to two verses that aren't making your case. Then you allege you can't find clear evidence of the discipleship ministry that's utterly obvious, wondering where I have exegeted, while you persist in alleging your injection of other ideas into the text is valid. It seems to me you're simply reacting against what you don't wish to see.

I've no reason to go chasing ghosts through your posts. I'll have to ask you again to reduce the chaff. Then I might find something worth considering.

 

[cygnusx1]

We harden our OWN hearts away from God, belief and unbelief are CHOICES.

Rom11 tells us that "WE can be cut off if we come to unbelief". It also tells us that "they can be returned if they return to belief".

and what has that got to do with God hardening men's hearts ben ?

If scripture says God hardens mens hearts , why do you change it from God into man ?

 

[Ben johnson]

If scripture says God hardens men's hearts , why do you change it from God into man ?

What does Heb3:8 (and 12-13) say about "heart-hardening"? Who, or what, hardens men's hearts?

What's happening in Exodus 9:34 and 10:1? Who hardened Pharaoh's heart?