Which "Christians" will not be saved?

[hedrick]

Irony, again. You say they are already belonging to Christ. Why should they then have to change their behavior?

• There is accountability other than eternal torment. That's the whole point of 1 Cor 3:12
• Being in Christ is supposed to change our motivations.
• Living like Jesus taught is actually a better way of life.

I don't think you can scare people into loving others. Fear much more commonly leads to bad behavior.

 

[Wordkeeper]

• There is accountability other than eternal torment. That's the whole point of 1 Cor 3:12

• 
  

Do you mean good behaviour results in escaping temporal torment? However, the text seems to say good behaviour leads to entering Rest:

Romans 6
22But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life. 23For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in b Christ Jesus our Lord.

As for 1 Cor 3:12, gold and precious stones seem to mean forming correct doctrine, not forming good behaviour.

• Being in Christ is supposed to change our motivations.

As shown above, having correct motivation RESULTS in being in Christ (Rom 6:23)

• Living like Jesus taught is actually a better way of life.

• 
  

The options are to live safely in selfishness/Egypt or face uncertainty in living selflessly/the wilderness. There’s a reason most of Jerusalem feared joining Peter on Solomon’s Portico. Better is relative.

I don't think you can scare people into loving others. Fear much more commonly leads to bad behavior.

I don't think I recognised that as a problem, or gave that as a solution to it. I just thought that you should know I think the teaching says good behaviour leads to being IN Christ, and does not say that being IN Christ requires good behaviour.

 

[hedrick]

Do you mean good behaviour results in escaping temporal torment? However, the text seems to say good behaviour leads to entering Rest:

Paul's overall concept is that we were slaves to sin. Dying and rising with Christ frees us for obedience, and leads to eternal life. I'm not so convinced that eternal life is a reward for obedience. Rather, being free leads to both holiness and eternal life. Rom 6:22, the benefit leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life. But eternal life is a gift, as is clear in 23, not a reward for the holiness. Paul is describing two results of being in Christ: a changed life now and eternal life in the future.

As for 1 Cor 3:12, gold and precious stones seem to mean forming correct doctrine, not forming good behaviour.

There's no sign of that kind of distinction.

As shown above, having correct motivation RESULTS in being in Christ (Rom 6:23)

The point of Rom 6 is that we were slaves of sin, and dying with Christ frees us for obedience. That's a change in heart. Jesus' main statement about why he died was during the last supper. He described his death as the blood of the new covenant. That's the new covenant that writes the law into our hearts.

 

[Wordkeeper]

Paul's overall concept is that we were slaves to sin. Dying and rising with Christ frees us for obedience, and leads to eternal life. I'm not so convinced that eternal life is a reward for obedience. Rather, being free leads to both holiness and eternal life. Rom 6:22, the benefit leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life. But eternal life is a gift, as is clear in 23, not a reward for the holiness. Paul is describing two results of being in Christ: a changed life now and eternal life in the future.

Hi Hedrick, you were on the Theogyweb discussions with Tercel, right? This is what he says about “gifts”:

Theo Geek: 'Grace', a mistranslated word and misunderstood concept

Quote
Amongst Classics scholars there is no debate as to what this word means. Surviving documents from the ancient world contain hundreds of passages that give us great clarity about their understanding of charis and the role this word and its concepts played in their society. Charis was the key-word in what scholars call "the reciprocity system". This system operated according to time-delay exchanges where goods were given and then at a later time goods of relatively equal value were returned to the giver. These goods could be tangible (money, material goods) or intangible (public acclaim, authority). An obligation existed to repay favors owed, they were not 'free' in the sense we would understand it - it is just like when a bank gives you a loan the money is not 'free'. (It is due to this reciprocal nature of the transactions that scholars label it the Reciprocity System.) Essentially the system was an informal system of economics. The word charis itself is best translated with the English "favor" in the sense of talking about favors given and favors repaid. Greek makes no linguistic distinction between the first favor given and the second favor to repay it, calling each a charis. Greek also uses charis to refer to a positive attitude toward someone - we would speak in English of this as "regarding them favorably" or "having their favor".


Of course, a century or more ago, such information simply wasn't available. People interpreting charis in the Bible had to use what information they had and try to make some sense of it. Reformation Christianity is famous for seeing charis as being "free grace" and being the opposite of human effort. These concepts have heavily influenced many Christians' understandings of 'grace' today, but have nothing to do with the actual meaning of charis in Greek. The translation 'grace' is not a good one, it is not 'free', and it isn't the opposite of human effort.


These historical misinterpretations of 'grace' have led to correspondingly incorrect interpretations of passages that use charis. Romans 4, for example, contrasts the Reciprocity System to a Contractual system (a rather subtle contrast) which has historically been exegeted as the difference between human effort and reliance on 'grace'. Similarly Ephesians 2:8, due to the ambiguity in Greek about givers and receivers of favors clarifies that God is the giver of the favor and we the receiver, and yet this has historically been exegeted as speaking about lack of human effort.

There's no sign of that kind of distinction.

Lets see the parallels:

1 Corinthians 3
10According to the grace of God which was given to me, like a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building on it. But each man must be careful how he builds on it. 11For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12Now if any man builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, 13each man’s work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to berevealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each man’s work. 14If any man’s work which he has built on it remains, he will receive a reward.15If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.
…..

Jeremiah 23
28Let the prophet who has a dream recount the dream, but let the one who has my word speak it faithfully. For what has straw to do with grain?” declares the Lord. 29“Is not my word like fire,” declares the Lord, “and like a hammer that breaks a rock in pieces?

The point of Rom 6 is that we were slaves of sin, and dying with Christ frees us for obedience. That's a change in heart. Jesus' main statement about why he died was during the last supper. He described his death as the blood of the new covenant. That's the new covenant that writes the law into our hearts.

Dying in Christ is not a change in heart but releasing of our bodies for redemption, resurrection from death. Our spirits are already redeemed:

Ephesians 2
4But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,

Phillipians 3
20But ourcitizenship (conversation/recognition) is in heaven, and we eagerly await a Savior from there,the Lord Jesus Christ, 21who, by the power that enables Him to subject all things to Himself, will transform our lowly bodies to be like His glorious body.…

Romans 7
21I find then the principle that evil is present in me, the one who wants to do good. 22For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, 23but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members. 24Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death? 25Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.

We are waiting for the redemption of our bodies, here on earth, NOW:

Romans 8
23And not only this, but also we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body.

 

[sdowney717]

The people who are not among the "elect", who do not persevere, whose names are not written in the Book of Life, are not saved. Now, if we could just somehow get hold of that list...

Those people stop believing or dont believe, and stop following Christ.
Christ says it is God's Spirit who gives life, not the flesh, pointing back to you must be born of God to believe and be saved, not just born of flesh.
Christ says God must grant you to come to Christ and believe in Christ, otherwise your going to depart from Christ.
Christ actually says He knows who believes and who does not about those who were counted among His disciples, and the reason why that is so.

People who are offended about the things Christ says and taught are not spiritually minded, so then they show they are not saved. Such people are also causing offense, and thus are gathered out of His kingdom all things that offend and are tossed into the fire by the angels on the Last Day, when He returns as the kingdoms of the world have become the kingdom of the Lord and of His Christ, on that Day. And anything that offends God will be destroyed at that time.

John 6
60 Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this, said, “This is a hard saying; who can understand it?”

61 When Jesus knew in Himself that His disciples complained about this, He said to them, “Does this offend you? 62 What then if you should see the Son of Man ascend where He was before?
63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.
64 But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who would betray Him.

65 And He said, “Therefore I have said to you that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted to him by My Father.”

66 From that time many of His disciples went back and walked with Him no more.
67 Then Jesus said to the twelve, “Do you also want to go away?”

 

[fhansen]

Those people stop believing or dont believe, and stop following Christ.
Christ says it is God's Spirit who gives life, not the flesh, pointing back to you must be born of God to believe and be saved, not just born of flesh.
Christ says God must grant you to come to Christ and believe in Christ, otherwise your going to depart from Christ.
Christ actually says He knows who believes and who does not about those who were counted among His disciples, and the reason why that is so.

People who are offended about the things Christ says and taught are not spiritually minded, so then they show they are not saved. Such people are also causing offense, and thus are gathered out of His kingdom all things that offend and are tossed into the fire by the angels on the Last Day, when He returns as the kingdoms of the world have become the kingdom of the Lord and of His Christ, on that Day. And anything that offends God will be destroyed at that time.

John 6
60 Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this, said, “This is a hard saying; who can understand it?”

61 When Jesus knew in Himself that His disciples complained about this, He said to them, “Does this offend you? 62 What then if you should see the Son of Man ascend where He was before?
63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.
64 But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who would betray Him.

65 And He said, “Therefore I have said to you that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted to him by My Father.”

66 From that time many of His disciples went back and walked with Him no more.
67 Then Jesus said to the twelve, “Do you also want to go away?”

Yes? And who can know who believes sufficiently, or can predict who will "stop believing or dont believe, and stop following Christ." Who can know with perfect certainty who will persevere and who will not?

 

[timothyu]

Paul is describing two results of being in Christ: a changed life now and eternal life in the future.

People forget that life here is not a gift but a punishment since the disobedience of the Garden. The gift is in the Kingdom.

 

[hedrick]

Hi Hedrick, you were on the Theogyweb discussions with Tercel, right? This is what he says about “gifts”:

Theo Geek: 'Grace', a mistranslated word and misunderstood concept

I guess I'd have to see an exegesis from this perspective. Malina seems to be associated with work recognizing patronage. However I have a set of his commentaries, and his commentary on Rom 4 understands grace in the usual way. (Also Rom 6:23).

I think it's a mistake to assume that Paul always has in mind a secular context, particularly when there's a history in Jewish usage. Louw and Nida point to examples of usage of the type you're talking about, but also uses implying an unmerited gift. (I will say, however, that one of their examples of the latter, 1 Cor 16:3, actually seems to me to have elements of reciprocity.)

I don't see how you can miss the element of change of motivation in Rom 6. 6:6 is the center of the passage. We had been slaves to sin. We're now freed for obedience.

On 1 Cor 3:12, Malina notes that there are two ways you can get in trouble. One is by messing with the foundation of the building, which is the Gospel, and by extension might be doctrine (though I'm not convinced that Paul actually dealt with doctrine in the sense that it later took on). The other is by building the wrong thing on it. But it's the latter that is involved in this passage. So you're right that there is in fact a distinction between doctrine and work, but 1 Cor 3:12 is actually talking about problems with the work.

Paul is actually a bit ambiguous about the foundation. He says it's Christ. But he also said he built it, so it seems that he is thinking not just of Christ personally, but the Gospel about him.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Most of us who post here in this forum are aware by now that there are tremendously diverse ideas of what it takes to make it to Heaven and escape Hell.

We know from the words of the Lord, if nowhere else in the scriptures, that there are a great many who consider themselves saved and even call Jesus their Lord who will be in for a rather rude awakening when they meet Him face to face.

I sincerely hope that the gospel net is so large that anyone who even names the name of Christ in any way will be saved. I just don't see that as being the case from the scriptures.

I suppose most Christians will agree about the out and out cults likely being lost _ with the exception of those who are in those cults of course.

But what about the ones in the general population of Christendom?

Being as careful as we possibly can to not say that any particular group as a whole is not saved (that's against the forum rules) - and understanding that obviously none of us here will be the final judge of these things - what is your general opinion as to where the line is when it comes to this rather upsetting truth about there not being salvation for all who name the name of Christ?

I.e. - in your opinion - what particular doctrine or lack of doctrine would likely form that God given line of division?

Mark 8:15

 

[Wordkeeper]

I guess I'd have to see an exegesis from this perspective. Malina seems to be associated with work recognizing patronage. However I have a set of his commentaries, and his commentary on Rom 4 understands grace in the usual way. (Also Rom 6:23).

I think it's a mistake to assume that Paul always has in mind a secular context, particularly when there's a history in Jewish usage. Louw and Nida point to examples of usage of the type you're talking about, but also uses implying an unmerited gift. (I will say, however, that one of their examples of the latter, 1 Cor 16:3, actually seems to me to have elements of reciprocity.)

Theo Geek: The Patron-Client system and Hebrews 11:1

Quote
Some books for those wanting to know more:
Palestine in the Time of Jesus, Hanson & Oakman, 1998
The Greco-Roman World of the New Testament Era, James S. Jeffers, 1999
Honor, Patronage, Kinship & Purity, David A. Desilva, 2000
The New Testament World, Bruce Malina, 3rd Ed 2001
The social setting of Jesus and the Gospels, Stegemann, Malina & Theissen, 2002

On 1 Cor 3:12, Malina notes that there are two ways you can get in trouble. One is by messing with the foundation of the building, which is the Gospel, and by extension might be doctrine (though I'm not convinced that Paul actually dealt with doctrine in the sense that it later took on). The other is by building the wrong thing on it. But it's the latter that is involved in this passage. So you're right that there is in fact a distinction between doctrine and work, but 1 Cor 3:12 is actually talking about problems with the work.

Paul is actually a bit ambiguous about the foundation. He says it's Christ. But he also said he built it, so it seems that he is thinking not just of Christ personally, but the Gospel about him.

You can see how Christ sweeps away the wrong doctrine of the Pharisees here:

Matthew 3
11I baptize you with water for repentance, but after me will come One more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire. 12His winnowing fork is in His hand to clear Histhreshing floor and to gather His wheat into thebarn; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.”

I don't see how you can miss the element of change of motivation in Rom 6. 6:6 is the center of the passage. We had been slaves to sin. We're now freed for obedience.

This reminds me of the situations when people walk into the middle of a discussion and find themselves all at sea about what is being talked about. That would explain why certain terms are used and cause confusion, because the same words can be used, and often are, to mean different things, depending on the context, who is being addressed, on what occasion and even how the term is placed in a passage. Being in Christ means being at Rest. Baptism into Christ means being inducted into a demonstration of turning away from selfishess and being sustained by God. So if the believers were in Christ they would have been practicising selflessness already, and bearing fruit.

International Standard Version
2 Corinthians 5
21God made the one who did not know sin to be sin (N. T. Wright: offering?) for us, so that God's righteousness (N. T. Wright on dikaiosune theou: His covenantal faithfulness in fulflling of His promise to Abraham? ) would be produced in us.

It helps to untangle things if we have a pre-understanding of the teaching, if there is a saving formula, and how the recipients of the letters have deviated.

To Be Saved

1. A person must be attentive to God’s promptings wherever he is (Acts of the Apostles 17:27)
2. God hears his cry to be saved from the oppression of selfishness (Hebrews 11:16)
3. God calls him out of Egypt (Hosea 11:1)
4. God demonstrates His ability to provide the alternative (Exodus 16:23)
5. The person learns and gets a different spirit (Numbers 14:24)
6. The person acts and becomes a new person (Deuteronomy 1:37)
7. The person succeeds in being rescued. (Deuteronomy 1:38, Hebrews 4:10, Colossians 2:17)

Changing the type of motivation means changing the type of prize which is being worked for. In this case it means the believer must change from working to fill appetites, to working to save others from working to fill appetites.

Romans 6
6For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body ruled by sin might be done away with, a that we should no longer be slaves to sin.

Romans 6:6 says that the believer has already changed his motivation, prize, goal when he crucified his body with Christ, at baptism. He agreed that working for earthly treasure was futile, harmful, subject to harsh judgment because of the prompting of God given conscience. The Gospel had given the information about God’s gift through Christ, of living the way the conscience prompted, in the greatest manifestation of love, sacrificing one’s own life to save others. This involved denying the appetites. Somehow, the church had missed learning this, requiring Paul’s letter.

From this, we can conclude that the church was not:
in Christ, turned away from selfishness to selflessness, but needing to change its motivation.

Rather the church had been:
inducted into the demonstration of how to be selfless, becoming instruments for God by turning away from selfishness and being sustained, in order to motivate others to turn away from selfishness, but still needed to learn and obey.

 

[hedrick]

There’s a problem with the patron-client model. It’s not irrelevant. Although everything it refers to has more traditional language, it describes the relationship between God and his people as it should happen. God is gracious to them; they respond by honoring him and doing what he wants.

But much of the OT, and Paul, deal with the question of what happens when the clients rebel. I don’t think the patron model alone really specifies how God deals with that.

Romans isn’t primarily about the obligations of clients. Those are pretty obvious. Honor God and obey him. It’s about violations of the covenant, the patron-client relationship, and about who are true clients and how we recognize them.

The prophets say that God disciplines his people, but never gives up. Paul agrees. But he adds an element to God’s plan to redeem his people: a whole new set of clients. They are defined by their faith. Paul also implies that their adoption has a role in God’s overall plan to restore Israel.

But Gentiles are no more perfect than Jews, and thus no more capable of fully complying with their obligations as clients. This is where Christ comes in. And in fact in dealing with this in his commentary on Romans, Malina gives a fairly straight Protestant reading of Paul, though translated to some extent into his jargon: “Paul now clearly lays out what his gospel of God implies: that persons are acceptable to God on the basis of their faith in God's raising Jesus and all that implies for Israel, and this quite apart from doing anything prescribed by the Law of Moses.”

He also describes exactly what I said, that being in Christ frees us, and we are expected to act accordingly:

“Paul reminds Roman Jesus-group members that they have been brought from the realm of sin/death to life and must therefore act accordingly (6:1-10). ... This should not be difficult if they make the effort, for they are no longer under the dominion of sin. The culture of willingness to dishonor God no longer exercises its sway on them.” He then goes on to talk about them being freed from slavery to sin.

Paul's exhortations to good behavior are all this way: You have been brought to new life in Christ. Now show it. This is why so many understandings of 1 Cor 6:9-10 shown in postings here are wrong. It isn't a list of requirements to be saved. It's a list of requirements for those who have been saved to show it in their lives.

 

[Wordkeeper]

There’s a problem with the patron-client model. It’s not irrelevant. Although everything it refers to has more traditional language, it describes the relationship between God and his people as it should happen. God is gracious to them; they respond by honoring him and doing what he wants.

But much of the OT, and Paul, deal with the question of what happens when the clients rebel. I don’t think the patron model alone really specifies how God deals with that.

Romans isn’t primarily about the obligations of clients. Those are pretty obvious. Honor God and obey him. It’s about violations of the covenant, the patron-client relationship, and about who are true clients and how we recognize them.

The prophets say that God disciplines his people, but never gives up. Paul agrees. But he adds an element to God’s plan to redeem his people: a whole new set of clients. They are defined by their faith. Paul also implies that their adoption has a role in God’s overall plan to restore Israel.

But Gentiles are no more perfect than Jews, and thus no more capable of fully complying with their obligations as clients. This is where Christ comes in. And in fact in dealing with this in his commentary on Romans, Malina gives a fairly straight Protestant reading of Paul, though translated to some extent into his jargon: “Paul now clearly lays out what his gospel of God implies: that persons are acceptable to God on the basis of their faith in God's raising Jesus and all that implies for Israel, and this quite apart from doing anything prescribed by the Law of Moses.”

He also describes exactly what I said, that being in Christ frees us, and we are expected to act accordingly:

“Paul reminds Roman Jesus-group members that they have been brought from the realm of sin/death to life and must therefore act accordingly (6:1-10). ... This should not be difficult if they make the effort, for they are no longer under the dominion of sin. The culture of willingness to dishonor God no longer exercises its sway on them.” He then goes on to talk about them being freed from slavery to sin.

Paul's exhortations to good behavior are all this way: You have been brought to new life in Christ. Now show it. This is why so many understandings of 1 Cor 6:9-10 shown in postings here are wrong. It isn't a list of requirements to be saved. It's a list of requirements for those who have been saved to show it in their lives.

Quote
Paul now clearly lays out what his gospel of God implies: that persons are acceptable to God on the basis of their faith in God's raising Jesus and all that implies for Israel,

What it implies is that believers can live selfless lives like Christ and God will sustain, motivating others to turn away from selfish living to selfless living.

Even Abraham understood what being sustained meant: he expected God to give his son back to him.

 

[timothyu]

Rather the church had been inducted into the demonstration of how to be selfless, becoming instruments for God by turning away from selfishness and being sustained, in order to motivate others to turn away from selfishness, but still needed to learn and obey.

Until it later re-aligned itself in partnership with the world of man.

 

[hedrick]

Until it later re-aligned itself in partnership with the world of man.

The Church has almost always has a strong partnership with political leadership.

 

[timothyu]

The Church has almost always has a strong partnership with political leadership.

Yes, it rejected the governance of God for the governance of man. Necessary as scripture would never have been forwarded to this day without the institution built upon man's values and not God's.

The problem with churches and Christianity is they are infiltrated by mankind. Hence the wide path dominates. Those with eyes to see can find the narrow path in scripture and within Christianity itself. They just need to throw off the shackles created by what the world taught them first as being the way since birth. God's way is opposite..

 

[SaintCody777]

I believe that the biggest reason why a professing "Christian" may not be saved are those who just want to take Jesus as a get out of jail free card by just signing a card or saying "Yes" to Jesus at an altar call with barely any desire to turn from sins nor want to become new creations in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17; Romans 12:2; Romans 6). And when any Christian struggles with sins, he will feel like absolute trash as God will discipline him back to righteousness (Romans 7:24-25; Hebrews 12:7-11). The professing "Christian" who is unsaved however, will feel no shame, maybe even feel pride in it, justify it, and does barely has any actual sorrow or shame for his sins. And he has no resolution to at least try to get rid of his sin.
Another big group of "Christians" who might be actually on their way to hell are those who think because of their goodness or certain threshold of good works, or not committing certain vices, they are on their way to heaven. We of course know that is false (Ephesians 2:8-9; Isaiah 64:6; and Romans 4:5-6) Many of these "Christians" may also overlap with the previous group for some reason.
These are the 2 biggest routes that "Christians" seek to get to the narrow gate but will not find it.

 

[timothyu]

Who's will is to come first... God's or man's (minions to the Adversary)?

 

[JLB777]

Most of us who post here in this forum are aware by now that there are tremendously diverse ideas of what it takes to make it to Heaven and escape Hell.

We know from the words of the Lord, if nowhere else in the scriptures, that there are a great many who consider themselves saved and even call Jesus their Lord who will be in for a rather rude awakening when they meet Him face to face.

I sincerely hope that the gospel net is so large that anyone who even names the name of Christ in any way will be saved. I just don't see that as being the case from the scriptures.

I suppose most Christians will agree about the out and out cults likely being lost _ with the exception of those who are in those cults of course.

But what about the ones in the general population of Christendom?

Being as careful as we possibly can to not say that any particular group as a whole is not saved (that's against the forum rules) - and understanding that obviously none of us here will be the final judge of these things - what is your general opinion as to where the line is when it comes to this rather upsetting truth about there not being salvation for all who name the name of Christ?

I.e. - in your opinion - what particular doctrine or lack of doctrine would likely form that God given line of division?

The doctrine of Christ.


Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. 2 John 9


Each born again believer is called to submit to Jesus Christ as their Lord; to obey the Truth.


The Truth is Jesus Christ; every word that proceeds out of His mouth.

His Gospel
His Doctrine
His Commandments (Law)


His doctrine (teaching) is about loving God and loving our neighbor.


He has called us to walk in love.

The way we love Him is by obeying Him.


“If you love Me, keep My commandments. John 14:15


If we as Christians do not remain in His doctrine, then we are walking in hate.


Whoever hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him. 1 John 3:15




JLB

 

[FreeGrace2]

Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. 2 John 9

When John spoke of abiding in Christ he was referring to being in fellowship with the Lord. One's salvation relationship cannot be broken, changed, etc.

Just as the children of human parents cannot change their DNA, which came from their parents, so God's children, who have been born again by the Holy Spirit, cannot change their spiritual DNA.

Each born again believer is called to submit to Jesus Christ as their Lord; to obey the Truth.

Yes, but not for or to maintain salvation.

The Truth is Jesus Christ; every word that proceeds out of His mouth.

His Gospel
His Doctrine
His Commandments (Law)

True. Even John 10:28

 

[JLB777]

When John spoke of abiding in Christ he was referring to being in fellowship with the Lord. One's salvation relationship cannot be broken, changed, etc.

Just as the children of human parents cannot change their DNA, which came from their parents, so God's children, who have been born again by the Holy Spirit, cannot change their spiritual DNA.

Your attempts to “redefine” the words of Jesus Christ are well noted on this Forum, as well as others from which you have been banned.


Jesus admonished His people to remain “in Him”.

Those who don’t remain “in Christ” are cast into the fire and burned burned.


If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned. John 15:6


It’s crystal clear.


In Christ = Eternal Life

Separated from Christ = Eternal Death.



Here is how the scriptures instruct us to remain “in Christ”.


Now he who keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in him. And by this we know that He abides in us, by the Spirit whom He has given us. 1 John 3:24


Can you explain what motivates you to teach God’s people that they do not need to remain “in Christ”, or keep His commandments?




JLB