PDA

View Full Version : NOSAS... why I believe it the correct doctrine.



Pages : [1] 2

ProjectPeter
Jan 19th 2007, 11:29 PM
Okay Jesuslover... here we go. And just for clarification to those that want to debate this and whatnot. That's cool but for now... I am going to lay this out since I was asked by Jesuslover. So naturally I have no problem yapping about all this with you but my first and foremost goal is to lay this out since someone has asked! ;)

Let's start with a couple of passages just to line this all up in the Old Testament, Gospels, and the Epistles.

Paul writes Timothy and tell him;

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
17 that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.


So all Scripture is for doctrine, reproof, correction and training in righteousness. Old and New. So with that knowledge I want to start with a passage in the Old and then I will line that up with passages from the Gospels and the Epistles.

One of the clearest passages on this issue is found here.

Ezekiel 18:20 "The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.
21 ¶"But if the wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed and observes all My statutes and practices justice and righteousness, he shall surely live; he shall not die.
22 "All his transgressions which he has committed will not be remembered against him; because of his righteousness which he has practiced, he will live.
23 "Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the Lord GOD, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?
24 ¶"But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and does according to all the abominations that a wicked man does, will he live? All his righteous deeds which he has done will not be remembered for his treachery which he has committed and his sin which he has committed; for them he will die.
25 "Yet you say, `The way of the Lord is not right.´ Hear now, O house of Israel! Is My way not right? Is it not your ways that are not right?
26 "When a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and dies because of it, for his iniquity which he has committed he will die.
27 "Again, when a wicked man turns away from his wickedness which he has committed and practices justice and righteousness, he will save his life.
28 "Because he considered and turned away from all his transgressions which he had committed, he shall surely live; he shall not die.

jesuslover1968
Jan 19th 2007, 11:38 PM
Very nicely laid-out. First question, and I won't be debating as it is a subject I am uncertain of, so I am here to learn.:D
So is the belief you have based upon the need for repentance alone, or do you believe a person who is saved and turns away must be saved again? God Bless.

*Madeline*
Jan 20th 2007, 12:00 AM
Hi PP!:)


Okay Jesuslover... here we go. And just for clarification to those that want to debate this and whatnot. That's cool but for now... I am going to lay this out since I was asked by Jesuslover. So naturally I have no problem yapping about all this with you but my first and foremost goal is to lay this out since someone has asked! ;)

Let's start with a couple of passages just to line this all up in the Old Testament, Gospels, and the Epistles.

Paul writes Timothy and tell him;

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
17 that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.


So all Scripture is for doctrine, reproof, correction and training in righteousness. Old and New. So with that knowledge I want to start with a passage in the Old and then I will line that up with passages from the Gospels and the Epistles.

One of the clearest passages on this issue is found here.

Ezekiel 18:20 "The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.
21 ¶"But if the wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed and observes all My statutes and practices justice and righteousness, he shall surely live; he shall not die.
22 "All his transgressions which he has committed will not be remembered against him; because of his righteousness which he has practiced, he will live.
23 "Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the Lord GOD, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?
24 ¶"But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and does according to all the abominations that a wicked man does, will he live? All his righteous deeds which he has done will not be remembered for his treachery which he has committed and his sin which he has committed; for them he will die.
25 "Yet you say, `The way of the Lord is not right.´ Hear now, O house of Israel! Is My way not right? Is it not your ways that are not right?
26 "When a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and dies because of it, for his iniquity which he has committed he will die.
27 "Again, when a wicked man turns away from his wickedness which he has committed and practices justice and righteousness, he will save his life.
28 "Because he considered and turned away from all his transgressions which he had committed, he shall surely live; he shall not die.

The passage in Ezekiel 18 is not speaking of eternal life, but rather temporal life. Take for example vs. 24, "in them (iniquity) shall he die". In other words, the man who commits iniquity will die according to the Mosaic law (vs. 26), "for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die" is the same thing. So this passage has nothing to do with losing one's salvation, it has to do with the wicked losing his temporal life in accordance with the Mosaic law. Now let's deal with the Hebrew word translated "righteous" in this passage. It doesn't mean saved, it means doing things correctly or right. An example can be found in 1 Sam. 24:17, "Thou art more righteous than I...". A person is either saved or not, he is not more saved than another. Note also 1 Kings 2:32, "...2 men more righteous and better....". "Righteous" is not saved, it is the description of having done what is right and good.

In summary, the Ezekiel passage is saying that if a man who had done the right things strays, and commits evil, he will lose his temporal life. There's no way of knowing if that man was a believer (i.e. saved) or not. But if he was he would die, but then he would be resurrected unto eternal salvation. But this passage has nothing to do with eternal life, it is speaking of the wicked losing his temporal life. Hope this helps! If you are so confident in the NOSAS doctrine, then why not take it to the arena?:) :hug:

Love,
Madeline

jesuslover1968
Jan 20th 2007, 12:19 AM
Hi PP!:)



The passage in Ezekiel 18 is not speaking of eternal life, but rather temporal life. Take for example vs. 24, "in them (iniquity) shall he die". In other words, the man who commits iniquity will die according to the Mosaic law (vs. 26), "for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die" is the same thing. So this passage has nothing to do with losing one's salvation, it has to do with the wicked losing his temporal life in accordance with the Mosaic law. Now let's deal with the Hebrew word translated "righteous" in this passage. It doesn't mean saved, it means doing things correctly or right. An example can be found in 1 Sam. 24:17, "Thou art more righteous than I...". A person is either saved or not, he is not more saved than another. Note also 1 Kings 2:32, "...2 men more righteous and better....". "Righteous" is not saved, it is the description of having done what is right and good.

In summary, the Ezekiel passage is saying that if a man who had done the right things strays, and commits evil, he will lose his temporal life. There's no way of knowing if that man was a believer (i.e. saved) or not. But if he was he would die, but then he would be resurrected unto eternal salvation. But this passage has nothing to do with eternal life, it is speaking of the wicked losing his temporal life. Hope this helps! If you are so confident in the NOSAS doctrine, then why not take it to the arena?:) :hug:

Love,
Madeline


Okay Jesuslover... here we go. And just for clarification to those that want to debate this and whatnot. That's cool but for now... I am going to lay this out since I was asked by Jesuslover. So naturally I have no problem yapping about all this with you but my first and foremost goal is to lay this out since someone has asked! ;)


Because of this.... God Bless.

*Madeline*
Jan 20th 2007, 12:27 AM
Hi jesuslover1968!:)


Because of this.... God Bless.

I understand, which is why I said that this issue should be taken to the "arena" instead of debating the issue here on this thread. But I'm sorry for interrupting.:hug:

Love,
Madeline

jesuslover1968
Jan 20th 2007, 12:30 AM
Hi jesuslover1968!:)



I understand, which is why I said that this issue should be taken to the "arena" instead of debating the issue here on this thread. But I'm sorry for interrupting.:hug:

Love,
Madeline


It's fine. That is why he brought it here, though. :hug: God Bless.

mdmd
Jan 20th 2007, 12:31 AM
In very simple terms: If you do something foolish that results in your death, all your past good decisions won't relieve the consequence of your one bad decision.

It has nothing to do with ultimate salvation.

moonglow
Jan 20th 2007, 12:32 AM
Well I have no idea what the last two posts (#5 and #6) were about...didn't follow that...but got a hint this is a no debate thread? is that correct? I would like to chime in but not certain if I should...

God bless

Redeemed by Grace
Jan 20th 2007, 12:38 AM
"Humpher whersytrwocnbsgtarsl dhhagdyat" <--- hand over my mouth refraining from speaking... LOL :lol:

Well it's probably for the best anyway... so much to say, so little time...

enjoy your discussion...

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 01:15 AM
Very nicely laid-out. First question, and I won't be debating as it is a subject I am uncertain of, so I am here to learn.:D
So is the belief you have based upon the need for repentance alone, or do you believe a person who is saved and turns away must be saved again? God Bless.
I didn't figure you would want to debate it. I have no problem doing that with folks that want to... just letting them know that it is my secondary thing here. :D So Madeline... I'll get with your in a sec!

Anyway... your question which was a very good one I might add! I think of the many times we read in the Prophets where the message they gave Israel was REPENT! Turn BACK to God. So it is certainly a matter of repentance. As to being saved again? That is really more semantics I figure and the further we go in the explanation of why I believe NOSAS is the proper doctrine that will at least become more apparent as to why I say that. But a passage to ponder would be found in Luke and the parable of the prodigal son.

Luke 15:11 ¶And He said, "A certain man had two sons;
12 and the younger of them said to his father, `Father, give me the share of the estate that falls to me.´ And he divided his wealth between them.
13 "And not many days later, the younger son gathered everything together and went on a journey into a distant country, and there he squandered his estate with loose living.
14 "Now when he had spent everything, a severe famine occurred in that country, and he began to be in need.
15 "And he went and attached himself to one of the citizens of that country, and he sent him into his fields to feed swine.
16 "And he was longing to fill his stomach with the pods that the swine were eating, and no one was giving anything to him.
17 "But when he came to his senses, he said, `How many of my father's hired men have more than enough bread, but I am dying here with hunger!
18 `I will get up and go to my father, and will say to him, "Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in your sight;
19 "I am no longer worthy to be called your son; make me as one of your hired men."´
20 "And he got up and came to his father. But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him, and felt compassion for him, and ran and embraced him, and kissed him.
21 "And the son said to him, `Father, I have sinned against heaven and in your sight; I am no longer worthy to be called your son.´
22 "But the father said to his slaves, `Quickly bring out the best robe and put it on him, and put a ring on his hand and sandals on his feet;
23 and bring the fattened calf, kill it, and let us eat and be merry;
24 for this son of mine was dead, and has come to life again; he was lost, and has been found.´ And they began to be merry.
25 "Now his older son was in the field, and when he came and approached the house, he heard music and dancing.
26 "And he summoned one of the servants and began inquiring what these things might be.
27 "And he said to him, `Your brother has come, and your father has killed the fattened calf, because he has received him back safe and sound.´
28 "But he became angry, and was not willing to go in; and his father came out and began entreating him.
29 "But he answered and said to his father, `Look! For so many years I have been serving you, and I have never neglected a command of yours; and yet you have never given me a kid, that I might be merry with my friends;
30 but when this son of yours came, who has devoured your wealth with harlots, you killed the fattened calf for him.´
31 "And he said to him, `My child, you have always been with me, and all that is mine is yours.
32 `But we had to be merry and rejoice, for this brother of yours was dead and has begun to live, and was lost and has been found.´"

So this son, willfully walked away with his inheritance. He was a son no doubt. But while he was gone... he was dead. It wasn't until he came back to the father and repented... it wasn't until then that he was alive again. And that is important wording as well.

Here is the Greek for the words "alive again."

anazao

to recover life (literally or figuratively): -- (be a-)live again, revive.

So he was a son who walked away. While he was away he was dead. When he came back broken and repentant... he was anazao. He recovered life. He lives again. He was once alive, then dead, then alive again. So born-again again... while I know that wording disturbs some folks... I've no problem with the thought. Naturally the ultimate thing is to repent and turn back to the Father. But I think it says much here and it being twice mentioned should gain our attention.

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 01:18 AM
Hi jesuslover1968!:)



I understand, which is why I said that this issue should be taken to the "arena" instead of debating the issue here on this thread. But I'm sorry for interrupting.:hug:

Love,
Madeline

You can certainly debate this with me. I'd just ask that folks let Jesuslover respond without any grief as she is studying the matter. I am sure that she'll read a number of the post but she asked me to explain why I was NOSAS so I want to do that. My words are wide open for anyone that wants to challenge them most certainly. I just want folks to understand that as the thread progresses... my first goal will be to respond to her questions and comments. Then when I am done with that... I will get with everyone else.

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 01:19 AM
Well I have no idea what the last two posts (#5 and #6) were about...didn't follow that...but got a hint this is a no debate thread? is that correct? I would like to chime in but not certain if I should...

God bless
Feel free. The thread is open for debate with the disclaimer that my first goal is to talk to Jesuslover on this and anyone else that wants to understand why I figure NOSAS is the correct doctrine. But shoot... you know me. Nothing like a good old debate to get the blood flowing! :lol:

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 01:20 AM
"Humpher whersytrwocnbsgtarsl dhhagdyat" <--- hand over my mouth refraining from speaking... LOL :lol:

Well it's probably for the best anyway... so much to say, so little time...

enjoy your discussion...
Oh feel free at any time to jump in! I don't mind at all!

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 01:23 AM
Hi PP!:)

The passage in Ezekiel 18 is not speaking of eternal life, but rather temporal life. Take for example vs. 24, "in them (iniquity) shall he die". In other words, the man who commits iniquity will die according to the Mosaic law (vs. 26), "for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die" is the same thing. So this passage has nothing to do with losing one's salvation, it has to do with the wicked losing his temporal life in accordance with the Mosaic law. Now let's deal with the Hebrew word translated "righteous" in this passage. It doesn't mean saved, it means doing things correctly or right. An example can be found in 1 Sam. 24:17, "Thou art more righteous than I...". A person is either saved or not, he is not more saved than another. Note also 1 Kings 2:32, "...2 men more righteous and better....". "Righteous" is not saved, it is the description of having done what is right and good.

In summary, the Ezekiel passage is saying that if a man who had done the right things strays, and commits evil, he will lose his temporal life. There's no way of knowing if that man was a believer (i.e. saved) or not. But if he was he would die, but then he would be resurrected unto eternal salvation. But this passage has nothing to do with eternal life, it is speaking of the wicked losing his temporal life. Hope this helps! If you are so confident in the NOSAS doctrine, then why not take it to the arena?:) :hug:

Love,
MadelineOkay let's see how that pans out.

If that is the case... will the one that is righteous live and never die or is man going to die no matter how righteous they are? Because if the death means they physically die... then we have an awful lot of sinners that are disproving that as truth and... the righteous are dying long about the same ages. So that being said... if the death means physical death then the life would have to mean they won't die. One cannot pick and choose context so it would have to work that way for both life and death. Naturally we know that it doesn't so that is why that just doesn't fly.

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 01:28 AM
Okay let's see how that pans out.

If that is the case... will the one that is righteous live and never die or is man going to die no matter how righteous they are? Because if the death means they physically die... then we have an awful lot of sinners that are disproving that as truth and... the righteous are dying long about the same ages. So that being said... if the death means physical death then the life would have to mean they won't die. One cannot pick and choose context so it would have to work that way for both life and death. Naturally we know that it doesn't so that is why that just doesn't fly.
And Madeline... The arena is for a more organized and structured debate. I've a lot going on in life right now and just don't have the time to fit within a structure. So you might ask around a bit before tossing at challenges like that because folks will tell you that I have no problem with my confidence in the doctrine nor do I have a problem debating it with anyone in any arena. It just isn't a good time. But rest assured... I am not afraid to do so and tossing out the challenge like you just did... my not taking it there means nothing other than I simply haven't the time right now. Ask in a couple of weeks when things have settled down and I am settled down then I'm your huckleberry. But ask some of the folks you agree with before doing it... such as RbG and whomever else and see if they think you are really ready for that. If he thinks so then cool... we'll set something up once I get settled.

moonglow
Jan 20th 2007, 01:30 AM
(sorry about the defensive tone of this article...I think he has been through this debate too many times..:cool: ) But he makes excellents points and helps clear up alot of misunderstanding about what NOSAS really means.

http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/misconceptions.htm
10 Common Misconceptions
About A Conditional Security


The following are misconceptions and strawman arguments that eternal security people use to falsely accuse and discredit Christians like us who teach a conditional security for the believer. Certainly, sometimes the eternal security teachers will intentionally imply any, some or all of the following to dishonor our beliefs when they are teaching. Here is what they slanderously say about us:

Such people don’t believe in grace.

Such people don’t believe in the blood of Jesus.

Such people don’t believe in the infinite work of Christ.

Such people don’t believe in the free gift of eternal life.

Such people believe in a works salvation.

Such people are in legalism

Such people believe in sinless perfection.

Such people are trying to save themselves.

Such people are unsaved.

Such people think they lose their salvation every time they sin.

Setting The Record Straight

Let’s review that list again but this time supply Biblical answers/comments to clear away these misconceptions about Christians who embrace a conditional security:

Such people don’t believe in grace.

We believe and know without a doubt that we are saved by grace, as the Bible declares (Acts 15:11; Eph. 2:5, 8, etc.). But after we do get saved we also know we can fall from grace (Gal. 5:2-4). If such occurs, then Christ has become of no effect unto such people, according to Scripture (Gal. 5:4). We also know there are other ways in which we can lose our salvation, according to Scripture.

Such people don’t believe in the blood of Jesus.

We believe it is only by the blood of Jesus that we can be purged from our sins (Heb. 1:3) and set free from its slavery (Rev. 1:5). We contact Jesus’ precious, saving blood at the point of a trusting-submitting faith in the Lord Jesus when we turn from all sins and get born again. But we also know some have treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified them (Heb. 10:29) and have since become enemies of God with raging fire awaiting them (Heb. 10:27). See also James 4:4.

Such people don’t believe in the infinite work of Christ.

We know our redemption was paid for in full at the cross by Christ alone when he said, It is finished (John 19:30). But we also know the Lord Jesus and his apostles taught those already saved that they would have to endure and remain faithful to God to the end to be saved and not be hurt by the second death (Mt. 10:22; Rev. 2:10,11; Heb. 3:14).

Such people don’t believe in the free gift of eternal life.

We believe that eternal life is a gift, as Rom. 6:23 declares. But we also believe the previous verse which describes a real Christian, and what leads to holiness resulting with eternal life:

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

Eternal life is gift, but it is also a hope, yet to be reaped in the age to come, for the ones who persist in doing good and don’t give up sowing to please the Spirit of God (Titus 3:7; Mark 10:30; Rom. 2:7; Gal. 6:8,9; etc.).

Such people believe in a works salvation.

As already stated we believe we are saved by grace. But we also believe grace is best described in the following passage:


It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age (Titus 2:12).


Paul also believed and wrote about salvation (by grace) and gave the following to those who had already been saved:


The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life. Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up. Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers (Gal. 6:8-10).

Such people are in legalism.

Paul taught against legalism, yet taught the aforementioned facts about salvation, which the eternal security teachers cannot reconcile with their security-in-sin “gospel.” In other words, those Scriptures, and others like them, are under the umbrella of grace, not legalism.

Such people believe in sinless perfection.

We do not believe in sinless perfection, as some have in the past. All sins are not the same in their effect on our souls. Some sins are greater than others (Jn. 19:11). One type is eternal (Mk. 3:29), while others are not. Another type of sin is uniquely against our bodies, while other sins are outside our bodies (1 Cor. 6:18). 1 Jn. 5:16 declares there is a sin that does not lead to death while there is a sin that leads to death. Sins such as worry (Phil. 4:6), unthankfulness (Col. 2:7, 3:15; Lk. 17:11-18) and not being completely humble and gentle (Eph. 4:2) are not included in any of the lists of sins that will send people to the lake of fire, even if they were once saved. However, other sins certainly will send any person to hell if they die unrepentant, even a person who was once saved. (See 1 Cor. 6:9,10; Rev. 21:8; Gal. 5:19-21; Eph. 5:5,6; Jude 7; Rev. 22:15; etc.).


Such people are trying to save themselves.

We are not trying to save ourselves. Jesus is the only Savior (Acts 4:12) and our eyes are on him for our salvation. All 100% of our trust is in Jesus alone for salvation and not our good deeds too, even though we have good deeds. We are his sheep, and have salvation, as long as we continue to follow him (John 10:27). Because our faith is alive we have good deeds (James 2:17).


Such people are unsaved.


We are not unsaved because we reject eternal security. Such an untruth cannot be tied to any Scripture. We do acknowledge that Christian people can become unsaved, though, by believing/preaching a false gospel, committing certain types of sin or disowning Jesus during persecution (1 Cor. 15:2; 1 John 2:24,25; Gal. 1:8,9; Rev. 21:8; Eph. 5:5-7; Gal. 5:19-21; Mt. 10:33; etc.).

Such people think they lose their salvation every time they sin.


We do not believe we lose our salvation every time we sin. There are many sins that will not damn any Christian to eternal fire if committed, such as: worry, not being completely humble and gentle and not overflowing with thanksgiving. Never are such sins included in any Biblical list which states who will not inherit the kingdom of God and/or be thrown into the lake of fire such as the sexually immoral, drunkards, idolaters, murderers, liars, etc. (1 Cor. 6:9,10; Eph. 5:5-7; Rev. 21:8).


We get all 100% of our beliefs from the Bible and sincerely have studied it for decades with a willingness to change accordingly. Our beliefs are backed up with appropriate Scripture used in its proper context as well as other supporting Scriptures. We have found the eternal security proponents to be the ones who don’t understand the Bible and will misrepresent our beliefs to make their own seem more credible, as just shown.


For much more information on eternal security consult our 801 page book, The Believer’s Conditional Security. This book has never been and never will be refuted. It is the dread of the eternal security teachers. GOD BLESS YOU.
------

Return to Evangelical Outreach
www.evangelicaloutreach.org


Evangelical Outreach
PO Box 265, Washington, PA 15301

moonglow
Jan 20th 2007, 01:34 AM
And Madeline... The arena is for a more organized and structured debate. I've a lot going on in life right now and just don't have the time to fit within a structure. So you might ask around a bit before tossing at challenges like that because folks will tell you that I have no problem with my confidence in the doctrine nor do I have a problem debating it with anyone in any arena. It just isn't a good time. But rest assured... I am not afraid to do so and tossing out the challenge like you just did... my not taking it there means nothing other than I simply haven't the time right now. Ask in a couple of weeks when things have settled down and I am settled down then I'm your huckleberry. But ask some of the folks you agree with before doing it... such as RbG and whomever else and see if they think you are really ready for that. If he thinks so then cool... we'll set something up once I get settled.

you might let the newer folks know too that usually a challenge to a formal debate is done on PM so a person doesn't feel cornered into it...at least that is how MightyMutt had set it up because of someone being challenged on the board, then feeling put on the spot...don't know if that has changed or not though...hasn't even been a formal debate in eons in there...I miss being in a Peanut gallery and throwing popcorn at the debaters though....:lol:

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 01:36 AM
you might let the newer folks know too that usually a challenge to a formal debate is done on PM so a person doesn't feel cornered into it...at least that is how MightyMutt had set it up because of someone being challenged on the board, then feeling put on the spot...don't know if that has changed or not though...hasn't even been a formal debate in eons in there...I miss being in a Peanut gallery and throwing popcorn at the debaters though....:lol:
It is rarely used sure enough. I think TULIP was the last big one in there! But shoot... I ain't ever put on the spot and wished I had the time to do it right now. I could do it but not with any structure and that may as well just be done here! But shoot... I won't be busy much longer so then you of all folk know I'm game!!! :lol:

moonglow
Jan 20th 2007, 01:45 AM
It is rarely used sure enough. I think TULIP was the last big one in there! But shoot... I ain't ever put on the spot and wished I had the time to do it right now. I could do it but not with any structure and that may as well just be done here! But shoot... I won't be busy much longer so then you of all folk know I'm game!!! :lol:

Ok good...I will start buying popcorn and peanuts...:lol:

I am bringing monkeys too for the show...

:monkeyd: :monkeyd:

gee this is the slowest I have ever seen a NOSAS thread go..:hmm:

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 01:46 AM
Ok good...I will start buying popcorn and peanuts...:lol:

I am bringing monkeys too for the show...

:monkeyd: :monkeyd:

gee this is the slowest I have ever seen a NOSAS thread go..:hmm:
Ha! It won't last! They never do. :D

Centurionoflight
Jan 20th 2007, 01:46 AM
ProjectPeter


So he was a son who walked away. While he was away he was dead. When he came back broken and repentant... he was anazao. He recovered life. He lives again. He was once alive, then dead, then alive again. So born-again again... while I know that wording disturbs some folks... I've no problem with the thought. Naturally the ultimate thing is to repent and turn back to the Father. But I think it says much here and it being twice mentioned should gain our attention.
Dead or alive; at what point was he unborn from being the fathers son?

Even though he was Dead he still had a father to return to.

That is salvation.

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 01:49 AM
ProjectPeter


Dead or alive; at what point was he unborn from being the fathers son?

Even though he was Dead he still had a father to return to.

That is salvation.
Point being... until he came back to the Father, he was counted dead by the father. When he came back, the father saw him coming back and ran to him. A wonderful truth and teaching there. But nonetheless until the son returned, to the father, he was dead. Not until he returned did he live again. Taking that into consideration along with death and life (here we know it isn't speaking of physical death and life) one should be able to put one plus one together and come up with two easy enough.

moonglow
Jan 20th 2007, 01:51 AM
ProjectPeter


Dead or alive; at what point was he unborn from being the fathers son?

Even though he was Dead he still had a father to return to.

That is salvation.

What do you think that passage means? Just curious. thanks.

God bless

Centurionoflight
Jan 20th 2007, 10:43 AM
ProjectPeter
Point being;


Doing his fathers will or in rebellion; he is still his fathers son.
Dead or alive; he is still his fathers son.

The son can not change what he is since birth.

Centurionoflight
Jan 20th 2007, 10:45 AM
moonglow


What do you think that passage means? Just curious. thanks.

Not sure which passage posted you are refering to.

Redeemed by Grace
Jan 20th 2007, 12:08 PM
As all scripture fit’s together as a glove to a hand, just a comment to those who are studying and searching…

As you seek to find the truth in understanding salvation’s call -- one needs to understand multiple doctrines that surround the (N)OSAS positions.

The doctrines of sovereignty and providence of God, the doctrines of sin, of grace, even of salvation. The doctrines of regeneration, sanctification, justification and glorification also play into the doctrine of salvation’s security…

To those who are new here at BB forums, this has been discussed many times by a core group of folks and if you use the search feature, may find discussions that have occurred over the years that you might find useful, maybe even amusing.

A coin has two sides but as a coin, is one coin. However, doctrine, correct doctrine has only one side… Now the underling question has to be, how off can one’s doctrinal positions be and still be right enough to be “saved”?

Scripture states that having good doctrine is very important, and one that we all must strive to achieve… May God grant us wisdom as we prayerfully search the word in understanding the truth behind salvation’s call…

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 12:17 PM
ProjectPeter
Point being;


Doing his fathers will or in rebellion; he is still his fathers son.
Dead or alive; he is still his fathers son.

The son can not change what he is since birth.

Oh death does change that Centurion. Sure he is still a son by birth and a father will still love that son. But death does change things. As should be clear... that isn't speaking a physical death Centurion. That boy never physically died and yet the father makes it very clear that he was dead, which is the wage of sin which that son was living. It wasn't until that sons return that the son was alive AGAIN. He was alive, then dead, then alive again. Hopefully others won't simply blow off that very significant truth.

Faithwalker
Jan 20th 2007, 12:23 PM
"Humpher whersytrwocnbsgtarsl dhhagdyat" <--- hand over my mouth refraining from speaking... LOL :lol:

...

Does that really work? :lol:

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 01:34 PM
Very nicely laid-out. First question, and I won't be debating as it is a subject I am uncertain of, so I am here to learn.:D
So is the belief you have based upon the need for repentance alone, or do you believe a person who is saved and turns away must be saved again? God Bless.
And another Scripture to go along with the idea that one can be alive, dead, then alive again... ponder this passage.

James 5:19 ¶My brethren, if any among you strays from the truth, and one turns him back,
20 let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death, and will cover a multitude of sins.

If any among you (James is writing the Jewish Christians) strays from the truth. Notice what else he says about that person in that last verse... they were sinners and their soul was saved from death. Alive, dead, alive again.

Quickened
Jan 20th 2007, 03:22 PM
This should be an interesting thread! I will be followingly along

Redeemed by Grace
Jan 20th 2007, 03:56 PM
Does that really work? :lol:

For this topic and with this thread??? I'm fighting it really really hard....:lol:

jesuslover1968
Jan 20th 2007, 04:07 PM
And another Scripture to go along with the idea that one can be alive, dead, then alive again... ponder this passage.

James 5:19 ¶My brethren, if any among you strays from the truth, and one turns him back,
20 let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death, and will cover a multitude of sins.

If any among you (James is writing the Jewish Christians) strays from the truth. Notice what else he says about that person in that last verse... they were sinners and their soul was saved from death. Alive, dead, alive again.


Ok. Very good verses actually. I think I probably have a few questions to ask, but not as arguing, as seeking...
First, I have to say that I totally agree with you on the basis of repentance. :)
With that said, I will ask my first question to this.
1) What happens to the Holy Spirit? As every believer is now indwelt with the Holy Spirit, and Jesus said it won't be taken away...Now, I could justify this by saying that we could grieve the Holy Spirit and by our unrepentful heart, cause Him to leave, and that would still not be the Holy Spirit leaving on His own, but by our free will. My point in asking this is this: If a person who was saved, and turns away, dies...if he has the H.S., then he would have eternal life. So....I would assume that the H.S. has to vacate at some point in this case. ??
The reason I said that at this point in time I am osas is for this reason. I went on the basis that if we are truly saved then we would have a repentful heart anyway. If we are not truly saved, then we will eventually fall away.
We have examples such as Judas...was he really saved? I really dont think so.
Then we have the example of the Israelites coming out of the red sea which is symbolic of baptism. They were baptized by water, but not by the Spirit, though. I do not believe that all O.T. saints were indwelt. That is a question I have for you as well. Do you? Only two of those men saw the promised land. Joshua and Caleb. All the others perished because of sin. These are questions that leave me up in the air as far as being strictly osas or nosas. God Bless.

jiggyfly
Jan 20th 2007, 04:39 PM
I would like to suggest one thing that might help with both sides of this struggle for truth concerning the doctrine of salvation. Can clarification be given to what it is to be "saved" concerning both nosas and osas.

*Madeline*
Jan 20th 2007, 04:45 PM
Hi PP!:)


Okay let's see how that pans out.

If that is the case... will the one that is righteous live and never die or is man going to die no matter how righteous they are? Because if the death means they physically die... then we have an awful lot of sinners that are disproving that as truth and... the righteous are dying long about the same ages. So that being said... if the death means physical death then the life would have to mean they won't die. One cannot pick and choose context so it would have to work that way for both life and death. Naturally we know that it doesn't so that is why that just doesn't fly.

Everyone, including those to whom this passage was written, knows that everyone will die eventually. So obviously Ezekiel did not mean an eventual death because that, as you implied, will happen to everyone anyway. So we have two choices as to what Ezek. 18 is all about.

1) Given that some transgressions of the Mosaic law are punishable by stoning, the death referred to in Ezek. 18 is an immediate death by stoning.
2) Ezek. 18 is speaking about eternal death.

You're speaking of a "physical death". What other kind of death is there? There is no mention of a "spiritual death" in this passage, but I have heard people speak of that, and since you are speaking of a physical death I am assuming you believe it speaks of a spiritual death.

In Ecclesiastes. 3 which speaks of death The death of an animal is the same as the death of a human, i.e. the body returns to dust and the spirit (i.e. the breath of life) returns to God.

Let's also consider the context. Note vs. 10-13 which speaks of one who has committed certain sins. We read in vs. 13, "....he shall surely die". Now look at verses 14-17 which speaks of a man who has not sinned as the previous person had. We read in vs. 17, "....he shall surely not die". Obviously, he will die, but he won't die by being stoned. In other words, this passage is about the good dying a natural death and the sinful by stoning as perscribed by the Mosaic law. Given that every Israelite knew that transgressions were punishable by stoning, I believe that Ezek. 18 speaks of that death. Hope this helps!:hug:

Love,
Madeline

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 05:13 PM
Ok. Very good verses actually. I think I probably have a few questions to ask, but not as arguing, as seeking...
First, I have to say that I totally agree with you on the basis of repentance. :)

With that said, I will ask my first question to this.

1) What happens to the Holy Spirit? As every believer is now indwelt with the Holy Spirit, and Jesus said it won't be taken away...Now, I could justify this by saying that we could grieve the Holy Spirit and by our unrepentful heart, cause Him to leave, and that would still not be the Holy Spirit leaving on His own, but by our free will. My point in asking this is this: If a person who was saved, and turns away, dies...if he has the H.S., then he would have eternal life. So....I would assume that the H.S. has to vacate at some point in this case. ??Keeping in mind that the Old Testament is for our example and it is for doctrine, reproof, etc... We do know that the Holy Spirit did in fact depart King Saul when Saul had finally gone to far in his disobedience to God. So we know that it can happen as God sees fit.


The reason I said that at this point in time I am osas is for this reason. I went on the basis that if we are truly saved then we would have a repentful heart anyway. If we are not truly saved, then we will eventually fall away.Then that would be more what is called POTS or Perseverance of the Saints. OSAS still when the rubber meets the road... but there is a difference.


We have examples such as Judas...was he really saved? I really dont think so.An age old debated question no doubt.



Then we have the example of the Israelites coming out of the red sea which is symbolic of baptism. They were baptized by water, but not by the Spirit, though. I do not believe that all O.T. saints were indwelt. That is a question I have for you as well. Do you?No, they were not. But as I stated above... we do have those that were and we do know that the Spirit can leave someone and will leave someone. That is doctrine that one has to contend with here. Most take the easy way and just say that this is "before the cross therefore not applicable." That at least works for them at the time.


Only two of those men saw the promised land. Joshua and Caleb. All the others perished because of sin. These are questions that leave me up in the air as far as being strictly osas or nosas. God Bless.Yes... a couple of very good passages in the Epistle's that speak of this:

1 Corinthians 9:23 And I do all things for the sake of the gospel, that I may become a fellow partaker of it.
24 ¶Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but only one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may win.
25 And everyone who competes in the games exercises self-control in all things. They then do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable.
26 Therefore I run in such a way, as not without aim; I box in such a way, as not beating the air;
27 but I buffet my body and make it my slave, lest possibly, after I have preached to others, I myself should be disqualified.

1 Corinthians 10:1 For I do not want you to be unaware, brethren, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;
2 and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea;
3 and all ate the same spiritual food;
4 and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was Christ.
5 Nevertheless, with most of them God was not well-pleased; for they were laid low in the wilderness.
6 Now these things happened as examples for us, that we should not crave evil things, as they also craved.
7 And do not be idolaters, as some of them were; as it is written, "THE PEOPLE SAT DOWN TO EAT AND DRINK, AND STOOD UP TO PLAY."
8 Nor let us act immorally, as some of them did, and twenty-three thousand fell in one day.
9 Nor let us try the Lord, as some of them did, and were destroyed by the serpents.
10 Nor grumble, as some of them did, and were destroyed by the destroyer.
11 Now these things happened to them as an example, and they were written for our instruction, upon whom the ends of the ages have come.
12 Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall.

And then in Hebrews

Hebrews 3

1 Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of a heavenly calling, consider Jesus, the Apostle and High Priest of our confession.
2 He was faithful to Him who appointed Him, as Moses also was in all His house.
3 For He has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses, by just so much as the builder of the house has more honor than the house.
4 For every house is built by someone, but the builder of all things is God.
5 Now Moses was faithful in all His house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken later;
6 but Christ was faithful as a Son over His house whose house we are, if we hold fast our confidence and the boast of our hope firm until the end.
7 Therefore, just as the Holy Spirit says, "TODAY IF YOU HEAR HIS VOICE,
8 DO NOT HARDEN YOUR HEARTS AS WHEN THEY PROVOKED ME, AS IN THE DAY OF TRIAL IN THE WILDERNESS,
9 WHERE YOUR FATHERS TRIED Me BY TESTING Me, AND SAW MY WORKS FOR FORTY YEARS.
10 "THEREFORE I WAS ANGRY WITH THIS GENERATION, AND SAID, `THEY ALWAYS GO ASTRAY IN THEIR HEART; AND THEY DID NOT KNOW MY WAYS´;
11 AS I SWORE IN MY WRATH, `THEY SHALL NOT ENTER MY REST.´"
12 Take care, brethren, lest there should be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart, in falling away from the living God.
13 But encourage one another day after day, as long as it is still called "Today," lest any one of you be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.
14 For we have become partakers of Christ, if we hold fast the beginning of our assurance firm until the end;
15 while it is said, "TODAY IF YOU HEAR HIS VOICE, DO NOT HARDEN YOUR HEARTS, AS WHEN THEY PROVOKED ME."
16 For who provoked Him when they had heard? Indeed, did not all those who came out of Egypt led by Moses?
17 And with whom was He angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the wilderness?
18 And to whom did He swear that they should not enter His rest, but to those who were disobedient?
19 And so we see that they were not able to enter because of unbelief.

Hebrews 4

1 Therefore, let us fear lest, while a promise remains of entering His rest, any one of you should seem to have come short of it.
2 For indeed we have had good news preached to us, just as they also; but the word they heard did not profit them, because it was not united by faith in those who heard.
3 For we who have believed enter that rest, just as He has said, "AS I SWORE IN MY WRATH, THEY SHALL NOT ENTER MY REST," although His works were finished from the foundation of the world.
4 For He has thus said somewhere concerning the seventh day, "AND GOD RESTED ON THE SEVENTH DAY FROM ALL HIS WORKS";
5 and again in this passage, "THEY SHALL NOT ENTER MY REST."
6 Since therefore it remains for some to enter it, and those who formerly had good news preached to them failed to enter because of disobedience,
7 He again fixes a certain day, "Today," saying through David after so long a time just as has been said before, "TODAY IF YOU HEAR HIS VOICE, DO NOT HARDEN YOUR HEARTS."
8 For if Joshua had given them rest, He would not have spoken of another day after that.
9 There remains therefore a Sabbath rest for the people of God.
10 For the one who has entered His rest has himself also rested from his works, as God did from His.
11 Let us therefore be diligent to enter that rest, lest anyone fall through following the same example of disobedience.
12 For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart.
13 And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are open and laid bare to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do.
14 ¶Since then we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession.
15 For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin.
16 Let us therefore draw near with confidence to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and may find grace to help in time of need.

Again another warning to us believers to not become as they did. Much is in the Hebrews passages as well as that entire letter on this very topic.

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 05:17 PM
Hi PP!:)



Everyone, including those to whom this passage was written, knows that everyone will die eventually. So obviously Ezekiel did not mean an eventual death because that, as you implied, will happen to everyone anyway. So we have two choices as to what Ezek. 18 is all about.

1) Given that some transgressions of the Mosaic law are punishable by stoning, the death referred to in Ezek. 18 is an immediate death by stoning.
2) Ezek. 18 is speaking about eternal death.

You're speaking of a "physical death". What other kind of death is there? There is no mention of a "spiritual death" in this passage, but I have heard people speak of that, and since you are speaking of a physical death I am assuming you believe it speaks of a spiritual death.

In Ecclesiastes. 3 which speaks of death The death of an animal is the same as the death of a human, i.e. the body returns to dust and the spirit (i.e. the breath of life) returns to God.

Let's also consider the context. Note vs. 10-13 which speaks of one who has committed certain sins. We read in vs. 13, "....he shall surely die". Now look at verses 14-17 which speaks of a man who has not sinned as the previous person had. We read in vs. 17, "....he shall surely not die". Obviously, he will die, but he won't die by being stoned. In other words, this passage is about the good dying a natural death and the sinful by stoning as perscribed by the Mosaic law. Given that every Israelite knew that transgressions were punishable by stoning, I believe that Ezek. 18 speaks of that death. Hope this helps!:hug:

Love,
MadelineAnd once again Madeline... This was God speaking through Ezekiel. If what you say was the case... then it just didn't work out so well because there were many a sinning Jewish person by the time Christ came to the earth that first time and there still is today. It doesn't work. There is no mention of stoning and all of that and no mention of living to a ripe old age. It says the one that sins will die and the one that is righteous will live. One can try and stretch this where you are... but if falls way short of making much sense. Remember that this isn't Ezekiel just jabbering to the Jewish folk. This is God speaking.

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 05:19 PM
I would like to suggest one thing that might help with both sides of this struggle for truth concerning the doctrine of salvation. Can clarification be given to what it is to be "saved" concerning both nosas and osas.
Romans 10:8 But what does it say? "THE WORD IS NEAR YOU, in your mouth and in your heart" -- that is, the word of faith which we are preaching,
9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you shall be saved;
10 for with the heart man believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.
11 For the Scripture says, "WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED."

I don't think it gets any more simple than that.

Dan Moran
Jan 20th 2007, 05:34 PM
Ezekiel 18:20 "The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.
21 ¶"But if the wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed and observes all My statutes and practices justice and righteousness, he shall surely live; he shall not die.
22 "All his transgressions which he has committed will not be remembered against him; because of his righteousness which he has practiced, he will live.
23 "Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the Lord GOD, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?
24 ¶"But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and does according to all the abominations that a wicked man does, will he live? All his righteous deeds which he has done will not be remembered for his treachery which he has committed and his sin which he has committed; for them he will die.
25 "Yet you say, `The way of the Lord is not right.´ Hear now, O house of Israel! Is My way not right? Is it not your ways that are not right?
26 "When a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and dies because of it, for his iniquity which he has committed he will die.
27 "Again, when a wicked man turns away from his wickedness which he has committed and practices justice and righteousness, he will save his life.
28 "Because he considered and turned away from all his transgressions which he had committed, he shall surely live; he shall not die.
Peter...per your request. Thanks!

I was reading through your scriptural references from the book of Exodus, regarding your conclusions on redemption/salvation. Out of respect for your wishes to keep from debate, I figured I'd write you here.

Do you believe Jesus Christ was the significant factor that established the Mosiac Law and would you consider his life to be the cornerstone to a new idea the Holy Spirit had in mind for his adopted sons and daughters called grace?

You have read, I'm certain in the gospels the Pharisees asking Jesus Christ what was the most important commandment; and his response to them was to love the Lord God with all the heart, mind, soul and strength. But he added a second like the first: "To love your neighbor as yourself."

One key idea in this change of administration, is that in both 'new' commandments that were brought on by Christ establishing the law was the action of love. He was not speaking of the phileo love in the means of you scratching my back and I'll scratch yours. He was speaking of the fruit of the spirit which is agape.

If we are truly sealed with the holy spirit as a guantee, than we are sealed and the fruit of the spirit will remain. It's simply a matter of returning to fellowship from walking the 'old man nature.' The people in the Old Testament did not have that luxery.

I Corinthians Chapter 13, written to today's church and believers, distinguishes between the phileo love and the agape love. For if I do these things of Christ and have not love, I'm simply a sounding brass or tingling cymbal. So we are capable in our 'old man nature' to act Christ-like, but we do it for selfish gain. In contrast, it also speaks of the agape love, for if we do not have it, our efforts are fruitless.

With this said, it reminds us to maintain fellowship with our heavenly Father and put away the old man.
I fear the NOSAS crowd continue to crucify Christ on a daily basis without this understanding.

I went out to the theatre a couple years ago to watch "The Passion." Perhaps the most heinous depiction of Christ's crucifixcion we'll ever get to imagine and yet I fear Mel Gibson was only able to paint still yet a very slight picture of it all.

I do not believe you wish to do that to Christ again, and you know I'm on the same page with you, nor do I wish to have him go through that again. It seems like a terrible thing to put the Son of God through just so God can pull his spirit out of people at will, and place it right back in again, leaving our moment of death on this earth to chance on whether we were playing red and landed on black or vice versa.

Just food for thought, brother. :hmm:



Dan

Ta-An
Jan 20th 2007, 05:47 PM
But Dan :hmm:
If a person, giving their lives to Christ, gets to a point where they fall off the rails and commit a besetting sin (Deliberate sin/sins of the flesh Gal.5:16-21) those sins will be punished.... what punishment is there for that sin :hmm: can one not lose your salvation ??
How can a person say :"I believe in Jesus Christ as my Savior, and choose to live a life of deliberate sin':hmm:

moonglow
Jan 20th 2007, 05:57 PM
PP: Keeping in mind that the Old Testament is for our example and it is for doctrine, reproof, etc... We do know that the Holy Spirit did in fact depart King Saul when Saul had finally gone to far in his disobedience to God. So we know that it can happen as God sees fit.

Just for those that don't know this scriptures:
Samuel 16:14
Now the Spirit of the Lord had left Saul, and the Lord sent a tormenting spirit that filled him with depression and fear.

This is echoed in the NT also:

2 Peter 2

19 They promise freedom, but they themselves are slaves to sin and corruption. For you are a slave to whatever controls you. 20 And when people escape from the wicked ways of the world by learning about our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and then get tangled up with sin and become its slave again, they are worse off than before. 21 It would be better if they had never known the right way to live than to know it and then reject the holy commandments that were given to them.

Verse 20
For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein and overcome, the last state has become worse with them than the first.

http://www.searchgodsword.org/com/bcc/view.cgi?book=2pe&chapter=002
Coffman Commentaries
Here again, the subsequent clause makes it perfectly clear what Peter said, and fully justifies the KJV rendition in 2 Pet. 2:18.

The thing in view in this verse is a spiritual condition described as worse than being lost; and the only thing that answers to such a condition is that of being lost without the possibility of being saved. Therefore, this verse is to be understood in connection with Heb. 6:6, "quenching the Spirit" (1 Thessalonians 5:19), "the sin unto death" (1 John 5:16), being "dead while alive" (1 Timothy 5:6), etc., that is, the state of having committed "an eternal sin" (Mark 3:29). The apostate teachers in view in this chapter are in a state of total rejection of Christ, having thereby committed the sin against the Holy Spirit, called by Mark, "an eternal sin." For full discussion of this, see in my Commentary on Matthew, pp. 173-175, and also in my Commentary on Mark, pp. 65-67.


Verse 21
For it were better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after knowing it, to turn back from the holy commandment delivered unto them.

As Caffin said, "This verse implies that these unhappy men once had the full knowledge of Christ. "The passage indicates that the heretics had been orthodox Christians in the first place." "Peter said they had escaped the defilements of the world, which could not be said of pretenders." The verse also declares that the holy commandment had once been "delivered unto them," which is a far different thing from merely having been preached to them. These men had once been true teachers of God's precious word. Green summarized the whole paragraph (the entire chapter), saying:

The subject of the whole paragraph is then the same ... those overcome in vv. 19 and 20 are also the same. There can be little doubt that the false teachers had once been orthodox Christians.


My understanding is these people cannot be saved again. They have committed the unforgivable sin. There is no being saved over and over again like some think we mean. This isn't about being a backslidden Christian who lost his way...this is about a conscience, willful rejection of God. This is why Hebrews says there is no way back!

Hebrews 6

4 For it is impossible to restore to repentance those who were once enlightened--those who have experienced the good things of heaven and shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the power of the age to come-- 6and who then turn away from God. It is impossible to bring such people to repentance again because they are nailing the Son of God to the cross again by rejecting him, holding him up to public shame.

This isn't about sinning too much and God gets disgusted and takes back His gift of salvation...He is not counting our sins in this way. The bible is clear when we sin, and repent, He forgets our sins. There is no limit saying you can only sin three thousand times and you are out. (now if you are sinning and not repenting, you need to realize the danger you are placing yourself in, sure! but that is for another topic).

God bless

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 06:14 PM
Peter...per your request. Thanks!

I was reading through your scriptural references from the book of Exodus, regarding your conclusions on redemption/salvation. Out of respect for your wishes to keep from debate, I figured I'd write you here.

Do you believe Jesus Christ was the significant factor that established the Mosiac Law and would you consider his life to be the cornerstone to a new idea the Holy Spirit had in mind for his adopted sons and daughters called grace?Honestly I don't think it a "new idea" at all. God's grace was present throughout the Old Testament. Were that not the case then those in the Wilderness would have been toast. Moses would have been toast. Sarah would have been toast for laughing at what the messengers told her. Lot would not have been spared. Sampson would have lived until he died in prison. David would have had his kingdom torn from him and stoned to death for the sins he committed... etc. because the list is very, very long. Grace has been ever present from God and God's grace today is no greater or no less than it always has been. There was changes yes. Changes in the atonement etc. But not in God's attributes and that is vital information that everyone MUST understand otherwise preachers and teachers out there are not doing justice to their supposed calling.


You have read, I'm certain in the gospels the Pharisees asking Jesus Christ what was the most important commandment; and his response to them was to love the Lord God with all the heart, mind, soul and strength. But he added a second like the first: "To love your neighbor as yourself."

One key idea in this change of administration, is that in both 'new' commandments that were brought on by Christ establishing the law was the action of love. He was not speaking of the phileo love in the means of you scratching my back and I'll scratch yours. He was speaking of the fruit of the spirit which is agape.No problem with this.



If we are truly sealed with the holy spirit as a guantee, than we are sealed and the fruit of the spirit will remain. It's simply a matter of returning to fellowship from walking the 'old man nature.' The people in the Old Testament did not have that luxery.Problem is... you won't find a passage that says that in the New Testament or the Old. I will simply give this link to you on the passage in Ephesians that speaks of being sealed. Owen and I have discussed this over the years at great length and he and I are in total agreement on this.

http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=754502&postcount=38


I Corinthians Chapter 13, written to today's church and believers, distinguishes between the phileo love and the agape love. For if I do these things of Christ and have not love, I'm simply a sounding brass or tingling cymbal. So we are capable in our 'old man nature' to act Christ-like, but we do it for selfish gain. In contrast, it also speaks of the agape love, for if we do not have it, our efforts are fruitless.I don't see it that way. If we do it with wrong motive then there is absolutely nothing Christ-like about it. It means absolutely nothing.


With this said, it reminds us to maintain fellowship with our heavenly Father and put away the old man.With what you said above, I can see why you would think that. However I believe what you said above is not at all the point that Paul was making in 1 Corinthians 13.



I fear the NOSAS crowd continue to crucify Christ on a daily basis without this understanding.How? What you said above sounds good I suppose but I think you are missing a whole lot there.


I went out to the theatre a couple years ago to watch "The Passion." Perhaps the most heinous depiction of Christ's crucifixcion we'll ever get to imagine and yet I fear Mel Gibson was only able to paint still yet a very slight picture of it all.

I do not believe you wish to do that to Christ again, and you know I'm on the same page with you, nor do I wish to have him go through that again. It seems like a terrible thing to put the Son of God through just so God can pull his spirit out of people at will, and place it right back in again, leaving our moment of death on this earth to chance on whether we were playing red and landed on black or vice versa.

Just food for thought, brother. :hmm:
DanYou paint a good picture here to try and paint this doctrine in a way that it is far from. Tugging on folks emotions works often and more will likely enjoy what you say a whole lot more than what I say. But ultimately the truth doesn't necessarily lie in word pictures folks paint. But it is the Book. So why not let's not go through these type things and actually discuss the Scripture being presented eh?

Dan Moran
Jan 20th 2007, 06:31 PM
Do you find God's terminology of a servant and that of a son and daughter to be at odds with one another, or do you find them synonymous? And if synonymous, how?

MynameisMary
Jan 20th 2007, 06:33 PM
PP,

Hey bud! Just your friendly little corncob here.

You know how I feel about this subject. I was just wondering if you and I could thrash it out .

Like I have before stated, My sister is osas. And she thinks she can do or say JUST ABOUT anything she wants and still go with Jesus when He returns.

My mother lives a life of fear and constant doubt about everyones salvation, including her own. It smacks of distrust in our Lord to me. She is nosas.

The thing that confuses me is that I take the bible in its entirety. I believe that splitting it into two different doctrines is not only detrimental to christians, but unbelievers as well.

So, that being said, and also given that I dont worry at all about hell and damnation because they dont belong to me,.... where would I fit in? I dont exactly believe everything about osas. And I dont exactly believe everything about nosas. I take the whole word, and take it litterally.

So what do you think?

Do I confuse you yet? Or should I try harder?

MynameisMary
Jan 20th 2007, 06:36 PM
Do you find God's terminology of a servant and that of a son and daughter to be at odds with one another, or do you find them synonymous? And if synonymous, how?Paul states throughout his letters that we are :

Ambassadors
Children of light
Sons and daughters

And a whole slew of other things including servant. I dont believe that there is a difference to God. So I like to think that we are children of light who serve God. :D.

When I have a bible handy I will seek out all the titles that Paul states we can claim.

Including SAINTS:o

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 06:38 PM
Do you find God's terminology of a servant and that of a son and daughter to be at odds with one another, or do you find them synonymous? And if synonymous, how?Depends on how it is being used. In other words... context of the various passages.

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 06:41 PM
PP,

Hey bud! Just your friendly little corncob here.

You know how I feel about this subject. I was just wondering if you and I could thrash it out .

Like I have before stated, My sister is osas. And she thinks she can do or say JUST ABOUT anything she wants and still go with Jesus when He returns.

My mother lives a life of fear and constant doubt about everyones salvation, including her own. It smacks of distrust in our Lord to me. She is nosas.

The thing that confuses me is that I take the bible in its entirety. I believe that splitting it into two different doctrines is not only detrimental to christians, but unbelievers as well.

So, that being said, and also given that I dont worry at all about hell and damnation because they dont belong to me,.... where would I fit in? I dont exactly believe everything about osas. And I dont exactly believe everything about nosas. I take the whole word, and take it litterally.

So what do you think?

Do I confuse you yet? Or should I try harder?Neither side of these doctrines have the market cornered on wrong living. Not everyone that teaches OSAS would ever say that one can live like a heathen although there are those that do live that way and even teach it that way. Not everyone that teaches NOSAS teach folks to fear things such as that although there are those that do fear that and those that do teach it so as to breed that fear. That's the sad reality of bad teachers and folks that aren't no more called by the Lord than the goofy dog sitting under my feet right now.

As to where you fit... no clue. So ask away as we go and I'll explain it the best I can. :)

MynameisMary
Jan 20th 2007, 06:45 PM
Ok:

If you commit just one sin, deliberate or not, are you d@mn3d to hell right then? Does the Lord really turn His back on you?

Or does He ignore it because after all you are His child?

Or is it like I think....That if you do something wrong He will punnish you just as you would punish your kids....

And maybe if you dont fall back in line before you die, you forfeit your salvation?

TrustGzus
Jan 20th 2007, 06:47 PM
Hey PP,

Interesting to see you use the prodigal son. I used to reject OSAS. I have believed it now for 15+ years. A couple comments on using Luke 15:

I think parables can be supportive, but I wouldn't use them in a formulative way to build a doctrine. I think the safest way to build doctrine is from didactic passages. If a parable supports it - great. I'm not saying it's formulative for you. I'm sure you have other passages you use and this is supportive.

That being said, I don't see parables as multi-faceted and usable to teach a multiplicity of things. I think we need to look at the context in which Jesus taught a parable to take from it what he intended (exegesis) rather than pour into it what he did not intend (eisogesis).

With that comment in place, look at the opening of Luke 15 before Jesus gave the parables of the lost sheep, lost coin, and prodigal son . . .

1 Now all the a (http://bibleforums.org/#_ftn1)tax collectors and the 1 (http://bibleforums.org/#_ftn2)sinners were coming near Him to listen to Him.

2 Both the Pharisees and the scribes began to grumble, saying, “This man receives sinners and a (http://bibleforums.org/#_ftn3)eats with them.”

3 So He told them this parable, saying,
a (http://bibleforums.org/#_ftnref1)Luke 5:29

1 (http://bibleforums.org/#_ftnref2)I.e. irreligious Jews

a (http://bibleforums.org/#_ftnref3)Matt 9:11


New American Standard Bible : 1995 Update (LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation, 1995), Lk 15:1.


His three parables were a response to the Pharisees' and scribes' grumbling that he received "sinners" and eats with them. Obviously, in the prodigal son, the pharisees are the son that never left his dad and tax collectors and "sinners" are the son that booked. The pharisees did not have this attitude but despised those Jesus hung with. Jesus' three parables were a correction to this attitude and to ours if we have it.

The point of the three parables is that God is seeking that which is lost. Do you think with that background that we should take a single Greek word within the parable and build and speak to a doctriine of which isn't the context in which the parable was given?

Grace & Peace to you,

Joe

MynameisMary
Jan 20th 2007, 06:50 PM
I will check in on this later PP. Thanks for answering. I still feel confused about where my stance falls in....

I am on a library computer and will not be back for a little while but I will try to keep up. Love ya and missed ya!

*Madeline*
Jan 20th 2007, 06:54 PM
Hi PP!:)


And once again Madeline... This was God speaking through Ezekiel. If what you say was the case... then it just didn't work out so well because there were many a sinning Jewish person by the time Christ came to the earth that first time and there still is today. It doesn't work. There is no mention of stoning and all of that and no mention of living to a ripe old age. It says the one that sins will die and the one that is righteous will live. One can try and stretch this where you are... but if falls way short of making much sense. Remember that this isn't Ezekiel just jabbering to the Jewish folk. This is God speaking.

You're right, there is nothing about stoning in the context. But there is an awful lot on the phrase "he shall die". This is a phrase that Israelites were all too familar with, because it occurs dozens perhaps even close to a hundred times in connection with God's dealing with them.

You said that Ezek. 18 speaks of people dying eternally, I'm saying that Ezek. 18 speaks of them dying immediately as a consequence of their sin. Let's look at Lev. 10 for example. Note in verse 1 that Nadab and Abihu offered a "strange fire before the Lord" and "they died". In other words they died immediately (like Anannias and Saphira in Acts) because they had done that which displeased the Lord. In this context it is clear that they died immediately, not eternally.

Now let's go to verse 6, "Moses said unto Aaron......'Uncover not your heads, neither rend your clothes; lest ye die, and let your brethren, the whole house of Israel, bewail the burning which the Lord hath kindled'". Given that those of verse 1 died immediately, not eternally, I believe that verse 6 also refers to an untimely death for the sin mentioned in this verse.

Look at verse 7, "and ye shall not go out from the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die". I believe that Israel would always connect the phrase "lest you die" with untimely death for a punishment of some sin. I suggest you look up "die" in the concordance and see how many times it refers to an untimely death as a consequence of sin. In Lev. and Numbers alone it is used that way 22 times.

Also, you have not commented (as far as I know) on the fact that the Hebrew word translated "righteous" does not mean "saved", it means that he had done the right, or correct things. (Remember that I wrote of times that the Bible speaks of one being more righteous than another. One is not more saved.) So there is no reason to assume that this "righteous man" was saved. That being the case, Ezek. 18 is not about a saved person, don't you think that you should address that difficulty in your position?:)

Love,
Madeline

jesuslover1968
Jan 20th 2007, 07:05 PM
I am really reading some great stuff here. Thanks to everyone who is posting.

Now...:lol:



Keeping in mind that the Old Testament is for our example and it is for doctrine, reproof, etc... We do know that the Holy Spirit did in fact depart King Saul when Saul had finally gone to far in his disobedience to God. So we know that it can happen as God sees fit.


I know that the H.S. left Saul. This is my confusion with that: The H.S. was not given as a permanent indwelling at that time. So the leaving of the H.S. at that time would not seem to be contradictory whatsoever, as it shouldn't be. I believe that anything we seem to think is contradictory in the Bible is just a misconception on our part. :)
However, with the scriptures you have given to me, and some of those given by Moonglow, I see them all coming together to form what I am beginning to see as the clear picture. I still am somewhat up in the air about how the H.S. leaves what is a permanent dwelling place. ??
I was talking to my sister on the phone about Judas...LOL. I know...I know...but that's the kind of stuff we discuss all the time. She seems to think Judas was repentful. I don't. Or at least not in the way she means. There is the, " I'm truly sorry I did this. " and there is the " I'm sorry I got caught cause now I'm doomed" types of sorry. The Bible says that Judas went to his own place, so we know he did not go to Heaven, nor Hell for that matter. As Heaven and Hell are both mentioned in the Bible, it would have been easier to just say, he went to hell, and it didn't. I think Judas knew he was doomed and tried to go back and make it right, but it was too late. When Jesus was sitting there talking about one of them betraying Him, the apostles didn't know who it was. But Judas was there, and he knew, and satan had already entered him( Luke 22:3) . So then you come to the question of whether a Christian can be indwelt by a demon or the devil and it goes on and on and on...
I have so far come to the conclusion that it is osas WITH repentance. Without repentance, then there is NO saved at all. I believe at this time that if we are truly saved, then we WILL BE truly repentful. :lol: . Still looking for further answers PP....:) :hug: God Bless.

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 07:05 PM
Ok:

If you commit just one sin, deliberate or not, are you d@mn3d to hell right then? Does the Lord really turn His back on you?Oh I don't think so no. If that was the case then as I said earlier... David would be toast. Peter would be toast... etc. Mind you... had they not repented of their sins... that would have led to death no doubt.


Or does He ignore it because after all you are His child?God doesn't ignore sin.




Or is it like I think....That if you do something wrong He will punnish you just as you would punish your kids....

And maybe if you dont fall back in line before you die, you forfeit your salvation?He will chastise us. That is very Scriptural... and there is a time when we are just turned over to Satan and perhaps that will be what it takes. If you die in your sin... then your righteousness will not be remembered.

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 07:29 PM
Hey PP,

Interesting to see you use the prodigal son. I used to reject OSAS. I have believed it now for 15+ years. A couple comments on using Luke 15:

I think parables can be supportive, but I wouldn't use them in a formulative way to build a doctrine. I think the safest way to build doctrine is from didactic passages. If a parable supports it - great. I'm not saying it's formulative for you. I'm sure you have other passages you use and this is supportive.

That being said, I don't see parables as multi-faceted and usable to teach a multiplicity of things. I think we need to look at the context in which Jesus taught a parable to take from it what he intended (exegesis) rather than pour into it what he did not intend (eisogesis).

With that comment in place, look at the opening of Luke 15 before Jesus gave the parables of the lost sheep, lost coin, and prodigal son . . . His three parables were a response to the Pharisees' and scribes' grumbling that he received "sinners" and eats with them. Obviously, in the prodigal son, the pharisees are the son that never left his dad and tax collectors and "sinners" are the son that booked. The pharisees did not have this attitude but despised those Jesus hung with. Jesus' three parables were a correction to this attitude and to ours if we have it.

The point of the three parables is that God is seeking that which is lost. Do you think with that background that we should take a single Greek word within the parable and build and speak to a doctriine of which isn't the context in which the parable was given?

Grace & Peace to you,

JoeAs you said Joe... it is used in support of many other passages and I am taking them one at a time for the purpose of explaining this to someone that asked why I believed as I do. But as to Parables being used for doctrine... Sure they can be. Yes, they make points and that has to be taken into context most surely. That being said too... this parable is still very clearly speaking of salvation therefore it is very much applicable to this discussion context wise. And rest assured that were we to discount the parables as doctrine then we discount a very large majority of the teachings of Christ who spoke in many parables. I gotta feeling that this would be a great mistake. ;)

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 07:30 PM
I will check in on this later PP. Thanks for answering. I still feel confused about where my stance falls in....

I am on a library computer and will not be back for a little while but I will try to keep up. Love ya and missed ya!Talk to you later corn cob. :)

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 07:39 PM
Hi PP!:)



You're right, there is nothing about stoning in the context. But there is an awful lot on the phrase "he shall die". This is a phrase that Israelites were all too familar with, because it occurs dozens perhaps even close to a hundred times in connection with God's dealing with them.

You said that Ezek. 18 speaks of people dying eternally, I'm saying that Ezek. 18 speaks of them dying immediately as a consequence of their sin. Let's look at Lev. 10 for example. Note in verse 1 that Nadab and Abihu offered a "strange fire before the Lord" and "they died". In other words they died immediately (like Anannias and Saphira in Acts) because they had done that which displeased the Lord. In this context it is clear that they died immediately, not eternally. Madeline... think about what you are saying here. If this was the case... there would have been no sinners on the planet left who could have put Jesus to death. Like I said... this don't work.



Now let's go to verse 6, "Moses said unto Aaron......'Uncover not your heads, neither rend your clothes; lest ye die, and let your brethren, the whole house of Israel, bewail the burning which the Lord hath kindled'". Given that those of verse 1 died immediately, not eternally, I believe that verse 6 also refers to an untimely death for the sin mentioned in this verse.

Look at verse 7, "and ye shall not go out from the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die". I believe that Israel would always connect the phrase "lest you die" with untimely death for a punishment of some sin. I suggest you look up "die" in the concordance and see how many times it refers to an untimely death as a consequence of sin. In Lev. and Numbers alone it is used that way 22 times. And this passage has absolutely nothing to do with the passage in Ezekiel.


You are trying to apply the judgment of the Law and how Israel was to judge folks who broke it and apply that to Ezekiel here and that is way off base.

[QUOTE]
Also, you have not commented (as far as I know) on the fact that the Hebrew word translated "righteous" does not mean "saved", it means that he had done the right, or correct things. (Remember that I wrote of times that the Bible speaks of one being more righteous than another. One is not more saved.) So there is no reason to assume that this "righteous man" was saved. That being the case, Ezek. 18 is not about a saved person, don't you think that you should address that difficulty in your position?:)

Love,
MadelineEver read the Psalms? It was the righteous who are saved Madeline. Those that believed. Those that didn't believe were the disobedient ones ... the ones who would die in their sin. That is absolutely how it worked then and technically speaking it is how it works now although we don't need bulls and goats to atone for our sin. Christ took care of that.

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 08:16 PM
I am really reading some great stuff here. Thanks to everyone who is posting.

Now...:lol:

I know that the H.S. left Saul. This is my confusion with that: The H.S. was not given as a permanent indwelling at that time. So the leaving of the H.S. at that time would not seem to be contradictory whatsoever, as it shouldn't be. I believe that anything we seem to think is contradictory in the Bible is just a misconception on our part. :) Why do we think that God didn't give the Spirit to someone permanently in the Old Testament.



However, with the scriptures you have given to me, and some of those given by Moonglow, I see them all coming together to form what I am beginning to see as the clear picture. I still am somewhat up in the air about how the H.S. leaves what is a permanent dwelling place. ?? I understand that. I used to struggle with it as well.



I was talking to my sister on the phone about Judas...LOL. I know...I know...but that's the kind of stuff we discuss all the time. She seems to think Judas was repentful. I don't. Or at least not in the way she means. There is the, " I'm truly sorry I did this. " and there is the " I'm sorry I got caught cause now I'm doomed" types of sorry. The Bible says that Judas went to his own place, so we know he did not go to Heaven, nor Hell for that matter. As Heaven and Hell are both mentioned in the Bible, it would have been easier to just say, he went to hell, and it didn't. I think Judas knew he was doomed and tried to go back and make it right, but it was too late. When Jesus was sitting there talking about one of them betraying Him, the apostles didn't know who it was. But Judas was there, and he knew, and satan had already entered him( Luke 22:3) . So then you come to the question of whether a Christian can be indwelt by a demon or the devil and it goes on and on and on...
I have so far come to the conclusion that it is osas WITH repentance. Without repentance, then there is NO saved at all. I believe at this time that if we are truly saved, then we WILL BE truly repentful. :lol: . Still looking for further answers PP....:) :hug: God Bless.Oh Judas may have been sorry that he did what he did but that isn't repentance. I agree with you there. Like I said... whether Judas was saved or not... I believe he was just as saved as were the others early on but that is my opinion based on other passages that are based on other passages etc. But that would turn into a debate that really isn't necessary for this discussion I figure (speaking of others) so I won't go beyond giving my opinion there. There are plenty of other passages to explain it without tackling that controversy! :lol:

You ready to continue with more passages?

TrustGzus
Jan 20th 2007, 08:35 PM
Hey PP,

Well at points I agree. At points I have to agree to disagree.
As you said Joe... it is used in support of many other passages and I am taking them one at a time for the purpose of explaining this to someone that asked why I believed as I do. I love agreement.
But as to Parables being used for doctrine... Sure they can be.I said they can be supportive, but I wouldn't use them to be formulative. I'm assuming you're claiming we can form doctrines from parables?
Yes, they make points and that has to be taken into context most surely. Agreement.
That being said too... this parable is still very clearly speaking of salvation therefore it is very much applicable to this discussion context wise.I don't think you've proven that. I laid out the context and I think I illustrated that it clearly speaks to the context I laid out which is two points:

1) the attitude of the pharisess and scribes is bad, i.e. they avoid the lost - correct yourself from that.
2) the Father and Son seek the lost - align yourself with that.

Anything more, I'd like to see a better justification on how one can exposit it from that context.
And rest assured that were we to discount the parables as doctrine then we discount a very large majority of the teachings of Christ who spoke in many parables. I gotta feeling that this would be a great mistake. ;)A large majority? I'll grant he gave a lot of parables. However, a large majority? He gave some massive discourses too that sometimes were multiple chapters without a single parable in them. I don't think we can claim the majority of his teachings were parables, nevertheless a large majority if we broke down his teaching.

And again, how many of those parables were meant to illustrate a single point about something which Jesus witnessed and then commented on? Context is key. We cannot take a verse out of its context to support our personal distinctives. Also the parables of Luke 15 weren't meant to start forming a systematic theology on salvation. Romans & Galatians (Romans in particular) are more suited for that. Or perhaps some of Jesus' didactic passages.

I don't want to divert the thread and I can see that this thread is going to grow too fast for my pace. I'll give you a final word if you'd like.

Grace & peace to you, Project Peter.

Joe

maryg
Jan 20th 2007, 08:45 PM
Just wanted to add: You can only be saved once.

I do not mean that 'once saved always saved' doctrine is true. I believe that is a false teaching.

Scripture tells us if we forsake our salvation then we put Christ to an open shame and there is no more room for repentance. He is not going to die all over for us again. He did it once. He is not going to do it again.

Hebrews 6

1Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
2Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.
3And this will we do, if God permit.
4For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
5And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, 6If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

MaryG

jesuslover1968
Jan 20th 2007, 09:10 PM
Why do we think that God didn't give the Spirit to someone permanently in the Old Testament.

I understand that. I used to struggle with it as well.

Oh Judas may have been sorry that he did what he did but that isn't repentance. I agree with you there. Like I said... whether Judas was saved or not... I believe he was just as saved as were the others early on but that is my opinion based on other passages that are based on other passages etc. But that would turn into a debate that really isn't necessary for this discussion I figure (speaking of others) so I won't go beyond giving my opinion there. There are plenty of other passages to explain it without tackling that controversy! :lol:

You ready to continue with more passages?

The answer to your first question is because the indwelling Spirit was NOT given until Pentecost. If the H.S. was an indwelling Spirit before that, then the cross of Christ would have been of no effect, and in fact, unneccessary, as we would have already possessed eternal life. The O.T. was under the Law, we are under Grace. The Law( physical ) is a type and shadow of Grace( spiritual ) that was to show that there is absolutely nothing we could do in order to bring ourselves eternal life. It is given by God as a free gift because of His love and mercy. We must crawl before we can walk because we have a fallen nature, not to mention we are a stubborn lot. :lol:
Yes, I am ready for more scripture. This is great stuff. I appreciate you taking the time to do it. God Bless.

moonglow
Jan 20th 2007, 09:27 PM
I am really reading some great stuff here. Thanks to everyone who is posting.

Now...:lol:



I know that the H.S. left Saul. This is my confusion with that: The H.S. was not given as a permanent indwelling at that time. So the leaving of the H.S. at that time would not seem to be contradictory whatsoever, as it shouldn't be. I believe that anything we seem to think is contradictory in the Bible is just a misconception on our part. :)
However, with the scriptures you have given to me, and some of those given by Moonglow, I see them all coming together to form what I am beginning to see as the clear picture. I still am somewhat up in the air about how the H.S. leaves what is a permanent dwelling place. ??
I was talking to my sister on the phone about Judas...LOL. I know...I know...but that's the kind of stuff we discuss all the time. She seems to think Judas was repentful. I don't. Or at least not in the way she means. There is the, " I'm truly sorry I did this. " and there is the " I'm sorry I got caught cause now I'm doomed" types of sorry. The Bible says that Judas went to his own place, so we know he did not go to Heaven, nor Hell for that matter. As Heaven and Hell are both mentioned in the Bible, it would have been easier to just say, he went to hell, and it didn't. I think Judas knew he was doomed and tried to go back and make it right, but it was too late. When Jesus was sitting there talking about one of them betraying Him, the apostles didn't know who it was. But Judas was there, and he knew, and satan had already entered him( Luke 22:3) . So then you come to the question of whether a Christian can be indwelt by a demon or the devil and it goes on and on and on...
I have so far come to the conclusion that it is osas WITH repentance. Without repentance, then there is NO saved at all. I believe at this time that if we are truly saved, then we WILL BE truly repentful. :lol: . Still looking for further answers PP....:) :hug: God Bless.

What scripture are you thinking of where you are getting the permanent dwelling place? Just wondering.

It almost sounds like you feel once we are saved, we lose our freewill to walk away from God...that with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit He would keep us from doing so...or lead us back to Him if we are getting off the track to too much sin. Yes there are scriptures that the Holy Spirit will convict us of sins...and the pull back to Him is strong. But the bible does say people can ingore those 'warnings' and they keep doing it and keep doing it falling more and more into sin or doubts or whatever finally causes them to totally reject God...but at some point this calling us back stops. I have read on here people who were strong in the faith...got involved in sin and eventually it got where scripture became harder and harder for them to understand. Its like the reserve of what happens when we get saved. Like me for instance...I got totally confused over alot of scriptures...once I was saved and the Holy Spirit came into me, the 'scales' so to speak, fell off my eyes and I would go, "oh! so that is what that means!"

There was no longer this wall blocking my mind and heart from Him and His word. Those that fall back into sin, like that 2 Peter passage I posted, get to the point their hearts are hardened and the scales over their eyes come back...they can no longer understand the bible like they used too or feel God anymore. The Lord does everything He can to hang onto us, (as Jesus says, I will never leave you or forsake you) but there is a point that comes when we continually ingore Him and sin, which is a direct rebellion against Him, that He stops that urging in us. WE walk away from God, He doesn't just say opps you messed up and withdrawals Himself. He hangs on...then eventually gives us what we want...which is not wanting Him anymore.

Hebrews 10

26 Dear friends, if we deliberately continue sinning after we have received a full knowledge of the truth, there is no other sacrifice that will cover these sins. 27 There will be nothing to look forward to but the terrible expectation of God's judgment and the raging fire that will consume his enemies. 28 Anyone who refused to obey the law of Moses was put to death without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29 Think how much more terrible the punishment will be for those who have trampled on the Son of God and have treated the blood of the covenant as if it were common and unholy. Such people have insulted and enraged the Holy Spirit who brings God's mercy to his people.

30 For we know the one who said,


"I will take vengeance.
I will repay those who deserve it."

He also said,


"The Lord will judge his own people."

31 It is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

Adam Clark Bible Commentary
Verse 26. For if we sin wilfully

If we deliberately, for fear of persecution or from any other motive, renounce the profession of the Gospel and the Author of that Gospel, after having received the knowledge of the truth so as to be convinced that Jesus is the promised Messiah, and that he had sprinkled our hearts from an evil conscience; for such there remaineth no sacrifice for sins; for as the Jewish sacrifices are abolished, as appears by the declaration of God himself in the fortieth Psalm, and Jesus being now the only sacrifice which God will accept, those who reject him have none other; therefore their case must be utterly without remedy.

This is the meaning of the apostle, and the case is that of a deliberate apostate-one who has utterly rejected Jesus Christ and his atonement, and renounced the whole Gospel system. It has nothing to do with backsliders in our common use of that term. A man may be overtaken in a fault, or he may deliberately go into sin, and yet neither renounce the Gospel, nor deny the Lord that bought him. His case is dreary and dangerous, but it is not hopeless; no case is hopeless but that of the deliberate apostate, who rejects the whole Gospel system, after having been saved by grace, or convinced of the truth of the Gospel. To him there remaineth no more sacrifice for sin; for there was but the ONE, Jesus, and this he has utterly rejected.


God bless

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 09:27 PM
Hey PP,

Well at points I agree. At points I have to agree to disagree.I love agreement. I said they can be supportive, but I wouldn't use them to be formulative. I'm assuming you're claiming we can form doctrines from parables?Agreement.I don't think you've proven that. I laid out the context and I think I illustrated that it clearly speaks to the context I laid out which is two points:Sure we can. Just as the parables support other passages the other passages can be supported with the parables. Part of the whole if you will. As to two points... while one never need take a parable where it need not go, many hyper-spiritualize thing that way. The entire parable is speaking a point and there are often times many points within a parable. As I stated... these parables are speaking of salvation as their main point and I've no problem with that. Most of the parables of Jesus spoke of this.... many anyway.


1) the attitude of the pharisess and scribes is bad, i.e. they avoid the lost - correct yourself from that.


2) the Father and Son seek the lost - align yourself with that.That is a given.



Anything more, I'd like to see a better justification on how one can exposit it from that context.A large majority? I'll grant he gave a lot of parables. However, a large majority? He gave some massive discourses too that sometimes were multiple chapters without a single parable in them. I don't think we can claim the majority of his teachings were parables, nevertheless a large majority if we broke down his teaching.The majority of the teaching that he gave the people. Naturally he spoke to His disciples about many things. I am speaking of the teachings of Christ to the people. So yes, the majority. Probably the most plain spoken and straight forward teaching that we see from Jesus to the masses would be the message Jesus gave on the Mount. After that... we have many parables. If Matthew followed more of a time line (that is arguable depending on who you ask) then that was early on in His ministry and then He spoke to them using Parables for the most part.


And again, how many of those parables were meant to illustrate a single point about something which Jesus witnessed and then commented on? Context is key. We cannot take a verse out of its context to support our personal distinctives. Also the parables of Luke 15 weren't meant to start forming a systematic theology on salvation. Romans & Galatians (Romans in particular) are more suited for that. Or perhaps some of Jesus' didactic passages.And I would argue against that. Paul wrote the church. Those already saved. You find more preaching of the Gospel in the Gospels and in Acts than you will in all of the other epistles written. Naturally much of the gospel is explained in various passages throughout the epistles but that wasn't their function. The function of the letters from Paul and the others were for direction to the church. Jesus' business here on the earth was to preach the good news of the kingdom of God. That is what His messages were about. Even the harsher messages.

And to add... rest assured that I am not "taking a verse out of context to support my personal distinctive."




I don't want to divert the thread and I can see that this thread is going to grow too fast for my pace. I'll give you a final word if you'd like.

Grace & peace to you, Project Peter.Okay. Most times this topic does go fast. It will be a challenge keeping up no doubt.

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 09:44 PM
The answer to your first question is because the indwelling Spirit was NOT given until Pentecost. If the H.S. was an indwelling Spirit before that, then the cross of Christ would have been of no effect, and in fact, unneccessary, as we would have already possessed eternal life.Well again that is really semantics. I figure you've heard the term that those in the days of Old looked forward to the cross and we look behind to the cross. But all in all we all look to the Messiah. But we look at the words "came upon" and we make it into something I don't think is intended.

Example: The Spirit of the Lord is upon me and...............

This is what Jesus quoted speaking of Himself. We know that Jesus was filled without measure. Different terminology... different languages... but the same thing. The Spirit was upon David till the day that David died. In him, on top of him, surrounding him... The Spirit is the Spirit and the functions are His functions.

Isaiah says earlier in his book that the Spirit of the Lord will rest upon him (again speaking of Jesus). Yet in the New Testament we are told that the Spirit was within Him. So different terminology but saying the same thing.


The O.T. was under the Law, we are under Grace. The Law( physical ) is a type and shadow of Grace( spiritual ) that was to show that there is absolutely nothing we could do in order to bring ourselves eternal life. It is given by God as a free gift because of His love and mercy. We must crawl before we can walk because we have a fallen nature, not to mention we are a stubborn lot. :lol: But this is where we have to be careful in our understanding because the Law was a teacher most definitely. But a type and shadow of grace? Think on that because if that was the case then we'd all be pretty much doomed! The Law didn't allow for much in the area of grace when doled out by the letter. The Law couldn't save a person at all yet it is by grace any of us are saved. So while they were under the bondage of the Law... it was still by faith any of them or us are saved.


Yes, I am ready for more scripture. This is great stuff. I appreciate you taking the time to do it. God Bless.Not a problem. I'll start that in another post. :)

jesuslover1968
Jan 20th 2007, 09:49 PM
What scripture are you thinking of where you are getting the permanent dwelling place? Just wondering.

It almost sounds like you feel once we are saved, we lose our freewill to walk away from God...


Not at all. I know that people can walk away from the H.S. The H.S. won't walk away from us because Jesus said once it was given, it wouldn't be taken away. :)
I have a friend that was full of the Holy Spirit. She led more people to Christ than any person that I personally know. Then she walked away from it. The H.S. did not leave her. She turned away from the H.S. Hope that explains what I mean a bit better. God Bless.

jesuslover1968
Jan 20th 2007, 09:59 PM
Well again that is really semantics. I figure you've heard the term that those in the days of Old looked forward to the cross and we look behind to the cross. But all in all we all look to the Messiah. But we look at the words "came upon" and we make it into something I don't think is intended.

Example: The Spirit of the Lord is upon me and...............

This is what Jesus quoted speaking of Himself. We know that Jesus was filled without measure. Different terminology... different languages... but the same thing. The Spirit was upon David till the day that David died. In him, on top of him, surrounding him... The Spirit is the Spirit and the functions are His functions.

Isaiah says earlier in his book that the Spirit of the Lord will rest upon him (again speaking of Jesus). Yet in the New Testament we are told that the Spirit was within Him. So different terminology but saying the same thing.

But this is where we have to be careful in our understanding because the Law was a teacher most definitely. But a type and shadow of grace? Think on that because if that was the case then we'd all be pretty much doomed! The Law didn't allow for much in the area of grace when doled out by the letter. The Law couldn't save a person at all yet it is by grace any of us are saved. So while they were under the bondage of the Law... it was still by faith any of them or us are saved.

Not a problem. I'll start that in another post. :)


Yes I have heard that and I agree. Well, I have to disagree that the Holy Spirit was a permanent indwelling for all O.T. saints. I do know that some were permanently indwelt, but that was because they were obedient, such as David. King Saul is the other side of that coin. David was a man after God's own heart, King Saul was a man after his own heart. :lol: The differences I see in the O.T. is that it was not give to ALL saints and it had the ability to come and go. There was no promise that it would stay. On the other hand, in the N.T. Jesus said once it was given, it wouldn't be taken away.
Yes, I believe the law was a type and a shadow. Every ritual that the Israelites did was symbolic of something that had greater spiritual truth in the reality. The Israelites didn't understand the spiritual, but only the physical. The law was given to show them that there is nothing they can do to save themselves. It isn't of works...I know and understand that the law didn't save anyone. It has ALWAYS been by Grace through Faith. Those who got that in the O.T. were enabled to receive the Spirit. Those who didn't, didn't. :)
When I said the Law, I mean the whole of the Laws and customs that they were required to do. The whole point was looking forward to that perfect sacrifice, Jesus Christ. God Bless.

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 10:00 PM
Jesuslover,

Okay... Going to post another parable of Jesus here.

Matthew 18:21 ¶Then Peter came and said to Him, "Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him? Up to seven times?"
22 Jesus said to him, "I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven.
23 "For this reason the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a certain king who wished to settle accounts with his slaves.
24 "And when he had begun to settle them, there was brought to him one who owed him ten thousand talents.
25 "But since he did not have the means to repay, his lord commanded him to be sold, along with his wife and children and all that he had, and repayment to be made.
26 "The slave therefore falling down, prostrated himself before him, saying, `Have patience with me, and I will repay you everything.´
27 "And the lord of that slave felt compassion and released him and forgave him the debt.
28 "But that slave went out and found one of his fellow slaves who owed him a hundred denarii; and he seized him and began to choke him, saying, `Pay back what you owe.´
29 "So his fellow slave fell down and began to entreat him, saying, `Have patience with me and I will repay you.´
30 "He was unwilling however, but went and threw him in prison until he should pay back what was owed.
31 "So when his fellow slaves saw what had happened, they were deeply grieved and came and reported to their lord all that had happened.
32 "Then summoning him, his lord said to him, `You wicked slave, I forgave you all that debt because you entreated me.
33 `Should you not also have had mercy on your fellow slave, even as I had mercy on you?´
34 "And his lord, moved with anger, handed him over to the torturers until he should repay all that was owed him.
35 "So shall My heavenly Father also do to you, if each of you does not forgive his brother from your heart."

1. Who does the king represent in this parable?

2. Does the servant ask for mercy?

3. Is mercy granted this servant?

4. What happens when the servant doesn't go and continue in the kindness of the king?

5. What did Jesus warn the disciples would happen to them if they didn't forgive his brother from the heart?

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 10:05 PM
Yes I have heard that and I agree. Well, I have to disagree that the Holy Spirit was a permanent indwelling for all O.T. saints. I do know that some were permanently indwelt, but that was because they were obedient, such as David. King Saul is the other side of that coin. David was a man after God's own heart, King Saul was a man after his own heart. :lol: The differences I see in the O.T. is that it was not give to ALL saints and it had the ability to come and go. There was no promise that it would stay. On the other hand, in the N.T. Jesus said once it was given, it wouldn't be taken away.I don't see anything at all in Scripture either that would lead me to believe that the Spirit indwelled all of the saints. I wouldn't dare argue against that. I agree that He didn't. But those that He did... they are for our example.



Yes, I believe the law was a type and a shadow. Every ritual that the Israelites did was symbolic of something that had greater spiritual truth in the reality. The Israelites didn't understand the spiritual, but only the physical. The law was given to show them that there is nothing they can do to save themselves. It isn't of works...I know and understand that the law didn't save anyone. It has ALWAYS been by Grace through Faith. Those who got that in the O.T. were enabled to receive the Spirit. Those who didn't, didn't. :)
When I said the Law, I mean the whole of the Laws and customs that they were required to do. The whole point was looking forward to that perfect sacrifice, Jesus Christ. God Bless.Again yes, but we have to be careful not to get tangled in common religious speak because it honestly does trip us up! Hebrews speaks of the type and shadow of the sacrifice etc... and how that pointed to the atonement of Christ. The sacrifice was no doubt part of the law. But if the Law was a type and shadow of grace then I figure Galatians is going to get rather tricky! But again... that is really a sidebar in regard to the topic at hand. So I'll let all that go at this point.

moonglow
Jan 20th 2007, 10:36 PM
Not at all. I know that people can walk away from the H.S. The H.S. won't walk away from us because Jesus said once it was given, it wouldn't be taken away. :)
I have a friend that was full of the Holy Spirit. She led more people to Christ than any person that I personally know. Then she walked away from it. The H.S. did not leave her. She turned away from the H.S. Hope that explains what I mean a bit better. God Bless.

That, I bolded, is excatly what no-osas means...that 'we' can walk away from God. Jesus said He would never leave us or forsake us...He didn't say we couldn't leave or forsake Him though. Since you know this can happen you are already in agreement with what PP and I are saying on this.

What trips people up on this is they think we are saying we can 'lose' our salvation...the whole thing is really worded wrong to start with. Its not 'losing'...its 'giving up' the free gift given to us just as your friend did. And that's it in a nut shell.

God bless

jiggyfly
Jan 20th 2007, 11:05 PM
Romans 10:8 But what does it say? "THE WORD IS NEAR YOU, in your mouth and in your heart" -- that is, the word of faith which we are preaching,
9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you shall be saved;
10 for with the heart man believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.
11 For the Scripture says, "WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED."

I don't think it gets any more simple than that.
YesI agree it is simple.
Hebrews 6:7-12
7 When the ground soaks up the rain that falls on it and bears a good crop for the farmer, it has the blessing of God. 8 But if a field bears thistles and thorns, it is useless. The farmer will condemn that field and burn it.
9 Dear friends, even though we are talking like this, we really don’t believe that it applies to you. We are confident that you are meant for better things, things that come with salvation. 10 For God is not unfair. He will not forget how hard you have worked for him and how you have shown your love to him by caring for other Christians, as you still do. 11 Our great desire is that you will keep right on loving others as long as life lasts, in order to make certain that what you hope for will come true. 12 Then you will not become spiritually dull and indifferent. Instead, you will follow the example of those who are going to inherit God’s promises because of their faith and patience.

But is this how osas views salvation?

Dan Moran
Jan 20th 2007, 11:20 PM
Depends on how it is being used. In other words... context of the various passages.
I've heard one determine that God has called us by many names; servants, saints, sons, daughters. I can understand the saints, I can understand the sons and daughters. But unless there is no significant change between the Mosiac Law and the age of grace; than yes, we could also be called servants in the context on which Moses or Joshua had been called a servant.

Ro 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. 21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; 22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: 23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: 25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; 26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. 27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. 28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. 29 Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: 30 Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith. 31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

The Christian doctrine as set forth in the book of Romans illustrates that our justification is through Christ, that we are justified by faith (which is of the spirit, nothing of our own personal measures); so it is the spirit of God housed within the son and daughter of God, vice the servant of God (in proper context), that God looks at, through the blood of Jesus Christ, we are justified and redeemed for eternal life. By grace. It was a gift, freely given, so you and I can approach the throne of God equally; not you, nor I any better than the other. We're justified by Christ. :)

ProjectPeter
Jan 20th 2007, 11:37 PM
I've heard one determine that God has called us by many names; servants, saints, sons, daughters. I can understand the saints, I can understand the sons and daughters. But unless there is no significant change between the Mosiac Law and the age of grace; than yes, we could also be called servants in the context on which Moses or Joshua had been called a servant.

Ro 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. 21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; 22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: 23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: 25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; 26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. 27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. 28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. 29 Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: 30 Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith. 31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

The Christian doctrine as set forth in the book of Romans illustrates that our justification is through Christ, that we are justified by faith (which is of the spirit, nothing of our own personal measures); so it is the spirit of God housed within the son and daughter of God, vice the servant of God (in proper context), that God looks at, through the blood of Jesus Christ, we are justified and redeemed for eternal life. By grace. It was a gift, freely given, so you and I can approach the throne of God equally; not you, nor I any better than the other. We're justified by Christ. :)And this just goes to show that while we all speak the same language... we don't always mean the same thing.

No one lays claim to being "better than another." And if you read closely in the New Testament... being a servant was not a new concept at all. Most times the word bond servant was used which has its own significance. So it isn't simply an Old Testament concept.

Redeemed by Grace
Jan 21st 2007, 12:58 AM
Just a reminder to those who are posting or following the dialog, that it is incorrect exegesis to read back New Testament understandings into Old Testament writings on many points…, for the old preceded the new…

For example, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, which comes as a Promise of Jesus at Pentacost, should not be attributed to the same meaning as within the OT...

ProjectPeter
Jan 21st 2007, 01:14 AM
Just a reminder to those who are posting or following the dialog, that it is incorrect exegesis to read back New Testament understandings into Old Testament writings on many points…, for the old preceded the new…

For example, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, which comes as a Promise of Jesus at Pentacost, should not be attributed to the same meaning as within the OT...
Um... thanks! I think it has already been made pretty clear that there is a difference but the principles we learn from those in the Old Testament are examples for us even in this time of the New. You actually going to participate or just offer the occassional "reminder" without dialogue? Just curious so I know as to whether to actually spend much time responding to your post.

Redeemed by Grace
Jan 21st 2007, 02:19 AM
Um... thanks! I think it has already been made pretty clear that there is a difference but the principles we learn from those in the Old Testament are examples for us even in this time of the New. You actually going to participate or just offer the occassional "reminder" without dialogue? Just curious so I know as to whether to actually spend much time responding to your post.


You and I have danced to this tune many times in the past…and as I’ve stated recently… my days are very full as of late and will be for some time…

As I’ve read many of a post here from folks, I wanted to chime in but am resisting because of time, and also letting this play out to your desire to instruct another… so I’m trusting that the Lord will bring others to speak to the “other” understanding, which I see that they are starting to…

As to being around and your direct response - I know your position on this topic, and you know mine, for we’ve exchanged reasoning regarding the Ezekiel passage many times before and we have disagreed about Saul’s salvation and “filling” of the Holy Spirit, so to go again wouldn’t be prudent…. At least not for me at this time.

You should know my position that salvation is for God, of God, by God, in God, through God and God alone, and is for His Glory -- and in that-- who He has called into faith in Christ, that they will never again be lost. The challenge that always becomes lost in our talks from the NOSAS camp is that the ‘will of man’ states that he can/may/will walk away during a lifetime, or that he can sin all he wants without worry, or that God will change His mind based on a man’s sin, response, behavior… What never seems to evolve in the discussion is that Christ lives within His saved, that a man’s heart is being transformed and changed, and the desires for obedience along with awareness of the fullness of faith is given, and that in part of the self-test which includes trials and tribulations is the challenge through continual self-examination to ensure Christ is indeed within self – instead the dialog that always points toward the salvation call of another.

So my desire for today is to share to say that folks -- know what you believe and why you believe it, and when it comes in to an awareness that contradicts with other scripture and doctrine, that you grow in letting scripture to continually form your doctrine… Hold on to what confirms to be right, discard what no longer fits together perfectly...

So with all due respect PP, I’d prefer to talk to you outside of the [N]OSAS discussion for now, for I value our polite banter better than the non-persuasive dialogs, many times with passion - that seem to always occur.


So to that end, how’s the weather these days in Minnesota? :saint:

Dan Moran
Jan 21st 2007, 02:23 AM
Um... thanks! I think it has already been made pretty clear that there is a difference but the principles we learn from those in the Old Testament are examples for us even in this time of the New. You actually going to participate or just offer the occassional "reminder" without dialogue? Just curious so I know as to whether to actually spend much time responding to your post.
What Redeemed by Grace is saying is that the context changes between the Old and New Testament, and one can not cross over and back again defining the same idea; because the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ is the defining factor in the change.

The fall of man in the garden of Eden was certainly the cause to have a Redeemer. The first prophesy of the coming Son was Genesis 3:15 which states: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

II Corinthians 1:22

Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.

Sealed means sealed, because the faith in the Lord Jesus Christ bypasses the five senses of walking by stringent guidelines, of which God did know already was an impossible walk. The Christian doctrine in Ephesians reiterates:

Ephesians 1:13

In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise.

When God speaks twice that's established news.

Ephesians 4:30

And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.

From the Strong's Concordance, Greek 3076; the word Lupeo meaning not to be distressed, cause grief or grieve or be in heaviness towards. Why? Because you have nothing to grieve about, you are sealed with that holy spirit of promise, you promised eternity. :)

The spirit of God that lives within the believer will continue to draw that man or woman back to God. As you've said in your initial post; scripture is good for doctrine, reproof, for correction. Different degrees in admonishment to lead the old man back into fellowship with the Lord Jesus Christ.

The people in the Old Testament could not be guaranteed their salvation, their savior hadn't come yet. The whole hearted belief in the resurrection of the Son of God is the promise of eternity with God. :D

Redeemed by Grace
Jan 21st 2007, 02:27 AM
What Redeemed by Grace is saying is that the context changes between the Old and New Testament, and one can not cross over and back again defining the same idea; because the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ is the defining factor in the change.

The fall of man in the garden of Eden was certainly the cause to have a Redeemer. The first prophesy of the coming Son was Genesis 3:15 which states: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

II Corinthians 1:22

Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.

Sealed means sealed, because the faith in the Lord Jesus Christ bypasses the five senses of walking by stringent guidelines, of which God did know already was an impossible walk. The Christian doctrine in Ephesians reiterates:

Ephesians 1:13

In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise.

When God speaks twice that's established news.

Ephesians 4:30

And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.

From the Strong's Concordance, Greek 3076; the word Lupeo meaning not to be distressed, cause grief or grieve or be in heaviness towards. Why? Because you have nothing to grieve about, you are sealed with that holy spirit of promise, you promised eternity. :)

The spirit of God that lives within the believer will continue to draw that man or woman back to God. As you've said in your initial post; scripture is good for doctrine, reproof, for correction. Different degrees in admonishment to lead the old man back into fellowship with the Lord Jesus Christ.

The people in the Old Testament could love their salvation, their savior hadn't come yet. The whole hearted belief in the resurrection of the Son of God is the promise of eternity with God. :D

Exactly !

ProjectPeter
Jan 21st 2007, 02:27 AM
You and I have danced to this tune many times in the past…and as I’ve stated recently… my days are very full as of late and will be for some time…

As I’ve read many of a post here from folks, I wanted to chime in but am resisting because of time, and also letting this play out to your desire to instruct another… so I’m trusting that the Lord will bring others to speak to the “other” understanding, which I see that they are starting to…

As to being around and your direct response - I know your position on this topic, and you know mine, for we’ve exchanged reasoning regarding the Ezekiel passage many times before and we have disagreed about Saul’s salvation and “filling” of the Holy Spirit, so to go again wouldn’t be prudent…. At least not for me at this time.

You should know my position that salvation is for God, of God, by God, in God, through God and God alone, and is for His Glory -- and in that-- who He has called into faith in Christ, that they will never again be lost. The challenge that always becomes lost in our talks from the NOSAS camp is that the ‘will of man’ states that he can/may/will walk away during a lifetime, or that he can sin all he wants without worry, or that God will change His mind based on a man’s sin, response, behavior… What never seems to evolve in the discussion is that Christ lives within His saved, that a man’s heart is being transformed and changed, and the desires for obedience along with awareness of the fullness of faith is given, and that in part of the self-test which includes trials and tribulations is the challenge through continual self-examination to ensure Christ is indeed within self – instead the dialog that always points toward the salvation call of another.

So my desire for today is to share to say that folks -- know what you believe and why you believe it, and when it comes in to an awareness that contradicts with other scripture and doctrine, that you grow in letting scripture to continually form your doctrine… Hold on to what confirms to be right, discard what no longer fits together perfectly...

So with all due respect PP, I’d prefer to talk to you outside of the [N]OSAS discussion for now, for I value our polite banter better than the non-persuasive dialogs, many times with passion - that seem to always occur.


So to that end, how’s the weather these days in Minnesota? :saint:Not in Minnesota any longer. In the South again! So weather is times better.... you weenie. :lol:

Redeemed by Grace
Jan 21st 2007, 02:36 AM
Not in Minnesota any longer. In the South again! So weather is times better.... you weenie. :lol:

You in the South again... Hilary running for President... must be in the Last Days... :lol:

ProjectPeter
Jan 21st 2007, 02:37 AM
You in the South again... Hilary running for President... must be in the Last Days... :lol:
That has to be my guess!

*Madeline*
Jan 21st 2007, 04:03 AM
Hi PP!:)

Sorry for the late response, I am usually busy on the weekends.


And this passage has absolutely nothing to do with the passage in Ezekiel.

My point is that Ezekiel 18 does indeed use the phrase "lest you die", and it is necessary to understand how the people to whom Ezekiel was writing would have understood it. Because it is used so many times as an immediate death sentence throughout the OT, those to whom Ezekiel was writing would have understood it that way. If they understood it that, so too should we.


You are trying to apply the judgment of the Law and how Israel was to judge folks who broke it and apply that to Ezekiel here and that is way off base.

I don't understand why it's "off base". It is true that people judged Israel, but those judgments were made in accordance with the law that was given by God. In other words, they are every bit God's judgments as those in Ezek. 18. Therefore, I don't see the difference in judgment of man according to God's law and the judgment of God. Am I missing something?


"It was the righteous who are saved Madeline. Those that believed".

Salvation has always been by grace through faith. In other words, if one believed he was made rightoues. A perfect example of that is Abraham, "Abraham believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness". But that doesn't change the meaning of "righteous" to "believer". Yes, believers were made righteous, but as we read in Ezek. 18 some who had at one time done things correctly (the way the Holy Spirit uses the word) does not automatically mean that that man was a believer. We can't change the meaning of a word way to accomodate our own doctrine.

Love,
Madeline

maryg
Jan 21st 2007, 01:57 PM
Hi,
Someone mentioned the falling away of one from the Faith and I wanted to insert this scripture. Thanks. MaryG

Hebrews 6:4-6

4For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift (saved & filled with Spirit), and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,

5And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, 6If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

ProjectPeter
Jan 21st 2007, 01:59 PM
Hi PP!:)

Sorry for the late response, I am usually busy on the weekends. That is the beauty of message boards. Folks can respond as they have the time, whenever that time may be. :)



My point is that Ezekiel 18 does indeed use the phrase "lest you die", and it is necessary to understand how the people to whom Ezekiel was writing would have understood it. Because it is used so many times as an immediate death sentence throughout the OT, those to whom Ezekiel was writing would have understood it that way. If they understood it that, so too should we. What happens when a person dies in sin Madeline? What is the wage of sin? Do you believe that when that is told in Scripture that the wages of sin is death that it is talking about a physical death but that soul still goes on the the kingdom? And once again... if what you say is true then according to this passage the righteous should never die but continue to live. You are either going to have to be consistent and say that it means physical death therefore the life means physical life or you are (as you seem to be doing) going to have to add something to that passage that God didn't say and that is that they live to a ripe old age or some such. Either way you slice this... your off on this one big time!



I don't understand why it's "off base". It is true that people judged Israel, but those judgments were made in accordance with the law that was given by God. In other words, they are every bit God's judgments as those in Ezek. 18. Therefore, I don't see the difference in judgment of man according to God's law and the judgment of God. Am I missing something? This is totally different than what is being spoken of in the passages you provided. Goodness... if you can't understand that then nothing much else I can say to get you there.


Salvation has always been by grace through faith. In other words, if one believed he was made rightoues. A perfect example of that is Abraham, "Abraham believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness". But that doesn't change the meaning of "righteous" to "believer". Yes, believers were made righteous, but as we read in Ezek. 18 some who had at one time done things correctly (the way the Holy Spirit uses the word) does not automatically mean that that man was a believer. We can't change the meaning of a word way to accomodate our own doctrine.

Love,
MadelineThere was no way that any man could be righteous in the eyes of God (remember who is talking Madeline) without believing.

maryg
Jan 21st 2007, 02:40 PM
Abraham’s faith came by hearing God. His obedience to what he heard caused him to be accounted righteous. Now how was it then reckoned? He was considered righteous before he was ever circumcised. Because he believed, God made a covenant with him and sealed it with the circumcision in the flesh: a sign of the righteousness of God Abraham would one day receive. Remember, he could not be made perfect without us because the indwelling of the Holy Spirit was the “Promise”. The Holy Spirit overshadowed and moved upon those in the OT but never indwelled them. That could not happen until the final sacrifice for mankind was made.

Hebrews 11:39-40
39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:
40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.

Abraham’s faith: He heard God – He believed.

The Jews felt God was indebted to them because they served the Law. They justified themselves based on the works of the Law, but the righteousness of God comes by faith.

St. John 8:39-40
39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham.
40 But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.

The Jews were judged because the Gentiles believed, although they were not of the circumcision. But in their ungodly state, they believed God, just as Abraham did. Now those who produce human faith (same as Abraham) can receive the promise. Your faith came by hearing. You heard, you believed and then you received.

Romans 10:1-4
1 Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved.
2 For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.


3 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.
4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

Israel became ignorant of God’s righteousness and went about to establish their own righteousness by doing the works of the Law. They rejected the righteousness which is of God. Christ is the end of the Law. He is the righteousness of God, having fulfilled the Law. He is the righteousness that was reckoned to Abraham for which the circumcision of the flesh was merely a sign and a seal of that which was to come.

Before Faith came we were under the law. The ‘Promise” of the infilling of the Holy Spirit (salvation and the INFILLING OF THE HOLY SPIRIT) came in the NT by Jesus. (The Faith of Jesus Christ and the Circumcision of the Flesh – a circumcision made without human hands but by God Himself.)

Galatians 3:21-27
21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

Centurionoflight
Jan 21st 2007, 04:17 PM
ProjectPeter


Oh death does change that Centurion. Sure he is still a son by birth and a father will still love that son. But death does change things. As should be clear... that isn't speaking a physical death Centurion. That boy never physically died and yet the father makes it very clear that he was dead, which is the wage of sin which that son was living. It wasn't until that sons return that the son was alive AGAIN. He was alive, then dead, then alive again. Hopefully others won't simply blow off that very significant truth.

The other significant truth that is being blown off is that dead or alive; he was still his fathers son.

The son in a state of DEATH returned to the father and the father still saw him as his son even while he was in that state of death.

ProjectPeter
Jan 21st 2007, 04:41 PM
ProjectPeter


The other significant truth that is being blown off is that dead or alive; he was still his fathers son.

The son in a state of DEATH returned to the father and the father still saw him as his son even while he was in that state of death.
And you equate death with eternal life? Not sure how you make that work!

Centurionoflight
Jan 21st 2007, 04:50 PM
ProjectPeter


And you equate death with eternal life? Not sure how you make that work!


He had eternal life because he was born into a family.

He had death because he strayed from his father.

Even in his death he still knew he had a father.
Even in his death the father knew he had a son.

moonglow
Jan 21st 2007, 05:00 PM
Hi PP!:)

Sorry for the late response, I am usually busy on the weekends.



My point is that Ezekiel 18 does indeed use the phrase "lest you die", and it is necessary to understand how the people to whom Ezekiel was writing would have understood it. Because it is used so many times as an immediate death sentence throughout the OT, those to whom Ezekiel was writing would have understood it that way. If they understood it that, so too should we.



I don't understand why it's "off base". It is true that people judged Israel, but those judgments were made in accordance with the law that was given by God. In other words, they are every bit God's judgments as those in Ezek. 18. Therefore, I don't see the difference in judgment of man according to God's law and the judgment of God. Am I missing something?



Salvation has always been by grace through faith. In other words, if one believed he was made rightoues. A perfect example of that is Abraham, "Abraham believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness". But that doesn't change the meaning of "righteous" to "believer". Yes, believers were made righteous, but as we read in Ezek. 18 some who had at one time done things correctly (the way the Holy Spirit uses the word) does not automatically mean that that man was a believer. We can't change the meaning of a word way to accomodate our own doctrine.

Love,
Madeline

Madeline maybe this bible commentary will help you see what PP is talking about on Ezekiel 18:


http://www.studylight.org/com/acc/view.cgi?book=eze&chapter=018
The Adam Clarke Commentary

Verse 20. The soul that sinneth, it shall die.
Hitherto we have had to do with the simple cases of the righteous and the wicked; of him who lived and died a holy man, and of him who lived and died a wicked man. But there are two cases behind: 1. That of the wicked man, who repents and turns to God. 2. That of the righteous man, who backslides, and does not return to God by repentance. On both these cases God decides thus:-

Verse 21. But if the wicked will turn from all his sins
And afterwards walk according to the character of the righteous already specified; shall he find mercy, and be for ever saved? YES.

Verse 22. All his transgressions
Shall be so completely forgiven by God's mercy, that they shall not be even mentioned to him; and if he live and die in this recovered state, he shall live with God to all eternity. And why? Hear the reason:-

Verse 23. Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die?
No! That is foreign to him whose name is love, and whose nature is mercy. On the contrary he "wills that he should return from his evil ways and live."

And if God can have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, he cannot have made a decree to abandon him to the evil of his nature, and then damn him for what he could not avoid: for as God can do nothing with which he is not pleased, so he can decree nothing with which he is not pleased. But he is "not pleased with the death of a sinner," therefore he cannot have made a decree to bring him to this death.

Verse 24. When the righteous turneth away from his righteousness
Here is the second case. Can a man who was once holy and pure, fall away so as to perish everlastingly? YES. For God says, "If he turn away from his righteousness;" not his self-righteousness, the gloss of theologians: for God never speaks of turning away from that, for, in his eyes, that is a nonentity. There is no righteousness or holiness but what himself infuses into the soul of man, and as to self-righteousness, i.e., a man's supposing himself to be righteous when he has not the life of God in his soul, it is the delusion of a dark and hardened heart; therefore it is the real righteous principle and righteous practice that God speaks of here. And he tells us, that a man may so "turn away from this," and so "commit iniquity," and "act as the wicked man," that his righteousness shall be no more mentioned to his account, than the sins of the penitent backslider should be mentioned to his condemnation; and "in the sin that he," this once righteous man, "hath sinned, and in the trespass that he hath trespassed, in them shall he die."

O, how awful a termination of a life once distinguished for righteousness and true holiness! So then, God himself informs us that a righteous man may not only fall foully, but fall finally. But to such righteous persons the devil will ever preach, "Ye shall not surely die; ye shall be as God." Touch, taste, and handle; ye cannot ultimately fall. Thus we find, by the manner of treating these two cases, that God's way is equal, Ezekiel 18:25; just, merciful, and impartial. And to prove this, he sums up his conduct in the above cases, in the following verses, 26-29. Ezekiel 18:26-29And then, that the "wicked may not die in his sins," and that the "backslider may return and find mercy," he thus exhorts:-

Its kind of confusing in a way because its addressing four different spiritual states...the wicked, the righteous saved, the blackslider and those that have totally fallen away. I had to read it several times myself to get it.

God bless

ProjectPeter
Jan 21st 2007, 05:01 PM
ProjectPeter




He had eternal life because he was born into a family.

He had death because he strayed from his father.

Even in his death he still knew he had a father.
Even in his death the father knew he had a son.
So again.... you contend that folks can be dead at the same time that they are eternally alive?

Ta-An
Jan 21st 2007, 05:26 PM
Even in his death he still knew he had a father.
Even in his death the father knew he had a son.Centurionoflight, in his death (away from his father) yes, he knew he had a father...so that he could repent (come back) to become 'alive' again..

maryg
Jan 21st 2007, 05:32 PM
Eternal life is only through the Son. The OT saints never received eternal life until we (NT) were made perfect. Hebrews 11:40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.

Jon 6:40 For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day."

1 John 5:11
And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.

1 John 5:20
We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true—even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.

God bless,
MaryG

*Madeline*
Jan 21st 2007, 09:53 PM
Hi again PP!:)


That is the beauty of message boards. Folks can respond as they have the time, whenever that time may be. :)

What happens when a person dies in sin Madeline? What is the wage of sin? Do you believe that when that is told in Scripture that the wages of sin is death that it is talking about a physical death but that soul still goes on the the kingdom? And once again... if what you say is true then according to this passage the righteous should never die but continue to live. You are either going to have to be consistent and say that it means physical death therefore the life means physical life or you are (as you seem to be doing) going to have to add something to that passage that God didn't say and that is that they live to a ripe old age or some such. Either way you slice this... your off on this one big time!

This is totally different than what is being spoken of in the passages you provided. Goodness... if you can't understand that then nothing much else I can say to get you there.

There was no way that any man could be righteous in the eyes of God (remember who is talking Madeline) without believing.

Let's talk about the phrase "the wages of sin is death" versus the phrase "lest ye die". You seem to think that they mean the same thing. I think we have to consider them in context.

The phrase "the wages of sin is death is found in Romans 6:23. The rest of that verse reads, "but the gift of God is eternal life...". Here the context is clearly talking about the natural loss of life due to the fact that all have sinned.

But the phrase "lest ye die" is found, at least in it's first 22 occurrences, (I have not gone beyond those) in the context of "if you sin in this particular way, you will die". That leads me to the conclusion that it is not the natural loss of life that is in view, it is punishment for a particular sin that one shall lose his life more immediately than the natural order of things.

In other words, we have to consider these things in context. The context will tell us whether it is a death according to the natural state of things, or if it is a more immediate death as a consequence of a particular sin.

Then you said, "if what you say is true then according to this passage the righteous should never die but continue to live". I never said that. What I am trying to say is that all men die. But some will die immediately as a punishment of a particular sin. Evidently, I am not understanding the point that is being made when you had talked about people's judgment as opposed to God's. A clarification would be appreciated.

In regard to the meaing of the Hebrew word transalted "righteous" you said "There was no way that any man could be righteous in the eyes of God (remember who is talking) without believing.

Of course, that is absolutely true. But he is saying that all men who have done rightly, or correctly, are believers. The word does not mean "believe". Therefore, one can have done righlty and not have been a believer.

The fact that believing and faith are not the same as being made righteous is proved by the statement that "Abraham believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness". It was his faith, i.e. he believed God, that caused God to see hm as having alwyas done the right thing.

We have to understand is that there is no scriptural evidence that men who have at one time in their lives done the right things, are believers. "Righteous" does not mean "believe", they are two separate things. A person can have done the right things and not be a believer, but a believer is always counted as righteous in God's sight.:)

Love,
Madeline

ProjectPeter
Jan 21st 2007, 10:23 PM
Hi again PP!:)



Let's talk about the phrase "the wages of sin is death" versus the phrase "lest ye die". You seem to think that they mean the same thing. I think we have to consider them in context.

The phrase "the wages of sin is death is found in Romans 6:23. The rest of that verse reads, "but the gift of God is eternal life...". Here the context is clearly talking about the natural loss of life due to the fact that all have sinned.

But the phrase "lest ye die" is found, at least in it's first 22 occurrences, (I have not gone beyond those) in the context of "if you sin in this particular way, you will die". That leads me to the conclusion that it is not the natural loss of life that is in view, it is punishment for a particular sin that one shall lose his life more immediately than the natural order of things.

In other words, we have to consider these things in context. The context will tell us whether it is a death according to the natural state of things, or if it is a more immediate death as a consequence of a particular sin.

Then you said, "if what you say is true then according to this passage the righteous should never die but continue to live". I never said that. What I am trying to say is that all men die. But some will die immediately as a punishment of a particular sin. Evidently, I am not understanding the point that is being made when you had talked about people's judgment as opposed to God's. A clarification would be appreciated.

In regard to the meaing of the Hebrew word transalted "righteous" you said "There was no way that any man could be righteous in the eyes of God (remember who is talking) without believing.

Of course, that is absolutely true. But he is saying that all men who have done rightly, or correctly, are believers. The word does not mean "believe". Therefore, one can have done righlty and not have been a believer.

The fact that believing and faith are not the same as being made righteous is proved by the statement that "Abraham believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness". It was his faith, i.e. he believed God, that caused God to see hm as having alwyas done the right thing.

We have to understand is that there is no scriptural evidence that men who have at one time in their lives done the right things, are believers. "Righteous" does not mean "believe", they are two separate things. A person can have done the right things and not be a believer, but a believer is always counted as righteous in God's sight.:)

Love,
MadelineThis passage doesn't say some who sin will die nor does it say that some who are righteous will live Madeline. You keep talking about context here but shoot... what does it say! Let's not add words and do the whole fill in the invisible blanks! What does it say. Here it is again.

Ezekiel 18:20 "The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.
21 ¶"But if the wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed and observes all My statutes and practices justice and righteousness, he shall surely live; he shall not die.
22 "All his transgressions which he has committed will not be remembered against him; because of his righteousness which he has practiced, he will live.
23 "Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the Lord GOD, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?
24 ¶"But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and does according to all the abominations that a wicked man does, will he live? All his righteous deeds which he has done will not be remembered for his treachery which he has committed and his sin which he has committed; for them he will die.
25 "Yet you say, `The way of the Lord is not right.´ Hear now, O house of Israel! Is My way not right? Is it not your ways that are not right?
26 "When a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and dies because of it, for his iniquity which he has committed he will die.
27 "Again, when a wicked man turns away from his wickedness which he has committed and practices justice and righteousness, he will save his life.
28 "Because he considered and turned away from all his transgressions which he had committed, he shall surely live; he shall not die.
29 "But the house of Israel says, `The way of the Lord is not right.´ Are My ways not right, O house of Israel? Is it not your ways that are not right?
30 ¶"Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, each according to his conduct," declares the Lord GOD. "Repent and turn away from all your transgressions, so that iniquity may not become a stumbling block to you.
31 "Cast away from you all your transgressions which you have committed, and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! For why will you die, O house of Israel?
32 "For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies," declares the Lord GOD. "Therefore, repent and live."


Add no words Madeline and then talk to me about keeping it in context. If death is physical then so is life in this instance which is the contrast between evil and righteousness. If sin brings about physical death then look at that RED print. The righteous would not physically die.

I know that you aren't likely going to see this as your doctrine has problems with the thought. But hopefully others reading along will. It is not speaking of physical death nor life. Reading in its true context without adding to it or trying to use another Scripture to nix what is clearly written should make that pretty clear to the average reader I would think.

doug3
Jan 21st 2007, 11:55 PM
1 Peter 4:17-18

For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?
18 And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?

I read these verses as indicating that salvation does require us to stay on the strait and narrow path home (Mat 7:14 KJV Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. Joh 14:6KJV Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.).

IMO in 1Peter 4:18 the righteous represents those who stay on the path, the ungodly represents those who stray from the strait and narrow path, and the sinner represents the unsaved "lost".

:2cents::2cents: :)

Diggindeeper
Jan 22nd 2007, 01:05 AM
The fact that believing and faith are not the same as being made righteous is proved by the statement that "Abraham believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness". It was his faith, i.e. he believed God, that caused God to see hm as having alwyas done the right thing.

We have to understand is that there is no scriptural evidence that men who have at one time in their lives done the right things, are believers. "Righteous" does not mean "believe", they are two separate things. A person can have done the right things and not be a believer, but a believer is always counted as righteous in God's sight.:)

Love,
Madeline


Madeline, first of all, lets consider Abraham...you said:
It was his faith, i.e. he believed God, that caused God to see hm as having alwyas done the right thing.

That is correst, but...Abraham also OBEYED God. If he had not, I tend to believe that it would NOT have counted unto him as righteousness.

And then second, you said:
A person can have done the right things and not be a believer, but a believer is always counted as righteous in God's sight.


I offer a story of someone who DID believe, but it certainly was not counted to him for righteousness!

Acts 8:9-24...
9 But there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one:

10 To whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the great power of God.

11 And to him they had regard, because that of long time he had bewitched them with sorceries.

12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.

13 Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.

14 Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:

15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:

16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)

17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.

18 And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money,

19 Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost.

20 But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.

(Peter told him:)
21 Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God.

22 Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.

23 For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity.

24 Then answered Simon, and said, Pray ye to the LORD for me, that none of these things which ye have spoken come upon me.

That man believed! And was baptised! And continued on with the disciples!

But, Madeline, it takes MORE than believing! And this story is prime proof of that. It takes obedience! I have known many over the years who believed, but the obedience was was not in their life. And as time went on, they ended up in a life of total rebellion and sin. I've talked to some and told them, "Its wrong that you do this.."

And they would say... "I KNOW it. You are right. I KNOW I shouldn't be doing this." Yet, they would continue living and wallowing in their sin! Believing and knowing right from wrong all the while!

*Madeline*
Jan 22nd 2007, 01:33 AM
Hi Diggindeeper!:)


Madeline, first of all, lets consider Abraham...you said:
It was his faith, i.e. he believed God, that caused God to see hm as having alwyas done the right thing.

That is correst, but...Abraham also OBEYED God. If he had not, I tend to believe that it would NOT have counted unto him as righteousness.

And then second, you said:
A person can have done the right things and not be a believer, but a believer is always counted as righteous in God's sight.


I offer a story of someone who DID believe, but it certainly was not counted to him for righteousness!

Acts 8:9-24...
9 But there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one:

10 To whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the great power of God.

11 And to him they had regard, because that of long time he had bewitched them with sorceries.

12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.

13 Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.

14 Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:

15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:

16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)

17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.

18 And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money,

19 Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost.

20 But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.

(Peter told him:)
21 Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God.

22 Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.

23 For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity.

24 Then answered Simon, and said, Pray ye to the LORD for me, that none of these things which ye have spoken come upon me.

That man believed! And was baptised! And continued on with the disciples!

But, Madeline, it takes MORE than believing! And this story is prime proof of that. It takes obedience! I have known many over the years who believed, but the obedience was was not in their life. And as time went on, they ended up in a life of total rebellion and sin. I've talked to some and told them, "Its wrong that you do this.."

And they would say... "I KNOW it. You are right. I KNOW I shouldn't be doing this." Yet, they would continue living and wallowing in their sin! Believing and knowing right from wrong all the while!



Christ repeated promises of eternal life is simply to faith (John 3:16, 6:47, etc.). Since believers show their faith by their works (James 2:18), and the God-given gift of saving faith (1 Corinthians 3:5-7) is not merely intellectual knowledge, but works by love (Galatians 5:6), the new nature given by God (Hebrews 8:8-12) at the point of belief (Romans 5:1) will inevitably express itself in holiness of life; obedience to Christ's command to be obedient is expected of the convert. Furthermore, since man cannot see the heart, only the outward actions of others (1 Samuel 16:7), whilst sinners are justified by faith apart from works in the sight of God (Romans 3:28), we should only have confidence that others have been born again when we see fruits that evidence regeneration (cf. Matthew 7:16, 20), including obedience. Nothing is more natural for one who has been given a new heart to love the Lord Jesus than to seek to keep His commandments (John 14:23), including obedience. The Bible contains numbers of passages that, in a manner comparable to Mark 16:16a, conjoin promises of justification by faith apart from works (Ephesians 2:8-9, Titus 3:4-7) and the works that are the fruits of that justification (Ephesians 2:10, Titus 3:8). No disagreement here, if Abraham had not obeyed God he would not have shown that he did beleive God's message to him an dhe would not have been counted righteous. We are both saying the same thing. That was in fact my very point in Heb. 11. As for Simon, the same truth, i.e. obedience proves one's faith. No disagreement here also. :hug:

Love,
Madeline

*Madeline*
Jan 22nd 2007, 02:12 AM
Hi PP!:)


This passage doesn't say some who sin will die nor does it say that some who are righteous will live Madeline. You keep talking about context here but shoot... what does it say! Let's not add words and do the whole fill in the invisible blanks! What does it say. Here it is again.

Ezekiel 18:20 "The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.
21 ¶"But if the wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed and observes all My statutes and practices justice and righteousness, he shall surely live; he shall not die.
22 "All his transgressions which he has committed will not be remembered against him; because of his righteousness which he has practiced, he will live.
23 "Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the Lord GOD, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?
24 ¶"But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and does according to all the abominations that a wicked man does, will he live? All his righteous deeds which he has done will not be remembered for his treachery which he has committed and his sin which he has committed; for them he will die.
25 "Yet you say, `The way of the Lord is not right.´ Hear now, O house of Israel! Is My way not right? Is it not your ways that are not right?
26 "When a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and dies because of it, for his iniquity which he has committed he will die.
27 "Again, when a wicked man turns away from his wickedness which he has committed and practices justice and righteousness, he will save his life.
28 "Because he considered and turned away from all his transgressions which he had committed, he shall surely live; he shall not die.
29 "But the house of Israel says, `The way of the Lord is not right.´ Are My ways not right, O house of Israel? Is it not your ways that are not right?
30 ¶"Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, each according to his conduct," declares the Lord GOD. "Repent and turn away from all your transgressions, so that iniquity may not become a stumbling block to you.
31 "Cast away from you all your transgressions which you have committed, and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! For why will you die, O house of Israel?
32 "For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies," declares the Lord GOD. "Therefore, repent and live."


Add no words Madeline and then talk to me about keeping it in context. If death is physical then so is life in this instance which is the contrast between evil and righteousness. If sin brings about physical death then look at that RED print. The righteous would not physically die.

I know that you aren't likely going to see this as your doctrine has problems with the thought. But hopefully others reading along will. It is not speaking of physical death nor life. Reading in its true context without adding to it or trying to use another Scripture to nix what is clearly written should make that pretty clear to the average reader I would think.

The righteous will not die physically as a result of transgressions. Also take a look at verse 21:

"But if the wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed and observes all My statutes and practices justice and righteousness, he shall surely live; he shall not die."

Not observing the statutes results in death by physical punishment. Sooo, can you show me where it actually says that the "righteous" and "unrighteous" are saved persons in that passage? As you said, we shouldn't add words to fill in the blanks. Wouldn't assuming these "righteous" and "unrighteous" people are saved or not be adding to the context? Also, can you be more righteous than others? Just something to think about PP!:)

Love,
Madeline

spiritual jew
Jan 22nd 2007, 02:59 AM
Hi PP!:)



The passage in Ezekiel 18 is not speaking of eternal life, but rather temporal life. Take for example vs. 24, "in them (iniquity) shall he die". In other words, the man who commits iniquity will die according to the Mosaic law (vs. 26), "for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die" is the same thing. So this passage has nothing to do with losing one's salvation, it has to do with the wicked losing his temporal life in accordance with the Mosaic law. Now let's deal with the Hebrew word translated "righteous" in this passage. It doesn't mean saved, it means doing things correctly or right. An example can be found in 1 Sam. 24:17, "Thou art more righteous than I...". A person is either saved or not, he is not more saved than another. Note also 1 Kings 2:32, "...2 men more righteous and better....". "Righteous" is not saved, it is the description of having done what is right and good.

Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

Rom 6:16


Same principle as Ezekiel 18 teaches;
Obedience/Righteousness/life
Sin/Death

And now back to Ezekiel;

23 Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?
24 But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.

Is dying in sin only an old testament principle, or is it an old AND new testament principle that is interrelated with belief in the Son of God?


John 8:21 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=50&chapter=8&verse=21&version=9&context=verse)
Then said Jesus again unto them, I go my way, and ye shall seek me, and shall die in your sins: whither I go, ye cannot come

John 8:24 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=50&chapter=8&verse=24&version=9&context=verse)
I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.


Romans 8:13 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=52&chapter=8&verse=13&version=9&context=verse)
For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.

Now,why would living according to the flesh be considered only in the context of "physical mortality" in Ezekiel, and not in Romans chapter 8, or vice-versa?...:hmm:





In summary, the Ezekiel passage is saying that if a man who had done the right things strays, and commits evil, he will lose his temporal life. There's no way of knowing if that man was a believer (i.e. saved) or not. But if he was he would die, but then he would be resurrected unto eternal salvation. But this passage has nothing to do with eternal life, it is speaking of the wicked losing his temporal life. Hope this helps! If you are so confident in the NOSAS doctrine, then why not take it to the arena?:) :hug:

Love,
Madeline[/quote]

But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.
22 All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.
.23 Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways.


Within this passage is a moral obligation to the individual to turn from wickedness and the promise that if one does this,"all his transgressions" will not be remembered. This principle of turning from wickedness to righteousness in connection with the death of the individual is the same principle that establishes the fact that it is because of sin that people die.

For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord

Romans 6:23

The teaching of Ezekiel 18 is in harmony with that of Romans chapter 6; That is, the moral act of transgression affects the spiritual life of the individual.

The teaching of the Scriptures from beginning to end is in perfect harmony with the concept that the wages of sin affects the spiritual well being of individuals.

Why would the wages of sin require a Saviour and the plan of Redemption for Adam and Eve to restore them to their once unfallen condition not be applicable to the one who has applied the faith of Christ to their lives, yet have once again fallen into sin?

When Adam and Eve sinned, they immediately began the process of death and death entered into the world because of it.

Contrary to this, the OSAS doctrine ignores the Moral Purpose of the Scriptures-that mankind should turn from evil and through faith in the Son of God, and thus live Eternally Ultimately. It promises life and eternal security even in a state of utter wickedness and that one's relationship with a Righteous God will continue no matter how wicked one continues to live afterward.

Then it will suggest that the very clear texts,verses,and passages of the scriptures that simply say exactly what they do belong to another age, or some other time that is not related to the Christian today.

I will go forward with that even to the point to say that it makes of none effect the Scriptures through the suggestion that some of it does not pertain to today, or is outdated and therefore does not apply to the present.

This is exactly what is implied here by the suggestion that these passages refer only to "the Mosaic law"-- and the people of that time that were apparently Redeemed some other way other than through the Gospel Message now currently in effect....




2 Timothy 3:16 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=62&chapter=3&verse=16&version=9&context=verse)
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness


How can this scripture be true if there is one set of directions for those living "under the law of Moses" in connection with faith; and a completely different code for Modern Christianity..Moreover, how can it thus be possible that the Scriptures are in harmony,do not contradict; and that God does not change, and is "no respector of persons"--


Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
35But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

If it is true that every nation that "worketh righteousness" and "feareth" Him is thus "accepted with him", then the opposite is also true; that those that do NOT work righteousness are NOT accepted with Him, nor acceptible TO Him..

moonglow
Jan 22nd 2007, 03:17 AM
*Madeline*...did you see my post to you here?

http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1122114&postcount=86

God bless

ProjectPeter
Jan 22nd 2007, 11:21 AM
1 Peter 4:17-18

For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?
18 And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?

I read these verses as indicating that salvation does require us to stay on the strait and narrow path home (Mat 7:14 KJV Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. Joh 14:6KJV Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.).

IMO in 1Peter 4:18 the righteous represents those who stay on the path, the ungodly represents those who stray from the strait and narrow path, and the sinner represents the unsaved "lost".

:2cents::2cents: :)The sinner and the ungodly would fall into the same category so not sure how you could separate those. Here is a passage to ponder.

James 5:19 ¶My brethren, if any among you strays from the truth, and one turns him back,
20 let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death, and will cover a multitude of sins.

Here we have James telling the folks that if there is a brother among us that strays from the truth and you turn them back to God... then you have turned a sinner from the error of his ways and in turn you saved his soul from death.

That passage speaks of what you are talking about and I might add it really does speak loudly concerning this topic and why I see NOSAS as the correct doctrine. :)

ProjectPeter
Jan 22nd 2007, 11:30 AM
Hi PP!:)



The righteous will not die physically as a result of transgressions. Also take a look at verse 21:

"But if the wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed and observes all My statutes and practices justice and righteousness, he shall surely live; he shall not die."

Not observing the statutes results in death by physical punishment. Sooo, can you show me where it actually says that the "righteous" and "unrighteous" are saved persons in that passage? As you said, we shouldn't add words to fill in the blanks. Wouldn't assuming these "righteous" and "unrighteous" people are saved or not be adding to the context? Also, can you be more righteous than others? Just something to think about PP!:)

Love,
Madeline

Who is speaking Madeline? Now please show me in the Scripture anything that would allude to the idea that God would mention those righteous and not be speaking of folks He would call HIS own? I am honestly blown away that you would even attempt this stand! Say it is before the cross and while I would say that God's ways there haven't changed but at least that is a viable case. But to try and say the righteous here aren't the "saved"... wow!

It isn't even an "assumption" that the righteous are God's people here Madeline. Look at the description given of the righteous.

Ezekiel 18:20 "The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.
21 ¶"But if the wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed and observes all My statutes and practices justice and righteousness, he shall surely live; he shall not die.
22 "All his transgressions which he has committed will not be remembered against him; because of his righteousness which he has practiced, he will live.
23 "Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the Lord GOD, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?
24 ¶"But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and does according to all the abominations that a wicked man does, will he live? All his righteous deeds which he has done will not be remembered for his treachery which he has committed and his sin which he has committed; for them he will die.
25 "Yet you say, `The way of the Lord is not right.´ Hear now, O house of Israel! Is My way not right? Is it not your ways that are not right?
26 "When a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and dies because of it, for his iniquity which he has committed he will die.
27 "Again, when a wicked man turns away from his wickedness which he has committed and practices justice and righteousness, he will save his life.
28 "Because he considered and turned away from all his transgressions which he had committed, he shall surely live; he shall not die.
29 "But the house of Israel says, `The way of the Lord is not right.´ Are My ways not right, O house of Israel? Is it not your ways that are not right?
30 ¶"Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, each according to his conduct," declares the Lord GOD. "Repent and turn away from all your transgressions, so that iniquity may not become a stumbling block to you.
31 "Cast away from you all your transgressions which you have committed, and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! For why will you die, O house of Israel?
32 "For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies," declares the Lord GOD. "Therefore, repent and live."


Now if you want to go on about these not being "saved" people then that is certainly something you have to contend with. But what I hope people see out of this more than anything else is the places that people will go with a passage that kicks a sacred doctrinal cow slap in its side!!! ;)

*Madeline*
Jan 22nd 2007, 02:20 PM
Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

Rom 6:16


Same principle as Ezekiel 18 teaches;
Obedience/Righteousness/life
Sin/Death

And now back to Ezekiel;

23 Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?
24 But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.

Is dying in sin only an old testament principle, or is it an old AND new testament principle that is interrelated with belief in the Son of God?


John 8:21
Then said Jesus again unto them, I go my way, and ye shall seek me, and shall die in your sins: whither I go, ye cannot come

John 8:24
I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.


Romans 8:13
For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.

Now,why would living according to the flesh be considered only in the context of "physical mortality" in Ezekiel, and not in Romans chapter 8, or vice-versa?...






But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.
22 All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.
.23 Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways.


Within this passage is a moral obligation to the individual to turn from wickedness and the promise that if one does this,"all his transgressions" will not be remembered. This principle of turning from wickedness to righteousness in connection with the death of the individual is the same principle that establishes the fact that it is because of sin that people die.

For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord

Romans 6:23

The teaching of Ezekiel 18 is in harmony with that of Romans chapter 6; That is, the moral act of transgression affects the spiritual life of the individual.

The teaching of the Scriptures from beginning to end is in perfect harmony with the concept that the wages of sin affects the spiritual well being of individuals.

Why would the wages of sin require a Saviour and the plan of Redemption for Adam and Eve to restore them to their once unfallen condition not be applicable to the one who has applied the faith of Christ to their lives, yet have once again fallen into sin?

When Adam and Eve sinned, they immediately began the process of death and death entered into the world because of it.

Contrary to this, the OSAS doctrine ignores the Moral Purpose of the Scriptures-that mankind should turn from evil and through faith in the Son of God, and thus live Eternally Ultimately. It promises life and eternal security even in a state of utter wickedness and that one's relationship with a Righteous God will continue no matter how wicked one continues to live afterward.

Then it will suggest that the very clear texts,verses,and passages of the scriptures that simply say exactly what they do belong to another age, or some other time that is not related to the Christian today.

I will go forward with that even to the point to say that it makes of none effect the Scriptures through the suggestion that some of it does not pertain to today, or is outdated and therefore does not apply to the present.

This is exactly what is implied here by the suggestion that these passages refer only to "the Mosaic law"-- and the people of that time that were apparently Redeemed some other way other than through the Gospel Message now currently in effect....




2 Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness


How can this scripture be true if there is one set of directions for those living "under the law of Moses" in connection with faith; and a completely different code for Modern Christianity..Moreover, how can it thus be possible that the Scriptures are in harmony,do not contradict; and that God does not change, and is "no respector of persons"--


Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
35But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

If it is true that every nation that "worketh righteousness" and "feareth" Him is thus "accepted with him", then the opposite is also true; that those that do NOT work righteousness are NOT accepted with Him, nor acceptible TO Him..


Again, let's deal with the Hebrew word translated "righteous" in this passage. It doesn't mean saved, it means doing things correctly or right. An example can be found in 1 Sam. 24:17, "Thou art more righteous than I...". A person is either saved or not, he is not more saved than another. Note also 1 Kings 2:32, "...2 men more righteous and better....". "Righteous" is not saved, it is the description of having done what is right and good.


Romans 3:10 says that no man is righteous.

My response would depend on what you mean by "actual" righteousness. I do not believe man is righteous when he is saved, but that he is declared righteous because of the blood of Christ. Thus, Christians are often referred to as "the righteous." However, our actual righteousness will not be realized until God grants it after the resurrection of the saints.

This is sort of a muddied doctrine. Since all of man's sins (except for unbelief) are covered by Christ's sacrifice, then it may be that we do not have Christ's righteousness imputed to us, but that Christ legally removes our sinful state before God. Man is righteous in himself, then, when he believes in Christ, thus having no sin which has not been paid for. By faith, then, man becomes righteous, and as he is righteous, he can enter God's kingdom.

The born again believer "worketh" righteousness. God had decreed that the redemption Christ purchased on the cross is received by repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 20:21). One repents of his sin and places his faith in Christ for salvation at a particular moment of time; repentance and faith express two aspects of the one decision to receive Christ (John 1:12), so that to repent involves believing in Christ, and believing in Christ involves repentance; the Bible warns that except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish (Luke 13:3) and he that believeth not shall be damned (Mark 16:16), and also states Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out (Acts 3:19) and He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life (John 3:36). One cannot repent or turn from his sins without forsaking the awful sin of unbelief (1 John 5:10), nor can he believe or trust in Christ to save him from sin without actually wanting the Savior to free him from its power (cf. Matthew 21:32). Repentance and faith are inseparable aspects of the decision to come to Christ for salvation (John 6:37), and are therefore implied in the many verses that predicate redemption upon only the one or the other; it is proper to speak of salvation by faith alone, as Scripture does abundantly, without an explicit mention of the repentant nature of saving faith. Although two sides of the same coin, repentance and faith do emphasize different aspects of mans required response to Christs saving work.

Saving repentance is a gift of God (Acts 11:18) where a sinner agrees with God that he is lost, as wicked as the Bible declares (Leviticus 26:40-41), and headed to and worthy of hell (cf. 1 Kings 8:47, Luke 5:32, 2 Timothy 2:25); he then turns from his sins (Ezekiel 14:6, Revelation 16:11) in godly sorrow for them (2 Corinthians 7:9-11) to God to submit to Him unconditionally as Lord (1 Thessalonians 1:9-10), and believes or trusts in Christ alone for salvation (Acts 3:19, 20:21). God now commandeth all men every where to repentance (Acts 17:30). Christ said, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospels, the same shall save it (Mark 8:34-35). When people turn from their sins and surrender to Christ, God changes them so that those who repent and turn to God will do works meet for [i. e. befitting] repentance (Acts 26:20) and bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance (Matthew 3:8). Whilst doing good works is not part of repentance, but a result of it, all who truly repent and believe in Christ will manifest their change of heart in a changed life (James 2:17).


Hi moonglow!


*Madeline*...did you see my post to you here?

http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1122114&postcount=86

God bless[/quote]

Yes, I disgree with him. I can easily provide links to many biblical scholars who would disgaree with Adam Clarke. Furthermore, he believes in baptismal regeneration which I understand is not taught in the scriptures. But that's another topic altogether.

Love,
Madeline

*Madeline*
Jan 22nd 2007, 02:26 PM
Hi PP!:)


Who is speaking Madeline? Now please show me in the Scripture anything that would allude to the idea that God would mention those righteous and not be speaking of folks He would call HIS own? I am honestly blown away that you would even attempt this stand! Say it is before the cross and while I would say that God's ways there haven't changed but at least that is a viable case. But to try and say the righteous here aren't the "saved"... wow!

It isn't even an "assumption" that the righteous are God's people here Madeline. Look at the description given of the righteous.

Ezekiel 18:20 "The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.
21 ¶"But if the wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed and observes all My statutes and practices justice and righteousness, he shall surely live; he shall not die.
22 "All his transgressions which he has committed will not be remembered against him; because of his righteousness which he has practiced, he will live.
23 "Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the Lord GOD, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?
24 ¶"But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and does according to all the abominations that a wicked man does, will he live? All his righteous deeds which he has done will not be remembered for his treachery which he has committed and his sin which he has committed; for them he will die.
25 "Yet you say, `The way of the Lord is not right.´ Hear now, O house of Israel! Is My way not right? Is it not your ways that are not right?
26 "When a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and dies because of it, for his iniquity which he has committed he will die.
27 "Again, when a wicked man turns away from his wickedness which he has committed and practices justice and righteousness, he will save his life.
28 "Because he considered and turned away from all his transgressions which he had committed, he shall surely live; he shall not die.
29 "But the house of Israel says, `The way of the Lord is not right.´ Are My ways not right, O house of Israel? Is it not your ways that are not right?
30 ¶"Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, each according to his conduct," declares the Lord GOD. "Repent and turn away from all your transgressions, so that iniquity may not become a stumbling block to you.
31 "Cast away from you all your transgressions which you have committed, and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! For why will you die, O house of Israel?
32 "For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies," declares the Lord GOD. "Therefore, repent and live."


Now if you want to go on about these not being "saved" people then that is certainly something you have to contend with. But what I hope people see out of this more than anything else is the places that people will go with a passage that kicks a sacred doctrinal cow slap in its side!!! ;)

There are two issues discussed in this letter.

1) In my opinion, Ezek. 18 speaks of punishment for specific sins, not loss of salvation. You will have to decide this issue for yourself. I will say that it is a very important one because it tells us a great deal about Who God is. That is to say, there are scriptures that tell us that God has given us the spirit as a gaurantee of resurrection. I believe that God does not break His guarantees, others believe He does. You will have to decide that for yourself.

2) If the law of Moses is for today, then we are all in trouble. There are long passages that tell what to do if your house has mold, what to do on the Sabbath, i,e, Satruday, when and how to stone disobedient children, to run to specified cities ("cities of refuge") if we have accidentally killed someone,etc. etc. These things are not being done today. If the Law of Moses is in effect today, why is no one even attempting to do any of these things?

But more importantly, unless we "rightly divide the Word of truth" (2 Tim. 2:15) we have contradictions in the Word of God, which is an absolute impossibilty. The bible is explicit that we cannot lose our salvation.

We read in Eph. 1:13-14, "In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession ....". Note the three words highlighted in this passage. We were sealed, with a promise which is the earnest or guarantee of resurrection. This guarantee is a promise which is given when we were sealed. This promise does not come with any conditions. Therefore, God, Who cannot lie, cannot break this promise of resurrection to all who had been sealed, i.e. all who are saved.

John 10:28, "And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand". The Greek translated here "never" is "ou me". The two negatives when combined lose their distinctive meanings, and form the strongest and most emphatic asserevation". Had the Holy Spirit used the Greek "me" alone He would have given a conditional aspect to the statement of this verse. It is expressing conditional negation....". But the Holy spirit did not use the conditional word, He used the phrase which makes the statement that "they shall never perish" unconditionally.

John 3:16, "For God so loved the world, that he gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life". There is no condition here, this is an unconditional promise.

Romans 8:37-39, "Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him That loved us. For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height nor depth, nor any other creature shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord".
Phil. 1:6, "Being confident of this very thing, that He Which hath begun a good word in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ". The Greek word translated"perform" is "epiteleo". It is translated "perform" 4 times, "do" once. But it is also translated "accomplish" two times and "perfect" or "perfecting" or "made perfect" and "finish". In other words "epiteleo" carries the idea of finishing the act. Therefore, the NIV translation gives a better sense of the meaning of this verse. "being confident of this, that He Who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus". The work that was "begun" was obviously, salvation. Here we are told that that work will be completed. The term "until the day of Christ Jesus" refers to resurrection. Therefore, we are told in this verse that God will complete the work of salvation at resurrection. Note there is no condition attached, and it is not man, but God Who will complete the work. Hope this helps!:hug:


Love,
Madeline

ProjectPeter
Jan 22nd 2007, 02:38 PM
Hi PP!:)



There are two issues discussed in this letter.

1) In my opinion, Ezek. 18 speaks of punishment for specific sins, not loss of salvation. You will have to decide this issue for yourself. I will say that it is a very important one because it tells us a great deal about Who God is. That is to say, there are scriptures that tell us that God has given us the spirit as a gaurantee of resurrection. I believe that God does not break His guarantees, others believe He does. You will have to decide that for yourself.

2) If the law of Moses is for today, then we are all in trouble. There are long passages that tell what to do if your house has mold, what to do on the Sabbath, i,e, Satruday, when and how to stone disobedient children, to run to specified cities ("cities of refuge") if we have accidentally killed someone,etc. etc. These things are not being done today. If the Law of Moses is in effect today, why is no one even attempting to do any of these things?

But more importantly, unless we "rightly divide the Word of truth" (2 Tim. 2:15) we have contradictions in the Word of God, which is an absolute impossibilty. The bible is explicit that we cannot lose our salvation.

We read in Eph. 1:13-14, "In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession ....". Note the three words highlighted in this passage. We were sealed, with a promise which is the earnest or guarantee of resurrection. This guarantee is a promise which is given when we were sealed. This promise does not come with any conditions. Therefore, God, Who cannot lie, cannot break this promise of resurrection to all who had been sealed, i.e. all who are saved.

John 10:28, "And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand". The Greek translated here "never" is "ou me". The two negatives when combined lose their distinctive meanings, and form the strongest and most emphatic asserevation". Had the Holy Spirit used the Greek "me" alone He would have given a conditional aspect to the statement of this verse. It is expressing conditional negation....". But the Holy spirit did not use the conditional word, He used the phrase which makes the statement that "they shall never perish" unconditionally.

John 3:16, "For God so loved the world, that he gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life". There is no condition here, this is an unconditional promise.

Romans 8:37-39, "Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him That loved us. For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height nor depth, nor any other creature shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord".
Phil. 1:6, "Being confident of this very thing, that He Which hath begun a good word in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ". The Greek word translated"perform" is "epiteleo". It is translated "perform" 4 times, "do" once. But it is also translated "accomplish" two times and "perfect" or "perfecting" or "made perfect" and "finish". In other words "epiteleo" carries the idea of finishing the act. Therefore, the NIV translation gives a better sense of the meaning of this verse. "being confident of this, that He Who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus". The work that was "begun" was obviously, salvation. Here we are told that that work will be completed. The term "until the day of Christ Jesus" refers to resurrection. Therefore, we are told in this verse that God will complete the work of salvation at resurrection. Note there is no condition attached, and it is not man, but God Who will complete the work. Hope this helps!:hug:


Love,
Madeline
Certainly no one has heard me say that we are to follow the Law of Moses so no clue why you are tossing that in there. As to all of that other... since that isn't really answering any of the points made in the Ezekiel passage... I'll not even respond to that. I am sure it will come up again as the discussion with Jesuslover progresses!

moonglow
Jan 22nd 2007, 02:42 PM
Hi moonglow!


Quote:

Originally Posted by moonglow View Post
*Madeline*...did you see my post to you here?

http://bibleforums.org/sho...4&postcount=86

God bless


Yes, I disgree with him. I can easily provide links to many biblical scholars who would disgaree with Adam Clarke. Furthermore, he believes in baptismal regeneration which I understand is not taught in the scriptures. But that's another topic altogether.

Love,
Madeline

Ok...I don't agree with every single thing he writes either but that doesn't discount his ability to explains things and back it up with other scriptures. I thought maybe seeing it broke down like that for you would help you to see what PP and others were trying to say....but apparently it didn't help you understand. I thought if you could understand at least where PP was coming from (doesn't mean agree, just understand what he was saying) then it would just help you get a handle on what he is saying is all. I know if I am in a discussion and cannot understand the others viewpoints, then we just tend to go around in cycles repeating the same things over and over again which seems like what is happening on this thread. Once I understand their views (doesn't mean I agree though...understanding and agreeing are two different things), then we can make some kind of progress in the discussion.

God bless

moonglow
Jan 22nd 2007, 03:02 PM
*Madeline*, maybe we need to try a different approach here...you seem stuck on the OT verse PP posted and posts all the verse in the NT that show our salvation is secure, while ingoring those that say we can give up our salvation. Of course God doesn't forsake us or our salvation...but we can give it up, either through willfull rejection of Him or getting back into sin so deep we don't want to stop the sin. For instance Paul say people involved in certain sins will not share the kingdom of God...

1 Corinthians 6

9 Don't you know that those who do wrong will have no share in the Kingdom of God? Don't fool yourselves. Those who indulge in sexual sin, who are idol worshipers, adulterers, male prostitutes, homosexuals, 10 thieves, greedy people, drunkards, abusers, and swindlers--none of these will have a share in the Kingdom of God.


A Christian cannot be actively engaging in any of those sins listed and expect to go to Heaven. Now I am sure you will argue a true born again Christians wouldn't engage in such things or stop them once saved. That the Holy Spirit would make them stop...if that were true then why all the warnings in the bible about not falling into sin? Yet there are MANY Christians out there that truly believe they are saved yet are activitly involved in these sins...OR they got involved in these sin after getting saved and upon being convicted by the Holy Spirit what they were doing was wrong, they decide the sin is too much fun and refuse to stop it. Some will try to say they were never saved to start with...but how do we know that? Only God can judge anyone's salvation. To know if they were or not. At any rate the bible DOES address what happens to a saved Christian involved in a sinning lifestyle such as those listed, and refusing to repent of them:

Hebrews 6

4 For it is impossible to restore to repentance those who were once enlightened--those who have experienced the good things of heaven and shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the power of the age to come-- 6 and who then turn away from God. It is impossible to bring such people to repentance again because they are nailing the Son of God to the cross again by rejecting him, holding him up to public shame.

Now who do you think is being address in Hebrews 6 here? A unsaved sinner? Couldn't be because it clearly says these people were once enlightened... experienced the good things of heaven and shared in the Holy Spirit. And goes on to say they cannot be brought back to repentance again...meaning they had repented in the past of their sins at one time...but for whatever reason went back to their sinful life style.

What do you think Hebrews 6 means?

And what about this next one?


Hebrews 10

26 Dear friends, if we deliberately continue sinning after we have received a full knowledge of the truth, there is no other sacrifice that will cover these sins. 27 There will be nothing to look forward to but the terrible expectation of God's judgment and the raging fire that will consume his enemies. 28 Anyone who refused to obey the law of Moses was put to death without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29 Think how much more terrible the punishment will be for those who have trampled on the Son of God and have treated the blood of the covenant as if it were common and unholy. Such people have insulted and enraged the Holy Spirit who brings God's mercy to his people.

30 For we know the one who said,


"I will take vengeance.
I will repay those who deserve it."

He also said,

"The Lord will judge his own people."

31 It is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

Who is this passage talking about? Who are God's own people?
Who keeps sinning AFTER recieving the knowledge of truth...

God bless

*Madeline*
Jan 22nd 2007, 03:33 PM
Hi moonglow!:)


*Madeline*, maybe we need to try a different approach here...you seem stuck on the OT verse PP posted and posts all the verse in the NT that show our salvation is secure, while ingoring those that say we can give up our salvation. Of course God doesn't forsake us or our salvation...but we can give it up, either through willfull rejection of Him or getting back into sin so deep we don't want to stop the sin. For instance Paul say people involved in certain sins will not share the kingdom of God...

1 Corinthians 6

9 Don't you know that those who do wrong will have no share in the Kingdom of God? Don't fool yourselves. Those who indulge in sexual sin, who are idol worshipers, adulterers, male prostitutes, homosexuals, 10 thieves, greedy people, drunkards, abusers, and swindlers--none of these will have a share in the Kingdom of God.


A Christian cannot be actively engaging in any of those sins listed and expect to go to Heaven. Now I am sure you will argue a true born again Christians wouldn't engage in such things or stop them once saved. That the Holy Spirit would make them stop...if that were true then why all the warnings in the bible about not falling into sin? Yet there are MANY Christians out there that truly believe they are saved yet are activitly involved in these sins...OR they got involved in these sin after getting saved and upon being convicted by the Holy Spirit what they were doing was wrong, they decide the sin is too much fun and refuse to stop it. Some will try to say they were never saved to start with...but how do we know that? Only God can judge anyone's salvation. To know if they were or not. At any rate the bible DOES address what happens to a saved Christian involved in a sinning lifestyle such as those listed, and refusing to repent of them:

Hebrews 6

4 For it is impossible to restore to repentance those who were once enlightened--those who have experienced the good things of heaven and shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the power of the age to come-- 6 and who then turn away from God. It is impossible to bring such people to repentance again because they are nailing the Son of God to the cross again by rejecting him, holding him up to public shame.

Now who do you think is being address in Hebrews 6 here? A unsaved sinner? Couldn't be because it clearly says these people were once enlightened... experienced the good things of heaven and shared in the Holy Spirit. And goes on to say they cannot be brought back to repentance again...meaning they had repented in the past of their sins at one time...but for whatever reason went back to their sinful life style.

What do you think Hebrews 6 means?

And what about this next one?


Hebrews 10

26 Dear friends, if we deliberately continue sinning after we have received a full knowledge of the truth, there is no other sacrifice that will cover these sins. 27 There will be nothing to look forward to but the terrible expectation of God's judgment and the raging fire that will consume his enemies. 28 Anyone who refused to obey the law of Moses was put to death without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29 Think how much more terrible the punishment will be for those who have trampled on the Son of God and have treated the blood of the covenant as if it were common and unholy. Such people have insulted and enraged the Holy Spirit who brings God's mercy to his people.

30 For we know the one who said,


"I will take vengeance.
I will repay those who deserve it."

He also said,

"The Lord will judge his own people."

31 It is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

Who is this passage talking about? Who are God's own people?
Who keeps sinning AFTER recieving the knowledge of truth...

God bless

That passage is to the Hebrews and is written to warn them what would happen if they were to revert back to Judaism. That passage in a nutshell is stating that it is impossible to renew true Christians again to repentance should they fall away (cf. Heb. 3:12-4:2). But what I find interesting in verses 4-6 is the contrast with genuine believers, notice verse 9, hmmm.. the passage also says it is impossible to renew these people to repentance. Note again that it's talking about repentance, not salvation. It doesn't say that it is impossible to bring back to "Salvation", it clearly says that it is impossible to bring them back to REPENTANCE.

In Heb 10: The context is of an ended OT sacrificial system - not the impossibility of forgiveness. And actually the entire context of chapter 10 shows six parallel constructs affirming Eternal Security.

Heb 10.
Here are the six constructs.
Note that five of the six constructs above utilize the Greek Perfect Tense (GPT). By themselves, the Greek Perfect Tense is sufficient for once-saved always-saved. The GPT constructs above also employ redundant emphatic and parallel constructs that say the same thing that the GPT says:
[1] Heb 10:2 uses the word a[pax Strong says this Greek word means: 1) once, one time, 2) once for all.
[2] Heb 10:10 uses the compound word "ejfavpax" a preposition. The use of the extra (ejf) makes it a super emphatic form of a[pax.
[3] Heb 10:14 emphatically adds the prepositional phrase eij~ dienekev~ = for ever.
[4] Heb 10:17 God says that He will no more remember sins. The English word no is the double negative ouj mhv in Greek. This combination of the double negative is used to highlight or underscore the impossibility of the stated action occurring. To carry this idea in English we would have to add extra qualifiers to bring out the emphasis. God will absolutely never ever remember our sins.
[5] Heb 10:22a has a GPT with by an intensifying phrase.
[6] Heb 10:22b has a GPT with an intensifying phrase.

And I don't see how 1 Corinthians 6 relates to one losing his/her salvation. The fact that a child of God does not practice sin is contrary to those mentioned in that passage. I was hoping to stick with the Ezekeil passage from now on. I'll be back to respond to PP's post later. Hope this helps for n:hug:

Love,
Madeline

Pilgrimtozion
Jan 22nd 2007, 04:19 PM
Hi moonglow!:)

That passage is to the Hebrews and is written to warn them what would happen if they were to revert back to Judaism. That passage in a nutshell is stating that it is impossible to renew true Christians again to repentance should they fall away (cf. Heb. 3:12-4:2). But what I find interesting in verses 4-6 is the contrast with genuine believers, notice verse 9, hmmm.. the passage also says it is impossible to renew these people to repentance. Note again that it's talking about repentance, not salvation. It doesn't say that it is impossible to bring back to "Salvation", it clearly says that it is impossible to bring them back to REPENTANCE.



Are salvation and repentance not inseparable? How is it possible that somebody cannot be brought back to repentance but can still be brought back to salvation? Is repentance not an essential part of what it means to be saved? How can I be saved if I don't repent from my sins?

DSK
Jan 22nd 2007, 04:22 PM
Yes, I disgree with him. I can easily provide links to many biblical scholars who would disgaree with Adam Clarke. Furthermore, he believes in baptismal regeneration which I understand is not taught in the scriptures. But that's another topic altogether.


I find it odd to believe that Adam Clarke believes in baptismal regeneration. See the comment below from Clarke on why I would tend to disagree with you.

"Baptism changes nothing; the grace signified by it cleanses and purifies. They who think baptism to be regeneration, neither know the Scriptures nor the power of God; therefore they do greatly err." - Adam Clarke comment on Titus 3:5

jesuslover1968
Jan 22nd 2007, 05:24 PM
That, I bolded, is excatly what no-osas means...that 'we' can walk away from God. Jesus said He would never leave us or forsake us...He didn't say we couldn't leave or forsake Him though. Since you know this can happen you are already in agreement with what PP and I are saying on this.

What trips people up on this is they think we are saying we can 'lose' our salvation...the whole thing is really worded wrong to start with. Its not 'losing'...its 'giving up' the free gift given to us just as your friend did. And that's it in a nut shell.

God bless

I would agree. :) God Bless.

jesuslover1968
Jan 22nd 2007, 05:29 PM
Again yes, but we have to be careful not to get tangled in common religious speak because it honestly does trip us up! Hebrews speaks of the type and shadow of the sacrifice etc... and how that pointed to the atonement of Christ. The sacrifice was no doubt part of the law. But if the Law was a type and shadow of grace then I figure Galatians is going to get rather tricky! But again... that is really a sidebar in regard to the topic at hand. So I'll let all that go at this point.


LOL...yeah, I can see where you're coming from. It certainly tripped up the Israelites...( being humanistically religious without being spiritually believing by faith )As I stated to Moonglow, I agree with your stance, as well as hers as the whole premise is not really can we LOSE our salvation, but can we give it up, which I agree that we can, and many do. I would tend to believe that a misunderstanding of these two concepts ( osas/nosas ) could actually cause one to fall away for lack of understanding what it is really saying. God Bless.

Diggindeeper
Jan 22nd 2007, 05:50 PM
LOL...yeah, I can see where you're coming from. It certainly tripped up the Israelites...( being humanistically religious without being spiritually believing by faith )As I stated to Moonglow, I agree with your stance, as well as hers as the whole premise is not really can we LOSE our salvation, but can we give it up, which I agree that we can, and many do. I would tend to believe that a misunderstanding of these two concepts ( osas/nosas ) could actually cause one to fall away for lack of understanding what it is really saying. God Bless.

That is right, Misty. Someone can be saved, but WILLFULLY GIVE IT UP.

Therefore they are Not Once Saved, Always Saved=NOSAS. Now, what is it you still do not agree with? I don't understand.

I once heard a preacher say, "Once a person is saved, even if he lives like the lowest sinner on earth, he will still go to heaven...whether he wants to or not!" That, to me, is simply foolish. No one will be forced into heaven, kicking and screaming that they don't want to be there! There is not one scripture...NOT ONE...to back up that stance!

ProjectPeter
Jan 22nd 2007, 06:12 PM
LOL...yeah, I can see where you're coming from. It certainly tripped up the Israelites...( being humanistically religious without being spiritually believing by faith )As I stated to Moonglow, I agree with your stance, as well as hers as the whole premise is not really can we LOSE our salvation, but can we give it up, which I agree that we can, and many do. I would tend to believe that a misunderstanding of these two concepts ( osas/nosas ) could actually cause one to fall away for lack of understanding what it is really saying. God Bless.

Oh there isn't as much misunderstanding as folks let on! Actually there are some very important differences. There are different types of NOSAS and OSAS too which sort of muddies up the waters some. Some NOSAS folks act as if you even stub your toe then you have turned from God and there are OSAS folk that teach that even if you ever truly believed at any point in your life, and went to your deathbed denying Christ to man... then you would still have eternal life. So while it can be complicated to that degree... there isn't as much misunderstanding as often let on!

moonglow
Jan 22nd 2007, 06:22 PM
Hi moonglow!:)



That passage is to the Hebrews and is written to warn them what would happen if they were to revert back to Judaism. That passage in a nutshell is stating that it is impossible to renew true Christians again to repentance should they fall away (cf. Heb. 3:12-4:2). But what I find interesting in verses 4-6 is the contrast with genuine believers, notice verse 9, hmmm.. the passage also says it is impossible to renew these people to repentance. Note again that it's talking about repentance, not salvation. It doesn't say that it is impossible to bring back to "Salvation", it clearly says that it is impossible to bring them back to REPENTANCE.

In Heb 10: The context is of an ended OT sacrificial system - not the impossibility of forgiveness. And actually the entire context of chapter 10 shows six parallel constructs affirming Eternal Security.

Heb 10.
Here are the six constructs.
Note that five of the six constructs above utilize the Greek Perfect Tense (GPT). By themselves, the Greek Perfect Tense is sufficient for once-saved always-saved. The GPT constructs above also employ redundant emphatic and parallel constructs that say the same thing that the GPT says:
[1] Heb 10:2 uses the word a[pax Strong says this Greek word means: 1) once, one time, 2) once for all.
[2] Heb 10:10 uses the compound word "ejfavpax" a preposition. The use of the extra (ejf) makes it a super emphatic form of a[pax.
[3] Heb 10:14 emphatically adds the prepositional phrase eij~ dienekev~ = for ever.
[4] Heb 10:17 God says that He will no more remember sins. The English word no is the double negative ouj mhv in Greek. This combination of the double negative is used to highlight or underscore the impossibility of the stated action occurring. To carry this idea in English we would have to add extra qualifiers to bring out the emphasis. God will absolutely never ever remember our sins.
[5] Heb 10:22a has a GPT with by an intensifying phrase.
[6] Heb 10:22b has a GPT with an intensifying phrase.

And I don't see how 1 Corinthians 6 relates to one losing his/her salvation. The fact that a child of God does not practice sin is contrary to those mentioned in that passage. I was hoping to stick with the Ezekeil passage from now on. I'll be back to respond to PP's post later. Hope this helps for n:hug:

Love,
Madeline


Pilgrimtozion
Quote:

Originally Posted by *Madeline* View Post
Hi moonglow!

That passage is to the Hebrews and is written to warn them what would happen if they were to revert back to Judaism. That passage in a nutshell is stating that it is impossible to renew true Christians again to repentance should they fall away (cf. Heb. 3:12-4:2). But what I find interesting in verses 4-6 is the contrast with genuine believers, notice verse 9, hmmm.. the passage also says it is impossible to renew these people to repentance. Note again that it's talking about repentance, not salvation. It doesn't say that it is impossible to bring back to "Salvation", it clearly says that it is impossible to bring them back to REPENTANCE.


Are salvation and repentance not inseparable? How is it possible that somebody cannot be brought back to repentance but can still be brought back to salvation? Is repentance not an essential part of what it means to be saved? How can I be saved if I don't repent from my sins?

Excatly. Whoever heard of being saved but not repenting of their sins? Which means asking for forgiviness and stopping them...not continuing on in them. I already posted what the bible says about those that keep sinning.

Hebrews 10

26 Dear friends, if we deliberately continue sinning after we have received a full knowledge of the truth, there is no other sacrifice that will cover these sins. 27 There will be nothing to look forward to but the terrible expectation of God's judgment and the raging fire that will consume his enemies. 28 Anyone who refused to obey the law of Moses was put to death without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29 Think how much more terrible the punishment will be for those who have trampled on the Son of God and have treated the blood of the covenant as if it were common and unholy. Such people have insulted and enraged the Holy Spirit who brings God's mercy to his people.

30 For we know the one who said,


"I will take vengeance.
I will repay those who deserve it."

He also said,

"The Lord will judge his own people."

31 It is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God.



And I don't see how 1 Corinthians 6 relates to one losing his/her salvation. The fact that a child of God does not practice sin is contrary to those mentioned in that passage. I was hoping to stick with the Ezekeil passage from now on. I'll be back to respond to PP's post later. Hope this helps for n:hug:

I never said 1 Corinthians 6 was about giving up your salvation...I said its clear those involved in those sins (including those saying their are Christians) will not shared in the kingdom of Heaven. Its a warning passage for those tempted to get into those sins. Why would the bible include warnings such as these if we were incapable of doing these or other sins? And then not being able to share in in the kingdom of Heaven? What would that mean? Wouldn't that mean not going to Heaven? Wouldn't that mean we no longer had salvation then? There ARE Christians involved in these sins that believe they are osas...that all they had to do was say the sinners prayer, get bapisted and had their free ticket to Heaven...this isn't what the bible says though.

At any rate, I was putting out those passages to try to get you unstuck off the OT passages PP posted since you don't understand what he is saying on them...or maybe you do but just disagree. Good luck.

God bless

*Madeline*
Jan 22nd 2007, 06:45 PM
Excatly. Whoever heard of being saved but not repenting of their sins? Which means asking for forgiviness and stopping them...not continuing on in them. I already posted what the bible says about those that keep sinning.

Hebrews 10

26 Dear friends, if we deliberately continue sinning after we have received a full knowledge of the truth, there is no other sacrifice that will cover these sins. 27 There will be nothing to look forward to but the terrible expectation of God's judgment and the raging fire that will consume his enemies. 28 Anyone who refused to obey the law of Moses was put to death without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29 Think how much more terrible the punishment will be for those who have trampled on the Son of God and have treated the blood of the covenant as if it were common and unholy. Such people have insulted and enraged the Holy Spirit who brings God's mercy to his people.

30 For we know the one who said,


"I will take vengeance.
I will repay those who deserve it."

He also said,

"The Lord will judge his own people."

31 It is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God.




I never said 1 Corinthians 6 was about giving up your salvation...I said its clear those involved in those sins (including those saying their are Christians) will not shared in the kingdom of Heaven. Its a warning passage for those tempted to get into those sins. Why would the bible include warnings such as these if we were incapable of doing these or other sins? And then not being able to share in in the kingdom of Heaven? What would that mean? Wouldn't that mean not going to Heaven? Wouldn't that mean we no longer had salvation then? There ARE Christians involved in these sins that believe they are osas...that all they had to do was say the sinners prayer, get bapisted and had their free ticket to Heaven...this isn't what the bible says though.

At any rate, I was putting out those passages to try to get you unstuck off the OT passages PP posted since you don't understand what he is saying on them...or maybe you do but just disagree. Good luck.

God bless

You said this before already. I have already showed you how Hebrews 10 disproves NOSAS. Good luck? I don't believe in 'luck" since the bible doesn't mention that word. ;) Why would Paul give these warnings in the first place? Paul tells us "examine" ourselves to see whether we are in the faith to 2 Corinthians 13:5. I would suggest that you go back and read my response to Hebrews 10 which actually affirms the doctrine of Eternal Security, which no one has commented on but rather forced their doctrine without providing a solid rebuttal. Now since I am probably the only person who adheres to the doctrine of Eternal Security on this thread, please give me some time to answer the previous arguments posted on this thread. :)

Love,
Madeline

jesuslover1968
Jan 22nd 2007, 07:04 PM
Therefore they are Not Once Saved, Always Saved=NOSAS. Now, what is it you still do not agree with? I don't understand.

I don't have any disagreement. This was more a question of fully understanding why there was disagreement in the first place. The way one learns is to ask questions. :) PP answered my questions and I learned that we were not really in disagreement at all, I just did not see what the actual differences were. Once saved always saved is a concept from God's point of view. Once we receive Grace, He will not take it away. But as with all things, we have free will to give it up. On that premise, I totally agree with Nosas and would disagree with osas for that reason as it is based on repentance and our willigness to walk toward God and not away from Him. God Bless.

jesuslover1968
Jan 22nd 2007, 07:07 PM
Oh there isn't as much misunderstanding as folks let on! Actually there are some very important differences. There are different types of NOSAS and OSAS too which sort of muddies up the waters some. Some NOSAS folks act as if you even stub your toe then you have turned from God and there are OSAS folk that teach that even if you ever truly believed at any point in your life, and went to your deathbed denying Christ to man... then you would still have eternal life. So while it can be complicated to that degree... there isn't as much misunderstanding as often let on!


Well, I would tend to agree with you. I like the clear water rather than the muddy water so I will refrain from all other doctrine and stick to the Nosas based on repentance and a continual walk with God and not away from Him. Thank you for taking the time to explain all this to me. :hug: God Bless.

Centurionoflight
Jan 22nd 2007, 07:15 PM
PP


So again.... you contend that folks can be dead at the same time that they are eternally alive?


Yes;
We {as believers} can be dead{out of fellowship} in our sins; yet have eternal life{as part of being spiritually alive}.


Ephesians 2:5
Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)

Dan Moran
Jan 22nd 2007, 07:16 PM
Well, I would tend to agree with you. I like the clear water rather than the muddy water so I will refrain from all other doctrine and stick to the Nosas based on repentance and a continual walk with God and not away from Him. Thank you for taking the time to explain all this to me. :hug: God Bless.
Walking away from God after the heart has accepted the holy spirit is only going to hurt you in the rewards department when at the judgment seat of Christ. Pending on your works being godly or ungodly depends on your status in heaven; not fuel for the fire, however.

jesuslover1968
Jan 22nd 2007, 07:23 PM
Walking away from God after the heart has accepted the holy spirit is only going to hurt you in the rewards department when at the judgment seat of Christ. Pending on your works being godly or ungodly depends on your status in heaven; not fuel for the fire, however.


There is a difference between back-sliding and falling away. backsliding is like being 4 rungs up on the ladder and sliding back down two, but still allowing that you can climb back up. Falling away would be like being on the ladder at any point and letting go just because you want to. God Bless.

Centurionoflight
Jan 22nd 2007, 07:28 PM
jesuslover1968



There is a difference between back-sliding and falling away. backsliding is like being 4 rungs up on the ladder and sliding back down two, but still allowing that you can climb back up. Falling away would be like being on the ladder at any point and letting go just because you want to. God Bless.


Psalm 37:24- Though he fall, he shall not be utterly cast down: for the LORD upholdeth him with his hand.

And Gods hand is there to hold us when we "fall away"

jesuslover1968
Jan 22nd 2007, 07:29 PM
jesuslover1968




Psalm 37:24- Though he fall, he shall not be utterly cast down: for the LORD upholdeth him with his hand.

And Gods hand is there to hold us when we "fall away"

God can only hold our hand when We reach out to HIM. If we pull our hand away, we will fall and be utterly lost. It IS a free will thing. God Bless.

Centurionoflight
Jan 22nd 2007, 07:35 PM
jesuslover1968


God can only hold our hand when We reach out to HIM. If we pull our hand away, we will fall and be utterly lost. It IS a free will thing. God Bless.
Doesnt state that.

It states he catches us.
God does all the catching; we do none of the grabbing.

Also its not a freewill thing; for we are Gods property at salvation;
He bought with a price; he owns us.

1 cor 6
19What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

20 For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.

Dan Moran
Jan 22nd 2007, 07:35 PM
God can only hold our hand when We reach out to HIM. If we pull our hand away, we will fall and be utterly lost. It IS a free will thing. God Bless.
Why call Him Father, if we are sons or daughters of our own biological father, we can live our entire lives out of fellowship with him, but we still carry his name with us, because of seed.

Why call Him Father, after truly accepting His seed (the holy spirit) within us, that He entirely disowns any knowledge of us being His. It sounds to me, this idea causes our sovereign, righteous God, to be more evil than our own biological father is.

You can slide back far enough to be entirely out of fellowship with your biological father; but you can not slide back far enough to be entirely disowned, because you are his seed. Perhaps our biological father has more power over us than our heavenly Father has.

...But I strongly doubt this thought. :hmm:

ProjectPeter
Jan 22nd 2007, 07:53 PM
PP


Yes;
We {as believers} can be dead{out of fellowship} in our sins; yet have eternal life{as part of being spiritually alive}.


Ephesians 2:5
Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)
Um... one little snag there Centurion. That whole use of the word "were" as opposed to are or can be dead in sin and alive in Christ all at the same time!

But thanks for the post because again you provide a wonderful example to those who aren't perhaps decided in what to believe in regard to this.

Let me post that passage in context for folks to read so that it can be seen what Paul was truly saying here.

Ephesians 2:1 And you were dead in your trespasses and sins,
2 in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.
3 Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.
4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,
5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
6 and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places, in Christ Jesus,
7 in order that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;
9 not as a result of works, that no one should boast.

This is clearly speaking of a time past. No where will you see Paul writing to the church where he doesn't come down rather hard on folks who are in fact "dead" in sin. There is no such thing as being dead and alive at the same time. One is either dead in their sin because that is the wage of sin... or one is alive in Christ.

ProjectPeter
Jan 22nd 2007, 07:54 PM
Well, I would tend to agree with you. I like the clear water rather than the muddy water so I will refrain from all other doctrine and stick to the Nosas based on repentance and a continual walk with God and not away from Him. Thank you for taking the time to explain all this to me. :hug: God Bless.
Never a problem. :)

ProjectPeter
Jan 22nd 2007, 08:18 PM
You said this before already. I have already showed you how Hebrews 10 disproves NOSAS. Good luck? I don't believe in 'luck" since the bible doesn't mention that word. ;) Why would Paul give these warnings in the first place? Paul tells us "examine" ourselves to see whether we are in the faith to 2 Corinthians 13:5. I would suggest that you go back and read my response to Hebrews 10 which actually affirms the doctrine of Eternal Security, which no one has commented on but rather forced their doctrine without providing a solid rebuttal. Now since I am probably the only person who adheres to the doctrine of Eternal Security on this thread, please give me some time to answer the previous arguments posted on this thread. :)

Love,
Madeline
I am going to post this again in this discussion and see if any of you OSAS folk might actually take a stab at actually discussing Hebrews.

Hebrews is a major letter in this discussion so here are some things for folks to ponder on some of the major chapters that I believe clearly show that NOSAS is the correct doctrine.


Hebrews 3:1 Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of a heavenly calling, consider Jesus, the Apostle and High Priest of our confession;
2 He was faithful to Him who appointed Him, as Moses also was in all His house.
3 For He has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses, by just so much as the builder of the house has more honor than the house.
4 For every house is built by someone, but the builder of all things is God.
5 Now Moses was faithful in all His house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken later;This would be major league to the Jew being that Moses was the Law Giver so to speak. I think of the way the Pharisee acted pretty much any time Jesus mentioned Moses. This is one of the reasons that I think that people who say that this was just written to the Jews fall way short. I doubt an unbelieving Jew would have made it beyond chapter 1 but had they got to this point... there'd of been some head spinning and green stuff flying! I know no one is saying that in the thread of yet... but it usually happens before too long once Hebrews gets tossed into the discussion so this is simply answering that in advance! ;)



6 but Christ was faithful as a Son over His house -- whose house we are, if we hold fast our confidence and the boast of our hope firm until the end.This verse is important to understand and pay heed to. Christ is faithful as a Son over His house. We are that house IF WE HOLD FAST our confidence and the boast of our hope FIRM UNTIL THE END. Those that don't figure we must endure to the end... they aren't agreeing with this passage of Scripture. We will see it again in this chapter as well as in other verses throughout Hebrews.



7 ¶Therefore, just as the Holy Spirit says, "TODAY IF YOU HEAR HIS VOICE,
8 DO NOT HARDEN YOUR HEARTS AS WHEN THEY PROVOKED ME, AS IN THE DAY OF TRIAL IN THE WILDERNESS,
9 WHERE YOUR FATHERS TRIED Me BY TESTING Me, AND SAW MY WORKS FOR FORTY YEARS.
10 "THEREFORE I WAS ANGRY WITH THIS GENERATION, AND SAID, `THEY ALWAYS GO ASTRAY IN THEIR HEART, AND THEY DID NOT KNOW MY WAYS´;
11 AS I SWORE IN MY WRATH, `THEY SHALL NOT ENTER MY REST.´"
12 Take care, brethren, that there not be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart that falls away from the living God.Now the writer quotes Psalms 95: 7-11 here. And for those that don't think the Old Testament Scripture apply to us today... someone forgot to tell the writer of Hebrews such. We are warned that we (remember that the writer of Hebrews is writing Christians) should take care that we don't be like the children of Israel and try God by testing Him as they did. It also makes it clear the possibility of a believer can wind up with an unbelieving heart and can fall away from God. The warning continues.


13 But encourage one another day after day, as long as it is still called "Today," so that none of you will be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. A believer can become hardened by sin.


14 For we have become partakers of Christ, if we hold fast the beginning of our assurance firm until the end,Again that message that we have become partakers of Christ IF we HOLD FAST the beginning of our assurance firm until the end. Not sure how folks can even think enduring to the end is not required.


15 while it is said, "TODAY IF YOU HEAR HIS VOICE, DO NOT HARDEN YOUR HEARTS, AS WHEN THEY PROVOKED ME."
16 For who provoked Him when they had heard? Indeed, did not all those who came out of Egypt led by Moses?
17 And with whom was He angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the wilderness?
18 And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who were disobedient?
19 So we see that they were not able to enter because of unbelief.
Why was God angry with the children of Israel? Because of sin. Why could they not enter into His rest? They were disobedient. Why were they not able to enter? Because it was counted as unbelief. Their hearts were hardened by their sin and disobedience and it produced an unbelieving heart and they fell away from the living God.

Chapter four just continues right from that third one. Notice that the chapters just roll together as 2,3 and 4 all begin with "therefore".


Hebrews 4:1 Therefore, let us fear lest, while a promise remains of entering His rest, any one of you should seem to have come short of it.What is therefore there for? Go back to chapter three.

Hebrews 3:7 Therefore, just as the Holy Spirit says, "TODAY IF YOU HEAR HIS VOICE,
8 DO NOT HARDEN YOUR HEARTS AS WHEN THEY PROVOKED ME, AS IN THE DAY OF TRIAL IN THE WILDERNESS,
9 WHERE YOUR FATHERS TRIED Me BY TESTING Me, AND SAW MY WORKS FOR FORTY YEARS.
10 "THEREFORE I WAS ANGRY WITH THIS GENERATION, AND SAID, `THEY ALWAYS GO ASTRAY IN THEIR HEART; AND THEY DID NOT KNOW MY WAYS´;
11 AS I SWORE IN MY WRATH, `THEY SHALL NOT ENTER MY REST.´"
12 Take care, brethren, lest there should be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart, in falling away from the living God.
13 But encourage one another day after day, as long as it is still called "Today," lest any one of you be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.
14 For we have become partakers of Christ, if we hold fast the beginning of our assurance firm until the end;
15 while it is said, "TODAY IF YOU HEAR HIS VOICE, DO NOT HARDEN YOUR HEARTS, AS WHEN THEY PROVOKED ME."
16 For who provoked Him when they had heard? Indeed, did not all those who came out of Egypt led by Moses?
17 And with whom was He angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the wilderness?
18 And to whom did He swear that they should not enter His rest, but to those who were disobedient?
19 And so we see that they were not able to enter because of unbelief.


So why should we fear? I mean we are promised that rest right? You hear it all the time... God said it therefore he can't go back on His word. That rest is promised... we have eternal life. But yet the writer uses strange language here. Therefore let us fear lest we come short of that rest. Yes... it is promised. But we can still fall short just as the children of Israel fell short.



2 For indeed we have had good news preached to us, just as they also; but the word they heard did not profit them, because it was not united by faith in those who heard.The children of Israel had the good news preached to them as well. God was delivering them and offering them wonderful rest. Ultimately for the older generation of Israel, it didn't profit them because when it was said and done... they didn't believe (last verse back in chapter 3).


3 For we who have believed enter that rest, just as He has said, "AS I SWORE IN MY WRATH, THEY SHALL NOT ENTER MY REST," although His works were finished from the foundation of the world.
4 For He has thus said somewhere concerning the seventh day, "AND GOD RESTED ON THE SEVENTH DAY FROM ALL HIS WORKS";
5 and again in this passage, "THEY SHALL NOT ENTER MY REST."
6 Since therefore it remains for some to enter it, and those who formerly had good news preached to them failed to enter because of disobedience,
7 He again fixes a certain day, "Today," saying through David after so long a time just as has been said before, "TODAY IF YOU HEAR HIS VOICE, DO NOT HARDEN YOUR HEARTS."
8 For if Joshua had given them rest, He would not have spoken of another day after that.
9 There remains therefore a Sabbath rest for the people of God.
10 For the one who has entered His rest has himself also rested from his works, as God did from His.There are those that teach that the rest spoken of in Chapter 3 is the actual Promised Land (Israel) but that is not what the writer is speaking of here. He makes that clear in verse 8. The rest spoken of is still available today for us to enter. But notice too in that 6th verse... those who haven't entered failed to do so because of disobedience.


11 Let us therefore be diligent to enter that rest, lest anyone fall through following the same example of disobedience.Here it is again lest anyone think differently. Be diligent.... in other words labor to enter that rest so that you don't fall through doing the same thing the Israelites did, following their example of disobedience.


12 For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart.
13 And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are open and laid bare to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do.
14 ¶Since then we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession.
15 For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin.
16 Let us therefore draw near with confidence to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and may find grace to help in time of need.There is nothing that we will hide. One day we will all give an account to the Lord and that account will be according to His word. We, as man, have weaknesses. But we can draw near to the throne of grace because Jesus knows how it is. He's been here, done that in other words and He did it without sin. When we do that, with faith, we'll receive mercy and find the grace to help when help is needed.

Centurionoflight
Jan 22nd 2007, 08:25 PM
ProjectPeter



Um... one little snag there Centurion. That whole use of the word "were" as opposed to are or can be dead in sin and alive in Christ all at the same time!

But thanks for the post because again you provide a wonderful example to those who aren't perhaps decided in what to believe in regard to this.

Let me post that passage in context for folks to read so that it can be seen what Paul was truly saying here.

Ephesians 2:1 And you were dead in your trespasses and sins,
2 in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.
3 Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.
4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,
5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
6 and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places, in Christ Jesus,
7 in order that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;
9 not as a result of works, that no one should boast.

This is clearly speaking of a time past. No where will you see Paul writing to the church where he doesn't come down rather hard on folks who are in fact "dead" in sin. There is no such thing as being dead and alive at the same time. One is either dead in their sin because that is the wage of sin... or one is alive in Christ.

One little snag that you seem to have ignored is the duel nature of the saved man.

His inner conflict of The sin nature and the spirit nature

Since we are now alive in Christ there is no reason to serve that which is dead; yet we do.

Romans 7

14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
So here you have your "no such thing"; the body of death and the spirit of life, in the same person.

Also note: Paul came down hard because he wanted them to grow to glory.

*Madeline*
Jan 22nd 2007, 08:26 PM
Are salvation and repentance not inseparable? How is it possible that somebody cannot be brought back to repentance but can still be brought back to salvation? Is repentance not an essential part of what it means to be saved? How can I be saved if I don't repent from my sins?

It says that it is impossible to bring them back to repentance, not salvation which they have already obtained. In other words, being brought back to repentance is not possible. It doesn't say "to be brought back to salvation." The Greek word (parapipto) "fall away" literally means to "fall along side or stumble", it's not the same word for apostasy.

Hebrews 6:1—Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,

Repentance and Salvation are not the same. The believer cannot be brought back to the state of repentance as a result of having fallen away (stumble), however he/she does not lose their salvation. It doesn't say that anywhere in that passage. More when I have time.

Love,
Madeline

*Madeline*
Jan 22nd 2007, 08:30 PM
I find it odd to believe that Adam Clarke believes in baptismal regeneration. See the comment below from Clarke on why I would tend to disagree with you.

"Baptism changes nothing; the grace signified by it cleanses and purifies. They who think baptism to be regeneration, neither know the Scriptures nor the power of God; therefore they do greatly err." - Adam Clarke comment on Titus 3:5


Adam Clarke said: "Baptism in water, into the Christian faith, was necessary to every Jew and Gentile that entered into the kingdom of the Messiah" (Commentary on John 3:5).

Love,
Madeline

*Madeline*
Jan 22nd 2007, 08:36 PM
Hi PP!:)


Who is speaking Madeline? Now please show me in the Scripture anything that would allude to the idea that God would mention those righteous and not be speaking of folks He would call HIS own? I am honestly blown away that you would even attempt this stand! Say it is before the cross and while I would say that God's ways there haven't changed but at least that is a viable case. But to try and say the righteous here aren't the "saved"... wow!

It isn't even an "assumption" that the righteous are God's people here Madeline. Look at the description given of the righteous.

Ezekiel 18:20 "The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.
21 ¶"But if the wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed and observes all My statutes and practices justice and righteousness, he shall surely live; he shall not die.
22 "All his transgressions which he has committed will not be remembered against him; because of his righteousness which he has practiced, he will live.
23 "Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the Lord GOD, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?
24 ¶"But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and does according to all the abominations that a wicked man does, will he live? All his righteous deeds which he has done will not be remembered for his treachery which he has committed and his sin which he has committed; for them he will die.
25 "Yet you say, `The way of the Lord is not right.´ Hear now, O house of Israel! Is My way not right? Is it not your ways that are not right?
26 "When a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and dies because of it, for his iniquity which he has committed he will die.
27 "Again, when a wicked man turns away from his wickedness which he has committed and practices justice and righteousness, he will save his life.
28 "Because he considered and turned away from all his transgressions which he had committed, he shall surely live; he shall not die.
29 "But the house of Israel says, `The way of the Lord is not right.´ Are My ways not right, O house of Israel? Is it not your ways that are not right?
30 ¶"Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, each according to his conduct," declares the Lord GOD. "Repent and turn away from all your transgressions, so that iniquity may not become a stumbling block to you.
31 "Cast away from you all your transgressions which you have committed, and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! For why will you die, O house of Israel?
32 "For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies," declares the Lord GOD. "Therefore, repent and live."


Now if you want to go on about these not being "saved" people then that is certainly something you have to contend with. But what I hope people see out of this more than anything else is the places that people will go with a passage that kicks a sacred doctrinal cow slap in its side!!! ;)

I have decided to re-study Ezek. 18 and have found that I have been quite wrong in one very important thing. I believe now that you are correct when you said that the death spoken of in this chapter is eternal death. This then brings us to a new look at verse 26, "When a righteous man turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and dieth in them: for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die".

If it were not for Eph. 1:13-14 I would say that this verse tells us that one can lose his salvation. But we reading that passage of Ephesians that God has given each believer a guarantee of resurrection life. Let's say I went to a used car lot and bought a car that was guaranteed to last at least 1 year, but it totally fell apart after one month. I would go back to that car lot and demand a new car, or something that would live up the the guarantee. Let's say that the salesman said no, he can't do that. I would be well within my rights to report him as a crooked car dealer, don't you think?

The doctrine that says that one can lose his salvation puts God in the same position as that used car salesman, i.e. not living up the the guarantee. I cannot accept that of God, I simply cannot.

Also, Jn. 3:16 is the most clear statement as to what is required for salvation. It is an unconditional promise. That is to say, there are no conditions that say, if one doesn't live the life God wants him to, this promise will be resinded. I will use the used car salesman again. Let's say I took my lemon back and he said, well it broke down because you didn't keep the gas tank full all the time. I would say, "but you never said that the guarantee was good only if I kept the gas tank full". He would say, "sorry".

Again, I cannot put God in the position of making an unconditional promise and then saying, "Sorry, my child, but you didn't live up to certain conditions, the fact that those conditions were not stated in the orginal promise is not my fault". No, no, I don't see God saying that.

So let's see if we can make Ezek. 18:26 fit into the proven guarantee and unconditional promise.

1) Every word in every language takes its meaning from usage. Yes, I know, everyone thinks that "righteous" means saved. But it can't because as I keep saying, it is used in the sense of one being more righteous than another. One is not more save than another. The Hebrew word means "to do correctly". Just because the man of Ezek. 18:26 is righteous, does not mean that he was saved. It means only that at one time in his life he had done things correctly, or even rightly.

2) Let's also consider the phrase in Ezek. 18:26, "turn away from his righteousness". What does it mean to "turn away from righteousness"? One does not turn away from being saved. Those who believe that you can lose your salvation will tell you that we can "turn away" from God, but how can we turn away from salvation. We can turn away from doing right, and that is exaclty what the man in this verse did. He turned away from doing what was right, not from his salvation.

3) Also consider the explanation of the phrase "turn away form his iniquity" because that will shed more light on what it means to "turn away from iniquity". The explanatory phrase is, "and committeth iniquity". In other words, instead of doing what was right and good this man did evil and sins. Each phrase helps define the other. Let me put that in other terms because I believe it will be helpful.

The man did something, i.e. he turned away from righteousness. What does this verse tell us it means to turn away from righteousness". It goes on to say, that "he committeth iniquity".

There is nothing here to suggest that the man was saved in the first place, only that he had at one time in his life done the right things, and then turned from that to do evil things. This satisfies me because it is based on the correct meaning of the Hebrew word translated "righteous" and it fits the explanatory phrase of what the man did, and it is consistent with the fact that God has made an unconditional guarantee that believers will live in resurrection. You are going to have to decide if it satisfies you or not. I will get to your next response when I have the time, I am tied up as of now.:)

Love,
Madeline

DSK
Jan 22nd 2007, 08:40 PM
Adam Clarke said: "Baptism in water, into the Christian faith, was necessary to every Jew and Gentile that entered into the kingdom of the Messiah" (Commentary on John 3:5).


Please take note that Clarke did not say that baptism is necessary for regeneration. Therefore, it is safer to check out Clarke's comments in which both baptism and regeneration are actually mentioned and from such comments of his we can understand that he did not believe in baptismal regeneration as you wrongly assume.

Once again I post it as it came straight from the pen of Adam Clarke:

"Baptism changes nothing; the grace signified by it cleanses and purifies. They who think baptism to be regeneration, neither know the Scriptures nor the power of God; therefore they do greatly err." - Adam Clarke comment on Titus 3:5

A man who believes in baptismal regeneration would never make such a comment.

moonglow
Jan 22nd 2007, 08:41 PM
You said this before already. I have already showed you how Hebrews 10 disproves NOSAS. Good luck? I don't believe in 'luck" since the bible doesn't mention that word. ;) Why would Paul give these warnings in the first place? Paul tells us "examine" ourselves to see whether we are in the faith to 2 Corinthians 13:5. I would suggest that you go back and read my response to Hebrews 10 which actually affirms the doctrine of Eternal Security, which no one has commented on but rather forced their doctrine without providing a solid rebuttal. Now since I am probably the only person who adheres to the doctrine of Eternal Security on this thread, please give me some time to answer the previous arguments posted on this thread. :)

Love,
Madeline

I didn't comment on it because I didn't understand it...you put a whole bunch of definations on there about grammar and such and lost me! sorry! If I don't understand a post I usually don't comment. I don't see you proved anything because I didn't understand it. It was very confusing and probably why no one has responded to it. And I meant good luck in understanding PP on the OT scriptures you two have been discussing (I don't personally believe in luck either) I was just trying to be nice is all.

God bless

DSK
Jan 22nd 2007, 08:49 PM
Jn. 3:16 is the most clear statement as to what is required for salvation. It is an unconditional promise. That is to say, there are no conditions that say, if one doesn't live the life God wants him to, this promise will be resinded.

Again, I cannot put God in the position of making an unconditional promise and then saying, "Sorry, my child, but you didn't live up to certain conditions, the fact that those conditions were not stated in the orginal promise is not my fault". No, no, I don't see God saying that.



The conditions you don't believe exist are found in the very same book of John which you quoted from. It's not His fault you ignore them.

John 15:6 If anyone does not remain in Me, he is thrown aside like a branch and he withers. They gather them, throw them into the fire, and they are burned.

You must remain in Him, or be thrown aside.

jesuslover1968
Jan 22nd 2007, 08:54 PM
jesuslover1968


Doesnt state that.

It states he catches us.
God does all the catching; we do none of the grabbing.

Also its not a freewill thing; for we are Gods property at salvation;
He bought with a price; he owns us.


1 cor 6
19What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?



20 For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.


That scripture you used doesn't apply here as Christ died for all, but it is only those who accept Him that are saved. If one turns away from their walk with God by their own free will and does not want to be born again, then God can not change that because they DO have free will. God Bless.

jesuslover1968
Jan 22nd 2007, 09:01 PM
Why call Him Father, if we are sons or daughters of our own biological father, we can live our entire lives out of fellowship with him, but we still carry his name with us, because of seed.

Why call Him Father, after truly accepting His seed (the holy spirit) within us, that He entirely disowns any knowledge of us being His. It sounds to me, this idea causes our sovereign, righteous God, to be more evil than our own biological father is.

You can slide back far enough to be entirely out of fellowship with your biological father; but you can not slide back far enough to be entirely disowned, because you are his seed. Perhaps our biological father has more power over us than our heavenly Father has.

...But I strongly doubt this thought. :hmm:

Let me give you an example of what I am saying here, as it is getting all muddled up in thought. If someone is a born again Christian, truly having the Spirit of God, but then at a later time decided they no longer desire that, and turn to satan worship, then do you suppose that person is still saved? I know that God would NOT accept any person who worships another god, and so do you...
God Bless.

Centurionoflight
Jan 22nd 2007, 09:07 PM
jesuslover1968



That scripture you used doesn't apply here as Christ died for all,
but it is only those who accept Him that are saved.


Paul is writing to the saved.
Therefore I am not seeing how this "doesnt apply"



If one turns away from their walk with God by their own free will and does not want to be born again, then God can not change that because they DO have free will. God Bless.


A slave is bought with a price; they cant just walk away.

After salvation Christ owns us just like slaves, we have no choice in this issue. We are his property. He bought us;.

AS Paul stated:

19What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

Pilgrimtozion
Jan 22nd 2007, 09:10 PM
The conditions you don't believe exist are found in the very same book of John which you quoted from. It's not His fault you ignore them.

John 15:6 If anyone does not remain in Me, he is thrown aside like a branch and he withers. They gather them, throw them into the fire, and they are burned.

You must remain in Him, or be thrown aside.

How do those who believe in OSAS deal with Scriptures such as this one? Does this not talk about remaining? In order to remain, one must first be in, or am I missing something?

DSK
Jan 22nd 2007, 09:12 PM
How do those who believe in OSAS deal with Scriptures such as this one? Does this not talk about remaining? In order to remain, one must first be in, or am I missing something?

You are absolutely correct, the "remaining in Him" begins once you are in Him. ;)

Those who believe in OSAS in a strange manner attempt to find loop-holes, but always to no avail.

Centurionoflight
Jan 22nd 2007, 09:20 PM
Pilgrimtozion


How do those who believe in OSAS deal with Scriptures such as this one? Does this not talk about remaining? In order to remain, one must first be in, or am I missing something?

The focus is on the fruit{production}, not salvation.

John 15

4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.


5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.


6If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.


They they dont abide; then they will suffer the disipline and fire of God.


This is not about any sort of loss of salvation.

DSK
Jan 22nd 2007, 09:25 PM
Pilgrimtozion



The focus is on the fruit{production}, not salvation.


John 15
4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.




5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.




6If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.

They they dont abide; then they will suffer the disipline and fire of God.


This is not about any sort of loss of salvation.

Question

Is Jesus referring to fruit or an individual in this verse? Look at the words, "if any man" and "he" and the pronoun "they" in the context of John 15:1-6

This is not referring to fruit being removed and gathered, since in John 15:2 we see that these same branches had no fruit to be gathered and burned to begin with. The context demands that man not fruit is what is being referred to

Many are always speaking about the importance of context? So why do we desire to go out of context in this verse. Could it be because it doesn't fit the demands of a particular theology?

Pilgrimtozion
Jan 22nd 2007, 09:28 PM
Pilgrimtozion



The focus is on the fruit{production}, not salvation.

John 15
4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.


5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.


6If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.
They they dont abide; then they will suffer the disipline and fire of God.


This is not about any sort of loss of salvation.

Centurion, how can the fire of God be a symbol of the discipline of God? What is left of a branch after it is burned?

Rather, the pruning mentioned in the same passage is the discipline being mentioned by Jesus! Not fire, but pruning is the symbol of discipline. Fire merely destroys the branch, does it not?

Centurionoflight
Jan 22nd 2007, 09:32 PM
Pilgrimtozion



Centurion, how can the fire of God be a symbol of the discipline of God? What is left of a branch after it is burned?

On works;


1 Cor 3
13Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

14If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.


15If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
On Disipline;

Hebrews 12:28-29
28 Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear:

29 For our God is a consuming fire.



Rather, the pruning mentioned in the same passage is the discipline being mentioned by Jesus! Not fire, but pruning is the symbol of discipline. Fire merely destroys the branch, does it not?

Pruning is what occurs when we dont tie into the vine;
We wither and then we have nothing but ash to show for our efforts.

jiggyfly
Jan 22nd 2007, 09:37 PM
Pilgrimtozion


On works;



1 Cor 3
13Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.



14If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.




15If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
On Disipline;


Hebrews 12:28-29
28 Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear:



29 For our God is a consuming fire.



Pruning is what occurs when we dont tie into the vine;
We wither and then we have nothing but ash to show for our efforts.
Ah more word games:lol:

Centurionoflight
Jan 22nd 2007, 09:43 PM
DSK


Is Jesus referring to fruit or an individual in this verse? Look at the words, "if any man" and "he" and the pronoun "they" in the context of John 15:1-6

This is not referring to fruit being removed and gathered, since in John 15:2 we see that these same branches had no fruit to be gathered and burned to begin with. The context demands that man not fruit is what is being referred to


The focus is to bear fruit.
One cant do that with out being tied into the vine.
Yes if a branch does not produce fruit they are disiplined or removed;

They are a withered branch that will produce nothing more than ash.




Many are always speaking about the importance of context? So why do we desire to go out of context in this verse. Could it be because it doesn't fit the demands of a particular theology?

Very well in context then

Since the context is fruit and growth; why insert a distortion of loss of salvation here?
That is not in any form the context here.

Could it be that many other scriptures dont fit the context of insecure salvation;
So that false out of context doctrine is tacked here;

Pilgrimtozion
Jan 22nd 2007, 09:44 PM
Pilgrimtozion


On works;


1 Cor 3
13Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

14If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.


15If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
On Disipline;

Hebrews 12:28-29
28 Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear:

29 For our God is a consuming fire.


Pruning is what occurs when we dont tie into the vine;
We wither and then we have nothing but ash to show for our efforts.

Centurion,

It was not the works that were burned up as in the other passages; instead, it was the person that was burned up. Jesus says in John 15:1 that He is the vine and we are the branches. Again, this hermeneutical and exegetical joyriding that you do does not give credibility to what you believe to be true. You cannot drag in another Scripture that talks about works being burned up and all of a sudden claim that John 15 is talking about works being burned up too! The verse itself says that it is talking about people!!

Centurionoflight
Jan 22nd 2007, 09:46 PM
jiggyfly



Ah more word games


Interesting how the fate of the eternal soul is nothing more than a game to some.


Note:
There is no respawn or replay

It must be done right with all soberness the first time.

Perhaps a little attention to details is in order.

Pilgrimtozion
Jan 22nd 2007, 09:49 PM
Centurion,

A withered branch does not produce ash. After it is burned up in the fire, it is ash.

Centurionoflight
Jan 22nd 2007, 09:59 PM
Pilgrimtozion


Centurion,

It was not the works that were burned up as in the other passages; instead, it was the person that was burned up.
Jesus says in John 15:1 that He is the vine and we are the branches. Again, this hermeneutical and exegetical joyriding that you do does not give credibility to what you believe to be true. You cannot drag in another Scripture that talks about works being burned up and all of a sudden claim that John 15 is talking about works being burned up too! The verse itself says that it is talking about people!!

6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.
The verse is talking about branches.

A note of reality is Men are not gathering wayward believers and tossing them into a fire.

A wayward believer is LIKE A withered and burned branch and is unable to produce any sort of divine fruit.

The fruit of a withered branch is nothing but ash.

Divine fruit is what God expects of followers not ash.

John 15:8 "My Father is glorified by this, that you bear much fruit, and so prove to be My disciples.

You are trying to read this verse set in a vacuum; ignoring the rest of scripture that is out there.

We are to;

2 Timothy 2:15
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
Therefore I can and will "drag other scriptures" into this context when they fit.

It is part of proper division of the doctrines with in the bible.

*Madeline*
Jan 22nd 2007, 10:17 PM
Hi DSK!:)


Please take note that Clarke did not say that baptism is necessary for regeneration. Therefore, it is safer to check out Clarke's comments in which both baptism and regeneration are actually mentioned and from such comments of his we can understand that he did not believe in baptismal regeneration as you wrongly assume.

Once again I post it as it came straight from the pen of Adam Clarke:

"Baptism changes nothing; the grace signified by it cleanses and purifies. They who think baptism to be regeneration, neither know the Scriptures nor the power of God; therefore they do greatly err." - Adam Clarke comment on Titus 3:5

A man who believes in baptismal regeneration would never make such a comment.

I don't think it's necessary to quote Adam Clarke again, but I will just in case. It's not my assumption, it's what he explicitly stated. Here it is again, seems to me like he's confused:


"Baptism in water, into the Christian faith, was necessary to every Jew and Gentile that entered into the kingdom of the Messiah" (Commentary on John 3:5).

Hope you realize that large bold fonts is indicative of screaming or shouting on websites. Whether you scream that Adam Clarke did not say this doesn't change the fact that he did. If you disagree with me, then take it up with Adam Clarke. Relax, don't be so tense:) As per your other post concerning John 15, that is already being discussed here by others. I have to catch up on my responses. I still haven't responded to PP, but I will. :) P.S. Adam Clarke did not say "see" the Kingdom of God, he clearly said "ENTER" the Kingdom of God.;)

Love,
Madeline

Pilgrimtozion
Jan 22nd 2007, 10:19 PM
Pilgrimtozion



6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.
The verse is talking about branches.

A note of reality is Men are not gathering wayward beleivers and tossing them into a fire.

A wayward believer is LIKE A withered and burned branch and is unable to produce any sort of divine fruit.

The fruit of a withered branch is nothing but ash.

Divine fruit is what God expects of followers.

You are trying to read this verse set in a vacuum; ignoring the rest of scripture that is out there.

We are to;

2 Timothy 2:15
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
Therefore I can and will "drag other scriptures" into this context when they fit.

It is part of proper division of the doctrines with in the bible.

The problem is, my friend, that they don't fit. One should always first understand the verse and its direct and larger context, before getting other Scriptures involved in the process. I totally agree with you that rightly dividing the Word of truth by comparing Scripture with Scripture is an essential part of interpreting the Word of God properly.

So what does this Scripture say?

1"I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. 2"Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit, He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit.
3"You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you.
4"Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me.
5"I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing.
6"If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned.

So Jesus is the vine; fair enough. In verse 4, you see that we are the branches (saying that we are like the branches is stating the obvious; Jesus is not the vine as such literally but can be likened unto the vine. This does not take away, however, from the message being presented).

Verse 2 tells us that the Father takes away every branch that does not bear fruit. In other words, he breaks it off the vine so that it is no longer in the vine. He then goes on to say that the branch that does bear fruit is pruned, so that it will bear more fruit.
Verse 4 tells us to abide or remain in Him, quite like the branch needs to abide in the vine in order to live. Obviously, as Jesus says here, we cannot bear fruit unless we are in Christ.
Verse 5 reiterates the message that if we abide in Christ, we will bear much fruit, just like the branch bears much fruit when it is connected to the vine.
Verse 6 then says that if a branch does not abide in the vine (and thus does not bear fruit), he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; the life leaves the branch. The branches are then gathered and thrown into the fire and burned. Likewise, a believer who does not bear fruit will be cut off from the vine and dry up spiritually. He will be gathered and thrown into the fire.
Hence the importance for believers to remain in Christ!

Now why can you not compare this to the passage concerning works? Because in that Scripture, it is the works that are burned up; in this Scripture, it is the people themselves that are burned up! Centurion, you can search the gospels for the meaning of people being cast into the fire. You will find it refers to the fire of hell and eternal damnation.

With all of that having been said, I do not say it is easy for a believer to get to the point of being cut off, drying up, and being thrown into the fire. One sin or even habitual sin does not constitute falling away and losing your salvation. But one who takes the holiness of God lightly and plays with God's grace needs to be careful. I am not to be the judge of where that person does or does not stand. The fruit speaks for itself, however.

Centurion, I agree with you. Let's rightly divide the word of truth.

DSK
Jan 22nd 2007, 10:31 PM
Madeline;

I guess you just don't get it. A man who supposedly believes in baptismal regeneration as you assume would never in a million years write in his commentary the following words.


They who think baptism to be regeneration, neither know the Scriptures nor the power of God; therefore they do greatly err." - Adam Clarke comment on Titus 3:5

The comment you posted by Adam Clarke said nothing about his thoughts on regeneration. Sorry I shouted it's only because you appeared to be deaf.

jiggyfly
Jan 22nd 2007, 10:42 PM
jiggyfly



Interesting how the fate of the eternal soul is nothing more than a game to some.


Note:
There is no respawn or replay

It must be done right with all soberness the first time.

Perhaps a little attention to details is in order.
Yes, by some of the posts it would seem so.

Centurionoflight
Jan 22nd 2007, 10:44 PM
Pilgrimtozion




Because in that Scripture, it is the works that are burned up; in this Scripture, it is the people themselves that are burned up! Centurion, you can search the gospels for the meaning of people being cast into the fire. You will find it refers to the fire of hell and eternal damnation.


Yet as I posted

Fires also refers to judgement and disipline, refinement of ones deeds.

1 cor 3
15If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.




With all of that having been said, I do not say it is easy for a believer to get to the point of being cut off, drying up, and being thrown into the fire.

Why the disclaimer?

Lets go all the way in this...

The passage states its very easy to get cut off.

Dont abide in Christ; then we will not produce fruit and will be cast into hell.

So if there is no {divine} fruit in ones life then they are to be clipped off and cast away into hell?

Note: This is divine fruit; fruit that is not done thru a human mentality.

Now what is divine fruit that is acceptable to God?

Remember its what God views as fruit is not what mans views.

And if a man gets it wrong; Its off to the fires of Hell.

Sucks to be him, dont it?

{I am Sure Glad I can trust Christ for my salvation rather than my effort of runing around and worry if I am doing the right fruit.}

jiggyfly
Jan 22nd 2007, 10:48 PM
1 Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom. 2 And five of them were wise, and five were foolish. 3 They that were foolish took their lamps, and took no oil with them: 4 but the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps. 5 While the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept. 6 And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him. 7 Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps. 8 And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are gone out. 9 But the wise answered, saying, Not so; lest there be not enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves. 10 And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut. 11 Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us. 12 But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not. 13 Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.

Pilgrimtozion
Jan 22nd 2007, 10:50 PM
Pilgrimtozion



Yet as I posted

Fires also refers to judgement and disipline, refinement of ones deeds.

1 cor 3
15If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.



Why the disclaimer?

Lets go all the way in this...

The passage states its very easy to get cut off.

Dont abide in Christ; then we will not produce fruit and will be cast into hell.

So if there is no {divine} fruit in ones life then they are to be clipped off and cast away into hell?

Note: This is divine fruit; fruit that is not done thru a human mentality.

Now what is divine fruit that is acceptable to God?

Remember its what God views as fruit is not what mans views.

And if a man gets it wrong; Its off to the fires of Hell.

Sucks to be him, dont it?

{I am Sure Glad I can trust Christ for my salvation rather than my effort of runing around and worry if I am doing the right fruit.}

Dear Centurion,

I do not kno what view you hold of people that believe one can walk away from his salvation. But let me state clearly that the only thing I can ever present to God that is pleasing to Him if faith. Nothing more, nothing less.

And like you, I am extremely glad that I can trust Christ for my salvation rather than my effort. Please, my friend, we do not believe that which you are suggesting we believe, even if it appears so to you.

But I am going to bed for the night. Good night!

Benjamin

*Madeline*
Jan 22nd 2007, 10:56 PM
Hi DSK!:)


Madeline;

I guess you just don't get it. A man who supposedly believes in baptismal regeneration as you assume would never in a million years write in his commentary the following words.


They who think baptism to be regeneration, neither know the Scriptures nor the power of God; therefore they do greatly err." - Adam Clarke comment on Titus 3:5

The comment you posted by Adam Clarke said nothing about his thoughts on regeneration. Sorry I shouted it's only because you appeared to be deaf.

Ouch! Doesn't sound too nice now does it? I hope you realize that people are susceptible to doctrinal changes as they grow in the knowledge of the word. I use to believe in NOSAS, now I no longer do. Adam Clarke doesn't have all the answers, SEE again:


Baptism in water, into the Christian faith, was necessary to every Jew and Gentile that entered into the kingdom of the Messiah" (Commentary on John 3:5).:) You can repeat yourself if you'd like, but it says what it says in the above quote.

Love,
Madeline

jiggyfly
Jan 22nd 2007, 10:57 PM
“But if you can’t understand this story, how will you understand all the others I am going to tell? 14 The farmer I talked about is the one who brings God’s message to others. 15 The seed that fell on the hard path represents those who hear the message, but then Satan comes at once and takes it away from them. 16 The rocky soil represents those who hear the message and receive it with joy. 17 But like young plants in such soil, their roots don’t go very deep. At first they get along fine, but they wilt as soon as they have problems or are persecuted because they believe the word. 18 The thorny ground represents those who hear and accept the Good News, 19 but all too quickly the message is crowded out by the cares of this life, the lure of wealth, and the desire for nice things, so no crop is produced. 20 But the good soil represents those who hear and accept God’s message and produce a huge harvest—thirty, sixty, or even a hundred times as much as had been planted.”

*Madeline*
Jan 22nd 2007, 11:11 PM
Hi again PP! :)

Here we go....


I am going to post this again in this discussion and see if any of you OSAS folk might actually take a stab at actually discussing Hebrews.

Hebrews is a major letter in this discussion so here are some things for folks to ponder on some of the major chapters that I believe clearly show that NOSAS is the correct doctrine.

This would be major league to the Jew being that Moses was the Law Giver so to speak. I think of the way the Pharisee acted pretty much any time Jesus mentioned Moses. This is one of the reasons that I think that people who say that this was just written to the Jews fall way short. I doubt an unbelieving Jew would have made it beyond chapter 1 but had they got to this point... there'd of been some head spinning and green stuff flying! I know no one is saying that in the thread of yet... but it usually happens before too long once Hebrews gets tossed into the discussion so this is simply answering that in advance! ;)

This verse is important to understand and pay heed to. Christ is faithful as a Son over His house. We are that house IF WE HOLD FAST our confidence and the boast of our hope FIRM UNTIL THE END. Those that don't figure we must endure to the end... they aren't agreeing with this passage of Scripture. We will see it again in this chapter as well as in other verses throughout Hebrews.

Now the writer quotes Psalms 95: 7-11 here. And for those that don't think the Old Testament Scripture apply to us today... someone forgot to tell the writer of Hebrews such. We are warned that we (remember that the writer of Hebrews is writing Christians) should take care that we don't be like the children of Israel and try God by testing Him as they did. It also makes it clear the possibility of a believer can wind up with an unbelieving heart and can fall away from God. The warning continues.

A believer can become hardened by sin.

Again that message that we have become partakers of Christ IF we HOLD FAST the beginning of our assurance firm until the end. Not sure how folks can even think enduring to the end is not required.

Why was God angry with the children of Israel? Because of sin. Why could they not enter into His rest? They were disobedient. Why were they not able to enter? Because it was counted as unbelief. Their hearts were hardened by their sin and disobedience and it produced an unbelieving heart and they fell away from the living God.

Chapter four just continues right from that third one. Notice that the chapters just roll together as 2,3 and 4 all begin with "therefore".

What is therefore there for? Go back to chapter three.

Hebrews 3:7 Therefore, just as the Holy Spirit says, "TODAY IF YOU HEAR HIS VOICE,
8 DO NOT HARDEN YOUR HEARTS AS WHEN THEY PROVOKED ME, AS IN THE DAY OF TRIAL IN THE WILDERNESS,
9 WHERE YOUR FATHERS TRIED Me BY TESTING Me, AND SAW MY WORKS FOR FORTY YEARS.
10 "THEREFORE I WAS ANGRY WITH THIS GENERATION, AND SAID, `THEY ALWAYS GO ASTRAY IN THEIR HEART; AND THEY DID NOT KNOW MY WAYS´;
11 AS I SWORE IN MY WRATH, `THEY SHALL NOT ENTER MY REST.´"
12 Take care, brethren, lest there should be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart, in falling away from the living God.
13 But encourage one another day after day, as long as it is still called "Today," lest any one of you be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.
14 For we have become partakers of Christ, if we hold fast the beginning of our assurance firm until the end;
15 while it is said, "TODAY IF YOU HEAR HIS VOICE, DO NOT HARDEN YOUR HEARTS, AS WHEN THEY PROVOKED ME."
16 For who provoked Him when they had heard? Indeed, did not all those who came out of Egypt led by Moses?
17 And with whom was He angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the wilderness?
18 And to whom did He swear that they should not enter His rest, but to those who were disobedient?
19 And so we see that they were not able to enter because of unbelief.


So why should we fear? I mean we are promised that rest right? You hear it all the time... God said it therefore he can't go back on His word. That rest is promised... we have eternal life. But yet the writer uses strange language here. Therefore let us fear lest we come short of that rest. Yes... it is promised. But we can still fall short just as the children of Israel fell short.

The children of Israel had the good news preached to them as well. God was delivering them and offering them wonderful rest. Ultimately for the older generation of Israel, it didn't profit them because when it was said and done... they didn't believe (last verse back in chapter 3).

There are those that teach that the rest spoken of in Chapter 3 is the actual Promised Land (Israel) but that is not what the writer is speaking of here. He makes that clear in verse 8. The rest spoken of is still available today for us to enter. But notice too in that 6th verse... those who haven't entered failed to do so because of disobedience.

Here it is again lest anyone think differently. Be diligent.... in other words labor to enter that rest so that you don't fall through doing the same thing the Israelites did, following their example of disobedience.

There is nothing that we will hide. One day we will all give an account to the Lord and that account will be according to His word. We, as man, have weaknesses. But we can draw near to the throne of grace because Jesus knows how it is. He's been here, done that in other words and He did it without sin. When we do that, with faith, we'll receive mercy and find the grace to help when help is needed.

First of all, you are suggesting that Hebrews was not written to the Hebrews, (he calls them Jews, but Hebrews are Jews). I believe Heb. 1:1 will tell us that it was indeed written to Jews, "God who at sundry times....spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets". Who were these "fathers"? The ones to whom the prophets spoke. To whom did the prophets speak? To the Jews. Yes, Paul was an apostle to the Gentiles, but this verse is speaking of "times past". No prophet ever spoke with Gentiles in times past. In other words, the writer of Hebrews tells them right off the bat that the epistle was written to those whose fathers were Jews. If their fathers were Jews of course they were Jews.

Secondly, Heb. 3: 7-11 is a quote from Ps. 95:8-11. Verse 7 reads, "for He is our God; and we are the People of His pasture, and the sheep of His hand". This is true of Israel and Israel only, especially in David's time. In other words, the verses quoted in Hebrews 3 are written to and about Israel. So there is one important difference in our views.

But the real point here is the phrase in Heb. 3:6, "firm unto the end". What end? In order to answer that question we must understand that Hebrews was written while Israel was still God's people. (Let me know if you would like the scriptural evidence for that statement.) Because the epistle was written before Israel had been set aside at Acts 28 they were expecting to see the tribulation in their time.

The tribulation is God allowing Satan to test Israel for their faith in Him, rather than in Satan. (Again, please let me know if you would like the scriptural evidence.) I believe "the end" of 3:6 is the end of the tribulation. That is to say, if they would remain faithful unto death if necessary, they would be counted as God's "house".

Is this one losing his salvation? It is only if one fails to take into account that faith must be proved by works. That is to say, as James wrote, "faith without works is dead". So if an Israelite going through the tribulation said, "Oh I am a believer" , but then in order to save his temporal life he receives the mark of the beast and worships the antichrist, he has proved that he never was a believer. In other words, he never was a believer, so he never lost something he never had. Hope this helps PP! :) I'll respond to the other posts when I have the time.:hug:

Love,
Madeline

ProjectPeter
Jan 22nd 2007, 11:55 PM
ProjectPeter


One little snag that you seem to have ignored is the duel nature of the saved man.

His inner conflict of The sin nature and the spirit nature

Since we are now alive in Christ there is no reason to serve that which is dead; yet we do.

Romans 7

14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
So here you have your "no such thing"; the body of death and the spirit of life, in the same person.

Also note: Paul came down hard because he wanted them to grow to glory.Cool... now we are getting to all the classic passages!!! We can talk about another passage written to another group and in different context than what we are speaking of here with the passage that you posted and then the left out stuff that I posted. Let's finish discussing this one and then naturally I will be tickled to talk about Romans 7 with ya!

Ephesians 2:1 And you were dead in your trespasses and sins,
2 in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.
3 Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.
4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,
5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
6 and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places, in Christ Jesus,
7 in order that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;
9 not as a result of works, that no one should boast.

Now in putting that in context... don't you think Paul is putting that whole "dead" issue as something in their past?

doug3
Jan 23rd 2007, 12:22 AM
The sinner and the ungodly would fall into the same category so not sure how you could separate those. Here is a passage to ponder.

James 5:19 ¶My brethren, if any among you strays from the truth, and one turns him back,
20 let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death, and will cover a multitude of sins.

Here we have James telling the folks that if there is a brother among us that strays from the truth and you turn them back to God... then you have turned a sinner from the error of his ways and in turn you saved his soul from death.

That passage speaks of what you are talking about and I might add it really does speak loudly concerning this topic and why I see NOSAS as the correct doctrine. :)

Thank you ProjectPeter for the input. After posting I was wondering if I had mixed things up about the word "ungodly". :)

ProjectPeter
Jan 23rd 2007, 12:24 AM
Hi PP!:)

I have decided to re-study Ezek. 18 and have found that I have been quite wrong in one very important thing. I believe now that you are correct when you said that the death spoken of in this chapter is eternal death. This then brings us to a new look at verse 26, "When a righteous man turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and dieth in them: for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die". Glad you see that.


If it were not for Eph. 1:13-14 I would say that this verse tells us that one can lose his salvation. But we reading that passage of Ephesians that God has given each believer a guarantee of resurrection life. Let's say I went to a used car lot and bought a car that was guaranteed to last at least 1 year, but it totally fell apart after one month. I would go back to that car lot and demand a new car, or something that would live up the the guarantee. Let's say that the salesman said no, he can't do that. I would be well within my rights to report him as a crooked car dealer, don't you think?

The doctrine that says that one can lose his salvation puts God in the same position as that used car salesman, i.e. not living up the the guarantee. I cannot accept that of God, I simply cannot.Here is that passage.

Ephesians 1:13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation -- having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise,
14 who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God's own possession, to the praise of His glory.

Where do you see a guarantee of salvation in this passage?


Also, Jn. 3:16 is the most clear statement as to what is required for salvation. It is an unconditional promise. That is to say, there are no conditions that say, if one doesn't live the life God wants him to, this promise will be resinded. I will use the used car salesman again. Let's say I took my lemon back and he said, well it broke down because you didn't keep the gas tank full all the time. I would say, "but you never said that the guarantee was good only if I kept the gas tank full". He would say, "sorry".

Again, I cannot put God in the position of making an unconditional promise and then saying, "Sorry, my child, but you didn't live up to certain conditions, the fact that those conditions were not stated in the orginal promise is not my fault". No, no, I don't see God saying that.

Jeremiah 18:7 "At one moment I might speak concerning a nation or concerning a kingdom to uproot, to pull down, or to destroy it;
8 if that nation against which I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent concerning the calamity I planned to bring on it.
9 "Or at another moment I might speak concerning a nation or concerning a kingdom to build up or to plant it;
10 if it does evil in My sight by not obeying My voice, then I will think better of the good with which I had promised to bless it.

Matthew 18:21 ¶Then Peter came and said to Him, "Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him? Up to seven times?"
22 Jesus said to him, "I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven.
23 "For this reason the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a certain king who wished to settle accounts with his slaves.
24 "And when he had begun to settle them, there was brought to him one who owed him ten thousand talents.
25 "But since he did not have the means to repay, his lord commanded him to be sold, along with his wife and children and all that he had, and repayment to be made.
26 "The slave therefore falling down, prostrated himself before him, saying, `Have patience with me, and I will repay you everything.´
27 "And the lord of that slave felt compassion and released him and forgave him the debt.
28 "But that slave went out and found one of his fellow slaves who owed him a hundred denarii; and he seized him and began to choke him, saying, `Pay back what you owe.´
29 "So his fellow slave fell down and began to entreat him, saying, `Have patience with me and I will repay you.´
30 "He was unwilling however, but went and threw him in prison until he should pay back what was owed.
31 "So when his fellow slaves saw what had happened, they were deeply grieved and came and reported to their lord all that had happened.
32 "Then summoning him, his lord said to him, `You wicked slave, I forgave you all that debt because you entreated me.
33 `Should you not also have had mercy on your fellow slave, even as I had mercy on you?´
34 "And his lord, moved with anger, handed him over to the torturers until he should repay all that was owed him.
35 "So shall My heavenly Father also do to you, if each of you does not forgive his brother from your heart."

God can and will revoke his mercy if folks don't do as He says do. Sure... might not be a comfortable thought... but it is certainly a biblical one as the two passages make crystal clear. There are many in the Scripture that make such as this clear.



So let's see if we can make Ezek. 18:26 fit into the proven guarantee and unconditional promise.

1) Every word in every language takes its meaning from usage. Yes, I know, everyone thinks that "righteous" means saved. But it can't because as I keep saying, it is used in the sense of one being more righteous than another. One is not more save than another. The Hebrew word means "to do correctly". Just because the man of Ezek. 18:26 is righteous, does not mean that he was saved. It means only that at one time in his life he had done things correctly, or even rightly. Those two passages that you posted earlier were far from making your point. Neither were using righteousness in this way and neither of them were spoken from God directly. In context those passages were not even close to being used as you are attempting to use it.

And of course the righteous is speaking of being saved. Now you agree that dying there is about eternal death... then the live has to be about eternal life. That stands to reason right? You agree that death means eternal death ... but now you are trying to write off life meaning eternal life. Slow down. You were right in changing your understanding on death. But you are trying to make this passage fit your doctrine as opposed to letting Scripture dictate your doctrine! But hey... I am thrilled you are seeing the one part... now continuing applying it where it needs applied and you'll get it totally! :) Death means eternal death and life is speaking of eternal life.



2) Let's also consider the phrase in Ezek. 18:26, "turn away from his righteousness". What does it mean to "turn away from righteousness"? One does not turn away from being saved. Those who believe that you can lose your salvation will tell you that we can "turn away" from God, but how can we turn away from salvation. We can turn away from doing right, and that is exaclty what the man in this verse did. He turned away from doing what was right, not from his salvation.Again... you are basing this on your doctrine and now what it is actually saying in that text. And Madeline... the one that turns away from God is the one that certainly turns away and certainly forfeits his salvation. I sort of think that would be rather obvious.



3) Also consider the explanation of the phrase "turn away form his iniquity" because that will shed more light on what it means to "turn away from iniquity". The explanatory phrase is, "and committeth iniquity". In other words, instead of doing what was right and good this man did evil and sins. Each phrase helps define the other. Let me put that in other terms because I believe it will be helpful.

The man did something, i.e. he turned away from righteousness. What does this verse tell us it means to turn away from righteousness". It goes on to say, that "he committeth iniquity".

There is nothing here to suggest that the man was saved in the first place, only that he had at one time in his life done the right things, and then turned from that to do evil things. This satisfies me because it is based on the correct meaning of the Hebrew word translated "righteous" and it fits the explanatory phrase of what the man did, and it is consistent with the fact that God has made an unconditional guarantee that believers will live in resurrection. You are going to have to decide if it satisfies you or not. I will get to your next response when I have the time, I am tied up as of now.:)

Love,
MadelineMadeline. If the man was on the righteous path to eternal life and turns to the path that leads to eternal death... that man was (emphasis on was) saved. Just as the man on the path to death who turns from sin is now on the path of righteousness that leads to eternal life. Really... this is very basic Bible I would think!

wpm
Jan 23rd 2007, 12:25 AM
Cool... now we are getting to all the classic passages!!! We can talk about another passage written to another group and in different context than what we are speaking of here with the passage that you posted and then the left out stuff that I posted. Let's finish discussing this one and then naturally I will be tickled to talk about Romans 7 with ya!

Ephesians 2:1 And you were dead in your trespasses and sins,
2 in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.
3 Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.
4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,
5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
6 and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places, in Christ Jesus,
7 in order that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;
9 not as a result of works, that no one should boast.

Now in putting that in context... don't you think Paul is putting that whole "dead" issue as something in their past?

Yep. The unsaved man is dead. Totally spiritually dead. He cannot come to God or respond in any acceptable way. He is as dead spiritually as a corpse is in the morgue physically. He therefore needs help. Divine help. He needs quickened by God. God is the instigator in salvation and salvation is off the Lord. To many people think that there is some virtuous quality within the old nature that can respond to God, but there isn't.

Paul

ProjectPeter
Jan 23rd 2007, 12:28 AM
Let me give you an example of what I am saying here, as it is getting all muddled up in thought. If someone is a born again Christian, truly having the Spirit of God, but then at a later time decided they no longer desire that, and turn to satan worship, then do you suppose that person is still saved? I know that God would NOT accept any person who worships another god, and so do you...
God Bless.Here is a passage that covers that very thing for use any other time you are making this point. :)

1 Timothy 5:11 But refuse to put younger widows on the list, for when they feel sensual desires in disregard of Christ, they want to get married,
12 thus incurring condemnation, because they have set aside their previous pledge.
13 And at the same time they also learn to be idle, as they go around from house to house; and not merely idle, but also gossips and busybodies, talking about things not proper to mention.
14 Therefore, I want younger widows to get married, bear children, keep house, and give the enemy no occasion for reproach;
15 for some have already turned aside to follow Satan.

ProjectPeter
Jan 23rd 2007, 12:29 AM
A slave is bought with a price; they cant just walk away.

After salvation Christ owns us just like slaves, we have no choice in this issue. We are his property. He bought us;.

AS Paul stated:

19What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?In keeping with the example Jesuslover gave you... even satan following slaves?

wpm
Jan 23rd 2007, 12:30 AM
Pilgrimtozion



Yet as I posted

Fires also refers to judgement and disipline, refinement of ones deeds.

1 cor 3
15If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.



Why the disclaimer?

Lets go all the way in this...

The passage states its very easy to get cut off.

Dont abide in Christ; then we will not produce fruit and will be cast into hell.

So if there is no {divine} fruit in ones life then they are to be clipped off and cast away into hell?

Note: This is divine fruit; fruit that is not done thru a human mentality.

Now what is divine fruit that is acceptable to God?

Remember its what God views as fruit is not what mans views.

And if a man gets it wrong; Its off to the fires of Hell.

Sucks to be him, dont it?

{I am Sure Glad I can trust Christ for my salvation rather than my effort of runing around and worry if I am doing the right fruit.}

Whether you realise it or not, many imagine they abide in Christ, but alas Christ does not abide in them. That is what Jesus was saying in John 15:1-10, "I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman. Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit. Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned. If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you. Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples. As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love. If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love."

If you can't see the two-fold element then you are missing what Christ is saying. It is not suffice for men to boast they are Christ's when Christ has no abode in them. The true believer is a fruit-bearer. The true child of God is not just a professor in Christ, but Christ abides in Him, His words abide in them. That is salvation. Non fruit-bearer individuals are non-Christians or mere professors.


Paul

Centurionoflight
Jan 23rd 2007, 12:34 AM
ProjectPeter



Cool... now we are getting to all the classic passages!!! We can talk about another passage written to another group and in different context than what we are speaking of here with the passage that you posted and then the left out stuff that I posted. Let's finish discussing this one and then naturally I will be tickled to talk about Romans 7 with ya!

Ephesians 2:1 And you were dead in your trespasses and sins,
2 in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.
3 Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.
4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,
5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
6 and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places, in Christ Jesus,
7 in order that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;
9 not as a result of works, that no one should boast.

Now in putting that in context... don't you think Paul is putting that whole "dead" issue as something in their past?


Of course that is Pauls wish that they live of the spirit rather than the flesh;

But their sin nature is still active and will cause them to stumble.

AS Paul later tells them:

EPH 4


21 if indeed you have heard Him and have been taught in Him, just as truth is in Jesus,
22 that, in reference to your former manner of life, you lay aside the old self, which is being corrupted in accordance with the lusts of deceit,
23 and that you be renewed in the spirit of your mind,
24 and put on the new self, which in the likeness of God has been created in righteousness and holiness of the truth.


Which is the stuggle of christians; what self are we wearing?

ProjectPeter
Jan 23rd 2007, 12:35 AM
Pilgrimtozion


On works;


1 Cor 3
13Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

14If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.


15If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
On Disipline;

Again context is important here.

1 Corinthians 3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to men of flesh, as to babes in Christ.
2 I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able to receive it. Indeed, even now you are not yet able,
3 for you are still fleshly. For since there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not fleshly, and are you not walking like mere men?
4 For when one says, "I am of Paul," and another, "I am of Apollos," are you not mere men?
5 What then is Apollos? And what is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, even as the Lord gave opportunity to each one.
6 I planted, Apollos watered, but God was causing the growth.
7 So then neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but God who causes the growth.
8 Now he who plants and he who waters are one; but each will receive his own reward according to his own labor.
9 For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, God's building.
10 ¶According to the grace of God which was given to me, as a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building upon it. But let each man be careful how he builds upon it.
11 For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
12 Now if any man builds upon the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw,
13 each man's work will become evident; for the day will show it, because it is to be revealed with fire; and the fire itself will test the quality of each man's work.
14 If any man's work which he has built upon it remains, he shall receive a reward.
15 If any man's work is burned up, he shall suffer loss; but he himself shall be saved, yet so as through fire.
16 ¶Do you not know that you are a temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?
17 If any man destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him, for the temple of God is holy, and that is what you are.
18 ¶Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become foolish that he may become wise.
19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness before God. For it is written, "He is THE ONE WHO CATCHES THE WISE IN THEIR CRAFTINESS";
20 and again, "THE LORD KNOWS THE REASONINGS of the wise, THAT THEY ARE USELESS."
21 So then let no one boast in men. For all things belong to you,
22 whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or things present or things to come; all things belong to you,
23 and you belong to Christ; and Christ belongs to God.


This passage is speaking of workers... those who plant and water. Those who build on the foundation laid. This is not speaking of the field which the seed is planted which would be the believers or congregation if you will. Let no worker boast... be it Paul, Apollos, Pastor John or Teacher Joe. The material the worker builds upon that foundation with... it is that work which will be burned up etc. etc. This is an often misused passage.

jesuslover1968
Jan 23rd 2007, 12:40 AM
Here is a passage that covers that very thing for use any other time you are making this point. :)

1 Timothy 5:11 But refuse to put younger widows on the list, for when they feel sensual desires in disregard of Christ, they want to get married,
12 thus incurring condemnation, because they have set aside their previous pledge.
13 And at the same time they also learn to be idle, as they go around from house to house; and not merely idle, but also gossips and busybodies, talking about things not proper to mention.
14 Therefore, I want younger widows to get married, bear children, keep house, and give the enemy no occasion for reproach;
15 for some have already turned aside to follow Satan.

hehehe....very good one....surely you aren't trying to tell me something here? :lol: ( Kidding )
Yeah, I do use scripture, the only problem with that is that so many people take one scripture and make it say something totally different than it was intended to say, so I tell my little stories...that relate in the way the actual scripture is supposed to. Duly noted and I will store that one away because it is very fitting. God Bless.

Centurionoflight
Jan 23rd 2007, 12:40 AM
ProjectPeter



In keeping with the example Jesuslover gave you... even satan following slaves?


Yes
Even satan worshiping Christians.
Even Legalist Christians;
Even Carnal Christians;
And Even faithful Christians.

They belong to God; he bought them.
And he will scourge them for their misdeeds

jesuslover1968
Jan 23rd 2007, 12:45 AM
ProjectPeter



Yes
Even satan worshiping Christians.
Even Legalist Christians;
Even Carnal Christians;
And Even faithful Christians.

They belong to God; he bought them.
And he will scourge them for their misdeeds


:o ....so you believe that people who worship satan will have eternal life and not eternal damnation? What does repentance mean to you? God Bless.

Centurionoflight
Jan 23rd 2007, 12:47 AM
pp


This passage is speaking of workers... those who plant and water. Those who build on the foundation laid. This is not speaking of the field which the seed is planted which would be the believers or congregation if you will. Let no worker boast... be it Paul, Apollos, Pastor John or Teacher Joe. The material the worker builds upon that foundation with... it is that work which will be burned up etc. etc. This is an often misused passage.




We are all workers in our spiritual growth;


None can build for us;
The master builders{pastors} can tell us how to build and lay ground work;
but we do our own building.

Centurionoflight
Jan 23rd 2007, 12:48 AM
jesuslover1968


....so you believe that people who worship satan will have eternal life and not eternal damnation? What does
repentance mean to you? God Bless.


Christians{Those who have been born again.} will have eternal life.
Even those who fall.

wpm
Jan 23rd 2007, 12:55 AM
:o ....so you believe that people who worship satan will have eternal life and not eternal damnation? What does repentance mean to you? God Bless.

No. A true child of God would never do that, just a phoney.

Paul

ProjectPeter
Jan 23rd 2007, 12:59 AM
ProjectPeter



Yes
Even satan worshiping Christians.
Even Legalist Christians;
Even Carnal Christians;
And Even faithful Christians.

They belong to God; he bought them.
And he will scourge them for their misdeedsThis is truly amazing! Would it do any good to post the passages that show folks that follow satan aren't going to fare well and really have nothing at all to do with God?

Centurionoflight
Jan 23rd 2007, 01:03 AM
ProjectPeter


This is truly amazing! Would it do any good to post the passages that show folks that follow satan aren't going to fare well and really have nothing at all to do with God?

Never stated they would fare a blessed life;

Just that thier eternal salvation is secure.

jesuslover1968
Jan 23rd 2007, 01:05 AM
No. A true child of God would never do that, just a phoney.

Paul


Paul, there are those who were once TRUE Christians that now follow satan. If you are not for God, you are against Him. If you aren't following HIM then you are following satan. So that statement should be fixed to say that while a true Christian, they wouldn't do that. :) God Bless.

wpm
Jan 23rd 2007, 01:06 AM
ProjectPeter



Never stated they would fare a blessed life;

Just that thier eternal salvation is secure.

No, no. Wrong Gospel.

Jesus said in Mark 8:38, “Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.”

Jesus said in Matthew 10:32-39, “Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven… And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.”

Paul

ProjectPeter
Jan 23rd 2007, 01:08 AM
ProjectPeter



Of course that is Pauls wish that they live of the spirit rather than the flesh;

But their sin nature is still active and will cause them to stumble.

AS Paul later tells them:

EPH 4


21 if indeed you have heard Him and have been taught in Him, just as truth is in Jesus,
22 that, in reference to your former manner of life, you lay aside the old self, which is being corrupted in accordance with the lusts of deceit,
23 and that you be renewed in the spirit of your mind,
24 and put on the new self, which in the likeness of God has been created in righteousness and holiness of the truth.


Which is the stuggle of christians; what self are we wearing?And once again... that isn't at all what Paul said. In fact Paul tells them to knock it off and do not walk in the way of their FORMER life.

Here is more of that passage in context.

Ephesians 4

17 ¶This I say therefore, and affirm together with the Lord, that you walk no longer just as the Gentiles also walk, in the futility of their mind,
18 being darkened in their understanding, excluded from the life of God, because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the hardness of their heart;
19 and they, having become callous, have given themselves over to sensuality, for the practice of every kind of impurity with greediness.
20 But you did not learn Christ in this way,
21 if indeed you have heard Him and have been taught in Him, just as truth is in Jesus,
22 that, in reference to your former manner of life, you lay aside the old self, which is being corrupted in accordance with the lusts of deceit,
23 and that you be renewed in the spirit of your mind,
24 and put on the new self, which in the likeness of God has been created in righteousness and holiness of the truth.
25 ¶Therefore, laying aside falsehood, SPEAK TRUTH, EACH ONE OF YOU, WITH HIS NEIGHBOR, for we are members of one another.
26 BE ANGRY, AND YET DO NOT SIN; do not let the sun go down on your anger,
27 and do not give the devil an opportunity.
28 Let him who steals steal no longer; but rather let him labor, performing with his own hands what is good, in order that he may have something to share with him who has need.
29 Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, that it may give grace to those who hear.
30 And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.
31 Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice.
32 And be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you.

And he continues into the next few chapters etc. etc. etc.

wpm
Jan 23rd 2007, 01:11 AM
Paul, there are those who were once TRUE Christians that now follow satan. If you are not for God, you are against Him. If you aren't following HIM then you are following satan. So that statement should be fixed to say that while a true Christian, they wouldn't do that. :) God Bless.

No. I would call them professers. The true child has the Holy Ghost within, has a love for Christ and follows Him. He may slip, he may fall, but he perseveres on. Satan often infiltrates the body to bring defame. Such people you speak of are charlatans and hypocrites. They follow their father Satan because that is their nature. The elect are holy and follow God.

Paul

jesuslover1968
Jan 23rd 2007, 01:14 AM
No. I would call them professers. The true child has the Holy Ghost within, has a love for Christ and follows Him. He may slip, he may fall, but he perseveres on. Satan often infiltrates the body to bring defame. Such people you speak of are charlatans and hypocrites. They follow their father Satan because that is their nature. The elect are holy and follow God.

Paul


nope. I disagree. :) It is once everybody's nature to follow satan. That is like saying everytime you sin you are following satan. It's a very thin line you are treading there, my friend. :) God Bless.

Centurionoflight
Jan 23rd 2007, 01:17 AM
ProjectPeter




And once again... that isn't at all what Paul said. In fact Paul tells them to knock it off and do not walk in the way of their FORMER life.


What did I state that Paul didnt say ?

1) We are to renew our minds to not serve our sin nature?
2) That christians struggle with which "self" they are wearing?
3) That we still in our flesh have a sin nature?


Enlighten on this;

Centurionoflight
Jan 23rd 2007, 01:20 AM
wpm


No, no. Wrong Gospel.

Jesus said in Mark 8:38, “Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.”

Jesus said in Matthew 10:32-39, “Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven… And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.”


This is a gospel?

her e is how this works;

Make a statement of where I errored;

Post verses that enforces your statement.

Dont just paste random verses

wpm
Jan 23rd 2007, 01:25 AM
nope. I disagree. :) It is once everybody's nature to follow satan. That is like saying everytime you sin you are following satan. It's a very thin line you are treading there, my friend. :) God Bless.

I didn't remotely say that. Please re-read what I wrote. I believe a Satan worshipper that was allegedly saved was never truly saved. I believe that God's people can backslide, whereupon God chastens them and draws them back, but anyone that has a heart of worship towards Satan never knew Jesus and never knew redemption.

Paul

jiggyfly
Jan 23rd 2007, 01:38 AM
jesuslover1968



Christians{Those who have been born again.} will have eternal life.
Even those who fall.
Matthew 25:10-12
10 “But while they were gone to buy oil, the bridegroom came, and those who were ready went in with him to the marriage feast, and the door was locked. 11 Later, when the other five bridesmaids returned, they stood outside, calling, ‘Sir, open the door for us!’ 12 But he called back, ‘I don’t know you!’

ProjectPeter
Jan 23rd 2007, 01:39 AM
ProjectPeter




What did I state that Paul didnt say ?

1) We are to renew our minds to not serve our sin nature?
2) That christians struggle with which "self" they are wearing?
3) That we still in our flesh have a sin nature?


Enlighten on this;
Matthew 4:6 and said to Him, "If You are the Son of God throw Yourself down; for it is written, `HE WILL GIVE HIS ANGELS CHARGE CONCERNING YOU´; and `ON their HANDS THEY WILL BEAR YOU UP, LEST YOU STRIKE YOUR FOOT AGAINST A STONE.´"

What did satan say that the Scripture didn't say?

Psalms 91:11 ¶For He will give His angels charge concerning you, To guard you in all your ways.
12 They will bear you up in their hands, Lest you strike your foot against a stone.

jesuslover1968
Jan 23rd 2007, 01:41 AM
I didn't remotely say that. Please re-read what I wrote. I believe a Satan worshipper that was allegedly saved was never truly saved. I believe that God's people can backslide, whereupon God chastens them and draws them back, but anyone that has a heart of worship towards Satan never knew Jesus and never knew redemption.

Paul


I still disagree and I read your post right by your re-post explaining it. Can you honestly tell me that you have never known anyone who had the H.S. that turned away to a life of sin? I can't say it because I know people that were TRULY saved that if they died tonight they would die in their sin. :cry: God Bless.

*Madeline*
Jan 23rd 2007, 01:47 AM
Hi PP!

Wow, you guys are fast! :)


Glad you see that.

Here is that passage.

Ephesians 1:13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation -- having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise,
14 who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God's own possession, to the praise of His glory.

Where do you see a guarantee of salvation in this passage?



Jeremiah 18:7 "At one moment I might speak concerning a nation or concerning a kingdom to uproot, to pull down, or to destroy it;
8 if that nation against which I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent concerning the calamity I planned to bring on it.
9 "Or at another moment I might speak concerning a nation or concerning a kingdom to build up or to plant it;
10 if it does evil in My sight by not obeying My voice, then I will think better of the good with which I had promised to bless it.

Matthew 18:21 ¶Then Peter came and said to Him, "Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him? Up to seven times?"
22 Jesus said to him, "I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven.
23 "For this reason the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a certain king who wished to settle accounts with his slaves.
24 "And when he had begun to settle them, there was brought to him one who owed him ten thousand talents.
25 "But since he did not have the means to repay, his lord commanded him to be sold, along with his wife and children and all that he had, and repayment to be made.
26 "The slave therefore falling down, prostrated himself before him, saying, `Have patience with me, and I will repay you everything.´
27 "And the lord of that slave felt compassion and released him and forgave him the debt.
28 "But that slave went out and found one of his fellow slaves who owed him a hundred denarii; and he seized him and began to choke him, saying, `Pay back what you owe.´
29 "So his fellow slave fell down and began to entreat him, saying, `Have patience with me and I will repay you.´
30 "He was unwilling however, but went and threw him in prison until he should pay back what was owed.
31 "So when his fellow slaves saw what had happened, they were deeply grieved and came and reported to their lord all that had happened.
32 "Then summoning him, his lord said to him, `You wicked slave, I forgave you all that debt because you entreated me.
33 `Should you not also have had mercy on your fellow slave, even as I had mercy on you?´
34 "And his lord, moved with anger, handed him over to the torturers until he should repay all that was owed him.
35 "So shall My heavenly Father also do to you, if each of you does not forgive his brother from your heart."

God can and will revoke his mercy if folks don't do as He says do. Sure... might not be a comfortable thought... but it is certainly a biblical one as the two passages make crystal clear. There are many in the Scripture that make such as this clear.

Those two passages that you posted earlier were far from making your point. Neither were using righteousness in this way and neither of them were spoken from God directly. In context those passages were not even close to being used as you are attempting to use it.

And of course the righteous is speaking of being saved. Now you agree that dying there is about eternal death... then the live has to be about eternal life. That stands to reason right? You agree that death means eternal death ... but now you are trying to write off life meaning eternal life. Slow down. You were right in changing your understanding on death. But you are trying to make this passage fit your doctrine as opposed to letting Scripture dictate your doctrine! But hey... I am thrilled you are seeing the one part... now continuing applying it where it needs applied and you'll get it totally! :) Death means eternal death and life is speaking of eternal life.

Again... you are basing this on your doctrine and now what it is actually saying in that text. And Madeline... the one that turns away from God is the one that certainly turns away and certainly forfeits his salvation. I sort of think that would be rather obvious.

Madeline. If the man was on the righteous path to eternal life and turns to the path that leads to eternal death... that man was (emphasis on was) saved. Just as the man on the path to death who turns from sin is now on the path of righteousness that leads to eternal life. Really... this is very basic Bible I would think!

Verse 14 reads, "Which (i.e. the holy spirit of promise, vs. 13) is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of His glory". The "redemption of the purchased possession" is a reference to the redemption of our bodies that have been redeemd by the blood of Christ. That redemption will be completed at our resurrection. The inheritance is our heavenly calling. The earnest of our inheritance is the pledge. The NIV has, " a depost guaranteeing", the NASB has "the pledge of our inheritance".

In other words, the holy spirit of promise is given us a pledge, or a guarantee of our redemption from the grave unto our heavenly inheritance. The context is clear PP, ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise. It's a promise, in other words if God revokes his mercy than He has lied, which is impossible.

Your answer to the fact that the gospel of salvation is unconditional is that "God can and will revoke his mercy if folks don't do as He says do". But neither of the passages you quoted show a promise of one thing and God revoking that promise. In other words, yes, of course, God punishes etc. But there is no evidence that once God has promised something, He revokes that promise. Salvation has been promised to believers with no conditions attached. God cannot lie, He cannot break His promise. BTW, you haven't given any reason for your disagreement with the scriptural defintion of the Hebrew word translated "righteous". Hope this helps PP!:) :hug:

Love,
Madeline

JesusPhreak27
Jan 23rd 2007, 01:56 AM
Okay Jesuslover... here we go. And just for clarification to those that want to debate this and whatnot. That's cool but for now... I am going to lay this out since I was asked by Jesuslover. So naturally I have no problem yapping about all this with you but my first and foremost goal is to lay this out since someone has asked! ;)

Let's start with a couple of passages just to line this all up in the Old Testament, Gospels, and the Epistles.

Paul writes Timothy and tell him;

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
17 that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.


So all Scripture is for doctrine, reproof, correction and training in righteousness. Old and New. So with that knowledge I want to start with a passage in the Old and then I will line that up with passages from the Gospels and the Epistles.

One of the clearest passages on this issue is found here.

Ezekiel 18:20 "The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.
21 ¶"But if the wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed and observes all My statutes and practices justice and righteousness, he shall surely live; he shall not die.
22 "All his transgressions which he has committed will not be remembered against him; because of his righteousness which he has practiced, he will live.
23 "Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the Lord GOD, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?
24 ¶"But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and does according to all the abominations that a wicked man does, will he live? All his righteous deeds which he has done will not be remembered for his treachery which he has committed and his sin which he has committed; for them he will die.
25 "Yet you say, `The way of the Lord is not right.´ Hear now, O house of Israel! Is My way not right? Is it not your ways that are not right?
26 "When a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and dies because of it, for his iniquity which he has committed he will die.
27 "Again, when a wicked man turns away from his wickedness which he has committed and practices justice and righteousness, he will save his life.
28 "Because he considered and turned away from all his transgressions which he had committed, he shall surely live; he shall not die.


Ill ask one simple question....the one I ask EVERY believer of NOSAS believer and I have yet to get a clear answer.

If in your mind you can lose your salvation by your acts (this is your belief correct?) why did Jesus say in the Book of Matthew (Ill have to find the verse to back this up) that the ONLY sin that cant be forgiven is falling away and NOT believing that He alone is the Savior?

No I may not be an expert in this by any stretch of the imagination...but if my Savior tells me that the ONLY thing He can not forgive is me not believing in Him....well then that tells me that no matter what I do Im forgiven and that my salvation is secured in Him.

Im not saying that I can walk around with an attitude of "Well Jesus says Im forgiven for everything I do so I can do whatever I want". Im held to a HIGHER standard then that..... But the thing is He loves me with my faults....... He knows that I struggle with lying and pornography..... But He also knows that I continually ask Him for His help to fix those things......

What Im saying is He doesnt expect us to be perfect....He is the ONLY perfect One. He knows that we are going to have struggles.

If what you are saying is true then that would amount to us having to try to live up to the Law much like the Israelites........ We arent held by that standard any more....

ProjectPeter
Jan 23rd 2007, 02:16 AM
Hi PP!

Wow, you guys are fast! :)



Verse 14 reads, "Which (i.e. the holy spirit of promise, vs. 13) is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of His glory". The "redemption of the purchased possession" is a reference to the redemption of our bodies that have been redeemd by the blood of Christ. That redemption will be completed at our resurrection. The inheritance is our heavenly calling. The earnest of our inheritance is the pledge. The NIV has, " a depost guaranteeing", the NASB has "the pledge of our inheritance".

In other words, the holy spirit of promise is given us a pledge, or a guarantee of our redemption from the grave unto our heavenly inheritance. The context is clear PP, ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise. It's a promise, in other words if God revokes his mercy than He has lied, which is impossible.

Your answer to the fact that the gospel of salvation is unconditional is that "God can and will revoke his mercy if folks don't do as He says do". But neither of the passages you quoted show a promise of one thing and God revoking that promise. In other words, yes, of course, God punishes etc. But there is no evidence that once God has promised something, He revokes that promise. Salvation has been promised to believers with no conditions attached. God cannot lie, He cannot break His promise. BTW, you haven't given any reason for your disagreement with the scriptural defintion of the Hebrew word translated "righteous". Hope this helps PP!:) :hug:

Love,
Madeline

Those two passages were God Himself saying he would and Christ saying that He would. So not sure what more evidence you need than that Madeline!

As to righteousness and the Ezekiel passage... did you miss the point? You did say that you agreed that the death spoken of there equals eternal death and now you aren't going to apply that to the live and eternal life? Think on it a bit because you again are trying to have it one way and reject the other obvious part. If dying is speaking of eternal death then living is speaking of eternal life in contrast of the one living righteous or evil.

ProjectPeter
Jan 23rd 2007, 02:18 AM
Ill ask one simple question....the one I ask EVERY believer of NOSAS believer and I have yet to get a clear answer.

If in your mind you can lose your salvation by your acts (this is your belief correct?) why did Jesus say in the Book of Matthew (Ill have to find the verse to back this up) that the ONLY sin that cant be forgiven is falling away and NOT believing that He alone is the Savior?

No I may not be an expert in this by any stretch of the imagination...but if my Savior tells me that the ONLY thing He can not forgive is me not believing in Him....well then that tells me that no matter what I do Im forgiven and that my salvation is secured in Him.

Im not saying that I can walk around with an attitude of "Well Jesus says Im forgiven for everything I do so I can do whatever I want". Im held to a HIGHER standard then that..... But the thing is He loves me with my faults....... He knows that I struggle with lying and pornography..... But He also knows that I continually ask Him for His help to fix those things......

What Im saying is He doesnt expect us to be perfect....He is the ONLY perfect One. He knows that we are going to have struggles.

If what you are saying is true then that would amount to us having to try to live up to the Law much like the Israelites........ We arent held by that standard any more....
Find that verse and we'll discuss it. I figure I know which verse you are thinking of but it isn't at all close to what you are saying here and that is a good chance why no one has ever answered it.

*Madeline*
Jan 23rd 2007, 02:45 AM
Hi again PP!:)


Those two passages were God Himself saying he would and Christ saying that He would. So not sure what more evidence you need than that Madeline!

As to righteousness and the Ezekiel passage... did you miss the point? You did say that you agreed that the death spoken of there equals eternal death and now you aren't going to apply that to the live and eternal life? Think on it a bit because you again are trying to have it one way and reject the other obvious part. If dying is speaking of eternal death then living is speaking of eternal life in contrast of the one living righteous or evil.

If I am understanding your question correctly, the answer is yes, the contrast in Ezek. 18 in general is between eternal death and eternal life. But can you explain how this impacts on the question of OSAS? I would like to add just one more thought about Ezek. 18. After all is said and done, it all boils down to one decision. Does "tzadek" mean saved?

If it means "saved "then we must conclude that one person can be more saved than another. That means that a saved man can lose his salvation and that God breaks His unconditional promise to believers. If it means "right", i.e. "one who does the right thing" then one person can be more right than another and God does not ever break His unconditional promise to believers. It's really that simple. Does "tzadek" describe one who is saved or does it describe one who is correct? I hope you will take this question to the Lord and wait for a sense of the truth. Well, it's dinner time for me, mmmm...Pizza! :) :) :)

Love,
Madeline

DSK
Jan 23rd 2007, 03:00 AM
Adam Clarke
Baptism in water, into the Christian faith, was necessary to every Jew and Gentile that entered into the kingdom of the Messiah" (Commentary on John 3:5).


OK, lets forget my Adam Clarke quote and focus on yours as posted above. What is Adam Clarke saying in this quote you posted?

Baptism in water was necessary

Necessary for what?
Necessary for regeneration? No he doesn't say baptism was necessary for regeneration. In fact the word regeneration isn't contained in that quote.

Better yet lets post some more Adam Clarke commentary, because obviously you are misrepresenting him.

Just two verses before the verse you quoted some commentary from Clarke, this is what he says in John 3:3:
"The Jews had some general notion of the new birth; but, like many among Christians, they put the acts of proselytism, baptism, etc., in the place of the Holy Spirit and his influence: they acknowledged that a man must be born again; but they made that new birth to consist in profession, confession, and external washing. See on Joh_3:10 (note).

Then in his comments on John 3:10 Clarke corrects the mistaken views of others and says:

“But I am taught to believe that this baptism is regeneration.” Then you are taught to believe a falsity.

Once again you are found misrepresenting Adam Clake's views as can be clearly seen by Clake's own comments.

So Madeline, since Clarke has passed on, I will rise up and defend him against being misrepresented by you.

I'm sure you would want someone to stand up and defend you, if they were misrepresenting you.

Once again the final verdict on Clarke's view of regeneration is:

"They who think baptism to be regeneration, neither know the Scriptures nor the power of God; therefore they do greatly err."

And they who think Adam Clarke believed in baptismal regeneration, likewise do greatly error.

DSK
Jan 23rd 2007, 03:10 AM
Salvation has been promised to believers with no conditions attached.

1 Cor 15:1 Now I make known unto you brethren, the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye received, wherein also ye stand,
1 Cor 15:2 by which also ye are saved, if ye hold fast the word which I preached unto you, except ye believed in vain.

2 Pet. 1:10 Therefore, brothers, rather be diligent to make sure of your calling and election; for if you do these things, you will not ever fall.

Maybe your not aware of the conditional word "if" contained in many verses of Scripture which outline some condition's

DSK
Jan 23rd 2007, 03:21 AM
Ill ask one simple question....the one I ask EVERY believer of NOSAS believer and I have yet to get a clear answer.

If in your mind you can lose your salvation by your acts (this is your belief correct?) why did Jesus say in the Book of Matthew (Ill have to find the verse to back this up) that the ONLY sin that cant be forgiven is falling away and NOT believing that He alone is the Savior?

No I may not be an expert in this by any stretch of the imagination...but if my Savior tells me that the ONLY thing He can not forgive is me not believing in Him....well then that tells me that no matter what I do Im forgiven and that my salvation is secured in Him.

Im not saying that I can walk around with an attitude of "Well Jesus says Im forgiven for everything I do so I can do whatever I want". Im held to a HIGHER standard then that..... But the thing is He loves me with my faults....... He knows that I struggle with lying and pornography..... But He also knows that I continually ask Him for His help to fix those things......

What Im saying is He doesnt expect us to be perfect....He is the ONLY perfect One. He knows that we are going to have struggles.

If what you are saying is true then that would amount to us having to try to live up to the Law much like the Israelites........ We arent held by that standard any more....

I think your alluding to the unpardonable sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, and if thats the case then the definition below is a good definition.

Mark 3:28 Verily I say unto you, All their sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and their blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme:
Mark 3:29 but whosoever shall blaspheme against the Holy Spirit hath never forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin:

"These words (Mark 3:28-30) were never intended to torment anxious souls honestly desiring to know Christ, but they stand out as a blazing beacon warning of the danger of persisting in the rejection of the Spirit's testimony of Christ, until the seared conscience no longer responds to the gospel message." (Ironside)

DSK
Jan 23rd 2007, 03:26 AM
Whether you realise it or not, many imagine they abide in Christ, but alas Christ does not abide in them. That is what Jesus was saying in John 15:1-10, "I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman. Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit. Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. Abide in me, and I in you.As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned. If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you. Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples. As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love. If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love."

If you can't see the two-fold element then you are missing what Christ is saying. It is not suffice for men to boast they are Christ's when Christ has no abode in them. The true believer is a fruit-bearer. The true child of God is not just a professor in Christ, but Christ abides in Him, His words abide in them. That is salvation. Non fruit-bearer individuals are non-Christians or mere professors.


Paul

Like most individual's it appears you haven't noticed in the above verses, that both the fruit bearing branch, as well as the non-fruit bearing branch are both said to be in Him, meaning in Christ. I high-lighted that part for you.

*Madeline*
Jan 23rd 2007, 03:37 AM
Hi DSK!:)


OK, lets forget my Adam Clarke quote and focus on yours as posted above. What is Adam Clarke saying in this quote you posted?

Baptism in water was necessary

Necessary for what?
Necessary for regeneration? No he doesn't say baptism was necessary for regeneration. In fact the word regeneration isn't contained in that quote.

Better yet lets post some more Adam Clarke commentary, because obviously you are misrepresenting him.

Just two verses before the verse you quoted some commentary from Clarke, this is what he says in John 3:3:
"The Jews had some general notion of the new birth; but, like many among Christians, they put the acts of proselytism, baptism, etc., in the place of the Holy Spirit and his influence: they acknowledged that a man must be born again; but they made that new birth to consist in profession, confession, and external washing. See on Joh_3:10 (note).

Then in his comments on John 3:10 Clarke corrects the mistaken views of others and says:

“But I am taught to believe that this baptism is regeneration.” Then you are taught to believe a falsity.

Once again you are found misrepresenting Adam Clake's views as can be clearly seen by Clake's own comments.

So Madeline, since Clarke has passed on, I will rise up and defend him against being misrepresented by you.

I'm sure you would want someone to stand up and defend you, if they were misrepresenting you.

Once again the final verdict on Clarke's view of regeneration is:

"They who think baptism to be regeneration, neither know the Scriptures nor the power of God; therefore they do greatly err."

And they who think Adam Clarke believed in baptismal regeneration, likewise do greatly error.

:lol: You left out the most important words in my response...take a look at the bolded!


Hi DSK!:)



Ouch! Doesn't sound too nice now does it? I hope you realize that people are susceptible to doctrinal changes as they grow in the knowledge of the word. I use to believe in NOSAS, now I no longer do. Adam Clarke doesn't have all the answers, SEE again:

:) You can repeat yourself if you'd like, but it says what it says in the above quote.

Love,
Madeline


Baptism in water, into the Christian faith, was necessary to every Jew and Gentile that entered into the kingdom of the messiah" (Commentary on John 3:5).

Hey, I only quoted what he said. ;) Only the regenerate can enter the Kingdom of God, since the regenerate are the saved. Adam said the it was a "necessity" for both Jews and Gentiles to be baptized in water if they were to enter into the Kingdom of Messiah (God). I'm simply paraphrasing what he said, makes sense to me. It could have been that Adam Clarke once believed that baptism was essential to enter into the Kingdom of God... and later had a doctrinal shift.


1 Cor 15:1 Now I make known unto you brethren, the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye received, wherein also ye stand,
1 Cor 15:2 by which also ye are saved, if ye hold fast the word which I preached unto you, except ye believed in vain.

2 Pet. 1:10 Therefore, brothers, rather be diligent to make sure of your calling and election; for if you do these things, you will not ever fall.

Maybe your not aware of the conditional word "if" contained in many verses of Scripture which outline some condition's

Fall from what in 2 Peter 1:10? where is Salvation mentioned in the context? The author is not referring to falling from salvation but to failure in Christian living. The word "fall" (ptaio) simply means to stumble. How do you make your calling and election sure as stated in verse 10?

4Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.
5And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge;
6And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness;
7And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity.
8For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.

There ya go! and verse 10 tells us "for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall (stumble). :)

1 Corinthians 15:2 is speaking to the "Corinthian Church", and is basically telling them that not retaing the gospel will show the Corinthians that they have "believed in vain", that is "without success or effort". You can't lose your salvation if you haven't received it. Belief without effort or success is really not faith at all, and certainly not a faith that "saves." So where does it mention the possibility of losing ones salvation? mmm...maybe you want to rethink what you said?:) My pizzas cold. Goodnight!:P

Love,
Madeline

DSK
Jan 23rd 2007, 03:44 AM
Hi DSK!:)



:lol: You left out the most important words in my response...take a look at the bolded!





Hey, I only quoted what he said. ;) Only the regenerate can enter the Kingdom of God, since the regenerate are the saved. Adam said the it was a "necessity" for both Jews and Gentiles to be baptized in water if they were to enter into the Kingdom of Messiah (God). I'm simply paraphrasing what he said, makes sense to me. It could have been that Adam Clarke once believed that baptism was essential to enter into the Kingdom of God... and later had a doctrinal shift.



Fall from what in 2 Peter 1:10? where is Salvation mentioned in the context? The author is not referring to falling from salvation but to failure in Christian living. The word "fall" (ptaio) simply means to stumble. How do you make your calling and election sure as stated in verse 10?

4Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.
5And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge;
6And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness;
7And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity.
8For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.

There ya go! and verse 10 tells us "for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall (stumble). :)

1 Corinthians 15:2 is speaking to the "Corinthian Church", and is basically telling them that not retaing the gospel will show the Corinthians that they have "believed in vain", that is "without success or effort". You can't lose your salvation if you haven't received it. Belief without effort or success is really not faith at all, and certainly not a faith that "saves." So where does it mention the possibility of losing ones salvation? mmm...maybe you want to rethink what you said?:) My pizzas cold. Goodnight!:P

Love,
Madeline

It's too bad you are willing to only look at one single quote from Clarke, without considering other comments he stated, which provide a clearer understabding of his views, therefore I can only assume that for some unknown reason you desire to continue to misrepresent Adam Clarke.

moonglow
Jan 23rd 2007, 04:00 AM
It's too bad you are willing to only look at one single quote from Clarke, without considering other comments he stated, which provide a clearer understabding of his views, therefore I can only assume that for some unknown reason you desire to continue to misrepresent Adam Clarke.

I get it, Adam Clark is extremely careful about how he words things...he is talking about two different things here...being bapisted is not the same as regeneration...that is why the wording is different...the only way to fully understand what he was talking about is to read the surrounding comments. Taking what he said out of content is like taking the bible or anything else out of content...it will appear to mean something it was never meant to be. Adam goes into great lengths and details to explain each verse, sometimes even a word! I have seen him write several paragraphs just on one word, always using the orginal language even. He is very good...using other scriptures to help clarify what he means and even historical events which I really enjoy! :) Many times I double check what he is saying with other commentaries and MOST of the time they are in agreement. The times they aren't, are when it comes to Revelation, Matthew 24, Luke 21, Daniel (anything having to do with the end times stuff) they we see a wider difference according to their individual end times doctine.

God bless

moonglow
Jan 23rd 2007, 04:07 AM
Galatians 5:2-4

2 Listen! I, Paul, tell you this: If you are counting on circumcision to make you right with God, then Christ cannot help you. 3 I'll say it again. If you are trying to find favor with God by being circumcised, you must obey all of the regulations in the whole law of Moses. 4 For if you are trying to make yourselves right with God by keeping the law, you have been cut off from Christ! You have fallen away from God's grace.

Now I suppose, like the other scriptures presented that clearly show no osas, we are going to hear how this doesn't apply to us, but to the Jews only....so my question is this...are the Jews saved under a different gospel? A different way then us? Yes this is about the Jews falling back to the OT laws...hate to say this but I see regular gentile Christians going back to the laws in the OT all the time! And they aren't even Jews!

But back to my first question...are the Jews saved in a different way then the rest of us? Is there a different gospel of salvation for them, that this passage cannot apply to us also?

Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Jesus sees us all as one, all saved the same way, or lost the same way. We are all the same in Him, whether Jew, gentile, male or female. So why could Galatians 5 apply to any of us? What does falling from God's grace mean?

Gotta get some sleep..check for answers tomorrow.

God bless

watchinginawe
Jan 23rd 2007, 04:16 AM
I get it, Adam Clark is extremely careful about how he words things...he is talking about two different things here...being bapisted is not the same as regeneration...that is why the wording is different...the only way to fully understand what he was talking about is to read the surrounding comments. Taking what he said out of content is like taking the bible or anything else out of content...it will appear to mean something it was never meant to be.Exactly, the way Adam Clarke has been quoted in this thread regarding regeneration via water baptism would make Jesus of the same belief :rolleyes:. Notwithstanding, I have seen many refer to it exactly that way :

John 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

God Bless!

*Madeline*
Jan 23rd 2007, 04:26 AM
:wasup:

Concerning Adam Clarke... no, baptism isn't the same as regeneration. Adam Clarke said that baptism is a necessity to enter ito the Kingdom. I simply paraphrased his words. But I'm not going to beat this dead horse any longer. I'm going to sink my teeth into the meat of the word. I want to go back to Hebrews 6, lets say that it does refer to the possibility of losing ones salvation. And I want to go over "salvation" and "repentance" Soooo heeeeere weeee gooooo....(I think I need some sleep).:D

The terms are confusing because they are not exactly equal and are overlapping. Salvation is the overarching term that comprises both justification and sanctification. Justification is the EVENT by which God the Judge of all mankind declares Christ's IMPUTED righteousness to the believing sinner. Humans are passively justified at the moment of faith (Rom 5:1 = We are justified by faith). This is the new birth. It leads to an eternal destiny.

Sanctification is also a bit confusing. It is the EVENT by which God the Father of all who believe in Jesus by which He sets aside believers into His covenantal family. 1 Cor 6:11 shows that the EVENT of justification and the EVENT of sanctification occur at the same time. This is our adoption.

Sanctification is also a PROCESS by which the believer is transformed into the image of Jesus Christ. Active obedience is the key by which we progress towards purification. Heb 10:14 shows that a believer is perfected (Greek Perfect Tense) even while they are progressing towards sanctification. This is our spiritual growth. It leads to eternal rewards (different than destiny).

So salvation comprises all three of these aspects: birth, a new family and growth. One has to be careful how one uses these terms!

Now on to Heb 6. I want to discuss three things with you: the word "impossible," the burning of the field, and the word "better."

Context helps us understand the word "impossible." The Book was written to Jewish Christians who were tired of the Roman State persecution. Some had determined to avoid this persecution by returning to Judaism, the faith of their fathers. They thought that God was still pleased with the Old Covenant system. With their minds thus made up it would be impossible to change their minds and bring them back to Christianity. They had turned their backs on Christianity and unwittingly had turned their backs on God.

Thus, it isn't impossible to be saved again. It is an example of somebody forcing their opinions on the text. Of course, our inborn guilt sure greases this wrong interpretation. Any other interpretation runs into difficulties if we simply take the presupposition of loss of eternal life to its natural conclusion. If a person is lost and it is impossible to restore a person to salvation, this contradicts the Bible's motiff of forgiveness. It would make Christianity a one-shot deal. Second, the burning of the field in verse 8. The farmer has planted good seeds and expects a good crop. Yet all he sees in his field is thorns. So the farmer burns the field with grumblings. Note that this prepares the field for next year's planting! The farmer is keeping the field even with all its weeds and thorns! There is no mention of selling the field. Again, while the word fire is a typical reference to hell, it is not so here. Context rules! Third, the word "better" in verse 9. This is a comparative word - not a contrasting word. Both the obedient listeners and these Jewish Christians turning away from God get the same type of reward. The obedient readers get a BETTER reward. They don't get a different reward. This means both go to heaven; not that one goes to heaven while the other goes to hell.

This is a warning about sanctified living - not a threat about losing one's eternal life. This is why I spent time on those three terms.

Hope this helps!

P.S. One should do a study in Hebrews about the ministries of Jesus.
1. Jesus is our High Priest. What does the phrase SAT DOWN mean with respect to a High Priest? Did the tabernacle have chairs in it?
2. Jesus is our Mediator. What does a mediator do? Can Jesus negotiate for us or not?
3. Jesus is our Surety. What is a surety in the banking world? Can Jesus cover our sin or not?
4. Jesus is our Good Shepherd. Does the Good Shepherd let the lost sheep stay lost?
5. Jesus will never leave us or forsake us! Even when we sin!
6. Jesus is the Author and Finisher of our faith - not us!

You can find all of these in the book of Hebrews. :) I have to go to bed!:sleeping:

Love,
Madeline

Pilgrimtozion
Jan 23rd 2007, 08:13 AM
One of the things that puzzles me when it comes to this discussion is that NOSASers are apparently believed to hold to the doctrine that the work that Jesus did for us on the cross was not enough. That somehow, we believe we can add to our salvation. That somehow, our salvation is not secure.

This truly puzzles me, because I put my trust in the cross of Jesus Christ and am saved by grace through faith. I believe Jesus will never leave me nor forsake me and that His right hand upholds me. I cannot tell you how many times these truths have been a tremendous encouragement to me.

Thinking about where the bottleneck lies, I come to the point of the part we play as humans. OSASers would say that we play no part whatsoever; everything is given to us by God and since God is faithful to His promise, He will not take it away. When I look at Scripture, however, I feel that people miss the nature of the convenant between God and man.

In a covenant, there are always two parties involved. God has His part and we have our part. In the Old Testament, we clearly see this at the end of Deuteronomy, where God pronounces blessings and curses depending on whether Israel keeps their part of the covenant. Let there be no mistake: God keeps His part! The only thing God asks of us is that we put our faith and trust in the cross of Jesus Christ. This faith goes much deeper than mere intellectual assent to a doctrine. In the New Testament, faith and obedience are very closely related to each other; one inevitably leads to the other.

So what if I choose to not uphold my end of the deal anymore? Look at what dictionary.com says about the word covenant:

5.Bible. a.the conditional promises made to humanity by God, as revealed in Scripture.
God's part of the deal was not to keep me and save me even when I choose to walk away from Christ and His cross with my heart. He has promised to keep me in the palm of His hand, but our faith is a condition for that. The heart of the issue here is the issue of the heart. Turning away from Christ is a conscious thing, a decision you make in your heart. Talk to Khalou here on this board - he can tell you. Saying that one was not truly saved is then only a desparate attempt to save a doctrine that is not Biblical in the first place. Some people have truly put their faith in the cross, but have decided to turn away from that. I know one of them personally!

But with these words I think we can all agree:
In Christ alone I place my trust
And find my glory in the power of the cross
In every victory let it be said of me
My source of strength, my source of hope
Is Christ alone

Blessings,
Benjamin

Christinme
Jan 23rd 2007, 10:52 AM
Pilgrimtozion,

Enduring to the end is a condition of being “saved” … yes? If one does not endure to the end on what basis do you say that they were “saved”? Scripture says if we endure to the end we will be saved … that’s why I have always had a problem with the question “Are you saved?” Rather ask me do I believe the promises that God has made … and I’ll tell you yes. So yes there may be people who believed the promises and then later did not believe the promises. However I don’t see it as that they “were saved” and now they “are not saved”. Those who believe are “being saved”, that is what I see scripture saying. Are there those who are on the road of salvation and then later on the road to destruction … yea I can see that. But to say that one “loses their salvation” I don’t see that to be an accurate description of what happens. So I would say once saved always saved … however one is not saved until they endure to the end.

Pilgrimtozion
Jan 23rd 2007, 10:57 AM
Pilgrimtozion,

Enduring to the end is a condition of being “saved” … yes? If one does not endure to the end on what basis do you say that they were “saved”? Scripture says if we endure to the end we will be saved … that’s why I have always had a problem with the question “Are you saved?” Rather ask me do I believe the promises that God has made … and I’ll tell you yes. So yes there may be people who believed the promises and then later did not believe the promises. However I don’t see it as that they “were saved” and now they “are not saved”. Those who believe are “being saved”, that is what I see scripture saying. Are there those who are on the road of salvation and then later on the road to destruction … yea I can see that. But to say that one “loses their salvation” I don’t see that to be an accurate description of what happens. So I would say once saved always saved … however one is not saved until they endure to the end.

I completely agree with what you are saying here. The only sidenote I would like to add is the fact that salvation is spoken of in the Bible as indeed something that already has been accomplished. It also states that we are being saved. But this road of salvation will not be finished until we cross the finish line. Good point and well observed, though I have no problem calling myself 'saved' because the Bible does use that tense as well. We just need to keep the rest in mind as well!

Christinme
Jan 23rd 2007, 11:15 AM
Pilgrimtozion,

So one who is being saved … their salvation “has already been accomplished” … however they can then lose their salvation and not be saved even though their salvation “has already been accomplished”??? Is that what you are saying?

Pilgrimtozion
Jan 23rd 2007, 11:25 AM
Pilgrimtozion,

So one who is being saved … their salvation “has already been accomplished” … however they can then lose their salvation and not be saved even though their salvation “has already been accomplished”??? Is that what you are saying?

Christinme,

What I am saying is that it is one's faith in Christ that transfers him from the Kingdom of darkness to the Kingdom of Light, as Ephesians 1 puts it. He is thus 'saved' from the darkness, guilt, sin, and lostness he was in before. But having been saved from the darkness, one can choose to forge the chains again by walking away from the cross and choosing to live in the former darkness - a dog returns to his own vomit as the Bible says. Thus, the person was saved but chose to walk away from that salvation and walk back into the Kingdom of darkness.

The Bible says we need to endure to the end and does so for the very reason you mentioned: it's not over until it's over. We are in a war and Satan still wants our soul. That is why we need to endure - He wants us back in the Kingdom of darkness! It is this transferring from darkness to light that I refer to as 'being saved'. Right now, we have been forgiven from our sins through faith, so salvation is something of the here and now. But we need to endure all the same.

Does that clarify what I mean?

Christinme
Jan 23rd 2007, 11:32 AM
Christinme,

What I am saying is that it is one's faith in Christ that transfers him from the Kingdom of darkness to the Kingdom of Light, as Ephesians 1 puts it. He is thus 'saved' from the darkness, guilt, sin, and lostness he was in before. But having been saved from the darkness, one can choose to forge the chains again by walking away from the cross and choosing to live in the former darkness - a dog returns to his own vomit as the Bible says. Thus, the person was saved but chose to walk away from that salvation and walk back into the Kingdom of darkness.

The Bible says we need to endure to the end and does so for the very reason you mentioned: it's not over until it's over. We are in a war and Satan still wants our soul. That is why we need to endure - He wants us back in the Kingdom of darkness! It is this transferring from darkness to light that I refer to as 'being saved'. Right now, we have been forgiven from our sins through faith, so salvation is something of the here and now. But we need to endure all the same.

Does that clarify what I mean?Yes that very much clarifies things and I feel is worthy of repeating (hence I quoted it ... ;) ). I pretty much see things as you present them above also.

DSK
Jan 23rd 2007, 01:09 PM
I get it, Adam Clark is extremely careful about how he words things...he is talking about two different things here...being bapisted is not the same as regeneration...that is why the wording is different...the only way to fully understand what he was talking about is to read the surrounding comments. Taking what he said out of content is like taking the bible or anything else out of content...it will appear to mean something it was never meant to be.

Exactly. And I always enjoy comments like this from those who actually take the time to spot the difference and are able to recognize it. If we can't read and properly represent commentary authors like Adam Clarke, then I have my doubts that we are able to properly represent Scripture. Nevertheless, it has been my general experience that the majority of people have an incorrect understanding of what "regeneration" is, and having a false understanding of such Biblical terms, it becomes easy to misrepresent the views of others. It would be interesting to have people provide us with their definition of "regeneration"

DSK
Jan 23rd 2007, 01:22 PM
The Book (of Hebrews) was written to Jewish Christians who were tired of the Roman State persecution. Some had determined to avoid this persecution by returning to Judaism, the faith of their fathers. They thought that God was still pleased with the Old Covenant system. With their minds thus made up it would be impossible to change their minds and bring them back to Christianity. They had turned their backs on Christianity and unwittingly had turned their backs on God.


Here you are correct and basically are saying the same thing NOSAS have said all along.

Redeemed by Grace
Jan 23rd 2007, 02:03 PM
One of the things that puzzles me when it comes to this discussion is that NOSASers are apparently believed to hold to the doctrine that the work that Jesus did for us on the cross was not enough. That somehow, we believe we can add to our salvation. That somehow, our salvation is not secure.

This truly puzzles me, because I put my trust in the cross of Jesus Christ and am saved by grace through faith. I believe Jesus will never leave me nor forsake me and that His right hand upholds me. I cannot tell you how many times these truths have been a tremendous encouragement to me.

Thinking about where the bottleneck lies, I come to the point of the part we play as humans. OSASers would say that we play no part whatsoever; everything is given to us by God and since God is faithful to His promise, He will not take it away. When I look at Scripture, however, I feel that people miss the nature of the convenant between God and man.

In a covenant, there are always two parties involved. God has His part and we have our part. In the Old Testament, we clearly see this at the end of Deuteronomy, where God pronounces blessings and curses depending on whether Israel keeps their part of the covenant. Let there be no mistake: God keeps His part! The only thing God asks of us is that we put our faith and trust in the cross of Jesus Christ. This faith goes much deeper than mere intellectual assent to a doctrine. In the New Testament, faith and obedience are very closely related to each other; one inevitably leads to the other.

So what if I choose to not uphold my end of the deal anymore? Look at what dictionary.com says about the word covenant:

5.Bible. a.the conditional promises made to humanity by God, as revealed in Scripture.
God's part of the deal was not to keep me and save me even when I choose to walk away from Christ and His cross with my heart. He has promised to keep me in the palm of His hand, but our faith is a condition for that. The heart of the issue here is the issue of the heart. Turning away from Christ is a conscious thing, a decision you make in your heart. Talk to Khalou here on this board - he can tell you. Saying that one was not truly saved is then only a desparate attempt to save a doctrine that is not Biblical in the first place. Some people have truly put their faith in the cross, but have decided to turn away from that. I know one of them personally!

But with these words I think we can all agree:
In Christ alone I place my trust
And find my glory in the power of the cross
In every victory let it be said of me
My source of strength, my source of hope
Is Christ alone

Blessings,
Benjamin

This is a well thought out and well written commentary and will say that there are some major points that make sense to me in many ways…but if it just went a step or two more, I’d find 100% agreement.


Here’s where I see the focus within the 1st paragraph, and that is the work of I. As one who believes in the security of salvation, I see God enabling the ‘works’ He warns against and/or requires within me… the repentance, the good works, the humility, is from His Spirit within me… Perspectivally, His child reads the warnings and cautions and will hear and respond because of His Spirit working within. Do I/we still battle with sin, yes. But His Spirit will convict me/us to seek repentance, to enable turning and in fact give victory in turning [Jude 24]… [much as - I will write my laws on their hearts… Hebrews 10:16]

To your second paragraph, 100% agreement as it stands alone, however in context to the whole commentary, is not as strong to the point of keeping one secure, even from self. The visibility I see from the typical NOSAS viewpoint is that as you say, “I believe Jesus will never leave me nor forsake me and that His right hand upholds me…” except when I decide to turn and walk away… This offers a conditional statement to say that His arms are very strong… except mine are stronger if/when walking away… That’s my take away at least… But God states that what He has deemed His will never be lost… even if one decides to leave… The apostle Peter comes quickly to my mind as a living example to me.

To your third paragraph, I see the security of salvation as all God, yet I agree that man thinks and has opinion and thus perspective[Proverbs 16:9]. Somewhere before on these boards I posted that a true Christian has God’s ‘DNA’ coded within him… Weak metaphor, I know, but the idea is that we are given obedience to respond and that our desire to obey has been given by Himself and is working in Himself within us. More can be stated but I don want to be verbose, and I also want to comment about covenants.

Biblically, as far as I can remember, most of the major covenants that God engages are between Himself; for man cannot keep one ounce or one hair, or one breath of the demands of a holy covenant of God. So God, by the regeneration of the heart, by the enablement to give repentance, by the power of His Spirit -- is the offerer, giver, provider, enabler, and keeper of the covenant of grace in Jesus Christ… For He is the Just and the Justifier [Romans 3:26]

And then to the point of “what if I don’t uphold my end of the covenant any more?” Well here is where some would find fault with me, but John states it best…

1 John 2:19, 20
19 They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us,
they would have remained with us; but they went out,
so that it would be shown that they all are not of us.

20 But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you all know.

For those who truly have the Holy Spirit within, they will never leave… again, because God holds them from doing so.

I write not to convince, but to share. And trust that God will be glorified and that we all grow in the truth and knowledge in obedience by His grace to the precious gift of salvation’s call.

ProjectPeter
Jan 23rd 2007, 02:26 PM
Hi again PP!:)



If I am understanding your question correctly, the answer is yes, the contrast in Ezek. 18 in general is between eternal death and eternal life. But can you explain how this impacts on the question of OSAS? I would like to add just one more thought about Ezek. 18. After all is said and done, it all boils down to one decision. Does "tzadek" mean saved?

If it means "saved "then we must conclude that one person can be more saved than another. That means that a saved man can lose his salvation and that God breaks His unconditional promise to believers. If it means "right", i.e. "one who does the right thing" then one person can be more right than another and God does not ever break His unconditional promise to believers. It's really that simple. Does "tzadek" describe one who is saved or does it describe one who is correct? I hope you will take this question to the Lord and wait for a sense of the truth. Well, it's dinner time for me, mmmm...Pizza! :) :) :)

Love,
Madeline
Madeline. If the contrast is between eternal life and eternal death and the wicked receive eternal death and the righteous eternal life... then how do you figure the righteous cannot be saved because according to the Bible... only the saved will receive eternal life right? So by your own understanding of it being eternal life spoken of here... it makes no sense that you would say that they righteous here aren't saved. Does that make sense now?

wpm
Jan 23rd 2007, 02:44 PM
I still disagree and I read your post right by your re-post explaining it. Can you honestly tell me that you have never known anyone who had the H.S. that turned away to a life of sin? I can't say it because I know people that were TRULY saved that if they died tonight they would die in their sin. :cry: God Bless.

I don't believe sinning is worshipping Satan. I thought we were talking about Satan worshippers (literally). When we sin, we may give place to the devil but our hearts are not full of adoration and love for Satan. We hate Satan. We hate sin. When we sin we feel wrong about it. We repent. Some who go into a backslidden state are held in a bondage they hate. They desire freedom. They have a heart towards God, but are unable to get back. If they are true they will be back, if not then they won't.

These are deep eternal things that we are trying put into human terms.

Paul

wpm
Jan 23rd 2007, 02:50 PM
Like most individual's it appears you haven't noticed in the above verses, that both the fruit bearing branch, as well as the non-fruit bearing branch are both said to be in Him, meaning in Christ. I high-lighted that part for you.

I believe the tree is a picture of professing Christendom. Just like ancient Israel, they partake of all the outward religious ordinances but are unfruitful and therefore unsaved. If Christ and His words do not abide in anyone then they are not saved - period. This is not a state we evolve into, it is an act. If this is not in play then we are not regenerated. Possessing Christ and His words is not optional - it is imperative. The non-fruit-bearing brances are not saved as they do not have Christ within. They are all outward but no inward.

Paul

DSK
Jan 23rd 2007, 03:01 PM
I believe the tree is a picture of professing Christendom. Just like ancient Israel, they partake of all the outward religious ordinances but are unfruitful and therefore unsaved. If Christ and His words do not abide in anyone then they are not saved - period. This is not a state we evolve into, it is an act. If this is not in play then we are not regenerated. Possessing Christ and His words is not optional - it is imperative. The non-fruit-bearing brances are not saved as they do not have Christ within. They are all outward but no inward.

Paul

So basically what your saying is that when Jesus says both the non-fruit bearing branches as well as the fruit bearing are both said to be "in Me" He was mistaken. Is that correct?

In the text below please note the two separate sorts of branches. I will separate them for you by dividing them by color of text.

John 15:2 Every branch in me that beareth not fruit, he taketh it away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he cleanseth it, that it may bear more fruit.

The only difference is the treatment the two sorts of branches "in Him" receive. The non-productive branches are removed, and the productive branches are cleansed in order to produce even more fruit. Now if you continue reading John chapter 15, you will see in 15:6 the end result of what happens to those non-productive branches which in 15:2 were removed.

John 15:6 If anyone does not remain in Me, he is thrown aside like a branch and he withers. They gather them, throw them into the fire, and they are burned.

moonglow
Jan 23rd 2007, 03:23 PM
One of the things that puzzles me when it comes to this discussion is that NOSASers are apparently believed to hold to the doctrine that the work that Jesus did for us on the cross was not enough. That somehow, we believe we can add to our salvation. That somehow, our salvation is not secure.

This truly puzzles me, because I put my trust in the cross of Jesus Christ and am saved by grace through faith. I believe Jesus will never leave me nor forsake me and that His right hand upholds me. I cannot tell you how many times these truths have been a tremendous encouragement to me.

Thinking about where the bottleneck lies, I come to the point of the part we play as humans. OSASers would say that we play no part whatsoever; everything is given to us by God and since God is faithful to His promise, He will not take it away. When I look at Scripture, however, I feel that people miss the nature of the convenant between God and man.

In a covenant, there are always two parties involved. God has His part and we have our part. In the Old Testament, we clearly see this at the end of Deuteronomy, where God pronounces blessings and curses depending on whether Israel keeps their part of the covenant. Let there be no mistake: God keeps His part! The only thing God asks of us is that we put our faith and trust in the cross of Jesus Christ. This faith goes much deeper than mere intellectual assent to a doctrine. In the New Testament, faith and obedience are very closely related to each other; one inevitably leads to the other.

So what if I choose to not uphold my end of the deal anymore? Look at what dictionary.com says about the word covenant:

5.Bible. a.the conditional promises made to humanity by God, as revealed in Scripture.
God's part of the deal was not to keep me and save me even when I choose to walk away from Christ and His cross with my heart. He has promised to keep me in the palm of His hand, but our faith is a condition for that. The heart of the issue here is the issue of the heart. Turning away from Christ is a conscious thing, a decision you make in your heart. Talk to Khalou here on this board - he can tell you. Saying that one was not truly saved is then only a desparate attempt to save a doctrine that is not Biblical in the first place. Some people have truly put their faith in the cross, but have decided to turn away from that. I know one of them personally!

But with these words I think we can all agree:
In Christ alone I place my trust
And find my glory in the power of the cross
In every victory let it be said of me
My source of strength, my source of hope
Is Christ alone

Blessings,
Benjamin

that isn't what we are saying at all! I posted this early in the thread, but I realize sometimes people come in the middle of a thread and haven't read through...or just want to make a comment and that is fine...so I will repost it again:

http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/misconceptions.htm
10 Common Misconceptions About A Conditional Security


The following are misconceptions and strawman arguments that eternal security people use to falsely accuse and discredit Christians like us who teach a conditional security for the believer. Certainly, sometimes the eternal security teachers will intentionally imply any, some or all of the following to dishonor our beliefs when they are teaching. Here is what they slanderously say about us:

Such people don’t believe in grace.

Such people don’t believe in the blood of Jesus.

Such people don’t believe in the infinite work of Christ.

Such people don’t believe in the free gift of eternal life.

Such people believe in a works salvation.

Such people are in legalism

Such people believe in sinless perfection.

Such people are trying to save themselves.

Such people are unsaved.

Such people think they lose their salvation every time they sin.

Setting The Record Straight

Let’s review that list again but this time supply Biblical answers/comments to clear away these misconceptions about Christians who embrace a conditional security:

Such people don’t believe in grace.

We believe and know without a doubt that we are saved by grace, as the Bible declares (Acts 15:11; Eph. 2:5, 8, etc.). But after we do get saved we also know we can fall from grace (Gal. 5:2-4). If such occurs, then Christ has become of no effect unto such people, according to Scripture (Gal. 5:4). We also know there are other ways in which we can lose our salvation, according to Scripture.

Such people don’t believe in the blood of Jesus.

We believe it is only by the blood of Jesus that we can be purged from our sins (Heb. 1:3) and set free from its slavery (Rev. 1:5). We contact Jesus’ precious, saving blood at the point of a trusting-submitting faith in the Lord Jesus when we turn from all sins and get born again. But we also know some have treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified them (Heb. 10:29) and have since become enemies of God with raging fire awaiting them (Heb. 10:27). See also James 4:4.

Such people don’t believe in the infinite work of Christ.

We know our redemption was paid for in full at the cross by Christ alone when he said, It is finished (John 19:30). But we also know the Lord Jesus and his apostles taught those already saved that they would have to endure and remain faithful to God to the end to be saved and not be hurt by the second death (Mt. 10:22; Rev. 2:10,11; Heb. 3:14).

Such people don’t believe in the free gift of eternal life.

We believe that eternal life is a gift, as Rom. 6:23 declares. But we also believe the previous verse which describes a real Christian, and what leads to holiness resulting with eternal life:

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

Eternal life is gift, but it is also a hope, yet to be reaped in the age to come, for the ones who persist in doing good and don’t give up sowing to please the Spirit of God (Titus 3:7; Mark 10:30; Rom. 2:7; Gal. 6:8,9; etc.).

Such people believe in a works salvation.

As already stated we believe we are saved by grace. But we also believe grace is best described in the following passage:


It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age (Titus 2:12).


Paul also believed and wrote about salvation (by grace) and gave the following to those who had already been saved:


The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life. Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up. Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers (Gal. 6:8-10).

Such people are in legalism.

Paul taught against legalism, yet taught the aforementioned facts about salvation, which the eternal security teachers cannot reconcile with their security-in-sin “gospel.” In other words, those Scriptures, and others like them, are under the umbrella of grace, not legalism.

Such people believe in sinless perfection.

We do not believe in sinless perfection, as some have in the past. All sins are not the same in their effect on our souls. Some sins are greater than others (Jn. 19:11). One type is eternal (Mk. 3:29), while others are not. Another type of sin is uniquely against our bodies, while other sins are outside our bodies (1 Cor. 6:18). 1 Jn. 5:16 declares there is a sin that does not lead to death while there is a sin that leads to death. Sins such as worry (Phil. 4:6), unthankfulness (Col. 2:7, 3:15; Lk. 17:11-18) and not being completely humble and gentle (Eph. 4:2) are not included in any of the lists of sins that will send people to the lake of fire, even if they were once saved. However, other sins certainly will send any person to hell if they die unrepentant, even a person who was once saved. (See 1 Cor. 6:9,10; Rev. 21:8; Gal. 5:19-21; Eph. 5:5,6; Jude 7; Rev. 22:15; etc.).


Such people are trying to save themselves.

We are not trying to save ourselves. Jesus is the only Savior (Acts 4:12) and our eyes are on him for our salvation. All 100% of our trust is in Jesus alone for salvation and not our good deeds too, even though we have good deeds. We are his sheep, and have salvation, as long as we continue to follow him (John 10:27). Because our faith is alive we have good deeds (James 2:17).


Such people are unsaved.


We are not unsaved because we reject eternal security. Such an untruth cannot be tied to any Scripture. We do acknowledge that Christian people can become unsaved, though, by believing/preaching a false gospel, committing certain types of sin or disowning Jesus during persecution (1 Cor. 15:2; 1 John 2:24,25; Gal. 1:8,9; Rev. 21:8; Eph. 5:5-7; Gal. 5:19-21; Mt. 10:33; etc.).

Such people think they lose their salvation every time they sin.


We do not believe we lose our salvation every time we sin. There are many sins that will not damn any Christian to eternal fire if committed, such as: worry, not being completely humble and gentle and not overflowing with thanksgiving. Never are such sins included in any Biblical list which states who will not inherit the kingdom of God and/or be thrown into the lake of fire such as the sexually immoral, drunkards, idolaters, murderers, liars, etc. (1 Cor. 6:9,10; Eph. 5:5-7; Rev. 21:8).


We get all 100% of our beliefs from the Bible and sincerely have studied it for decades with a willingness to change accordingly. Our beliefs are backed up with appropriate Scripture used in its proper context as well as other supporting Scriptures. We have found the eternal security proponents to be the ones who don’t understand the Bible and will misrepresent our beliefs to make their own seem more credible, as just shown.


For much more information on eternal security consult our 801 page book, The Believer’s Conditional Security. This book has never been and never will be refuted. It is the dread of the eternal security teachers. GOD BLESS YOU.
------

Return to Evangelical Outreach
www.evangelicaloutreach.org


Evangelical Outreach
PO Box 265, Washington, PA 15301

God bless

TheEditor
Jan 23rd 2007, 03:36 PM
The following are misconceptions and strawman arguments that eternal security people use to falsely accuse and discredit Christians like us who teach a conditional security for the believer.


Unfortunately many people try to be teachers when they do not understand God and His Word. They try to lead people astray and don't even have a clue how their teaching nicely fits into the Master Plan of Satan (And yeah such a thing exists... And many people don't even realize its there...)...

And yes I believe in NOSAS...

moonglow
Jan 23rd 2007, 03:38 PM
Christinme,

What I am saying is that it is one's faith in Christ that transfers him from the Kingdom of darkness to the Kingdom of Light, as Ephesians 1 puts it. He is thus 'saved' from the darkness, guilt, sin, and lostness he was in before. But having been saved from the darkness, one can choose to forge the chains again by walking away from the cross and choosing to live in the former darkness - a dog returns to his own vomit as the Bible says. Thus, the person was saved but chose to walk away from that salvation and walk back into the Kingdom of darkness.

The Bible says we need to endure to the end and does so for the very reason you mentioned: it's not over until it's over. We are in a war and Satan still wants our soul. That is why we need to endure - He wants us back in the Kingdom of darkness! It is this transferring from darkness to light that I refer to as 'being saved'. Right now, we have been forgiven from our sins through faith, so salvation is something of the here and now. But we need to endure all the same.

Does that clarify what I mean?

This is excatly what we (the non-osas) are saying too. :) And what you said also here:


5.Bible. a.the conditional promises made to humanity by God, as revealed in Scripture.
God's part of the deal was not to keep me and save me even when I choose to walk away from Christ and His cross with my heart. He has promised to keep me in the palm of His hand, but our faith is a condition for that. The heart of the issue here is the issue of the heart. Turning away from Christ is a conscious thing, a decision you make in your heart. Talk to Khalou here on this board - he can tell you. Saying that one was not truly saved is then only a desparate attempt to save a doctrine that is not Biblical in the first place. Some people have truly put their faith in the cross, but have decided to turn away from that. I know one of them personally!

That is all we are saying and you seem to be in agreement with that. This is why Paul calls it a race and to 'endure to the end'. The first part of your post was confusing to me because you seemed to say the opposite ...saying this:
One of the things that puzzles me when it comes to this discussion is that NOSASers are apparently believed to hold to the doctrine that the work that Jesus did for us on the cross was not enough. That somehow, we believe we can add to our salvation. That somehow, our salvation is not secure.

Which isn't what we are saying at all.
But then you go on to say what we (the no-osas) have been trying to say all along! :)

God bless

*Madeline*
Jan 23rd 2007, 04:03 PM
*yawn* Good morning PP!:)


Madeline. If the contrast is between eternal life and eternal death and the wicked receive eternal death and the righteous eternal life... then how do you figure the righteous cannot be saved because according to the Bible... only the saved will receive eternal life right? So by your own understanding of it being eternal life spoken of here... it makes no sense that you would say that they righteous here aren't saved. Does that make sense now?

You asked, "how does one know that the righteous cannot be save". Good question, but you've got the cart before the horse, so to speak. It's really quite simple PP.:)

Let's take this step by step.

1) A person believes God.

2) Because God has promised all believers eternal life, that person is saved.

3) Because a holy God cannot commune with sin or sinful man, a saved man is seen by God to have done all things right, therefore, God sees him as righteous.

So the man in Ezek. 18:26 is said, at least at one time in his life, to have done all things rightly. But because we are not told that that man in Ezek. 18 was a believer, we may not assume that he was saved. If he was not a believer that means he was not saved. Given that faith without works is dead and that that man in Ezek. 18 did those evil, sinful things, I think there is every reason to conclude that that man was not a believer, i.e. not saved. Because he was not saved in the first place, he didn't lose it. Hope this helps PP!:hug:

Love,
Madeline

moonglow
Jan 23rd 2007, 04:06 PM
Exactly. And I always enjoy comments like this from those who actually take the time to spot the difference and are able to recognize it. If we can't read and properly represent commentary authors like Adam Clarke, then I have my doubts that we are able to properly represent Scripture. Nevertheless, it has been my general experience that the majority of people have an incorrect understanding of what "regeneration" is, and having a false understanding of such Biblical terms, it becomes easy to misrepresent the views of others. It would be interesting to have people provide us with their definition of "regeneration"

Maybe you ought to do a new thread on this, regeneration...

I know there are some on here that get all offended when a bible commentary is posted, saying they don't need such things, they only need the bible and that is enough. Now I can understand why they say this, but I don't see the bible saying we are not allowed to use added materials, study guides, Lexicons...there are even bible dictionaries because many times a word in the bible does not have the same meaning as used in a secular dictionary and it can lead to serious errors in understanding scriptures, if you read a word and assume you know the meaning of the word (going by pretty much the secular world's definition that we learn in school, many times without realizing we are doing that).

Such as one of the confusions on this thread was the meaning of 'life' and 'death' in the bible. Of course there are times when someone really did physically die in the bible or physical lived, but many, many times its talking about spiritual life and death. The first time this type of death is mentioned is early in Genesis when God told Adam and Eve to not eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge or they would die...He didn't mean they would just dropped dead, physically! Athesit try to use that one to say the bible is flawed because they didn't drop over dead when they ate the fruit. A Christian should realize that since they didn't physically die, the Lord must have meant something else. The bible does explain it self in a passage...if someone physically died, it goes on to talk about people weeping, and them being buried and so forth...but on the verse where it might not be so clear as to the meaning of a word, I see nothing wrong with reading a bible commentary or using a bible dictionary and so forth.

With the historical information too that Clark provides it has really enchanced my knowledge of the bible...because in some cases, such as the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. I didn't know that the propheties Jesus gave in Matthew 24 had already happened in the past! Its not recorded in the bible because the writings stopped before that, but it is recorded in history.

Anyway...sorry this is all way off topic! I will shut up now....:lol:

God bless

ProjectPeter
Jan 23rd 2007, 04:11 PM
*yawn* Good morning PP!:)



You asked, "how does one know that the righteous cannot be save". Good question, but you've got the cart before the horse, so to speak. It's really quite simple PP.:)

Let's take this step by step.

1) A person believes God.

2) Because God has promised all believers eternal life, that person is saved.

3) Because a holy God cannot commune with sin or sinful man, a saved man is seen by God to have done all things right, therefore, God sees him as righteous.

So the man in Ezek. 18:26 is said, at least at one time in his life, to have done all things rightly. But because we are not told that that man in Ezek. 18 was a believer, we may not assume that he was saved. If he was not a believer that means he was not saved. Given that faith without works is dead and that that man in Ezek. 18 did those evil, sinful things, I think there is every reason to conclude that that man was not a believer, i.e. not saved. Because he was not saved in the first place, he didn't lose it. Hope this helps PP!:hug:

Love,
MadelineOkay let's try this a different way because you are still not getting this and it is very important here.

1. You do agree that it is speaking of live/life as eternal life?

2. You do agree that it is speaking of die/death as eternal death?

Those two you have agreed on a couple of times already but let's get that clarification here once again.

Pilgrimtozion
Jan 23rd 2007, 04:28 PM
Which isn't what we are saying at all.
But then you go on to say what we (the no-osas) have been trying to say all along! :)

God bless


I apologize for not wording that first sentence very clearly - it could have been done better. I meant to indicate that other people make it look like NOSASers believe that salvation is not secure. That was exactly what I was contending. I hope this clarifies the confusion...

Benjamin

moonglow
Jan 23rd 2007, 04:37 PM
I apologize for not wording that first sentence very clearly - it could have been done better. I meant to indicate that other people make it look like NOSASers believe that salvation is not secure. That was exactly what I was contending. I hope this clarifies the confusion...

Benjamin

Hey thanks for clearing that up! :)

God bless

DSK
Jan 23rd 2007, 04:49 PM
Maybe you ought to do a new thread on this, regeneration...



I have thought about it, and actually I did a thread on that very topic in another Christian forum, in which I generally noticed that the preconceived presuppositions of the majority became a stumbling block which prevented any attempts at coming to a correct understanding of what is actually meant by regeneration.

moonglow
Jan 23rd 2007, 05:12 PM
I have thought about it, and actually I did a thread on that very topic in another Christian forum, in which I generally noticed that the preconceived presuppositions of the majority became a stumbling block which prevented any attempts at coming to a correct understanding of what is actually meant by regeneration.

:hmm: that is too bad! :(

*Madeline*
Jan 23rd 2007, 05:48 PM
Hi PP!:)


Okay let's try this a different way because you are still not getting this and it is very important here.

1. You do agree that it is speaking of live/life as eternal life?

2. You do agree that it is speaking of die/death as eternal death?

Those two you have agreed on a couple of times already but let's get that clarification here once again.

Yes....:) :) :)

Love,
Madeline

Centurionoflight
Jan 23rd 2007, 06:15 PM
jiggyfly


Matthew 25:10-12
10 “But while they were gone to buy oil, the bridegroom came, and those who were ready went in with him to the marriage feast, and the door was locked. 11 Later, when the other five bridesmaids returned, they stood outside, calling, ‘Sir, open the door for us!’ 12 But he called back, ‘I don’t know you!’



Care to explain the CONTEXT?
I am not going to guess why you would post something so out of context.

Centurionoflight
Jan 23rd 2007, 06:16 PM
ProjectPeter


Matthew 4:6 and said to Him, "If You are the Son of God throw Yourself down; for it is written, `HE WILL GIVE HIS ANGELS CHARGE CONCERNING YOU´; and `ON their HANDS THEY WILL BEAR YOU UP, LEST YOU STRIKE YOUR FOOT AGAINST A STONE.´"

What did satan say that the Scripture didn't say?

Psalms 91:11 ¶For He will give His angels charge concerning you, To guard you in all your ways.
12 They will bear you up in their hands, Lest you strike your foot against a stone.


Ok explain more; I am not catching your drift.

Centurionoflight
Jan 23rd 2007, 06:20 PM
watchinginawe




Exactly, the way Adam Clarke has been quoted in this thread regarding regeneration via water baptism would make Jesus of the same belief . Notwithstanding, I have seen many refer to it exactly that way :

John 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

God Bless!




Except the water here is not baptism; rather its the water of the womb.

Context bears this position out.


John 3

4Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?

5Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water{Womb} and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

6That which is born of the flesh is flesh; {Womb} and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

To place baptism here is to misinterpret this passage.

ProjectPeter
Jan 23rd 2007, 06:42 PM
Hi PP!:)



Yes....:) :) :)

Love,
Madeline
Ezekiel 18:26 "When a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and dies because of it, for his iniquity which he has committed he will die.


He will die eternal death... this we agree.

27 "Again, when a wicked man turns away from his wickedness which he has committed and practices justice and righteousness, he will save his life.
28 "Because he considered and turned away from all his transgressions which he had committed, he shall surely live; he shall not die.

Since you agree that life means eternal life... then how do you figure this person is not saved because he does righteousness? You already agree that this person is going to have eternal life but then you are trying to say that this passage is not saying that this person is saved. It doesn't work with even what you say you believe about it being eternal life unless in fact this righteous person is in fact saved unless of course you figure there is another way to eternal life without being saved... and I know better than that. So again... you are trying to make this fit your doctrine. Not letting the Scripture determine the doctrine.

ProjectPeter
Jan 23rd 2007, 06:44 PM
ProjectPeter


Ok explain more; I am not catching your drift.
Point being... just because you quoted two verses of Scripture to try and make your point and then say something like "you just quoted Scripture"... point is... two verses of Scripture out of context isn't the truth although those two verses well may be part of a truth. Context. You took those two verses and tried to paint a doctrine that didn't fit the context of that passage. Twas the point! ;)

*Madeline*
Jan 23rd 2007, 07:31 PM
Hi PP!:)


Ezekiel 18:26 "When a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and dies because of it, for his iniquity which he has committed he will die.


He will die eternal death... this we agree.

27 "Again, when a wicked man turns away from his wickedness which he has committed and practices justice and righteousness, he will save his life.
28 "Because he considered and turned away from all his transgressions which he had committed, he shall surely live; he shall not die.

Since you agree that life means eternal life... then how do you figure this person is not saved because he does righteousness? You already agree that this person is going to have eternal life but then you are trying to say that this passage is not saying that this person is saved. It doesn't work with even what you say you believe about it being eternal life unless in fact this righteous person is in fact saved unless of course you figure there is another way to eternal life without being saved... and I know better than that. So again... you are trying to make this fit your doctrine. Not letting the Scripture determine the doctrine.

Ok, I have been thinking very long and hard on the Ezekiel passage. First, let's look at the context. It was written to Israelites who as a nation were being told about judgment for their backsliding. This is important. As a nation, these people were already in a covenantal relationship with God as His chosen elect people. Their works of righteousness of unrighteousness reflected on the fellowship of this covenantal arrangement. No Gentile has a right to make this claim today. The problem is not the reference for it is God's Word. The problem is that self-righteous theologies take this passage point designed for national Israel and wrongly misapply it to all people of all ages.

Second, the passage deals with a person's righteousness and unrighteousness. It is true that if a person is able to live a life of righteousness, then they will inherit eternal life. But who born of Adam has ever done this? Eternal life based on self-righteousness is only a theoretical possibility. It is also true that unrighteousness will bring eternal damnation. Eternal damnation based on self-unrighteousness is a sure thing. If I stop here, this is a very frightening passage.

The gospel message of Jesus Christ is the about God's righteousness (Rom 1:16,17) not our righteousness. The righteousness that saves lies OUTSIDE us in the Person of Jesus Christ. At the moment of faith, God declares believers forgiven and IMPUTES Christ's righteousness to them (2 Cor 5:19). Since eternal depends on Christ's righteousness alone, then no amount of our unrighteousness can change the basis of God's declaration of IMPUTED righteousness. The word IMPUTE means to count or to reckon. We aren't made righteous; we are counted as righteous even while we are filthy and deep in sin. Our position IN CHRIST is what God sees and counts as important. We are forgiven only for Christ's sake (Eph 4:32). There is nothing we can do (beyond faith) to get saved. There is nothing we can do to get unsaved. So if one believes this passage speaks about losing ones salivation, one would have to look at the passage ripped from context and only through a Christ-denying self-righteous view. It is a good thing that this portion of Ezekiel's writing was not, is not, and will never be the gospel of Jesus Christ. Context invalidates this passage for application to eternal life. Hope this helps!:)

Love,
Madeline

moonglow
Jan 23rd 2007, 07:37 PM
watchinginawe





Except the water here is not baptism; rather its the water of the womb.

Context bears this position out.


John 3

4Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?

5Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water{Womb} and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

6That which is born of the flesh is flesh; {Womb} and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

To place baptism here is to misinterpret this passage.

I think there is a bit more to it, don't you? Other wise, why would Jesus tell people to be bapisted in water?

http://www.studylight.org/com/acc/view.cgi?book=joh&chapter=003
Adam Clark Bible Commentary

Verse 3. Jesus answered
Not in the language of compliment:-he saw the state of Nicodemus's soul, and he immediately addressed himself to him on a subject the most interesting and important. But what connection is there between our Lord's reply, and the address of Nicodemus? Probably our Lord saw that the object of his visit was to inquire about the Messiah's kingdom; and in reference to this he immediately says, Except a man be born again,

The repetition of amen, or verily, verily, among the Jewish writers, was considered of equal import with the most solemn oath.

Be born again
Or, from above: different to that new birth which the Jews supposed every baptized proselyte enjoyed; for they held that the Gentile, who became a proselyte, was like a child new born. This birth was of water from below: the birth for which Christ contends is ανωθεν, from above-by the agency of the Holy Spirit. Every man must have two births, one from heaven, the other from earth-one of his body, the other of his soul: without the first he cannot see nor enjoy this world, without the last he can not see nor enjoy the kingdom of God.

As there is an absolute necessity that a child should be born into the world, that he may see its light, contemplate its glories, and enjoy its good, so there is an absolute necessity that the soul should be brought out of its state of darkness and sin, through the light and power of the grace of Christ, that it may be able to see, ιδειν, or, to discern, the glories and excellencies of the kingdom of Christ here, and be prepared for the enjoyment of the kingdom of glory hereafter. The Jews had some general notion of the new birth; but, like many among Christians, they put the acts of proselytism, baptism, they acknowledged that a man must be born again; but they made that new birth to consist in profession, confession, and external washing. See Clarke on John 3:10.

The new birth which is here spoken of comprehends, not only what is termed justification or pardon, but also sanctification or holiness. Sin must be pardoned, and the impurity of the heart washed away, before any soul can possibly enter into the kingdom of God. As this new birth implies the renewing of the whole soul in righteousness and true holiness, it is not a matter that may be dispensed with: heaven is a place of holiness, and nothing but what is like itself can ever enter into it.

Verse 4. How can a man be born when he is old?
It is probable that Nicodemus was pretty far advanced in age at this time; and from his answer we may plainly perceive that, like the rest of the Jews, and like multitudes of Christians, he rested in the letter, without paying proper attention to the spirit: the shadow, without the thing signified, had hitherto satisfied him. Our Lord knew him to be in this state, and this was the cause of his pointed address to him.

Verse 5. Of water and of the Spirit
To the baptism of water a man was admitted when he became a proselyte to the Jewish religion; and, in this baptism, he promised in the most solemn manner to renounce idolatry, to take the God of Israel for his God, and to have his life conformed to the precepts of the Divine law. But the water which was used on the occasion was only an emblem of the Holy Spirit. The soul was considered as in a state of defilement, because of past sin: now, as by that water the body was washed, cleansed, and refreshed, so, by the influences of the Holy Spirit, the soul was to be purified from its defilement, and strengthened to walk in the way of truth and holiness.

When John came baptizing with water, he gave the Jews the plainest intimations that this would not suffice; that it was only typical of that baptism of the Holy Ghost, under the similitude of fire, which they must all receive from Jesus Christ: see Matthew 3:11. Therefore, our Lord asserts that a man must be born of water and the Spirit, i.e. of the Holy Ghost, which, represented under the similitude of water, cleanses, refreshes, and purifies the soul.

Reader, hast thou never had any other baptism than that of water? If thou hast not had any other, take Jesus Christ's word for it, thou canst not, in thy present state, enter into the kingdom of God. I would not say to thee merely, read what it is to be born of the Spirit: but pray, O pray to God incessantly, till he give thee to feel what is implied in it! Remember, it is Jesus only who baptizes with the Holy Ghost: see John 1:33. He who receives not this baptism has neither right nor title to the kingdom of God; nor can he with any propriety be termed a Christian, because that which essentially distinguished the Christian dispensation from that of the Jews was, that its author baptized all his followers with the Holy Ghost.

Though baptism by water, into the Christian faith, was necessary to every Jew and Gentile that entered into the kingdom of the Messiah, it is not necessary that by water and the Spirit (in this place) we should understand two different things: it is probably only an elliptical form of speech, for the Holy Spirit under the similitude of water; as, in Matthew 3:3, the Holy Ghost and fire, do not mean two things, but one, viz. the Holy Ghost under the similitude of fire-pervading every part, refining and purifying the whole.

God bless

Centurionoflight
Jan 23rd 2007, 08:10 PM
moonglow


I think there is a bit more to it, don't you? Other wise, why would Jesus tell people to be bapisted in water?


As I stated

Baptism is not the context of the passage; being born of the WOMB is.

irv
Jan 23rd 2007, 09:23 PM
This is the first post I am making in this discussion on NOSAS v. OSAS. I tried to read through this entire discussion, but only made it to the halfway point then jumped to the last page to find that John 3 came into the picture. By the way, that was the scripture that the Holy Spirit open up to me because I was 40 years old when I got saved. I would have asked the same question Nicodemus ask, “How can a man be born again when he is old, can he enter in to his mother's womb and be born again?” I agree here, this is not baptism but the water that comes forth when a woman give birth. “Bore of Water”.
Well as I read through this discussion so many times I wanted to stop and give my two cents, but the more I read the more I saw many others voicing my own opinions. (Many great posts here). Well, I am going to throw in the monkey wrench here, so to speak. I am not going to answer this post with this subject, but am going to ask some questions for those who hold to the doctrine of NOSAS. These questions do not deal with this doctrine directly, but do in a round about way.


The first question to all those who hold to the doctrine of NOSAS, Have you ever come to the Cross? Don't get me wrong I am not asking are you saved or not, but just asking if you have ever come to the Cross for there is where the sin and the sinner has been dealt with. (I will come back to this in a minute).
Second questions: How can one who is dead to sin continue in it? Actually this one is answered in scripture. “Know ye not that as many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore, we are buried with him by baptism into death, that as Christ was raise up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.” (Romans 6:3, 4).
Going back to the first question: The reason I asked this question is the answer to it shows me that I cannot loose my salvation. How can a man who has be crucified with Christ come back and loose his salvation seeing Christ already dealt with not only his sin, but with the sinner himself.
How foolish to say I can undo my dieing with Christ every time I sin. If that is the case then I must have never gone to the Cross.
If a person tells me I can loose my salvation (and I don't see this in scripture), then I would have to ask them another question right our of scripture. “Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? [Shall] God that justifieth? Who is he that codemneth? (says I can loose my salvation). [Shall] Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us?” And then the scripture goes on with this same question about the believer being secure. “What shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? (and may I add those who hold to NOSAS).
I will never believe that I can loose my salvation because my Lord has told me different. He told me, “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain....” And again He told me, “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me, And I give unto them eternal live; (life that will always last, eternal), and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.” (And that means no matter what the NOSAS says will ever change my mind). I believe my Lord because he also said “My Father, who gave them to me, is greater than all, and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.” This is eternal security.

I would like to add more about going to the Cross:
“Reckoning” on the work of the Cross is the only relief from the carnal burden of self. Then comes the spiritual burden of Christ—to be more like Him. “Reckoning” is the answer there, too. “Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord (Romans 6:11). If we seek to escape the death, we will not experience the life.


We are not to try to crucify self, but we are to agree (reckon) with what God has said and done. In the lives of most believers self has usurped the place belonging to the Lord Jesus Christ. It is a criminal worthy of death, but the trouble is that they do not realize that this self-life has been crucified on the Cross. They do not believe the facts of the Word, and sin therefore reigns in their lives; they live in bondage to sin, praying for deliverance, praying that they may die to sin, but refusing to believe what God says He has already done.


The constant tendency is to try to improve the manner of one's life here below by adopting Christian principles, whereas you will never arrive at it unless you start from 'crucified with Christ.' Then it is not thinking of what I am, but of what He is, 'Christ liveth in me.'


“[I]And ye are complete in Him, who is the head of all principality and power” (Col. 2:10).


If we say we can loses our salvation then we are, and never were complete in Him. And we know that is not true!

ProjectPeter
Jan 23rd 2007, 10:01 PM
Hi PP!:)



Ok, I have been thinking very long and hard on the Ezekiel passage. First, let's look at the context. It was written to Israelites who as a nation were being told about judgment for their backsliding. This is important. As a nation, these people were already in a covenantal relationship with God as His chosen elect people. Their works of righteousness of unrighteousness reflected on the fellowship of this covenantal arrangement. No Gentile has a right to make this claim today. The problem is not the reference for it is God's Word. The problem is that self-righteous theologies take this passage point designed for national Israel and wrongly misapply it to all people of all ages.

Second, the passage deals with a person's righteousness and unrighteousness. It is true that if a person is able to live a life of righteousness, then they will inherit eternal life. But who born of Adam has ever done this? Eternal life based on self-righteousness is only a theoretical possibility. It is also true that unrighteousness will bring eternal damnation. Eternal damnation based on self-unrighteousness is a sure thing. If I stop here, this is a very frightening passage.

The gospel message of Jesus Christ is the about God's righteousness (Rom 1:16,17) not our righteousness. The righteousness that saves lies OUTSIDE us in the Person of Jesus Christ. At the moment of faith, God declares believers forgiven and IMPUTES Christ's righteousness to them (2 Cor 5:19). Since eternal depends on Christ's righteousness alone, then no amount of our unrighteousness can change the basis of God's declaration of IMPUTED righteousness. The word IMPUTE means to count or to reckon. We aren't made righteous; we are counted as righteous even while we are filthy and deep in sin. Our position IN CHRIST is what God sees and counts as important. We are forgiven only for Christ's sake (Eph 4:32). There is nothing we can do (beyond faith) to get saved. There is nothing we can do to get unsaved. So if one believes this passage speaks about losing ones salivation, one would have to look at the passage ripped from context and only through a Christ-denying self-righteous view. It is a good thing that this portion of Ezekiel's writing was not, is not, and will never be the gospel of Jesus Christ. Context invalidates this passage for application to eternal life. Hope this helps!:)

Love,
Madeline
And again Madeline... that is still reading doctrine into the passage and not letting the passage dictate the doctrine. We know and have already established that it was Abraham's faith that was counted to him as righteousness. I figure the same with David, Samuel, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, and many other Old Testament Saints such as spoken of in Hebrews 11. But that passage, truly does cause your doctrine some grief. But at least now you are simply going with the idea that it is Old Testament and not really applicable! That is really the only out folks can try and take! :lol:

jiggyfly
Jan 23rd 2007, 10:07 PM
Luke 9:23&24
23 Then he said to the crowd, “If any of you wants to be my follower, you must put aside your selfish ambition, shoulder your cross daily, and follow me. 24 If you try to keep your life for yourself, you will lose it. But if you give up your life for me, you will find true life.

*Madeline*
Jan 23rd 2007, 10:17 PM
Hi PP!:D


And again Madeline... that is still reading doctrine into the passage and not letting the passage dictate the doctrine. We know and have already established that it was Abraham's faith that was counted to him as righteousness. I figure the same with David, Samuel, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, and many other Old Testament Saints such as spoken of in Hebrews 11. But that passage, truly does cause your doctrine some grief. But at least now you are simply going with the idea that it is Old Testament and not really applicable! That is really the only out folks can try and take! :lol:

Let's talk about verses 27-28 first, as I think it will make the point very clearly. :)

27 "Again, when a wicked man turns away from his wickedness which he has committed and practices justice and righteousness, he will save his life. (By the way, please note that he practised righteousness, that also proves that "righteousness" is doing right, not salvation)
28 "Because he considered and turned away from all his transgressions which he had committed, he shall surely live; he shall not die".:)

This is salvation by works, isn't it? No way around that, this is salvation by works. But we know from Rom. 4:2-6 that salvation has never been by works, it has always been by grace through faith. "For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath wereof to glory; but not before God. For what saith the Scripture? 'Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness'. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. Even as David also describeth.....". This last sentence about David tells us that what was true of Abraham before the law was given was also true after the law was given. :)

And here's my point. What most people do, and (forgive me) what you are doing here, is taking a NT mentality and applying it to OT passages. The NT mentality is that one is saved by faith. But the OT almost never speaks of salvation by faith. The OT mentality is one of works. It isn't until we read Heb. 9, Rom. 1 and James 2 that we find out that in the OT, people were proving their faith by their works. The particular works they were doing was their obedience to the Law of Moses. :)

Now let's apply this to Ezek. 18. This chapter does not speak of a believer or an unbeliever. Nor does it speak about the saved or the unsaved. It speaks of those who do right and those who do evil. So who was saved/a believer? Again, one's faith is proved by their works, so we must conclude that those who turned from evil (as in verses 27-28) were believers, i.e. saved, and those who turned to evil (verse 26) were not believers because one's faith is proved by their works.:)

So let's consider once again verse 26. This man was "righteous", i.e. had done the right things. But we are not told he was a believer, and we are not told that he was saved, because the Hebrew word does not mean "believer" nor does it mean "saved". So what can we deduce about this man. Since we deduced that the man who had turned from evil was a believer because of his works, (works prove one's faith) then we must conclude that the man of verse 26 who turned to evil was not saved, (works proves one's faith, or in this case lack of faith). :)

Love,
Madeline:)

ProjectPeter
Jan 23rd 2007, 10:55 PM
The first question to all those who hold to the doctrine of NOSAS, Have you ever come to the Cross? Don't get me wrong I am not asking are you saved or not, but just asking if you have ever come to the Cross for there is where the sin and the sinner has been dealt with. (I will come back to this in a minute).I sort of figure if someone hasn't Irv, then they wouldn't be saved. So you'll have to excuse me here but I figure that is in fact questioning the salvation of those that believe in NOSAS. That's my opinion anyway.



Second questions: How can one who is dead to sin continue in it? Actually this one is answered in scripture. “Know ye not that as many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore, we are buried with him by baptism into death, that as Christ was raise up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.” (Romans 6:3, 4). I don't think you have any NOSAS folk that would question that. Certainly there are some OSAS folk that you would need to cover that with though! That being said... unless you are saying that to the believer, sin isn't really counted as sin any longer. I know that there are some that do teach that and we've not discussed that issue that I recall so I am not sure where you stand there.


Going back to the first question: The reason I asked this question is the answer to it shows me that I cannot loose my salvation. How can a man who has be crucified with Christ come back and loose his salvation seeing Christ already dealt with not only his sin, but with the sinner himself.And by that you mean... perhaps some clarification?


How foolish to say I can undo my dieing with Christ every time I sin.And tell me... where have you read that said in this thread? I've missed it if someone did.


If that is the case then I must have never gone to the Cross.
If a person tells me I can loose my salvation (and I don't see this in scripture), then I would have to ask them another question right our of scripture. “Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? [Shall] God that justifieth? Who is he that codemneth? (says I can loose my salvation). [Shall] Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us?” And then the scripture goes on with this same question about the believer being secure. “What shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? (and may I add those who hold to NOSAS).Paul said much there in the 8th chapter of Romans. But one should be able to read the context of those words and see that this isn't talking about sin or any of that like. Tribulation comes to His. Distress, persecution, famine, being naked, robbers, and even death. None of those things (which Paul constantly lived under) will separate him from the love of Christ.

Romans 8:31 ¶What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who is against us?
32 He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how will He not also with Him freely give us all things?
33 Who will bring a charge against God's elect? God is the one who justifies;
34 who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us.
35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?
36 Just as it is written, "FOR THY SAKE WE ARE BEING PUT TO DEATH ALL DAY LONG; WE WERE CONSIDERED AS SHEEP TO BE SLAUGHTERED."
37 But in all these things we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us.
38 For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers,
39 nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Paul isn't talking about eternal salvation or sin or any of that in this passage. He is talking about Christians being put to death and persecuted by the hands of even his own countrymen. Enter chapter 9-11. This isn't a passage that doesn't prove or disprove either OSAS or NOSAS.




I will never believe that I can loose my salvation because my Lord has told me different. He told me, “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain....” And again He told me, “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me, And I give unto them eternal live; (life that will always last, eternal), and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.” (And that means no matter what the NOSAS says will ever change my mind). I believe my Lord because he also said “My Father, who gave them to me, is greater than all, and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.” This is eternal security. And if you want to discuss Scripture that's cool.. be happy to do that. I think you'll find that most of these passages, if not all, have already been discussed and some at pretty good length. But if you would like to do so again then I'd be happy to do that.



I would like to add more about going to the Cross:
“Reckoning” on the work of the Cross is the only relief from the carnal burden of self. Then comes the spiritual burden of Christ—to be more like Him. “Reckoning” is the answer there, too. “Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord (Romans 6:11). If we seek to escape the death, we will not experience the life.

We are not to try to crucify self, but we are to agree (reckon) with what God has said and done. In the lives of most believers self has usurped the place belonging to the Lord Jesus Christ. It is a criminal worthy of death, but the trouble is that they do not realize that this self-life has been crucified on the Cross. They do not believe the facts of the Word, and sin therefore reigns in their lives; they live in bondage to sin, praying for deliverance, praying that they may die to sin, but refusing to believe what God says He has already done.Okay help me out here with some "where the rubber meets the road" speak! Let's say that I am one that practices stealing. I know that I shouldn't steal and I even feel bad when I steal. I am a believer in Christ and danged if I know it is something that I shouldn't do but I just can't seem to stop! So... if I reckon it as not sin, in faith believing that Christ is righteous in my stead, does God see it as sin? Answering this will help me understand more where you are trying to go with this.



The constant tendency is to try to improve the manner of one's life here below by adopting Christian principles, whereas you will never arrive at it unless you start from 'crucified with Christ.' Then it is not thinking of what I am, but of what He is, 'Christ liveth in me.'


“[I]And ye are complete in Him, who is the head of all principality and power” (Col. 2:10).


If we say we can loses our salvation then we are, and never were complete in Him. And we know that is not true!Christian principles? You mean all of that stuff the Bible tells us to do? See... I simply call that obedience.

ProjectPeter
Jan 23rd 2007, 11:08 PM
Hi PP!:D



Let's talk about verses 27-28 first, as I think it will make the point very clearly. :)

27 "Again, when a wicked man turns away from his wickedness which he has committed and practices justice and righteousness, he will save his life. (By the way, please note that he practised righteousness, that also proves that "righteousness" is doing right, not salvation)
28 "Because he considered and turned away from all his transgressions which he had committed, he shall surely live; he shall not die".:)

This is salvation by works, isn't it? No way around that, this is salvation by works.No more than calling Abraham's obedience to God, in faith in God, salvation by works. And knowing that Paul makes it clear that the folks in the Old Testament were justified righteous by their faith just as we are today... then I would say not at all although God certainly demands obedience from those that are His. Now.. if you want to make the case that God was saying something totally different than what Paul says was the deal... or that Ezekiel somehow is nor should be Scripture... that is a different tune I suppose.


But we know from Rom. 4:2-6 that salvation has never been by works, it has always been by grace through faith. "For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath wereof to glory; but not before God. For what saith the Scripture? 'Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness'. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. Even as David also describeth.....". This last sentence about David tells us that what was true of Abraham before the law was given was also true after the law was given. :)Okay... we were on the same train of thought there. So where does that leave us with the book of Ezekiel?



And here's my point. What most people do, and (forgive me) what you are doing here, is taking a NT mentality and applying it to OT passages. The NT mentality is that one is saved by faith. But the OT almost never speaks of salvation by faith. The OT mentality is one of works. It isn't until we read Heb. 9, Rom. 1 and James 2 that we find out that in the OT, people were proving their faith by their works. The particular works they were doing was their obedience to the Law of Moses. :) That was what they were supposed to do Madeline! And it does speak of that... many times in fact. What it doesn't do though, neither does the New Testament, is absolve folks from obedience. ;)


Now let's apply this to Ezek. 18. This chapter does not speak of a believer or an unbeliever. Nor does it speak about the saved or the unsaved. It speaks of those who do right and those who do evil. So who was saved/a believer? Again, one's faith is proved by their works, so we must conclude that those who turned from evil (as in verses 27-28) were believers, i.e. saved, and those who turned to evil (verse 26) were not believers because one's faith is proved by their works.:) Huh? See here is what I see you doing because this is like what... your fourth or fifth revelation in this passage? You are again simply trying to make your doctrine fit here Madeline and you are all over the place doing so! Again... the only way that you are going to make that work is to try and show that there is in fact another way to eternal life and that is by obeying the law (which is what you just finished saying this was about). Problem is... the law never could save anyone. So once again... it doesn't fit.




So let's consider once again verse 26. This man was "righteous", i.e. had done the right things. But we are not told he was a believer, and we are not told that he was saved, because the Hebrew word does not mean "believer" nor does it mean "saved". So what can we deduce about this man. Since we deduced that the man who had turned from evil was a believer because of his works, (works prove one's faith) then we must conclude that the man of verse 26 who turned to evil was not saved, (works proves one's faith, or in this case lack of faith). :)

Love,
Madeline:)Then pray tell Madeline... what did the man "turn away" from? How can a righteous man turn away from someplace that he had never been facing? Again... it just doesn't work! Then add that whole "he shall die and not live which shows he was on the path of living before dying... and the whole "his righteous deeds will not be remembered" if there was no real "righteous deeds" to remember. too many problems with your whole theory here! But keep digging! I give you an A+ for continuing to plug along! :D

irv
Jan 23rd 2007, 11:21 PM
I have a friend and a brother in the Lord who is now getting up in age, as I am also. And I look to this brother as my elder and have written to him about doctine in the past. He has help me out with some church problem also. His name is William MacDonald. Maybe you have heard of him, because he has written many books and travel all over the country speaking and teaching the Word of God. He also has written a Commentary on the entire Bible so I looked up what he had to say about the verses that started this discussion and here is what I found.



The Repudiation of the Parable of the Sour Grapes

Ezekiel 18


18:1-4, The people of Judah had a Proverb which blamed their sins on the failure of their ancestors: “The fathers have eaten sour grapes, And the children's teeth are set on edge.”
God refutes the proverb, stating that individuals are held responsible for their own sins.
18:5-24, He then gives several examples of His principles of judgment:
A man who shuns sin and lives righteously shall surely live (vv. 5-9).
A righteous man's wicked son...shall surely die (vv. 10-13). The Jews during the captivity as well as in the Lord Jesus' time prided themselves on having Abraham as there father (Luke 3:8; John 8:39). God points out that it will do no good to have a righteous father, if their own life is wicked. We also have the tendency to rely on the spirituality of others. But the righteous and holy life of our fathers and godly leaders must become a reality in our own lives.
An unrighteous man's righteous son...shall surely live (vv. 14-17), but the unrighteous father ...shall die for his iniquities (v. 18).
A wicked man who repents and turns from his sins will live (vv. 21-23).
A righteous man who turns away from his righteousness and commits iniquity...shall die (v. 24).There is no contradiction between verse 20 and Exodus 20:5. It is true, as taught in Exodus, that children are generally involved in the consequences of their parents' misdeeds. It is also true, as taught here, that each one is personally responsible for his or her actions.
In verse 20, the punishment is temporal, not eternal. It is physical death because of sin now. The principles stated in verses 5-24 are not dealing with eternal life; otherwise we would be force to conclude that salvation is by works (vv. 5-9) and that the righteous may eventually be lost, two doctrines clearly refuted by our Lord in the NT (e.g., Eph. 2:8, 9; John 10:28).
18:25-32, The people continued to accuse God of injustice, but He shows that there is no injustice because even a wicked man can be saved by turning from his sins, and that is what the Lord wants them to do.
When God forgives, He forgets (v. 22). This does not indicate a poor memory but the perfect satisfaction of His justice through the atoning work of Christ. For the believer the case is close.


And now I looked us some notes by C.I. Scofield. I would like to look at verse 24. This and similar passages in Ezekiel (e.g. 3:17-21; 33:10-20) have been understood by some to teach that a Christian may lose his righteous standing before God. But in support of the security of the believer it should be observed that these passages in Ezekiel do not necessarily teach the eternal loss of a saved person, because the word “righteous” may refer to ceremonial religion (compare Matthew 5:20) and not to “the righteousness which is of God by faith” (compare Phil. 3:7-9). Moreover, the punishment threatened may refer only to physical death rather than to eternal death. In any case, these texts in Ezekiel must be considered in the light of such N.T. affirmations as John 10:18, Romans 5:8-9; 8:38-39; Phil. 1:6; etc. that so clearly teach the security of the believer.


I believe some of this scripture have been quoted already by others. By taking this scripture in Ezekiel and basing a doctrine on it and ignoring all the solid scripture like these verses, one has to be bring their own beliefs to the Word of God and trying to make them fit. This is putting the cart before the horse. We are to come to the Word of God and see what it is teaching us based on the whole counsel of God. Let us not read into scripture what is not there.

maryg
Jan 23rd 2007, 11:21 PM
Hebrews 6: 4-6

4It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, 6if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, becauseto their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace.

[B]1 John 3:9

Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

Romans 6:2
God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

Romans 6:15
What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.

1 Cor. 6:
9Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

10Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. 11And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our

MaryG

DSK
Jan 23rd 2007, 11:40 PM
Hebrews 6: 4-6

4It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, 6if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because[b (http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=Hebrews+6&passage2=&passage3=&passage4=&passage5=&version1=31&version2=0&version3=0&version4=0&version5=0&Submit.x=0&Submit.y=0#fen-NIV-30035b)]to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace.



Just a quick note here.

A more correct rendering of Heb 6:4-6 is as follows:

For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit,
and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance,
since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame. (Heb. 6:4-6 NASB )

There is no conditional participle present in the Greek text to support any claims that the word “if” in Heb. 6:6 was in the original text.
The writer in Hebrews simply says to us …. kai parapesontas – “and they have fallen away” (second aorist active participle).

ProjectPeter
Jan 24th 2007, 12:22 AM
I have a friend and a brother in the Lord who is now getting up in age, as I am also. And I look to this brother as my elder and have written to him about doctine in the past. He has help me out with some church problem also. His name is William MacDonald. Maybe you have heard of him, because he has written many books and travel all over the country speaking and teaching the Word of God. He also has written a Commentary on the entire Bible so I looked up what he had to say about the verses that started this discussion and here is what I found.



The Repudiation of the Parable of the Sour Grapes

Ezekiel 18


18:1-4, The people of Judah had a Proverb which blamed their sins on the failure of their ancestors: “The fathers have eaten sour grapes, And the children's teeth are set on edge.”
God refutes the proverb, stating that individuals are held responsible for their own sins.
18:5-24, He then gives several examples of His principles of judgment:
A man who shuns sin and lives righteously shall surely live (vv. 5-9).
A righteous man's wicked son...shall surely die (vv. 10-13). The Jews during the captivity as well as in the Lord Jesus' time prided themselves on having Abraham as there father (Luke 3:8; John 8:39). God points out that it will do no good to have a righteous father, if their own life is wicked. We also have the tendency to rely on the spirituality of others. But the righteous and holy life of our fathers and godly leaders must become a reality in our own lives.
An unrighteous man's righteous son...shall surely live (vv. 14-17), but the unrighteous father ...shall die for his iniquities (v. 18).
A wicked man who repents and turns from his sins will live (vv. 21-23).
A righteous man who turns away from his righteousness and commits iniquity...shall die (v. 24).There is no contradiction between verse 20 and Exodus 20:5. It is true, as taught in Exodus, that children are generally involved in the consequences of their parents' misdeeds. It is also true, as taught here, that each one is personally responsible for his or her actions.
In verse 20, the punishment is temporal, not eternal. It is physical death because of sin now. The principles stated in verses 5-24 are not dealing with eternal life; otherwise we would be force to conclude that salvation is by works (vv. 5-9) and that the righteous may eventually be lost, two doctrines clearly refuted by our Lord in the NT (e.g., Eph. 2:8, 9; John 10:28).
18:25-32, The people continued to accuse God of injustice, but He shows that there is no injustice because even a wicked man can be saved by turning from his sins, and that is what the Lord wants them to do.
When God forgives, He forgets (v. 22). This does not indicate a poor memory but the perfect satisfaction of His justice through the atoning work of Christ. For the believer the case is close.


And now I looked us some notes by C.I. Scofield. I would like to look at verse 24. This and similar passages in Ezekiel (e.g. 3:17-21; 33:10-20) have been understood by some to teach that a Christian may lose his righteous standing before God. But in support of the security of the believer it should be observed that these passages in Ezekiel do not necessarily teach the eternal loss of a saved person, because the word “righteous” may refer to ceremonial religion (compare Matthew 5:20) and not to “the righteousness which is of God by faith” (compare Phil. 3:7-9). Moreover, the punishment threatened may refer only to physical death rather than to eternal death. In any case, these texts in Ezekiel must be considered in the light of such N.T. affirmations as John 10:18, Romans 5:8-9; 8:38-39; Phil. 1:6; etc. that so clearly teach the security of the believer.


I believe some of this scripture have been quoted already by others. By taking this scripture in Ezekiel and basing a doctrine on it and ignoring all the solid scripture like these verses, one has to be bring their own beliefs to the Word of God and trying to make them fit. This is putting the cart before the horse. We are to come to the Word of God and see what it is teaching us based on the whole counsel of God. Let us not read into scripture what is not there.
We've been here done this one too and not all that horribly far back! Maybe if you could read through the discussion between Madeline and I then that you could as well explain how it is that if it is speaking of a temporal death... then that means the one that practices righteousness will live and never die. One cannot have the death temporal and the life temporal at the same time because simply it says this... they will live and not die.

Point being... it ain't talking about temporal life or death but speaking of eternity. ;)

Centurionoflight
Jan 24th 2007, 12:33 AM
ProjectPeter



We've been here done this one too and not all that horribly far back! Maybe if you could read through the discussion between Madeline and I then that you could as well explain how it is that if it is speaking of a temporal death... then that means the one that practices righteousness will live and never die. One cannot have the death temporal and the life temporal at the same time because simply it says this... they will live and not die.

Ez 18

30 Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord GOD. Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin.

They will live after this judgement God is about to do.
If they are wicked they will die in this judgement;

Thus in its use it is temporal.

ProjectPeter
Jan 24th 2007, 12:38 AM
ProjectPeter


Ez 18

30 Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord GOD. Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin.

They will live after this judgement God is about to do.
If they are wicked they will die in this judgement;

Thus in its use it is temporal.
Um... sort of like some will go on to eternal life and others into the lake of fire therefore it is eternal?

*Madeline*
Jan 24th 2007, 12:47 AM
Hi PP!:)


No more than calling Abraham's obedience to God, in faith in God, salvation by works. And knowing that Paul makes it clear that the folks in the Old Testament were justified righteous by their faith just as we are today... then I would say not at all although God certainly demands obedience from those that are His. Now.. if you want to make the case that God was saying something totally different than what Paul says was the deal... or that Ezekiel somehow is nor should be Scripture... that is a different tune I suppose.

Okay... we were on the same train of thought there. So where does that leave us with the book of Ezekiel?

That was what they were supposed to do Madeline! And it does speak of that... many times in fact. What it doesn't do though, neither does the New Testament, is absolve folks from obedience. ;)

Huh? See here is what I see you doing because this is like what... your fourth or fifth revelation in this passage? You are again simply trying to make your doctrine fit here Madeline and you are all over the place doing so! Again... the only way that you are going to make that work is to try and show that there is in fact another way to eternal life and that is by obeying the law (which is what you just finished saying this was about). Problem is... the law never could save anyone. So once again... it doesn't fit.

Then pray tell Madeline... what did the man "turn away" from? How can a righteous man turn away from someplace that he had never been facing? Again... it just doesn't work! Then add that whole "he shall die and not live which shows he was on the path of living before dying... and the whole "his righteous deeds will not be remembered" if there was no real "righteous deeds" to remember. too many problems with your whole theory here! But keep digging! I give you an A+ for continuing to plug along! :D

Pray tell? lol, I use to say that all the time...got people upset. But not me, I don't get upset.:) First, recall my earlier message where I stressed the context being that of national Israelites in an already special covenantal relationship. Righteousness and unrighteousness in that agreement brings either blessing or curses. It is wrong to take a passage written to or about national Israel and apply it exactly as it is to us Gentiles. Second, no matter that the way to eternal life by self-righteous works is impossible after Adam's fall. It is still an option that must be discussed. It is discussed to show the impossibility of success following self-righteousness.:)

Q: So to what is the righteousness that will save one's soul alive (Ezek 18:27)?
A: The word "save" doesn't always automatically have to mean eternal life. Living and dieing in this passage is understood as being directed to national Israel (v31). A nation cannot receive eternal life.:)

It is dangerous to take a passage pointed designed for a non-personal entity and apply it to people.:hug: I have to wash my hands for supper!:)

Love,
Madeline

ProjectPeter
Jan 24th 2007, 12:52 AM
Hi PP!:)



Pray tell? lol, I use to say that all the time...got people upset. But not me, I don't get upset.:) First, recall my earlier message where I stressed the context being that of national Israelites in an already special covenantal relationship. Righteousness and unrighteousness in that agreement brings either blessing or curses. It is wrong to take a passage written to or about national Israel and apply it exactly as it is to us Gentiles. Second, no matter that the way to eternal life by self-righteous works is impossible after Adam's fall. It is still an option that must be discussed. It is discussed to show the impossibility of success following self-righteousness.:)

Q: So to what is the righteousness that will save one's soul alive (Ezek 18:27)?
A: The word "save" doesn't always automatically have to mean eternal life. Living and dieing in this passage is understood as being directed to national Israel (v31). A nation cannot receive eternal life.:)

It is dangerous to take a passage pointed designed for a non-personal entity and apply it to people.:hug: I have to wash my hands for supper!:)

Love,
Madeline
Again... this is God speaking through Ezekiel, telling him what to say to the people. Why would you call it "self-righteous works" when God made no such distinction nor was it implied? And then again you would have to show how "self-righteous works" can lead anyone to eternal life. I have missed those Scripture!

And regardless of whom it is written to... it is still Scripture and this is where we get our doctrine... or supposed to be anyway! If God is going to judge these folks this way... why do you think you are exempt from this judgment?

irv
Jan 24th 2007, 01:01 AM
PP,
Okay help me out here with some "where the rubber meets the road" speak! Let's say that I am one that practices stealing. I know that I shouldn't steal and I even feel bad when I steal. I am a believer in Christ and danged if I know it is something that I shouldn't do but I just can't seem to stop! So... if I reckon it as not sin, in faith believing that Christ is righteous in my stead, does God see it as sin? Answering this will help me understand more where you are trying to go with this.

Let me help you out with this scenario: First, if this is happening, you are living in Romans Seven. “...For the good that I would, I do not; but the evil which I would not; that I do...” OK, this is a problem that every Christian faces, but there is an answer to this dilemma, verse 25, “I thank God through Jesus Christ, our Lord, So, then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh, the law of sin.” We call this living in the flesh! Romans 8:5 says, “For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit, the things of the Spirit.”
We will agree on this, we do make choices, and we have two of them. To live in the flesh or to walk in the Spirit. Going back to Romans 6 for a minute, it says in verse 4 at the end of the verse, “...we also should walk in newness of life.” Now in your statement above, you said “So...if I reckon it as not sin,...” I never said to reckon it not sin, I said to reckon yourself to be dead to it, this is “Reckoning” on the work of the Cross. In Romans 6:11, it says “Likewise, reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ, our Lord.” That is the key to victory over sin. In the scenario you proposed, If you as a believer would have “reckon yourself to be dead”, you would not have stolen, therefore you would have had victory.
Let me talk about freedom for a moment:
Upon conversion, the new believer feels that every opposition to a joyous, fruitful Christian life has been overcome once for all. Later, when the wold and self begin to insinuate themselves once again, he thinks that determination and self-effort will keep him free. Finally, after a seemingly endless struggle, the defeated believer is brought back to the Cross. Here is the source of liberation from the power of self and the world.
Sinners are not saved until they trust the Saviour, and saints are not delivered until they trust the Deliverer. God has made both possible through the Cross of His Son.

The believer can never overcome the 'old man' even by the power of the 'new' apart from the work of the Cross, and therefore the death of Christ is indispensable, and unless the Cross is made the basis upon which he overcomes the 'old nature,' he only drops into another form of morality; in other words, he is seeking by self-effort to overcome sin and self, and the struggle is a hopeless one.

Just as the Lord Jesus came into this world where this old humanity was and came into it not to ally Himself with it but to take it into death by the Cross, even so He now by the Holy Spirit, in regeneration, comes into us where there is this old fallen life and not to ally Himself with it, but to hold it in the place of death by the same means—His Cross.

“But may it never be mine to boast of anything but the Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ by which the wold has been crucified to me and I to the world!” (Gal. 6:14, Wms.).


In my last post where I said

The constant tendency is to try to improve the manner of one's life here below by adopting Christian principles, whereas you will never arrive at it unless you start from 'crucified with Christ.' Then it is not thinking of what I am, but of what He is, 'Christ liveth in me.'

Your comment was
“Christian principles? You mean all of that stuff the Bible tells us to do? See... I simply call that obedience.” You miss the point: We can't improve on Christian principles until we start from 'crucified with Christ', death to self (the old-man) and live our lives by walking in the Spirit as I started to answer you scenario.


I hope this helps answer your questions?
Irv

Centurionoflight
Jan 24th 2007, 01:35 AM
ProjectPeter



Um... sort of like some will go on to eternal life and others into the lake of fire therefore it is eternal?


Not the topic of Ezekiel 18, the topic of Ezekiel 18 is a bunch of wayward countrymen of jewish desent about to face Gods judgement unless they quell their wicked ways.

ProjectPeter
Jan 24th 2007, 01:54 AM
PP,

Let me help you out with this scenario: First, if this is happening, you are living in Romans Seven. “...For the good that I would, I do not; but the evil which I would not; that I do...” OK, this is a problem that every Christian faces, but there is an answer to this dilemma, verse 25, “I thank God through Jesus Christ, our Lord, So, then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh, the law of sin.” We call this living in the flesh! Romans 8:5 says, “For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit, the things of the Spirit.”
We will agree on this, we do make choices, and we have two of them. To live in the flesh or to walk in the Spirit. Going back to Romans 6 for a minute, it says in verse 4 at the end of the verse, “...we also should walk in newness of life.” Now in your statement above, you said “So...if I reckon it as not sin,...” I never said to reckon it not sin, I said to reckon yourself to be dead to it, this is “Reckoning” on the work of the Cross. In Romans 6:11, it says “Likewise, reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ, our Lord.” That is the key to victory over sin. In the scenario you proposed, If you as a believer would have “reckon yourself to be dead”, you would not have stolen, therefore you would have had victory.
Let me talk about freedom for a moment:
Upon conversion, the new believer feels that every opposition to a joyous, fruitful Christian life has been overcome once for all. Later, when the wold and self begin to insinuate themselves once again, he thinks that determination and self-effort will keep him free. Finally, after a seemingly endless struggle, the defeated believer is brought back to the Cross. Here is the source of liberation from the power of self and the world.
Sinners are not saved until they trust the Saviour, and saints are not delivered until they trust the Deliverer. God has made both possible through the Cross of His Son.

The believer can never overcome the 'old man' even by the power of the 'new' apart from the work of the Cross, and therefore the death of Christ is indispensable, and unless the Cross is made the basis upon which he overcomes the 'old nature,' he only drops into another form of morality; in other words, he is seeking by self-effort to overcome sin and self, and the struggle is a hopeless one.

Just as the Lord Jesus came into this world where this old humanity was and came into it not to ally Himself with it but to take it into death by the Cross, even so He now by the Holy Spirit, in regeneration, comes into us where there is this old fallen life and not to ally Himself with it, but to hold it in the place of death by the same means—His Cross.

“But may it never be mine to boast of anything but the Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ by which the wold has been crucified to me and I to the world!” (Gal. 6:14, Wms.).


In my last post where I said


Your comment was You miss the point: We can't improve on Christian principles until we start from 'crucified with Christ', death to self (the old-man) and live our lives by walking in the Spirit as I started to answer you scenario.


I hope this helps answer your questions?
Irv
It really doesn't help at all. And please... no offense intended here but what I hear is religious speak that we all can say and yet in the end... we still aren't just spelling it out and we are going to end up saying much the same thing but obviously meaning something different. But that's cool.. it happens.

*Madeline*
Jan 24th 2007, 02:53 AM
Hi PP!:)


Again... this is God speaking through Ezekiel, telling him what to say to the people. Why would you call it "self-righteous works" when God made no such distinction nor was it implied? And then again you would have to show how "self-righteous works" can lead anyone to eternal life. I have missed those Scripture!

And regardless of whom it is written to... it is still Scripture and this is where we get our doctrine... or supposed to be anyway! If God is going to judge these folks this way... why do you think you are exempt from this judgment?

PP...If you are saying that salvation is ever by works, I believe the quote from Romans 4 further on in my message answers that. Salvation has always been by faith, and faith has always been proved by works. We cannot confuse proving faith by works with being saved by works. But again, Rom. 4 leaves, in my opinion, absolutely no doubt, salvation is not by works. :)

Also, let's look at Gen. 15:5-6, "And He (God) brought him (Abraham) forth abroad, and said, 'Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them'; and He said unto him, 'So shall thy seed be'. And he believed in the Lord; and He counted it to him for righteousness". Please note, Abraham did nothing but believe God and he was counted as righteous. But Heb. 11 is all about those of faith proving their faith by their works. So we read of Abraham in verse 8, "By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out......".

The point is that Abraham was counted righteous (saved) when he did nothing but believe God. But in the context of Heb. 11 we also learn that Abraham proved his faith by his obedience, i.e. by works. But salvation is never by works (again, please see Rom. 4) it is always by faith.

I'm wondering if you have misuderstood my first paragraphs, especially when I wrote that Ezek. 18 was salvation by works. I should have said, "that passage seemed to say that one is saved by works, but it does not". Did I confuse the issue by not being very clear? Please answer that so I can know where you are in your thinking. Yes, I think you did misunderstood what I was saying. Let me clarify that again. I am not saying that anyone was ever saved by works. I am saying that the emphasis in the OT was on works, not for salvation, but to prove salvation. But the fact that works proved one's faith was not written about until the NT.:)

In other words, salvation has always been by faith and faith has always been proved by works, but in the OT the emphasis was on the proof, rather than the faith. Does that clear up your confusion? I do apologize for not making things clearer. And earlier you wrote in regard to my comments on works proving faith, "But wasn't that was what they were supposed to do? And it does speak of that... many times I believe. What it doesn't do though, neither does the New Testament, is absolve people from obedience". :)

Problem is... the law never could save anyone. It doesn't seem to fit".

I have always believed and have never said anything different (but obviously not very well, and not very clearly) that salvation is by grace through faith. The only place that works of the law or any other works has in the plan of salvation is that works prove one's faith.

In regard to Ezek. 18:26 you asked, "What did the man "turn away" from? How can a righteous man turn away from someplace that he had never been facing?". He didn't turn away from a "place", he turned away from doing righteous acts. Remember the Hebrew word for "righteous"? To "turn away" in this context means to go down a different path, not literally. It means that he turned way from a path of good to a path of evil. Verse 26 reads, "when a righteous man turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and dieth in them; for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die". Note the phrase, "and dieth in them", i.e. the iniquities. It says that because this man turned from doing good to doing evil, and he continued in the evil until he died, he will die an eternal death.:)

Let me try to clarify some things that I have obviously not.

1) Salvation has always been by grace through faith. That is to say, when a person believes God, he is saved.

2) But an OT Jew, for example, could not say, "Oh sure, I believe that Jehovah is God" and then not obey any of the commandments of God. That man proves by his lack of works that he doesn't really believe in what he says he believes. In other words, works prove one's faith.

3) Ezek. 18:26 speaks of a man who is not saved. We know that he was not because his works that he turned to were evil and he continued to do those evil works until he died.

Does that clear things up? See you tomorrow!:)

Love,
Madeline