WHY SALVATION CAN BE LOST

FreeGrace2 · Jan 19, 2022

SabbathBlessings said: ↑
I have no problem discussing and rebutting, nothing was rebutted from my post through scripture other than an opinion, but when we get to calling each other names, we lose the whole point of sharing scripture. It pretty much defeats the purpose. It's okay to discuss and disagree with scripture, the name calling on here has been a bit much.

Clare73 said:
I guess I missed the "names" in post #766.

Exactly!!

FreeGrace2 · Jan 19, 2022

LoveGodsWord said:
All I see here from you is that in response to detailed posts and scriptures provided that disagree with you is denial without showing why you disagree with what was provided to you,
empty claims without proof and providing interpretation of scripture that is contradictory to other scriptures in the bible while hand waiving the Greek and scripture context and subject matter that is in disagreement with you and repeating yourself like you have done here without addressing anything in the posts that have been shared with you. So of course you are free to believe as wish as there is nothing shared with you that will change that. You have been provided scripture and the Greek tenses that I believe shows your interpretation of the scriptures you have provided above are not biblical. You were also provided supportive scriptures from Hebrews 6:4-8 and Hebrews 10:26-31 warning us not to "depart the faith" or we can lose eternal life meaning there is no such thing as once saved always saved because if we were once saved always saved we would not be warned against departing the faith. I believe it is you therefore dear friend that is making and as we are in disagreement we will of course need to agree to disagree. Let's talk more when you want to interact with the posts that have been shared with you. Until then I hope only the best for you.

What a large word salad.

Repetition seems to be your forte.

Rather than just actually addressing the verses of others or recognizing that your understanding of verses needs help.

FreeGrace2 · Jan 19, 2022

FreeGrace2 said: ↑
No, your reading was sloppy by claiming John 10:27 is a condition. It's NOT a condition so please quit thinking it is.

When discussing Scripture, and one party makes an error, I will correct that error.

SabbathBlessings said:
Jesus will sort all of this out when He comes back, which will be soon!

He'll have much bigger things to do when He returns.

Plus, it's already been done. You have been corrected.

LoveGodsWord · Jan 19, 2022

FreeGrace2 said:
What a large word salad.

Repetition seems to be your forte.

Rather than just actually addressing the verses of others or recognizing that your understanding of verses needs help.

Well I believe the repetition is all your side. I have provided detailed scripture responses to your posts. Your response has been to ignore or nor respond to my post content and simply repeat what you have said the first time without addressing any of my posts and scriptures that are in disagreement with you. If you disagree with the scriptures and posts that address your claims then rather than ignoring them and repeating yourself, your challenge is to prove your claims and accusations by addressing the posts that are in disagreement with you. Something that you seem to be unwilling to engage in when asked. All I am hearing here is denial rinse and repeat while making claims and accusations you have not been able to prove. It gets tiring after a while so I guess we will agree to disagree. There is no need to be unfriendly here and make untruthful claims. We should be able to come to a friendly discussion of the scriptures and not be afraid to be challenged as to what we believe if what we believe is true or not. Either way we can be blessed by God if we are opened to hearing His Word through His Spirit. Let's pray we do not harden our hearts to prayerfully hearing and seeing what Gods' Word says like those spoken of by Isaiah in Isaiah 6:9-10; Jesus in Matthew 13:13-15 and Paul in Acts of the Apostles 28:26-27 and Hebrews 3:8-19.

SabbathBlessings · Jan 19, 2022

FreeGrace2 said:
No, you make a grave error by claiming John 10:27 is a condition attached to v.28. It is NOT. It's a description not a condition. Maybe you don't even understand the difference so you needed correction.

Seems you don't even understand what "calling names" means. I called you nothing. I did describe your reading as sloppy. Did I say that you were sloppy? No. If I did, that would be name calling.

Seems you just don't like to be corrected when in error.

When I am in error, I don't mind being corrected so it's not about that. I just don't think its a good idea to make a gospel out of two scriptures, when there is the whole Bible that is God's Word, not just 2 verses out of context.

If you believe you can sin willingly without repenting and still be saved, you are free to believe whatever you wish, I prefer to believe in the scriptures which clearly tells us that is not the case. Matthew 4:17, Hebrews 10:26. We are saved by grace (God's gift) through our faith, but we are judged by our actions, before those receiving grace as all have sinned. Anyone can say they love Jesus, or say they have faith or belief, but actions are always much stronger than words. If faith has no fruit, it is false faith.

Again, Jesus will sort this all out soon enough as He is our righteous Judge! There is no harm in obeying God as its how we show love to Him John 14:15, John 15:10, 1 John 5:3, Exodus 20:6, and we are shown through scripture God's saints keep the commandments of God and the faith in Jesus Revelation 14:12 so its a good way to test yourself to if one is in the faith. We want to be sure we are following the right spirit and are not being deceived. Isaiah 8:20

LoveGodsWord · Jan 19, 2022

SabbathBlessings said:
When I am in error, I don't mind being corrected so it's not about that. I just don't think its a good idea to make a gospel out of two scriptures, when there is the whole Bible that is God's Word, not just 2 verses out of context.

If you believe you can sin willingly without repenting and still be saved, you are free to believe whatever you wish, I prefer to believe in the scriptures which clearly tells us that is not the case. Matthew 4:17, Hebrews 10:26. We are saved by grace (God's gift) through our faith, but we are judged by our actions, before those receiving grace as all have sinned. Anyone can say they love Jesus, or say they have faith or belief, but actions are always much stronger than words. If faith has no fruit, it is false faith.

Again, Jesus will sort this all out soon enough as He is our righteous Judge! There is no harm in obeying God, and we are shown through scripture God's saints keep the commandments of God and the faith in Jesus Revelation 14:12 so its a good way to test yourself to if one is in the faith so you can be sure we are following the right spirit. Isaiah 8:20

I think that is a good mindset. No one has perfect understanding of the scriptures, as we are all learning from Gods' Word every day. It is only by coming to Jesus through faith and seeking Him through His Word that he can guide us and teach us with His Spirit as shown in the scriptures (John 16:13; John 7:17; John 14:26; 1 John 2:23 etc). I think of the Words of Jesus in John 3:18-21 He that believes on him is not condemned: but he that believes not is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that does evil hates the light, neither comes to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that does truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are worked in God. We should not be afraid to come to Gods' Word to see if what we believe is true or not. Many people according to Jesus will not come to Gods' Word because it will show us if what we believe leads us to do evil or not. Goodness God's Word shows me I am evil every day without Jesus but He also shows my that this is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation that Christ Jesus has come into the world to save sinners of who I am chief!

God bless

Clare73 · Jan 19, 2022

LoveGodsWord said:
See post 771 linked your just repeating yourself again and being non-responsive to the contexts and subject matter of the post you are quoting from. The context and subject matter you are disregarding in Hebrews 7 was provided in in post # 631 linked. You were non-responsive. Here it is again if you do not want to go back to the linked post...
It seems you think that the law mentioned in Hebrews 7 is talking about Gods' 10 commandments? Prove it? I bet you cannot because the chapter context and subject matter is to the laws of the Levitical Priesthood.

So having done nothing but a continual grand run-around, you now want to re-litigate it.

LoveGodsWord said:
Here is the context and subject matter you left out which is the changing of the law of the Levitical Priesthood because Jesus was of the tribe of Judah (only Levites could be Priests under old covenant law)...

Hebrews 7:11-18 [11], If therefore perfection were by
the Levitical priesthood, for under it the people received the law,

And what law did the people receive? . . .the people received the Mosaic law, not the laws for the priesthood.

And what happened to that law which the people received? . . .it was set aside (Hebrews 7:18a).

Which law was set aside? . . .the one that was weak and useless to make anything perfect (Hebrews 7:18b). . .the same law of Romans 8:3 that was powerless, which in Romans 8:3 is the Mosaic law given to the people.

So what law was changed with the change of the priesthood? . . .the law which the priesthood administered to the people (Hebrews 7:11), the law that was given under the priesthood to the people, (Hebrews 7:11), and not the laws of the priesthood.

Please explain the meaning of the parenthetical, "for on the basis of (under) the priesthood, the law was given to the people," being true to its words, context and to apostolic teaching (Hebrews 7:11).

Which request likewise still remains unanswered.

what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? [12], For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. [13],

"The law" being that law which was given to the people (Hebrews 7:11) under the Aaronic priesthood and administered by the Aaronic priesthood; i.e., the Mosaic law, which now must be changed because the new eternal High Priest is given the New Covenant law, rather than the Old Covenant law, to administer to the people of the New Covenant.

So having justified the necessity of changing the law because of the change in the priesthood, Hebrews then goes on to justify the necessity of changing the priesthood, which is the main subject of chapter 7.

For he of whom these things are spoken pertains to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar. [14], For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood. [15], And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there rises another priest, [16], Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life. [17], For he testifies, You are a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec. [18], For there is truly a cancellation of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.

Hebrews 7:28, For the law makes men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, makes the Son, who is consecrated for ever more.

Hebrews 9:9 Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience

The changing of the law in Hebrews 7 is the changing of the law of the Priesthood

Not according to Hebrews 7:11, where the law that was changed was the law that was to the people, not to the priests.

and the old covenant laws for remission of sins and animal sacrifices
not Gods' 10 commandments.

The Aaronic priesthood administered all the law, not just the animal sacrifices. They administered the assemblies of worship, the feasts, the Sabbath law, the laws regarding parents, murder, adultery, theft, false testimony.

Your disregarding chapter context and subject matter

Contrare. . .I am treating it fully.

Chapter context is change of the priesthood, and
subject matter is change of the law given to the people,
and not as you maintain: "the law given to the priests."

as your friend was earlier and reading into the scriptures (eisegesis) what the scriptures do not say or do not teach. Under the Levitical Priesthood the people received the laws for remission of sins through animal sacrifices and sin offerings for blood atonement (see Hebrews 8; Hebrews 9 and Hebrews 10).

And the priests received the "laws for the priesthood" and, as has been clearly demonstrated without refutation, it was the laws for the people that were changed (Hebrews 7:11), not the "laws for the priesthood."

SabbathBlessings · Jan 19, 2022

LoveGodsWord said:
I think that is a good mindset. No one has perfect understanding of the scriptures, as we are all learning from Gods' Word every day. It is only be coming to Jesus through faith and seeking Him through His Word that he can guide us and teach us with His Spirit as shown in the scriptures (John 16:13; John 7:17; John 14:26; 1 John 2:23 etc). I think of the Words of Jesus in John 3:18-21 He that believes on him is not condemned: but he that believes not is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that does evil hates the light, neither comes to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that does truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are worked in God. We should not be afraid to come to Gods' Word to see if what we believe is true or not. Many people according to Jesus will not come to Gods' Word because it will show us if what we believe leads us to do evil or not. Goodness God's Word shows me I am evil every day without Jesus but He also shows my that this is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation that Christ Jesus has come into the world to save sinners of who I am chief!

God bless

Very well stated! This is so important:

LoveGodsWord said:
It is only be coming to Jesus through faith and seeking Him through His Word that he can guide us and teach us with His Spirit as shown in the scriptures (John 16:13; John 7:17; John 14:26; 1 John 2:23 etc)

Seek and ye shall find! I think this is the reason we should not hang our hats on just a few verses of scripture. Those earnestly seeking a relationship with Jesus need to earnestly study the Bible and be led the Spirit. The Spirit will never lead you away from the Word of God or lead you to sin, that does not come from God and it's shocking how many people actually think that living in perpetual sin is okay and that we don't have to obey God.

LoveGodsWord · Jan 19, 2022

Clare73 said:
So having done nothing but a continual grand run-around, you now want to re-litigate it.

And what law did the people receive? . . .the people received the Mosaic law, not the laws for the priesthood.

And what happened to that law which the people received? . . .it was set aside (Hebrews 7:18a).

Which law was set aside? . . .the one that was weak and useless to make anything perfect (Hebrews 7:18b). . .the same law of Romans 8:3 that was powerless, which in Romans 8:3 is the Mosaic law given to the people.

So what law was changed with the change of the priesthood? . . .the law which the priesthood administered to the people (Hebrews 7:11), the law that was given under the priesthood to the people, (Hebrews 7:11), and not the laws of the priesthood.

Please explain the meaning of the parenthetical, "for on the basis of (under) the priesthood, the law was given to the people," being true to its words, context and to apostolic teaching (Hebrews 7:11).

And this request likewise still remains unanswered.

The law being that law which was given to the people under the Aaronic priesthood and administered by the Aaronic priesthood; i.e., the Mosaic law, which now must be changed because the new eternal priesthood is given the New Covenant law, not the Old Covenant law, to administer to the people of the New Covenant.

Having justifed the necessity of changing the law because of the change in the priesthood, Hebrews goes on to justify the necessity of changing the priesthood.

Not according to Hebrews 7:11, where the law that was changed was the law that was to the people, not to the priests.
The Aaronic priesthood administered all the law, not just the animal sacrifices. They administered the assemblies of worship, the feasts, the Sabbath law, the laws regarding parents, murder, adultery, theft, false testimony.

Contrare. . .chapter context is change of the priesthood, and
subject matter is change of the law given to the people,
and not as you maintain: "the law given to the priests."

as your friend was earlier and reading into the scriptures (eisegesis) what the scriptures do not say or do not teach. Under the Levitical Priesthood the people received the laws for remission of sins through animal sacrifices and sin offerings for blood atonement (see Hebrews 8; Hebrews 9 and Hebrews 10)

Hi Clare, thanks for your post but you have not addressed anything in the post you are quoting from. Let's talk more when you have some time to address the context and the subject matter in the post you are quoting from with scripture. If your not able to show why you disagree rather then simply making claims of disagreement then we will of course agree to disagree. Perhaps you can show what it is in the the post you are quoting from that you are in disagreement with and why? Or why don't you prove from the scriptures that Hebrews 7 is talking about Gods' 10 commandments and not the laws of the Levitical Priesthood for which scripture was provided for you in the chapter context that proves this? You have done none of the above here. So until you want to enter into a discussion with me in regards to my rebuttal to you that proves you are disregarding scripture context and subject matter we will have to agree to disagree. Thanks for sharing your view though I do not see in anything you have posted that proves Hebrews 7 subject matter is talking about Gods' 10 commandments. The scripture and chapter context you have disregarded however proves that Hebrews 7 is talking about the laws of the Levitical Priesthood and the laws of remission of sins (animal sacrifices and sin offerings) under the Levitical Priesthood. This is the subject matter of Hebrews 7; Hebrews 8; Hebrews 9 and Hebrews 10 which are all "shadow laws" pointing to Christ as our true High Priest ministering on our behalf in the heavenly Sanctuary that the Lord pitched and not man and to Jesus as Gods 'sacrifice for the sins of the world once and for all (Hebrews 8:1-6; Hebrews 10:10) based on the better promises of the new covenant. Not God's 10 commandments that give us the knowledge of what sin is when broken that Paul calls holy just and good (Romans 3:20; Romans 7:7; 1 John 3:4; Romans 7:12).

Take Care.

LoveGodsWord · Jan 19, 2022

SabbathBlessings said:
Very well stated! This is so important:

Seek and ye shall find! I think this is the reason we should not hang our hats on just a few verses of scripture. Those earnestly seeking a relationship with Jesus need to earnestly study the Bible and be led the Spirit. The Spirit will never lead you away from the Word of God or lead you to sin, that does not come from God and it's shocking how many people actually think that living in perpetual sin is okay and that we don't have to obey God.

I like the words of Jesus in Matthew 4:4 which is good advice. (Jesus is actually quoting old covenant scripture from Deuteronomy 8:3)

Clare73 · Jan 19, 2022

LoveGodsWord said:
Hi Clare, thanks for your post but you have not addressed anything in the post you are quoting from.

More grand run-around.

Contrare. . .pay attention. . .I addressed your whole post,
after addressing your specific exegesis regarding "the law given to the priesthood,"
and then exegeting the rest of passage you quoted, demonstrating it is the law given to the people in Hebrews 7.

It now falls to you to demonstrate, not just assert, the specific Biblical error in my exegesis.

LoveGodsWord · Jan 19, 2022

Clare73 said:
I've exegeted the passage under discussion in Hebrews 7.It now falls to you to demonstrate, not just assert, the specific Biblical error in my exegesis.

I am sorry Clare, I do not believe you have exegeted anything or addressed anything in the post you are responding to. I believe I have already proven why by showing scripture context and subject matter you have disregarded in post # 775 that proves that Hebrews 7 is talking about the laws of the Levitical Priesthood and the laws of remission of sins through animal sacrifice and blood atonement not God's 10 commandments like your claiming. Please see also post # 789 that might be helpful to progress the discussion further if you wish to continue. Until then it is probably best if we agree to disagree and remain friendly here. Thanks for your time in sharing your thoughts though but I do not see that anything that you have provided in your posts prove Hebrews 7 subject matter is God's 10 commandments that give us the knowledge of what sin is in the new covenant *Romans 3:20; Romans 7:7; 1 John 3:4 that lead us to Christ that we might be forgiven through faith *Galatians 3:22-25.

Take Care.

Clare73 · Jan 19, 2022

LoveGodsWord said:
I am sorry Clare, I do not believe you have exegeted anything

More grand run-around. . .

It's not about what you "believe," it's about what you can demonstrate. . .and so far that is nothing... nada. . .zip. . .zilch.

So the Biblical refutation of your argument stands until you specifically demonstrate its error.

LoveGodsWord · Jan 19, 2022

Clare73 said:
More grand run-around. . .

It's not about what you "believe," it's about what you can demonstrate. . .and so far that is nothing... nada. . .zip. . .zilch.

So the Biblical refutation of your argument stands until you specifically demonstrate its error.

Of course you are free to believe as you wish. I prefer what the scriptures actually say. I think I will give you the last say as I think you need it more than I do.

Clare73 · Jan 19, 2022

LoveGodsWord said:
Of course you are free to believe as you wish. I prefer what the scriptures actually say. I think
I will give you the last say as I think you need it more than I do.

Denying my request (five times within 25 posts), in the inability to specifically demonstrate any error in the exegesis below, you've decided to bow out rather than respond to my request.

We'll see how long that lasts.

And so it concludes now in the continued grand run-around in lieu of demonstrating any error in the argument, following:

LoveGodsWord said:
It seems you think that the law mentioned in Hebrews 7 is talking about Gods' 10 commandments? Prove it? I bet you cannot because the chapter context and subject matter is to the laws of the Levitical Priesthood.

The continual grand run-around doesn't work, so now you want to re-litigate it.

Here is the context and subject matter you left out which is the changing of the law of the Levitical Priesthood because Jesus was of the tribe of Judah (only Levites could be Priests under old covenant law):

Hebrews 7:11-18 [11], If therefore perfection were by
the Levitical priesthood, for under it the people received the law,

And what law did the people receive? . . .the people received the Mosaic law, not the laws for the priesthood.

And what happened to that law which the people received? . . .it was set aside (Hebrews 7:18a).

Which law was set aside? . . .the one that was weak and useless to make anything perfect (Hebrews 7:18b). . .the same law of Romans 8:3 that was powerless, which in Romans 8:3 is the Mosaic law given to the people.

So what law was changed with the change of the priesthood? . . .the law which the priesthood administered to the people (Hebrews 7:11), the law that was given under the priesthood to the people, (Hebrews 7:11), and not the laws of the priesthood.

Please explain the meaning of the parenthetical, "for on the basis of (under) the priesthood, the law was given to the people," being true to its words, context and to apostolic teaching (Hebrews 7:11).

Which request likewise still remains unanswered.

what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? [12], For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. [13],

"The law" being that law which was given to the people (Hebrews 7:11) under the Aaronic priesthood and administered by the Aaronic priesthood; i.e., the Mosaic law, which now must be changed because the new eternal High Priest is given the New Covenant law, rather than the Old Covenant law, to administer to the people of the New Covenant.

So having justified the necessity of changing the law because of the change in the priesthood, Hebrews then goes on to justify the necessity of changing the priesthood, which is the main subject of chapter 7.

For he of whom these things are spoken pertains to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar. [14], For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood. [15], And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there rises another priest, [16], Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life. [17], For he testifies, You are a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec. [18], For there is truly a cancellation of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.

Hebrews 7:28, For the law makes men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, makes the Son, who is consecrated for ever more.

Hebrews 9:9 Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience

The changing of the law in Hebrews 7 is the changing of the law of the Priesthood

Not according to Hebrews 7:11, where the law that was changed was the law that was to the people, not to the priests.

and the old covenant laws for remission of sins and animal sacrifices not Gods' 10 commandments.

The Aaronic priesthood administered all the law, not just the animal sacrifices. They administered the assemblies of worship, the feasts, the Sabbath law, the laws regarding parents, murder, adultery, theft, false testimony.

Your disregarding chapter context and subject matter

Contrare. . .I am treating it fully.

Chapter context is change of the priesthood, and
subject matter is change of the law given to the people,
and not as you maintain: "the law given to the priests."

as your friend was earlier and reading into the scriptures (eisegesis) what the scriptures do not say or do not teach. Under the Levitical Priesthood the people received the laws for remission of sins through animal sacrifices and sin offerings for blood atonement (see Hebrews 8; Hebrews 9 and Hebrews 10).

While the priests received the "laws for the priesthood" and, as has been clearly demonstrated without refutation, it was the laws for the people that were changed (Hebrews 7:11), not the "laws for the priesthood."

LoveGodsWord · Jan 19, 2022

delete

LoveGodsWord · Jan 19, 2022

LoveGodsWord said:
And what law did the people receive? . . .the people received the Mosaic law, not the laws for the priesthood.

And what happened to that law which the people received? . . .it was set aside (Hebrews 7:18a).

Which law was set aside? . . .the one that was weak and useless to make anything perfect (Hebrews 7:18b). . .the same law of Romans 8:3 that was powerless, which in Romans 8:3 is the Mosaic law given to the people.

So what law was changed with the change of the priesthood? . . .the law which the priesthood administered to the people (Hebrews 7:11), the law that was given under the priesthood to the people, (Hebrews 7:11), and not the laws of the priesthood.

Please explain the meaning of the parenthetical, "for on the basis of (under) the priesthood, the law was given to the people," being true to its words, context and to apostolic teaching (Hebrews 7:11).

Which request likewise still remains unanswered.

"The law" being that law which was given to the people (Hebrews 7:11) under the Aaronic priesthood and administered by the Aaronic priesthood; i.e., the Mosaic law, which now must be changed because the new eternal High Priest is given the New Covenant law, not the Old Covenant law, to administer to the people of the New Covenant.

So having justified the necessity of changing the law because of the change in the priesthood, Hebrews then goes on to justify the necessity of changing the priesthood, which is the main subject of chapter 7.

Not according to Hebrews 7:11, where the law that was changed was the law that was to the people, not to the priests.
The Aaronic priesthood administered all the law, not just the animal sacrifices. They administered the assemblies of worship, the feasts, the Sabbath law, the laws regarding parents, murder, adultery, theft, false testimony.

Contrare. . .I am treating it fully.

Chapter context is change of the priesthood, and
subject matter is change of the law given to the people,
and not as you maintain: "the law given to the priests."
While the priests received the "laws for the priesthood," and as has been clearly demonstrated, it was the laws for the people that were changed (Hebrews 7:11), not the "laws for the priesthood.

Spamming repetition does not really help your cause here. I think that is also against the forum rules. So I would respectfully like to ask that you stop doing this. Do you have anything to share in regards to the OP? As posted earlier you may want to consider the response provided to you in post # 775 that proves that Hebrews 7 is talking about the laws of the Levitical Priesthood and the laws of remission of sins through animal sacrifice and blood atonement not God's 10 commandments like your claiming. Please see also post # 789 that might be helpful to progress the discussion further if you wish to continue. I do not believe you have addressed anything in the post you are quoting from. Let's talk more when you have some time to address the context and the subject matter in the post you are quoting from with scripture. Perhaps you can show what it is in the the post you are quoting from that you are in disagreement with and why? Or why don't you prove from the scriptures that Hebrews 7 is talking about Gods' 10 commandments and not the laws of the Levitical Priesthood for which scripture was provided for you in the chapter context that proves this?

Take Care

FreeGrace2 · Jan 19, 2022

LoveGodsWord said:
Then your challenge is to prove your claims and accusations.

Did.

Something that you seem to be unwilling to engage in when asked.

I've answered all your questions.

All I am hearing here is denial rinse and repeat while making claims and accusations you have not been able to prove.

This sentence fits you to a T.

LoveGodsWord · Jan 19, 2022

FreeGrace2 said:
Did.

I've answered all your questions.

This sentence fits you to a T.

Sorry I do not believe you. So we will agree to disagree.

Take Care.

FreeGrace2 · Jan 19, 2022

SabbathBlessings said:
When I am in error, I don't mind being corrected so it's not about that. I just don't think its a good idea to make a gospel out of two scriptures

This is what you seem not to understand. I haven't done that. What I have done is give you the 2 VERY BEST and MOST CLEAR verses that prove eternal security.

The reason I corrected your error about Jn 10:27 is that you were basing an important doctrine on a FAULTY understanding of that verse, which has led you into FALSE doctrine.

when there is the whole Bible that is God's Word, not just 2 verses out of context.

Out of context, huh? Prove it. Address the verses, apply exegesis and show how I've taken anything out of context.

Rather, I have simply AGREED with the 2 verses and what they say.

So, please do this: I will explain each verse in 1 sentence. Then you address my explanation and prove from the verses themselves, plus whatever context you think you need, that I have taken anything out of context.

If you believe you can sin willingly without repenting and still be saved, you are free to believe whatever you wish, I prefer to believe in the scriptures which clearly tells us that is not the case.

Your claim here shows clearly that you believe that committing sin will remove salvation. Well, it that were true, please pick out the very best and most clear verse that actually says this. So far, all you've got are verses that you imagine mean that. But NONE of them say that.

Matthew 4:17, Hebrews 10:26. We are saved by grace (God's gift) through our faith, but we are judged by our actions

Of course this is true, but what is NOT TRUE is your presumption that our actions can lead to loss of salvation. And you haven't proven it with very clear verses.

WHY SALVATION CAN BE LOST

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Blood-bought

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Blood-bought

Well-Known Member

Blood-bought

Well-Known Member

Blood-bought

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency