PDA

View Full Version : NOSAS/OSAS...Just a request for Clarity...



xIRoyal KnightIx
Mar 20th 2018, 10:06 PM
What does NOSAS/OSAS stand for?

It looks like an abbreviation.

I think OSAS is "Once Saved Always Saved" but I'm not sure and I haven't the slightest clue what NOSAS would be.

BrianW
Mar 20th 2018, 10:20 PM
You are correct in that they are abbreviations.

Once Saved Always Saved

Not Once Saved Always Saved.

The many replies you'll get to this thread over which is right and true is going to make your head spin. Buckle up brother, it's going to be a bumpy ride!

Athanasius
Mar 20th 2018, 10:23 PM
If you don't know then you're NOSAS. If you were OSAS you would know.

Go!!!

xIRoyal KnightIx
Mar 20th 2018, 11:00 PM
If you don't know then you're NOSAS. If you were OSAS you would know.

Go!!!

You mean there's a gray area for this subject?

ChangedByHim
Mar 20th 2018, 11:06 PM
You are correct in that they are abbreviations.

Once Saved Always Saved

Not Once Saved Always Saved.

The many replies you'll get to this thread over which is right and true is going to make your head spin. Buckle up brother, it's going to be a bumpy ride!
Technically there shouldn't be too much debate since this is posted in Christian Fellowship and not Bible Chat.

Old man
Mar 20th 2018, 11:11 PM
Technically there shouldn't be too much debate since this is posted in Christian Fellowship and not Bible Chat.

Not anymore.

I'm moving this to BC.

Then I'll run and get some popcorn. It's been awhile and I've been wondering when this topic would pop up again.

ChangedByHim
Mar 20th 2018, 11:12 PM
Not anymore.

I'm moving this to BC.

Then I'll run and get some popcorn. It's been awhile and I've been wondering when this topic would pop up again.

Been awhile? LOL.............

Old man
Mar 20th 2018, 11:14 PM
You mean there's a gray area for this subject?

Not really.

You either believe that you can't lose your salvation (OSAS) or you believe you can (NOSAS).

ChangedByHim
Mar 20th 2018, 11:20 PM
Not really.

You either believe that you can't lose your salvation (OSAS) or you believe you can (NOSAS).

What if you believe that you can't lose it but you can take it back for a refund?

xIRoyal KnightIx
Mar 20th 2018, 11:28 PM
Not anymore.

I'm moving this to BC.

Then I'll run and get some popcorn. It's been awhile and I've been wondering when this topic would pop up again.

ROFL...~grabs my own popcorn and sits back to enjoy the show~

TBH...I just needed to know what the letters stood for.

Wasn't really wanting to debate the dirty laundry and who is who about it but since it was moved to bible chat...i might as well watch it all unfold.

hehehe...might be quite interesting :)

randyk
Mar 21st 2018, 05:18 AM
Just ask yourself, Can you be unborn again? ;)

Old man
Mar 21st 2018, 02:23 PM
Just ask yourself, Can you be unborn again? ;)

You know it’s easy to post positions based on some form of what we think is a logical thought process. And many will argue the fallacies of our thought process. The end result is an argument (I mean discussion) based on emotionally driven positions based on what we want (or hope) to be true.

But it all comes down to scripture. What would really help to convince people is actual scripture that you believe supports your position (scripture that is in context). It is scripture that determines what is right or not.

I don’t want to be rude but … if I want to know the truth and the truth comes from scripture but you won’t put forth scripture to support or prove your position then there is no reason to pay attention to what you say … Is there? :hmm:

Start by posting one scriptural passage that you believe support your position then explain why it does.

And please try to keep it short. ;)

Old man
Mar 21st 2018, 02:30 PM
What if you believe that you can't lose it but you can take it back for a refund?

I agree the phrase "lose it" would not be the best description for the dynamics of what happens along with the why and how.

ChristianCoffee
Mar 21st 2018, 03:34 PM
I feel that this is one of the greatest debates to watch on this board, until we get 10 or so pages in and people lose focus. I will start the discussion with this set of verses from John, then sit back, get some coffee, and see what happens.

John 3: 15-18 Shows we do not lose out Salvation.

“The Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life. For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.”

ChangedByHim
Mar 21st 2018, 03:56 PM
I agree the phrase "lose it" would not be the best description for the dynamics of what happens along with the why and how.
Yes there is a vast doctrinal difference between "losing" one's salvation and willfully renouncing it. I do not believe that one can "lose" his/her salvation, but I do believe that man retains free will and may renounce it. This would be a very uncommon scenario (IMO).

ChangedByHim
Mar 21st 2018, 03:58 PM
Just ask yourself, Can you be unborn again? ;)

According to Jude, yes.

Jude 1:12 These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots

bluesky22
Mar 21st 2018, 04:38 PM
I am sure this has been posted before but I will throw it up. The Italic the prerequisite, the bold the surety.

25 Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The works I do in my Father’s name testify about me, 26 but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all[c]; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one.”

Old man
Mar 21st 2018, 04:38 PM
I feel that this is one of the greatest debates to watch on this board, until we get 10 or so pages in and people lose focus. I will start the discussion with this set of verses from John, then sit back, get some coffee, and see what happens.

John 3: 15-18 Shows we do not lose out Salvation.

“The Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life. For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.”

Would you say this is a one time event or a continuous requirement. All you have to do is believe once and it's good for the rest of your life? Or is it a continual believing in Christ for all your life span (an enduring to the end)? What happens if you don't continually believe in Christ?

How does that belief manifest? Or is it enough to just believe in the gray matter (cranial region)?

Does this verse even answer these questions or is it a little more complicated than that and need other scriptures to add supplemental support?

Slug1
Mar 21st 2018, 05:02 PM
Would you say this is a one time event or a continuous requirement. All you have to do is believe once and it's good for the rest of your life? Or is it a continual believing in Christ for all your life span (an enduring to the end)? What happens if you don't continually believe in Christ?

How does that belief manifest? Or is it enough to just believe in the gray matter (cranial region)?

Does this verse even answer these questions or is it a little more complicated than that and need other scriptures to add supplemental support?I would submit that John 15, Jesus' lesson that a believer must continue to "abide" after belief... answers your question :)

Old man
Mar 21st 2018, 05:08 PM
I am sure this has been posted before but I will throw it up. The Italic the prerequisite, the bold the surety.

25 Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The works I do in my Father’s name testify about me, 26 but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all[c]; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one.”

The context of this passage is regarding what outside influences (i.e. Pharisees, persecution etc.) can do to us. Paul (Rom 8) echoes what Jesus said here when he writes that nothing can separate us from the love of God which is in Christ. It is an encouragement for those who are seeking the steadfastness of God’s love for them. It will never change.

But notice everything Paul lists as circumstances are external influences. None of it mentions or indicates what we as ones in His hand can do on our own initiative.

Look at the word snatch. It literally refers to a violent snatching away. A kidnapping of sorts. It can only be applied to those who could do it. It can not be applied to one who has no possibility of making it a reality.

Imagine yourself sitting in a chair. Try to legitimately push or pull yourself out of the chair. It cant be done. Laws of physics won’t allow you to do it just as they would not allow you to lift yourself up in the air with out the aid of an outside influence. But get a group of people around you and they will soon have you out of the chair. The word snatch can not apply to you but can apply to those around you who have a possibility of success in their attempt

Because there is no way for you to accomplish the action the threat of being “snatched away” cannot be applied to you as one in His hand. It can only be applied to those on the outside who can make a legitimate attempt to snatch you away through persecution or threats or actual physical harm being done. Jesus is saying that those who are in is hand are safe from any of this being able to change His opinion of us and our position in Him.

Yet it doesn’t cover what we in His hand can do. This passage simply doesn’t cover that topic just what others can do or attempt to do.

I hope I’ve explained myself in a way that makes sense.

bluesky22
Mar 21st 2018, 05:15 PM
The context of this passage is regarding what outside influences (i.e. Pharisees, persecution etc.) can do to us. Paul (Rom 8) echoes what Jesus said here when he writes that nothing can separate us from the love of God which is in Christ. It is an encouragement for those who are seeking the steadfastness of God’s love for them. It will never change.

But notice everything Paul lists as circumstances are external influences. None of it mentions or indicates what we as ones in His hand can do on our own initiative.

Look at the word snatch. It literally refers to a violent snatching away. A kidnapping of sorts. It can only be applied to those who could do it. It can not be applied to one who has no possibility of making it a reality.

Imagine yourself sitting in a chair. Try to legitimately push or pull yourself out of the chair. It cant be done. Laws of physics won’t allow you to do it just as they would not allow you to lift yourself up in the air with out the aid of an outside influence. But get a group of people around you and they will soon have you out of the chair. The word snatch can not apply to you but can apply to those around you who have a possibility of success in their attempt

Because there is no way for you to accomplish the action the threat of being “snatched away” cannot be applied to you as one in His hand. It can only be applied to those on the outside who can make a legitimate attempt to snatch you away through persecution or threats or actual physical harm being done. Jesus is saying that those who are in is hand are safe from any of this being able to change His opinion of us and our position in Him.

Yet it doesn’t cover what we in His hand can do. This passage simply doesn’t cover that topic just what others can do or attempt to do.

I hope I’ve explained myself in a way that makes sense.


Makes sense to me. Thank you. :)

TrustGzus
Mar 21st 2018, 06:03 PM
Bluesky brings up a passage that is about as rock solid as it gets. Jesus can’t get much clearer.

27 “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me;
28 and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand.
29 “My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.

Jesus says it four different ways:

1) I give them eternal life.
2) They will never perish.
3) No one will snatch them out of my hand.
4) No one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.

Even if 3-4 were to apply to external sources, 1-2 are applicable to every kind of source.

Jesus gives his sheep eternal life and they will never perish.

I’m not sure why many ignore the meaning of eternal and change it to a quality of life rather than a quantity. And interpret “never perish”. If they perish, they were never his sheep because his sheep never perish.

That’s why Jesus can say in Matthew 7:23 I never knew you.

How much clearer can Jesus be? What would you like him to say to convince you, whoever does not agree?

Slug1
Mar 21st 2018, 06:56 PM
Bluesky brings up a passage that is about as rock solid as it gets. Jesus can’t get much clearer.

27 “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me;
28 and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand.
29 “My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.

Jesus says it four different ways:

1) I give them eternal life.
2) They will never perish.
3) No one will snatch them out of my hand.
4) No one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.

Even if 3-4 were to apply to external sources, 1-2 are applicable to every kind of source.

Jesus gives his sheep eternal life and they will never perish.

I’m not sure why many ignore the meaning of eternal and change it to a quality of life rather than a quantity. And interpret “never perish”. If they perish, they were never his sheep because his sheep never perish.

That’s why Jesus can say in Matthew 7:23 I never knew you.

How much clearer can Jesus be? What would you like him to say to convince you, whoever does not agree?If points 1-4 are always correct, then there would be no warnings in the Bible concerning abiding (a need to), falling away (and to turn from error), apostasy (those OF the faith, falling away to error), etc.

But there are these many warnings :hmm:

TrustGzus
Mar 21st 2018, 07:16 PM
If points 1-4 are always correct, then there would be no warnings in the Bible concerning abiding (a need to), falling away (and to turn from error), apostasy (those OF the faith, falling away to error), etc.

But there are these many warnings :hmm:

I have a suggestion but before I go there, can’t your question just be flopped?

Jesus is always correct, isn't he?

So since points 1-4 are:

1) verbatim from the Bible (the very literal NASB)
2) from the mouth of Jesus
3) who is the truth (John 14:6)
4) and who cannot lie (Titus 1:2; Hebrews 6:18; Numbers 23:19)
5) then they are always true.

Either you misunderstand the point of the warnings or if you have that correct, how does one interpret those four phrases Jesus used in John 10:28-29 and the “never” in Matthew 7:23 without mutilating the actual normal definition of those words?

ProDeo
Mar 21st 2018, 07:25 PM
You are correct in that they are abbreviations.

Once Saved Always Saved

Not Once Saved Always Saved.

The many replies you'll get to this thread over which is right and true is going to make your head spin. Buckle up brother, it's going to be a bumpy ride!
What about a 3th one.

OSAR - only sure at resurrection.

:D

Athanasius
Mar 21st 2018, 07:39 PM
Bluesky brings up a passage that is about as rock solid as it gets. Jesus can’t get much clearer.

27 “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me;
28 and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand.
29 “My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.

Jesus says it four different ways:

1) I give them eternal life.
2) They will never perish.
3) No one will snatch them out of my hand.
4) No one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.

Even if 3-4 were to apply to external sources, 1-2 are applicable to every kind of source.

Jesus gives his sheep eternal life and they will never perish.

I’m not sure why many ignore the meaning of eternal and change it to a quality of life rather than a quantity. And interpret “never perish”. If they perish, they were never his sheep because his sheep never perish.

That’s why Jesus can say in Matthew 7:23 I never knew you.

How much clearer can Jesus be? What would you like him to say to convince you, whoever does not agree?

Are they able to snatch themselves?

ChangedByHim
Mar 21st 2018, 07:44 PM
If one chooses to walk away from Christ then there is no snatching involved. Of course, Calvinists don't believe that man has a choice either way.

GraceX2
Mar 21st 2018, 08:00 PM
In the humblest of opinions, I believe that one honors God and one honors man!

Slug1
Mar 21st 2018, 08:05 PM
I have a suggestion but before I go there, can’t your question just be flopped?

Jesus is always correct, isn't he?

So since points 1-4 are:

1) verbatim from the Bible (the very literal NASB)
2) from the mouth of Jesus
3) who is the truth (John 14:6)
4) and who cannot lie (Titus 1:2; Hebrews 6:18; Numbers 23:19)
5) then they are always true.

Either you misunderstand the point of the warnings or if you have that correct, how does one interpret those four phrases Jesus used in John 10:28-29 and the “never” in Matthew 7:23 without mutilating the actual normal definition of those words?Because in the context of said warnings and I can add all the one's where Paul teaches about running the race TO the end, and to NOT stop enduring (or TO persevere)... those who finish, never perish (as you point out).

The warnings concern the outcome if one does NOT endure/abide to the end and those warnings, thus... are necessary to inform us what happens to those who have begun the race, but decide to stop running/enduring.

What you point out concern the outcome of those who DO endure/abide.

Old man
Mar 21st 2018, 08:11 PM
… That’s why Jesus can say in Matthew 7:23 I never knew you.

They were never His sheep to begin with, so they were never in a position to “lose” it. And that is what this discussion is about whether one who is in the position of being one of His sheep can lose that position. Can’t apply to those who never were. Jesus Himself said “I never knew you.”


Jesus is always correct, isn't he?

So since points 1-4 are:

1) verbatim from the Bible (the very literal NASB)
2) from the mouth of Jesus
3) who is the truth (John 14:6)
4) and who cannot lie (Titus 1:2; Hebrews 6:18; Numbers 23:19)
5) then they are always true.

Either you misunderstand the point of the warnings or if you have that correct, how does one interpret those four phrases Jesus used in John 10:28-29 and the “never” in Matthew 7:23 without mutilating the actual normal definition of those words?

The NASB is not as literal as many of us would like to think. There are places where the translators have opted for words based on their understanding of the context (not necessarily correct) not the literal word. In doing so have changed the context of the passage from what the real literal word would have shown.

The other 4 points are not being disputed. What is disputed is our interpretation and application of what He said. It goes beyond simply quoting His words. His words must also be interpreted within the context of the passage they were spoken in. That’s where we’re at now. Does the context of the passages He spoke those words support the idea that one cannot lose they standing with Him on their own initiative? Since there is disagreement about this it’s apparently not as clear cut as we would like to think.

Kalahari
Mar 21st 2018, 08:13 PM
Because in the context of said warnings and I can add all the one's where Paul teaches about running the race TO the end, and to NOT stop enduring (or TO persevere)... those who finish, never perish (as you point out).

The warnings concern the outcome if one does NOT endure/abide to the end and those warnings, thus... are necessary to inform us what happens to those who have begun the race, but decide to stop running/enduring.

What you point out concern the outcome of those who DO endure/abide.

Without going back to those teachings of Paul regarding enduring to the end and replying from memory, was the context salvation or ministry? I believe it was the last.

TrustGzus
Mar 21st 2018, 08:25 PM
Are they able to snatch themselves?

Old man propses the snatching is external. Let’s propose it’s internal. Can we snatch ourselves?

I am someone.
Jesus no one can snatch us.
Therefore, I am part of “no one” and cannot snatch myself.

But as I said, clauses 1-2 address it well.

Jesus said his sheep will never perish.
John Doe perished.
Therefore....?

Slug1
Mar 21st 2018, 08:28 PM
Without going back to those teachings of Paul regarding enduring to the end and replying from memory, was the context salvation or ministry? I believe it was the last.Ministry and salvation are elements of the scriptural warning(s).

They are about (keeping) "faith"... and how by keeping the faith, one can endure persecution while doing ministry. Stop abiding (evidence of walking away from the faith)... you won't endure to the end. This is where salvation enters the equation.

TrustGzus
Mar 21st 2018, 08:29 PM
If one chooses to walk away from Christ then there is no snatching involved. Of course, Calvinists don't believe that man has a choice either way.

I know you think that. I read educated Calvinists every day. That’s not accuate. But we can volley that ball back and forth to the second coming.

Kalahari
Mar 21st 2018, 08:34 PM
I believe any one can loose faith if it was your faith. If it was as I believe Scripture teaches faith in and through Christ then it is Christ who gives the assurance of endurance and not the promise of man which means nothing.

TrustGzus
Mar 21st 2018, 08:35 PM
They were never His sheep to begin with, so they were never in a position to “lose” it. And that is what this discussion is about whether one who is in the position of being one of His sheep can lose that position. Can’t apply to those who never were. Jesus Himself said “I never knew you.”



The NASB is not as literal as many of us would like to think. There are places where the translators have opted for words based on their understanding of the context (not necessarily correct) not the literal word. In doing so have changed the context of the passage from what the real literal word would have shown.

The other 4 points are not being disputed. What is disputed is our interpretation and application of what He said. It goes beyond simply quoting His words. His words must also be interpreted within the context of the passage they were spoken in. That’s where we’re at now. Does the context of the passages He spoke those words support the idea that one cannot lose they standing with Him on their own initiative? Since there is disagreement about this it’s apparently not as clear cut as we would like to think.

Your repsonse to Matthew 7 is more universal I believe. There is no one Jesus knew, then didn’t know. But on to John 10....

The comments about lack of literalness aren't relevent to John 10. Not only NASB, but pick a translation: they say the same here.

Old man, eternal life, not conditional, not 5-year, not 10-year, not 30-year....eternal.

Never perish.

Old Man is Jesus’ sheep.
Jesus’ sheep will never perish.
Therefore, Old Man will never perish.

If you perish, either Jesus was wrong or you weren’t his sheep.

Provide a viable alternate interpretation without mutilating that text.

And also, please tell me, what words would Jesus have had to have said to convince you?

Old man
Mar 21st 2018, 08:51 PM
Old man propses the snatching is external. Let’s propose it’s internal. Can we snatch ourselves?

I am someone.
Jesus no one can snatch us.
Therefore, I am part of “no one” and cannot snatch myself.

But as I said, clauses 1-2 address it well.

Jesus said his sheep will never perish.
John Doe perished.
Therefore....?

The snatching away can only be applied to those outside looking in. To those who Jesus warned His disciple about would hate them because of His name. Those who would try to make the recant their faith in Christ.

As to the phrase “no one”, it has limits. It only refers to those within the context of the passage. In this case the phrase “no one" only applies to those who could be a threat His followers. Can only be applied within the limits of context. The context of this passage is about protecting His sheep from those who would seek in to steal, kill and destroy John 1:1-14. These are the no ones He is talking about.

The phrase “no one” has limitations to how far it can be applied and it is context that determines that limitation.

bluesky22
Mar 21st 2018, 09:42 PM
Old man propses the snatching is external. Let’s propose it’s internal. Can we snatch ourselves?

I am someone.
Jesus no one can snatch us.
Therefore, I am part of “no one” and cannot snatch myself.

But as I said, clauses 1-2 address it well.

Jesus said his sheep will never perish.
John Doe perished.
Therefore....?

I was thinking the very same thing today.

Can Jesus save us from ourselfves ?

Seems to me this is the whole point.

ChangedByHim
Mar 21st 2018, 09:48 PM
I know you think that. I read educated Calvinists every day. That’s not accuate. But we can volley that ball back and forth to the second coming.
I'm just going off of what Calvin himself taught. I can't say what every person who adheres to his teachings actually believe.

Old man
Mar 21st 2018, 10:18 PM
Your response to Matthew 7 is more universal I believe. There is no one Jesus knew, then didn’t know. But on to John 10....

The context of Matt 7 is regarding those false prophets and those doing miracles in His name yet had no relationship with Him. They trusted the idea that doing the things of God means having a relationship with Him. The word “know” (ginōskō) in this case is the word for a growing relationship type of knowing.

There is another word for “know” (oida) that is more empirical knowledge type of knowing.

I agree that Jesus oida everyone, but He does not ginosko every one. In this case Jesus oida those false prophets but He never ginosko them. Which means they were never His to begin with and don’t fall into the context of OSAS / NOSAS.


The comments about lack of literalness aren't relevent to John 10. Not only NASB, but pick a translation: they say the same here.

You’re the one who listed it as the literal nature of the NASB being supportive of you position. You listed at the No. 1 spot. The fact is the NASB is not a literal translation and shouldn’t be trusted as such.


Old man, eternal life, not conditional, not 5-year, not 10-year, not 30-year....eternal.

It’s conditional upon repentance. It’s conditional upon enduring to the end.

Matt 24:9-13 “Then they will deliver you to tribulation, and will kill you, and you will be hated by all nations because of My name. At that time many will fall away and will betray one another and hate one another. Many false prophets will arise and will mislead many. Because lawlessness is increased, most people's love will grow cold. But the one who endures to the end, he will be saved.”


Old Man is Jesus’ sheep.
Jesus’ sheep will never perish.
Therefore, Old Man will never perish.

I’m His sheep because I continue to repent, endure and overcome.


If you perish, either Jesus was wrong or you weren’t his sheep.

Or I was His sheep and I gave up and stopped enduring to the end. ;)


Provide a viable alternate interpretation without mutilating that text.

LOL, mutilation is in the eye of the beholder. One could say you are mutilating the passage by not abiding within the context of the passage in order to hold to your position. But it goes both ways. You can say I am doing the same thing because what I am saying does not fit your method of biblical analysis.

So does it comes down to who ever first says “The Holy Spirit was sent to guide us into all truth, and what He has guided me into concerning this topic is therefore the truth.”?

There … I said it first so I win. :pp

Old man
Mar 21st 2018, 10:22 PM
... Can Jesus save us from ourselfves ? ...

Not if we don't want Him to or let Him. It is still our choice.

Kalahari
Mar 21st 2018, 10:26 PM
Not if we don't want Him to or let Him. It is still our choice.

So He is not God of all? :B

He is no King with authority, only man. :giveup:

Athanasius
Mar 21st 2018, 10:39 PM
Jesus said his sheep will never perish.
John Doe perished.
Therefore....?

Therefore John Doe wasn't a sheep, though this doesn't demonstrate on its own that John was never a sheep.


Old man propses the snatching is external. Let’s propose it’s internal. Can we snatch ourselves?

I am someone.
Jesus no one can snatch us.
Therefore, I am part of “no one” and cannot snatch myself.
That's what this bit is for, but it doesn't fit with the context. Jesus means someone else, not the person themselves (i.e it doesn't say, 'they will not leave me, and no one can snatch them').

Athanasius
Mar 21st 2018, 10:42 PM
So He is not God of all? :B

He is no King with authority, only man. :giveup:

It's no wonder these discussions are so difficult

bluesky22
Mar 21st 2018, 10:53 PM
Jesus means someone else, not the person themselves (i.e it doesn't say, 'they will not leave me, and no one can snatch them').

Interesting point.

Slug1
Mar 21st 2018, 11:30 PM
I believe any one can loose faith if it was your faith. If it was as I believe Scripture teaches faith in and through Christ then it is Christ who gives the assurance of endurance and not the promise of man which means nothing.In any of the scriptural warnings about people falling away from faith or better known as "apostasy", those scriptures are not about people falling away from "their" faith... the warnings are about those IN the faith with God, falling away. No one can apostatize if they are not "in" the faith first with God. When a person is not in the faith, or how you put it, "loose faith if it was your faith"... such a person cannot be one who we are warned about as becoming apostate.

Only a person who is part of the Body, can become apostate. One has to "be" a part of something to also be ABLE to fall away from that something. The apostasy warnings are about those who are a "part" of the Body... only they can fall away from "faith" concerning those warnings.

ProDeo
Mar 22nd 2018, 12:02 AM
Coming back on my half-joke-half-serious OSAR post #25, there are Christians who believe that pointing to Paul's running the race in 1 Cor 9:24-27 him ending with - lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified, meaning even Paul wasn't sure. Or he must has been speaking in hyperbole.

Kalahari
Mar 22nd 2018, 07:38 AM
In any of the scriptural warnings about people falling away from faith or better known as "apostasy", those scriptures are not about people falling away from "their" faith... the warnings are about those IN the faith with God, falling away. No one can apostatize if they are not "in" the faith first with God. When a person is not in the faith, or how you put it, "loose faith if it was your faith"... such a person cannot be one who we are warned about as becoming apostate.

Only a person who is part of the Body, can become apostate. One has to "be" a part of something to also be ABLE to fall away from that something. The apostasy warnings are about those who are a "part" of the Body... only they can fall away from "faith" concerning those warnings.

The reason why I do not agree with you is that many people believe they are in faith and are part of the Church, but are not. They are the people who can and will apostatized as prophesied. People who truely have faith are those who have received the faith given by God, not the faith they brought to God. They are the elect of God who will never perish. Scripture warns them to not be part of those falling away and to not be deceived in thinking they are part of them (and by God's power they will not). As many of Israel were lost and only a remnant was found to be true believers, so it will be with the Church also, wheat and tares.

Kalahari
Mar 22nd 2018, 07:41 AM
Coming back on my half-joke-half-serious OSAR post #25, there are Christians who believe that pointing to Paul's running the race in 1 Cor 9:24-27 him ending with - lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified, meaning even Paul wasn't sure. Or he must has been speaking in hyperbole.

He did not want to be disqualified to bring the Gospel to all. For him preaching the Gospel was not a choice, but it was committed to him and he was doing anything and forgoing anything to be not founded wanting by men.

randyk
Mar 22nd 2018, 08:07 AM
You know it’s easy to post positions based on some form of what we think is a logical thought process. And many will argue the fallacies of our thought process. The end result is an argument (I mean discussion) based on emotionally driven positions based on what we want (or hope) to be true.

But it all comes down to scripture. What would really help to convince people is actual scripture that you believe supports your position (scripture that is in context). It is scripture that determines what is right or not.

I don’t want to be rude but … if I want to know the truth and the truth comes from scripture but you won’t put forth scripture to support or prove your position then there is no reason to pay attention to what you say … Is there? :hmm:

Start by posting one scriptural passage that you believe support your position then explain why it does.

And please try to keep it short. ;)

I was being sort of "tongue in cheek." It was designed to provoke a start to the discussion. See the smiley: ;)

In reality, my belief in Predestination is based on a perspective I developed after listening to Walter Martin's Bible Answerman program many years ago (late 70s). I was not feeling very "spiritual," and nothing I did seemed to make me feel "good." I had to accept my feelings of inadequacy, along with my flaws, and push ahead, obeying the Lord and believing in my redemption.

It was in this context that I began to experience a unique ability to see people who have what I call "eternal faith." I've even been able to see it in people before they get saved. And many of those who I've seen as such have gotten saved. Rarely do any I see this way lose their faith, but there are definitely those.

For example, a brother who many years ago helped turn my life around spiritually gave up his faith due to unrequited love. He led a young lady to the Lord, and fell in love with her. But she did not love him in the same way. So he abandoned his Christian faith, and even today is about as far away from the faith as can be.

But I can tell you that after he had married a non-Christian woman, he came up to me privately and admitted he still believes...

Slug1
Mar 22nd 2018, 11:50 AM
The reason why I do not agree with you is that many people believe they are in faith and are part of the Church, but are not. They are the people who can and will apostatized as prophesied. The warning isn't about people who "think" or are deceived into thinking that they are part of the Body. The warning is for those OF faith, members of the Body.


People who truely have faith are those who have received the faith given by God, not the faith they brought to God. They are the elect of God who will never perish.Who are warned in two main ways in the scriptures, 1) that even they can (may) be deceived by the enemy and led away, and 2) that they must abide to the end. If they CAN'T be deceived, or choose to stop abiding, then the two main elements of warning would not be in the Bible.

Are the warnings for those who you say are not of "faith?" The warnings have to BE FOR someone... and they sure aren't for those who "think" that are part of the Body.


Scripture warns them to not be part of those falling away and to not be deceived in thinking they are part of them (and by God's power they will not). Based on the part I underlined, you have two conflicting statements :hmm: So, that alone should show you that something is not aligned with scripture. Either, its the underlined part that is not aligned with scriptures (meaning) and that means the warnings ARE for them. Or aligned with your elect statement (cannot EVER fall away) and thus, the warnings are only for those NOT of the faith.


As many of Israel were lost and only a remnant was found to be true believers, so it will be with the Church also, wheat and tares.And this is the focus... are warnings of falling away for tares or for wheat?

Tares are NOT of the faith... the warnings are not for them because they CAN'T fall away from the faith since they are not OF faith in God. Sure, they participate in church, but they are NOT part of the Body... so the warnings are not for them. Wheat however, ARE of faith, ARE part of the Body... so the warnings are FOR them because they are the only ones who CAN fall away.

Kalahari
Mar 22nd 2018, 12:17 PM
The warning isn't about people who "think" or are deceived into thinking that they are part of the Body. The warning is for those OF faith, members of the Body.

It is for people in the Body which are in context the Church which comprises of believers and unbelievers. I would think that you would agree that not all in Church are believers or the saved, although all would confess as being believers.


Who are warned in two main ways in the scriptures, 1) that even they can (may) be deceived by the enemy and led away, and 2) that they must abide to the end. If they CAN'T be deceived, or choose to stop abiding, then the two main elements of warning would not be in the Bible.

Are those warnings for those who you say are not of "faith?" The warnings have to BE FOR someone... and they sure aren't for those who "think" that are part of the Body.

They could have been deceived if not for God. We abide for He is faithful not us. Why would Scripture say continuously after the warning but you, the elect of God, are not part of those who will not endure? It is because of the faithfulness of God. Of His promises and our hope in Him. Still many will leave because they were never part of Him, only of the Church.


Based on the part I underlined about, you have two conflicting statements :hmm: So, that alone should show you that something is not aligned with scripture. Either, its the underlined part that is not aligned with scriptures (meaning) and that means the warnings ARE for them. Or aligned with your elect statement (cannot EVER fall away) and thus, the warnings are only for those NOT of the faith.

There is nothing conflicting, only conflicting understanding or doctrine.


And this is the focus... are warnings of falling away for tares or for wheat?

Tares are NOT of the faith... the warnings are not for them because they CAN'T fall away from the faith since they are not OF faith in God. Sure, they participate in church, but they are NOT part of the Body... so the warnings are not for them. Wheat however, ARE of faith, ARE part of the Body... so the warnings are FOR them because they are the only ones who CAN fall away.

Tares are part of the Church, but not part of God. If what you are saying should be true, then the promises of God would be of no consequence only the will of man. One of the reasons I believe free will theology to be false. Children of God (the elect, wheat) cannot fall away because of God. So do not be deceived by those who says otherwise. If you should fall then you were not of Him, but of the world. So do not fear when you see this happening in the Body, they were not part of the Body. Trust God and believe Him, for if you do you are part of Him.

Slug1
Mar 22nd 2018, 12:23 PM
It is for people in the Body which are in context the Church which comprises of believers and unbelievers. I would think that you would agree that not all in Church are believers or the saved, although all would confess as being believers.



They could have been deceived if not for God. We abide for He is faithful not us. Why would Scripture say continuously after the warning but you, the elect of God, are not part of those who will not endure? It is because of the faithfulness of God. Of His promises and our hope in Him. Still many will leave because they were never part of Him, only of the Church.



There is nothing conflicting, only conflicting understanding or doctrine.



Tares are part of the Church, but not part of God. If what you are saying should be true, then the promises of God would be of no consequence only the will of man. One of the reasons I believe free will theology to be false. Children of God (the elect, wheat) cannot fall away because of God. So do not be deceived by those who says otherwise. If you should fall then you were not of Him, but of the world. So do not fear when you see this happening in the Body, they were not part of the Body. Trust God and believe Him, for if you do you are part of Him.So, after reading all of your post and your final paragraph... do you take all the warnings about falling "away" are about falling away from being a part of the church, or from being part with God?

Kalahari
Mar 22nd 2018, 12:38 PM
So, after reading all of your post and your final paragraph... do you take all the warnings about falling "away" are about falling away from being a part of the church, or from being part with God?

The warning is for all in the Body. The deceiver will try his best for you to fall, but those who have their faith in God and not in them will not fall. So in whom do you trust? In whom are your hope? The answer to those questions will show who you are, wheat or tares.

The deeper issue is if you believe God to be a complete Saviour or only a means to an end.

If you believe Him for what He promised, you can enter into His rest. Otherwise you will strive to enter to no avail.

kyCyd
Mar 22nd 2018, 12:49 PM
It is for people in the Body which are in context the Church which comprises of believers and unbelievers. I would think that you would agree that not all in Church are believers or the saved, although all would confess as being believers.



They could have been deceived if not for God. We abide for He is faithful not us. Why would Scripture say continuously after the warning but you, the elect of God, are not part of those who will not endure? It is because of the faithfulness of God. Of His promises and our hope in Him. Still many will leave because they were never part of Him, only of the Church.



There is nothing conflicting, only conflicting understanding or doctrine.



Tares are part of the Church, but not part of God. If what you are saying should be true, then the promises of God would be of no consequence only the will of man. One of the reasons I believe free will theology to be false. Children of God (the elect, wheat) cannot fall away because of God. So do not be deceived by those who says otherwise. If you should fall then you were not of Him, but of the world. So do not fear when you see this happening in the Body, they were not part of the Body. Trust God and believe Him, for if you do you are part of Him.

So basically the ones being warned are these?

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

The question then becomes, were they really part of the believers planted in good soil? To me the warning is for those not planted in good soil.

Slug1
Mar 22nd 2018, 12:55 PM
The warning is for all in the Body. The deceiver will try his best for you to fall, but those who have their faith in God and not in them will not fall. So in whom do you trust? In whom are your hope? The answer to those questions will show who you are, wheat or tares.

The deeper issue is if you believe God to be a complete Saviour or only a means to an end.

If you believe Him for what He promised, you can enter into His rest. Otherwise you will strive to enter to no avail.:) You say one thing and then explain another :hmm:

The warning is for all the Body (I agree), BUT this means all in the Body are capable to fall. If anyone in the Body CAN'T fall, then they never are in need of warning of falling. Which then concludes... the warnings are NOT for all in the Body, the warnings can only be for those who aren't "truly" of the Body but are part of a church.

Kalahari
Mar 22nd 2018, 01:12 PM
So basically the ones being warned are these?

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

The question then becomes, were they really part of the believers planted in good soil? To me the warning is for those not planted in good soil.

When do you fall from God? When there is an evil heart of unbelief in you. Heb 3:12

Who are those? They that did not enter into the rest of God. They kept searching because of unbelief. So those who have never entered can fall, because belief were never found in them. They fall from God because they were part of Him not through faith, but of being part of the covenant He made with man. Still the covenant does not save, only faith in the Son as Saviour. (We do not discuss the salvation of children here. :D)

Kalahari
Mar 22nd 2018, 01:22 PM
When do you fall from God? When there is an evil heart of unbelief in you. Heb 3:12

Who are those? They that did not enter into the rest of God. They kept searching because of unbelief. So those who have never entered can fall, because belief were never found in them. They fall from God because they were part of Him not through faith, but of being part of the covenant He made with man. Still the covenant does not save, only faith in the Son as Saviour. (We do not discuss the salvation of children here. :D)

So the warning is for you to enter the rest of God, otherwise you could fall.

Slug1
Mar 22nd 2018, 02:19 PM
So the warning is for you to enter the rest of God, otherwise you could fall.This is where the honest conclusion has to be... Falling away FROM being lost :idea:

(which isn't what the warnings are about)

Kalahari
Mar 22nd 2018, 02:34 PM
This is where the honest conclusion has to be... Falling away FROM being lost :idea:

(which isn't what the warnings are about)

Falling off from the Body, being cut from the covenant is a sincere warning. Being not part of it has serious consequences and the longing to be part of it could lead to salvation. Not being part of it means not being part of God, so the warning is not of no avail. Still the warning can not be so interpreted to deny the promises of God. You can be cut of from the body without ever having been saved. If you do not want to be cut off, believe in Christ and enter His rest.

Slug1
Mar 22nd 2018, 03:14 PM
Falling off from the Body, being cut from the covenant is a sincere warning. Being not part of it has serious consequences and the longing to be part of it could lead to salvation. Not being part of it means not being part of God, so the warning is not of no avail. Still the warning can not be so interpreted to deny the promises of God. You can be cut of from the body without ever having been saved. If you do not want to be cut off, believe in Christ and enter His rest.Can't agree with you in saying that the warnings are to "get" people INTO the Body. The warnings are for those IN the Body... not to fall away.

ProDeo
Mar 22nd 2018, 04:49 PM
Coming back on my half-joke-half-serious OSAR post #25, there are Christians who believe that pointing to Paul's running the race in 1 Cor 9:24-27 him ending with - lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified, meaning even Paul wasn't sure. Or he must has been speaking in hyperbole.

He did not want to be disqualified to bring the Gospel to all. For him preaching the Gospel was not a choice, but it was committed to him and he was doing anything and forgoing anything to be not founded wanting by men.
According to Eph 2:10 we all have a race to run, the good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

Kalahari
Mar 22nd 2018, 05:34 PM
According to Eph 2:10 we all have a race to run, the good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

Yes to glorify God. Not to obtain anything.

Kalahari
Mar 22nd 2018, 05:36 PM
Can't agree with you in saying that the warnings are to "get" people INTO the Body. The warnings are for those IN the Body... not to fall away.

Why do you think the Church can censure someone and even ban them from the congregation?

Doug Brents
Mar 22nd 2018, 06:07 PM
Do you guys mind if I weigh in?

Consider if you will, Romans 11:11-24 and I will focus on verse 22.

"I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles. 12 Now if their fall is riches for the world, and their failure riches for the Gentiles, how much more their fullness!

13 For I speak to you Gentiles; inasmuch as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, 14 if by any means I may provoke to jealousy those who are my flesh and save some of them. 15 For if their being cast away is the reconciling of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?

16 For if the firstfruit is holy, the lump is also holy; and if the root is holy, so are the branches. 17 And if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive tree, were grafted in among them, and with them became a partaker of the root and fatness of the olive tree, 18 do not boast against the branches. But if you do boast, remember that you do not support the root, but the root supports you.

19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in.” 20 Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either. 22 Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off. 23 And they also, if they do not continue in unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 24 For if you were cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these, who are natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?" (emphasis added)

Now I ask you, were these Gentiles saved? I would have to say "yes, they were". They had been grafted into the Olive Tree. But then Paul says that if they (we) do not "continue in His goodness" they will be cut off again. Does that not clearly tell us that we can be saved, and then "lose" that salvation if we do not remain in Christ?

Kalahari
Mar 22nd 2018, 06:15 PM
Do you guys mind if I weigh in?

Consider if you will, Romans 11:11-24 and I will focus on verse 22.

"I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles. 12 Now if their fall is riches for the world, and their failure riches for the Gentiles, how much more their fullness!

13 For I speak to you Gentiles; inasmuch as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, 14 if by any means I may provoke to jealousy those who are my flesh and save some of them. 15 For if their being cast away is the reconciling of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?

16 For if the firstfruit is holy, the lump is also holy; and if the root is holy, so are the branches. 17 And if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive tree, were grafted in among them, and with them became a partaker of the root and fatness of the olive tree, 18 do not boast against the branches. But if you do boast, remember that you do not support the root, but the root supports you.

19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in.” 20 Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either. 22 Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off. 23 And they also, if they do not continue in unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 24 For if you were cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these, who are natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?" (emphasis added)

Now I ask you, were these Gentiles saved? I would have to say "yes, they were". They had been grafted into the Olive Tree. But then Paul says that if they (we) do not "continue in His goodness" they will be cut off again. Does that not clearly tell us that we can be saved, and then "lose" that salvation if we do not remain in Christ?

Not necessarily and especially if you take the working of the covenant in consideration. We are grafted into the tree by the covenant and can be cut from it if unbelief were found in you. But by God's grace belief can be found in you again and you can be grafted in back again.

Doug Brents
Mar 22nd 2018, 06:20 PM
Not necessarily and especially if you take the working of the covenant in consideration. We are grafted into the tree by the covenant and can be cut from it if unbelief were found in you. But by God's grace belief can be found in you again and you can be grafted in back again.

Clearly. The passage even tells us that the Jews who were unbelieving at the time, could be grafted back in if they did not continue in their unbelief. But what of the person who dies in their unbelieving state? They have been cut off. Their destination is the Lake of Fire. They will not enter Paradise!

Slug1
Mar 22nd 2018, 06:45 PM
Why do you think the Church can censure someone and even ban them from the congregation?I don't. All unbelievers in any church should be treated as members, just as Jesus fellow-shipped with sinners as He ate with them and ministered to them.

Kalahari
Mar 22nd 2018, 06:51 PM
I don't. All unbelievers in any church should be treated as members, just as Jesus fellow-shipped with sinners as He ate with them and ministered to them.

Then this is another thing that we differ on according to the teaching of Scripture. The Church is His and we ought to be obedient to Him, not according to how we think it should be or not be.

Doug Brents
Mar 22nd 2018, 06:54 PM
I don't. All unbelievers in any church should be treated as members, just as Jesus fellow-shipped with sinners as He ate with them and ministered to them.

But He also commanded us to disfellowship members who are living sinful lifestyles. Two reasons for this are: One, it puts pressure on the fallen member to mend his/her ways to regain fellowship. Two, it removes those who profess to be Christian but do not live like one so that he/she does not negatively influence nonmembers as to the need to obey our Lord.

Old man
Mar 22nd 2018, 07:04 PM
I don't. All unbelievers in any church should be treated as members, just as Jesus fellow-shipped with sinners as He ate with them and ministered to them.

Guests perhaps. But not members. Jesus may have eaten with them but He didn't include them into his group of disciples. Whereas he would explain the parables to His disciples He didn't for the unbelievers.

Slug1
Mar 22nd 2018, 07:24 PM
Then this is another thing that we differ on according to the teaching of Scripture. The Church is His and we ought to be obedient to Him, not according to how we think it should be or not be.


But He also commanded us to disfellowship members who are living sinful lifestyles. Two reasons for this are: One, it puts pressure on the fallen member to mend his/her ways to regain fellowship. Two, it removes those who profess to be Christian but do not live like one so that he/she does not negatively influence nonmembers as to the need to obey our Lord.


Guests perhaps. But not members. Jesus may have eaten with them but He didn't include them into his group of disciples. Whereas he would explain the parables to His disciples He didn't for the unbelievers.

While I understand all these points, here is the perspective and balance I am talking about. The church in Corinth, a bunch of believers and unbelievers. The believers were also STILL sinning BADLY and Paul discipled them all and all the unbelievers with them as well. Part of that discipleship is about WHEN they are to boot a sinner (either believer or unbeliever) from church. BUT, he WANTED to fellowship with them all in his need to disciple them all (more than just sending letters) as he wanted to return to them. That is the followshipping I am speaking about when both believing sinners and unbelievings sinners are in church.

Kalahari
Mar 22nd 2018, 07:35 PM
While I understand all these points, here is the perspective and balance I am talking about. The church in Corinth, a bunch of believers and unbelievers. The believers were also STILL sinning BADLY and Paul discipled them all and all the unbelievers with them as well. Part of that discipleship is about WHEN they are to boot a sinner (either believer or unbeliever) from church. BUT, he WANTED to fellowship with them all in his need to disciple them all (more than just sending letters) as he wanted to return to them. That is the followshipping I am speaking about when both believing sinners and unbelievings sinners are in church.

See if I understand you. Do you now say that there is a when to disfellowship a person? The way you answered my question was that you don't, but now you say you may? I know to ban people from the congregation is not a first step, but a last one.

Doug Brents
Mar 22nd 2018, 07:36 PM
While I understand all these points, here is the perspective and balance I am talking about. The church in Corinth, a bunch of believers and unbelievers. The believers were also STILL sinning BADLY and Paul discipled them all and all the unbelievers with them as well. Part of that discipleship is about WHEN they are to boot a sinner (either believer or unbeliever) from church. BUT, he WANTED to fellowship with them all in his need to disciple them all (more than just sending letters) as he wanted to return to them. That is the followshipping I am speaking about when both believing sinners and unbelievings sinners are in church.

Slug1, we as the Body of Christ should have a fellowship that is close and loving and inclusive so that everyone wants to be a part of it, and feels alone and "naked" when they are not a part of it. As an example, I have worn my wedding ring for so long that it is a part of my hand, and I feel naked when I am not wearing it.

But we should not have that deep of a fellowship with nonbelievers and professing "believers" who do not live "in Christ". We must only have a surface level association with them. They should see our deeper fellowship with each other so that it shows them what they are missing, but we must be apart from them, as "Old Man" suggested, just as Jesus kept His deeper conversations, explanations, and fellowship only with his Disciples, and especially the Apostles.

Slug1
Mar 22nd 2018, 07:41 PM
Slug1, we as the Body of Christ should have a fellowship that is close and loving and inclusive so that everyone wants to be a part of it, and feels alone and "naked" when they are not a part of it. As an example, I have worn my wedding ring for so long that it is a part of my hand, and I feel naked when I am not wearing it.

But we should not have that deep of a fellowship with nonbelievers and professing "believers" who do not live "in Christ". We must only have a surface level association with them. They should see our deeper fellowship with each other so that it shows them what they are missing, but we must be apart from them, as "Old Man" suggested, just as Jesus kept His deeper conversations, explanations, and fellowship only with his Disciples, and especially the Apostles.I understand... thus why I said from the perspective I stated. The Apostles and many disciples had an "inner circle" fellowship with Christ, I am not raising this perspective.

K raised an issue as such:


http://bibleforums.org/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Kalahari http://bibleforums.org/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?p=3432809#post3432809)

Why do you think the Church can censure someone and even ban them from the congregation?

I said that I don't... based on how I clarified myself in the perspective I detailed.

Slug1
Mar 22nd 2018, 07:49 PM
See if I understand you. Do you now say that there is a when to disfellowship a person? The way you answered my question was that you don't, but now you say you may? I know to ban people from the congregation is not a first step, but a last one.I leave that up the our pastor and yes, sin in the life of a believer that was causing problems in the church has led to a request to leave.

But in the broad stroke post you made earlier, NO, it's not about "kicking" them away (censoring them as you termed). I will fellowship with those who I know are unbelievers, I invite them to attend Bible studies and I WILL ask them questions and for their input concerning whatever the scripture topic is, even the small group ones held outside of the scheduled church Bible studies. I invite them (the adult males) to attend Men's Ministry events, breakfasts, outreach, studies, I have invited them to church BBQs, etc. Hey, I even invite them to help out in the church because if I know a members unbelieving spouse is a plumber and the church has a plumbing problem, then you better believe I will invite/ask for their help.

It's all about showing them... Christ and that they are not censored at all from attending church.

Kalahari
Mar 22nd 2018, 07:58 PM
I leave that up the our pastor and yes, sin in the life of a believer that was causing problems in the church has led to a request to leave.

But in the broad stroke post you made earlier, NO, it's not about "kicking" them away (censoring them as you termed). I will fellowship with those who I know are unbelievers, I invite them to attend Bible studies and I WILL ask them questions and for their input concerning whatever the scripture topic is, even the small group ones held outside of the scheduled church Bible studies. I invite them to attend Men's Ministry events, breakfasts, outreach, studies, I have invited them to church BBQs, etc. Hey, I even invite them to help out in the church because if I know a members unbelieving spouse is a plumber and the church has a plumbing problem, then you better believe I will invite/ask for their help.

It's all about showing them... Christ and that they are not censored at all from attending church.

OK I see where you are coming from. I probably do the same most of the times. The censureship I was talking about is when members of the church are hardened in sin and after much ministry refuse to break with it and by keeping living in sin becomes a problem for the church by confusing other members. We must always protect those given to us in the church from wrong influences.

Slug1
Mar 22nd 2018, 08:09 PM
OK I see where you are coming from. I probably do the same most of the times. The censureship I was talking about is when members of the church are hardened in sin and after much ministry refuse to break with it and by keeping living in sin becomes a problem for the church by confusing other members. We must always protect those given to us in the church from wrong influences.My wife and I lead the Breaking the Chains Biblical Recovery Ministry in our church, so we usually see even some as your just described. There we can focus on what's "under" the surface and root out the "why" they are in such rebellion and minister to them in a manner that has led to Christ healing them. Many have returned to church in time.

ProDeo
Mar 23rd 2018, 11:05 AM
According to Eph 2:10 we all have a race to run, the good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

Yes to glorify God. Not to obtain anything.
that we should walk in them is a commandment and commandments can be disobeyed.

Next ones - spoken to Christians.

He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. The one who conquers will not be hurt by the second death.

The one who conquers will be clothed thus in white garments, and I will never blot his name out of the book of life.

Kalahari
Mar 23rd 2018, 11:15 AM
that we should walk in them is a commandment and commandments can be disobeyed.

Next ones - spoken to Christians.

He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. The one who conquers will not be hurt by the second death.

The one who conquers will be clothed thus in white garments, and I will never blot his name out of the book of life.

We should walk in them, because it is the right thing to do. Be holy for I am holy. I hope you will see that walking or living in good works are the fruit of the workmanship of God.

mailmandan
Mar 23rd 2018, 11:24 AM
Clearly. The passage even tells us that the Jews who were unbelieving at the time, could be grafted back in if they did not continue in their unbelief. But what of the person who dies in their unbelieving state? They have been cut off. Their destination is the Lake of Fire. They will not enter Paradise! The Jews were in the olive tree to begin with because they were the "natural branches" and not because they were all saved. Because of their unbelief and hard hearts God removed His gracious hand from them as a people overall and broke them off from His goodness, but they could be grafted back in if they did not continue in their unbelief.

ProDeo
Mar 23rd 2018, 12:35 PM
We should walk in them, because it is the right thing to do. Be holy for I am holy. I hope you will see that walking or living in good works are the fruit of the workmanship of God.
Of course I see that, but this is a classic OSAS | NOSAS debate ;)

randyk
Mar 23rd 2018, 02:53 PM
My wife and I lead the Breaking the Chains Biblical Recovery Ministry in our church, so we usually see even some as your just described. There we can focus on what's "under" the surface and root out the "why" they are in such rebellion and minister to them in a manner that has led to Christ healing them. Many have returned to church in time.

Let's tell the other side of the story, although I like your point. Some need patience, and lots of grace, to enable them to witness genuine Christian love and care. But some, who have been in the church a long time, turn to sin and cover it up with "religion." Sometimes they need to be disfellowshiped.

For example, some years back some guy who had a tent out in the woods, an ex-Vietnam vet, came into our church, and began to speak in a friendly manner, with lots of Scriptures, offering to work around the church property, in return for access to the church facilities, restrooms, showers, etc. Wanting to be compassionate towards this man, most in the church embraced him, invited him in, and gave him a key to the property.

The man had a brother who had been part of the "laughing movement" down in Florida, and he himself exercised what he believed to be a "prophetic gift." Behind the scenes the pastor had warned him about the "prophesying," even though we are a Pentecostal church. I don't know, specifically, what concerned the pastor.

I discovered when my own teen aged daughter went out on a church youth outing that this man had gone along, offering to help supervise. Later, our daughter told us that the man had expressed his interest in "marrying" her! My daughter had to have been 16 or 17 at the time, and the man was perhaps 60! I informed everybody involved that the guy should stop his prophesying, that he and my daughter should "get together." The pastor informed me that he had already warned the man, and that he would be watched, and the situation was fine.

Nevertheless, the man continued in his church involvement, on the property, in the worship services, in the fellowship. And my daughter later disclosed another letter from him, indicating that God told him my daughter and him were to eventually get married! I promptly informed the pastor that "nothing was being done about this man," and either he would go or my family would go!

The pastor decided to ask the man to leave--the pastor is an ex-cop, and sympathized with our concern over our daughter. However, I had the feeling most of the church despised me for not having "compassion" on the man. One leader in the church was angry at me because I was not helping a "man in need," and openly condemned me.

I could tell you story after story about this kind of misplaced grace. For example, years earlier, at a different, but related, church, a drunken man walked into a church service, and sat up next to a single woman in a pew. He began talking to this woman as the sermon went on, and it was obvious the woman was bothered. I could see her trying to distance herself from the man, even though she may have known who he was.

Since I was sitting right behind them, and the church usher did absolutely nothing during this disruption, I decided to do something about it myself. This was a small church, and the exchange was noisy and disruptive. I leaned over the pew, and asked the drunken man to leave, which he did. At the point where I inserted myself, the lead usher began to come over. In other words, he seemed more concerned about *me* than about this drunken man bothering a woman in church!

I don't get it, brother? Sometimes we are blinded by our love to see men get saved. In the meantime wolves come into our churches, and do harm to our women and children, and to our own conflicted souls, who let this kind of thing go on! Do you agree?

There comes a time in every church, when the evangelism happens, the church grows, and the Spirit begins to move, that people enter in who do not mean well. They may have hidden the truth from themselves, but there are the Jezebels, the church dividers, the self-proclaimed prophets, and the cultists whose interest is in "drawing men after themselves." If we are to stay pure, and to foster our growth, we need to be aware of them. Otherwise, their harmful influence will grow, and the work in the church can be both polluted and destroyed. I've seen it happen!

Slug1
Mar 23rd 2018, 03:00 PM
Let's tell the other side of the story, although I like your point. Some need patience, and lots of grace, to enable them to witness genuine Christian love and care. But some, who have been in the church a long time, turn to sin and cover it up with "religion." Sometimes they need to be disfellowshiped.

For example, some years back some guy who had a tent out in the woods, an ex-Vietnam vet, came into our church, and began to speak in a friendly manner, with lots of Scriptures, offering to work around the church property, in return for access to the church facilities, restrooms, showers, etc. Wanting to be compassionate towards this man, most in the church embraced him, invited him in, and gave him a key to the property.

The man had a brother who had been part of the "laughing movement" down in Florida, and he himself exercised what he believed to be a "prophetic gift." Behind the scenes the pastor had warned him about the "prophesying," even though we are a Pentecostal church. I don't know, specifically, what concerned the pastor.

I discovered when my own teen aged daughter went out on a church youth outing that this man had gone along, offering to help supervise. Later, our daughter told us that the man had expressed his interest in "marrying" her! My daughter had to have been 16 or 17 at the time, and the man was perhaps 60! I informed everybody involved that the guy should stop his prophesying, that he and my daughter should "get together." The pastor informed me that he had already warned the man, and that he would be watched, and the situation was fine.

Nevertheless, the man continued in his church involvement, on the property, in the worship services, in the fellowship. And my daughter later disclosed another letter from him, indicating that God told him my daughter and him were to eventually get married! I promptly informed the pastor that "nothing was being done about this man," and either he would go or my family would go!

The pastor decided to ask the man to leave--the pastor is an ex-cop, and sympathized with our concern over our daughter. However, I had the feeling most of the church despised me for not having "compassion" on the man. One leader in the church was angry at me because I was not helping a "man in need," and openly condemned me.

I could tell you story after story about this kind of misplaced grace. For example, years earlier, at a different, but related, church, a drunken man walked into a church service, and sat up next to a single woman in a pew. He began talking to this woman as the sermon went on, and it was obvious the woman was bothered. I could see her trying to distance herself from the man, even though she may have known who he was.

Since I was sitting right behind them, and the church usher did absolutely nothing during this disruption, I decided to do something about it myself. This was a small church, and the disruption was loud and disruptive. I leaned over the pew, and asked the drunken man to leave, which he did. At the point where I inserted myself, the lead usher began to come over. In other words, he seemed more concerned about *me* than about this drunken man bothering a woman in church!

I don't get it, brother? Sometimes we are blinded by our love to see men get saved. In the meantime wolves come into our churches, and do harm to our women and children, and to our own conflicted souls, who let this kind of thing go on! Do you agree?

There comes a time in every church, when the evangelism happens, the church grows, and the Spirit begins to move, that people enter in who do not mean well. They may have hidden the truth from themselves, but there are the Jezebels, the church dividers, the self-proclaimed prophets, and the cultists whose interest is in "drawing men after themselves." If we are to stay pure, and to foster our growth, we need to be aware of them. Otherwise, their harmful influence will grow, and the work in the church can be both polluted and destroyed. I've seen it happen!I know exactly what you mean and when there is a need to cut ties to truly protect sheep from wolves... yeah cut ALL ties and ensure they are separated away so their purposeful leaven (whatever the form it takes as a pollution)... is removed. But the sinner, who is not a wolf... patience and love for them BUT should that mean to remove them from the congregation (1 Cor 5) due to their open sin... so be that also. After all, wickedness is a form of leaven that can spread as well.

randyk
Mar 23rd 2018, 03:17 PM
I think some of the discussion misses the main issue. Who are those warned about "losing their salvation?" And what is the "salvation" they are warned about losing? I'm an OSAS, although I'm open. I don't believe God determined either angels or men to fall. But it happened. The question is, does God actually *know* who will not fall and who will fall?

I'm a believer in free will, but I do believe that God knows who will choose Him. The same may not, perhaps, be said about the angels. I think God put into the equation, in His creation of angels, how many could fall, and how many absolutely wouldn't. The division of the angels into thirds appears to be something *controlled* by God. The rebellion of just 1/3 of the angels safely kept 2/3 within the fold, and the 1/3 that fell obviously were given a choice that could lead either to continuing obedience or to the fall.

Human beings may be different, however. I do think that God has a full number in mind when determining how many will get saved. And those he determines to save *will* stay saved! But there are others who, like the angels, have a choice to either obey or fall. But unlike the angels, it appears God knows all of those outside of his elect number *will fall!*

This is very difficult stuff, but there is a Scriptural basis for it. God has numbered how many are in His elect. That is Scriptural. Men fall. That is Scriptural. Human choice determines who will fall. But who determines who will remain but God? And if He determines they will stay, what can make them fall?

But my main point here is that men are in the church, experiencing the knowledge of salvation, and do not actually have the assurance of their salvation until they become *regenerate.* In other words, men can have knowledge of salvation without actually having salvation.

Thus, they can fall from this knowledge of salvation, losing their temporary participation in the church. And those are the ones who are warned not to fall from the knowledge of their salvation. Even the "elect" are warned not to fall, because even if our salvation is assured, our choice to remain in the church as a participant is not. As Christians we can indeed "backslide!"

So for me, the issue really comes down to *knowledge.* Can one have a knowledge about salvation without actually having it? I think so. I've met quite a few people who have had lots of time in the church, and know God along with the revelation of the Scriptures. They speak by revelation and about revelation, and yet in their personal lives they are completely *carnal!*

What I mean by "carnal" is that these men do not show a change in character--just a knowledge of Christian truth. They can speak all day long about the truths of Scripture, and they may even lead a relatively clean life, observing the 10 Commandments.

But when you inspect their lives closely, there is no real fruit of Christ's kindness, and no real Christian charity and compassion. It is all an effort to justify themselves by doing Christian deeds. Their real interest is in the things of the world, and they seem to think the difference between Christians and non-Christians is based on knowledge, rather than on a change in character.

This kind of thing requires real discernment. And I certainly am not talking about becoming "judgmental" with respect to fellow Christians. These kinds of believers I give complete liberty to within the church, because I know they should be invited to be there. They are the ones who must take the 2nd step in becoming "regenerate."

I *never* see men who have become regenerate leave their faith for all time. Sometimes they leave the church, and pretend they no longer have faith. But I don't really see them deny Jesus in their heart--they secretly hope in their salvation, in my experience. I keep my hope alive for them!

EarlyCall
Mar 24th 2018, 04:26 AM
We are sealed by the Holy Spirit. He will complete the work He began in yo. The parable of the sower of seeds that fell on four types of ground.

There you have arguments both for and against. Make of it what you will. There are three options: one claims they know and I claim they do not know, and the third option is God knows.

I believe it does not matter either way. I believe all that is required is to seek God continually with all we are and He will see to the rest for He is faithful and true. Anything else just muddies it all up and for what good reason when it cannot be known? Belief is not knowing.