PDA

View Full Version : OSAS vs PP Peanut Gallery! ;)



Pages : [1] 2

ProjectPeter
Feb 3rd 2007, 02:09 PM
This is for all you nutty onlookers! :lol:

Slug1
Feb 3rd 2007, 03:33 PM
I'll be on the 50 yardline watching :P

miepie
Feb 3rd 2007, 05:44 PM
Me too..... with refreshments and donuts if you need them PP.... :hug:

Love you,
Mieke :kiss:

Quickened
Feb 3rd 2007, 07:38 PM
LOL!! this thread already wins in my book :lol:

slightlypuzzled
Feb 3rd 2007, 08:35 PM
So far there appear to be few, if any, takers. With the no cut and paste from other sites rule, than will eliminate some of the flack.......:rolleyes:

threebigrocks
Feb 3rd 2007, 11:04 PM
'kay. I'm ready. Gotta be better than the game tomorrow, and I don't have to leave my nice, warm house to do it! No line for the bathroom either. :D

Vickilynn
Feb 3rd 2007, 11:42 PM
Shalom,

Okey doke! Looks like fun! Good thing there's nothing worthwhile on TV! :lol:

TrustingFollower
Feb 3rd 2007, 11:50 PM
This should be interesting. Hopefully we all learn something reading the debate.

Vickilynn
Feb 3rd 2007, 11:59 PM
This should be interesting. Hopefully we all learn something reading the debate.

Shalom TF,

Oh, were are supposed to LEARN something????? :lol:

TrustingFollower
Feb 4th 2007, 01:49 AM
Shalom TF,

Oh, were are supposed to LEARN something????? :lol:

Not necessarily if you get a good laugh all is good too.:lol:

Diggindeeper
Feb 4th 2007, 02:25 AM
I brought my lawn chair and a blanket and ear muffs and gloves and a thermos of Hot Chocolate...then, I found out we won't be outside after all! :dunno:

Boy! Do I feel overdressed!:blush:

threebigrocks
Feb 4th 2007, 02:19 PM
So, PP, you pickin' up on anything from us here in the peanut gallery yet?

cheech
Feb 4th 2007, 03:14 PM
I'm here...sitting next too Diggindeeper and yeah...she is overdressed :lol:. I'm hot just sitting next to her! http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/28/28_1_9.gif

Bandit
Feb 4th 2007, 05:45 PM
Hello MC (and all),

MC, a few days ago you asked me (on the Do people take OSAS this far? thread) about the same passage you are now asking ProjectPeter. I placed my response there yesterday. I think my response is very relevant to the discussion you and PP are now having.

Bandit

Vickilynn
Feb 4th 2007, 06:46 PM
I'm here...sitting next too Diggindeeper and yeah...she is overdressed :lol:. I'm hot just sitting next to her! http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/28/28_1_9.gif

Shalom Cheech,

Did I just read correctly that you consider yourself HOT??? :rofl:

Vickilynn
Feb 4th 2007, 06:51 PM
Shalom All,

I just want to say this and I've been busting to say it ever since I got here and saw the repeated debates about OSAS and NOAS.

Can I ask a serious question?

In all sincerity, no sarcasm or anything...

Does the OSAS / NOSAS debate REALLY matter?
Should we spend so much time debating this issue when there are more important (IMHO) issues that affect salvation that we could spend time on?

Just so you know, our church DOES support the OSAS doctrine and they had a 7-week teaching on it last year. My hubby and I have always believed that NSOAS was the Scriptural truth.

At the end of the teaching, our pastor asked us to send him any questions we had concerning the teaching and this issue. I asked him this very question...

for Believers... WHY is this issue important to debate? If we are saved, our emphasis should be on walking as close to Jesus as possible.

So, if someone could tell me why this issue keeps coming up and people focus so much on this issue [instead of more important issues dealing with salvation] I sure would appreciate the enlightenment!

Again, I'm not being argumentative or sarcastic, I'm really asking because I want your input and viewpoint.

Thanks!

Redeemed by Grace
Feb 4th 2007, 08:09 PM
2 Timothy 2:14-16
14 Remind them of these things, and solemnly charge them in the presence of God not to wrangle about words, which is useless and leads to the ruin of the hearers.
15 Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth.
16 But avoid worldly and empty chatter, for it will lead to further ungodliness,




The doctrine is important, the debate is not, IMO

The security of Salvation touches so many other doctrines, Sin, Sanctification, Justification, God's Sovereignty, Providence ...etc.

This debate has been done many times over the years here and I haven't seen anything that I would attribute as being good that has become of it...

It is usually between two or three strong-willed folks on both sides, who have a passion for their understandings... yet when done, both sides still are far apart and both side forgot their worship of God in the process... and if I may say, both sides build a wall of feelings against each other... so why bother when love is not within the desired outcome?

threebigrocks
Feb 4th 2007, 08:25 PM
Vickilynn, let me say this.

This eternal security issues is the one out of select few that I see worthwhile debating in an edifying manner. Why? Because it directly impacts ones view of their faith. Since I have hashed this out for myself I see things differently. I see the love of Christ being stronger, and the sin being worse. It reinforced for me the need to look at myself more. It has made me want to dig into the Word further. It continually humbles me.

The biblical evidence of eternal security not being secure can indeed change ones view of scripture and bring them so very much deeper into their faith. It's a serious heavyness added and a huge weight lifted for me all at once. I finally understood what God really expected of me, and what my faith walk really was to me and to God.

It's our eternity, and I have tried to make it seem not so big a deal but the more I grow the more I see it intertwined into so much in scripture. It's not a small issue.

DSK
Feb 4th 2007, 09:16 PM
This debate has been done many times over the years here and I haven't seen anything that I would attribute as being good that has become of it...

I disagree.

Owen recently conducted a poll, to see whether or not the discussions on OSAS have helped people alter their views on this much debated topic. To the best of my memory, the results showed that several participants in these forums, said they had to change from their previous position on this topic because of reading the replys in OSAS discussions. If nothing else, it directs us to look to the various Scriptures that have been presented either for or against OSAS, and then draw our own personal conclusions. Personally I'm for any discussion that forces us to look and see what the Scriptures say on any topic.

DSK
Feb 4th 2007, 09:23 PM
In all sincerity, no sarcasm or anything...

Does the OSAS / NOAS debate REALLY matter?
Should we spend so much time debating this issue when there are more important (IMHO) issues that affect salvation that we could spend time on?


I personally believe it matters.

Many who believe in OSAS, can get to the point where they believe that they can sin and still sin, and then go and sin some more, and it won't eventually effect their salvation. Now if the OSAS crowd is right, then it doesn't matter. But if they are wrong like the NOSAS crowd believes, then it could effect their salvation, and those from the NOSAS side, are only issuing warnings out of concern and love for those who see no danger in their low esteem of sin and how it grieves the Holy Spirit.

Owen
Feb 4th 2007, 09:42 PM
I disagree.

Owen recently conducted a poll, to see whether or not the discussions on OSAS have helped people alter their views on this much debated topic. To the best of my memory, the results showed that several participants in these forums, said they had to change from their previous position on this topic because of reading the replys in OSAS discussions. If nothing else, it directs us to look to the various Scriptures that have been presented either for or against OSAS, and then draw our own personal conclusions. Personally I'm for any discussion that forces us to look and see what the Scriptures say on any topic.

Yes. There is good that comes from these discussions. There have been many people that have changed their minds about the topic. It hasn't been the ones debating the topic because most of them are entrenched in their belief, but there are plenty of people who don't participate much that change their minds because of these discussions.

Vickilynn
Feb 4th 2007, 09:59 PM
Shalom,

Thank you everyone! I truly appreciate the sincere and honest responses.
Y'all have caused me to re-evaluate this question of the importance of this debate, in the light of your answers.

Thank you again, y'all have helped me to understand what I couldn't understand before.

Y'all are wonderful brothers and sisters! :hug:

ProjectPeter
Feb 4th 2007, 10:08 PM
2 Timothy 2:14-16
14 Remind them of these things, and solemnly charge them in the presence of God not to wrangle about words, which is useless and leads to the ruin of the hearers.
15 Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth.
16 But avoid worldly and empty chatter, for it will lead to further ungodliness,




The doctrine is important, the debate is not, IMO

The security of Salvation touches so many other doctrines, Sin, Sanctification, Justification, God's Sovereignty, Providence ...etc.

This debate has been done many times over the years here and I haven't seen anything that I would attribute as being good that has become of it...

It is usually between two or three strong-willed folks on both sides, who have a passion for their understandings... yet when done, both sides still are far apart and both side forgot their worship of God in the process... and if I may say, both sides build a wall of feelings against each other... so why bother when love is not within the desired outcome?
Rest assured that love is much the driving force behind the discussion on my end. It is clear you are basing this on your own personal experience but that is a pretty broad brush you are using to judge the few passionate folk with! ;)

ProjectPeter
Feb 4th 2007, 10:25 PM
Shalom,

Thank you everyone! I truly appreciate the sincere and honest responses.
Y'all have caused me to re-evaluate this question of the importance of this debate, in the light of your answers.

Thank you again, y'all have helped me to understand what I couldn't understand before.

Y'all are wonderful brothers and sisters! :hug:
Let me answer from my end and I'll let some of the OSAS folk answer from their end.

It is vital to me simply because of what many (not all mind you) teach when they teach this doctrine. With many, it becomes license. Oh they may tell you that sin will rob you of a blessing here on earth or an eternal jewel in the crown or some such. But I believe it can lead to much worse than that. I believe that there will be many that find the doctrine that they have "rested" in for many years to be wrong and what they will here is "away from me you worker of iniquity, I never knew you." Words that I would wish on no man or woman.

So to me this debate and doctrine is of eternal importance and is one of the reasons why I am one of those that will always discuss it. It has nothing to do with being stubborn/strong willed as RbG put it. It has to do with I find this one of the most important doctrines facing the believer today. Most all of our doctrine and our advice to others is built upon what we believe in this regard.

Example: Someone is caught up in pornography. I am going to tell them that they need to get out of this mess because ultimately their soul is at stake if they don't repent and turn back to God.

CenturionofLight would say that they are going to lose some earthly blessings but even if they continue in this sin until their dying days, they will still inherit eternity with God because that sin isn't counted against them in that regard.

RbG would say, if they continued in this, that they were never saved in the first place.

The only common ground that I can find there would be with RbG because I would at least agree that the person isn't saved now. Where we would differ is in that I believe they well could have been just as born-again as he and I.

But when it is all said and done, in my view... this is a discussion of eternal importance and I will contend with it as long as I can type or speak as the discussion arises. That I will always do because of love of others and I would that no man hear those words of rejection.

moonglow
Feb 4th 2007, 10:26 PM
Yes. There is good that comes from these discussions. There have been many people that have changed their minds about the topic. It hasn't been the ones debating the topic because most of them are entrenched in their belief, but there are plenty of people who don't participate much that change their minds because of these discussions.

Actually I changed my views because I was involved in those debates...not all of them of course as I got burnt out on it...but just off and on. First I was NO-OSAS as I understood it a person could walk away from God on their own as I had seen it happen myself....but then a respected member on here just totally insisted no matter what this Christian did...committed murder or whatever, they were still saved (even though they didn't repent of it) the example at the time being given of a man who killed an abortion doctor...he never repented because he truly believed he was acting in God's will by stopping this doctor from killing more babies....(apparently not realizing another doctor would just take his place)...anyway because I so respected this member, I changed my views to OSAS...BIG mistake!

No matter how much you respect a certain members opinions on here (even if they are posting scriptures to back up their point of view), we all must realize we are fallable...meaning we mess up....we have got to always, always realize a member is carefully selecting scriptures that only prove their point of view and ingoring scriptures that show the other side of the coin. Of course each side is only going to present the scriptures backing up their views, but when you see them dodging those scriptures showing the other view and not giving a GOOD soild backing why they don't think those scriptures mean what the opposing party says, that should be a red flag to you...no matter how much you admire and respect that person.

The bible was never meant to be sliced and diced to fix our views, but taken as a whole! The picture always becomes clearer when we see the whole thing, rather then seeing only parts of it. And always remember many times when a person is dead set on one view its one of two reasons...either they really are right...OR its because their doctine demands their views be a certain way. Once you know what a persons doctine is, it becomes pretty clear why they have certain views they have too.

One thing I have discovered about God's Word is while it has its set rules on things....there is almost always some exceptions allowed. For instance, bapistism is required of us for salvation (yes I know that is debatable for some) the debate hinges on a few scriptures, the biggest one being the thief on the cross wasn't bapisted but yet was saved...he was 'the exception' though not the rule because he was literally nailed to a cross it wasn't like they were going to let him down to get bapisted...most of us do not have that excuse though.

Another expection, the prostitute in the OT lied to hide some spies that were Israelites from the guards in the town she lived in...the rule is generally lying is considered a sin as most lies hurt ourselves or others...in this lie she helped them and saved their lives...she was saved too (and her family) not just for doing this but also for believing in their God (our God).

So you have to consider these things too...what is the general rule of the bible? Is the opposing party using the exceptions to argue their point possibly not realizing its an exception? And pay attention to whom Jesus or Paul or any author was speaking too when verses are quotes...do they really apply to everyone, or just a certain group of people or to even a single person or not. Is it an exception or the rule?

God bless

Redeemed by Grace
Feb 5th 2007, 03:44 AM
I disagree.

Owen recently conducted a poll, to see whether or not the discussions on OSAS have helped people alter their views on this much debated topic. To the best of my memory, the results showed that several participants in these forums, said they had to change from their previous position on this topic because of reading the replys in OSAS discussions. If nothing else, it directs us to look to the various Scriptures that have been presented either for or against OSAS, and then draw our own personal conclusions. Personally I'm for any discussion that forces us to look and see what the Scriptures say on any topic.

I'd be willing to consider the good and change my comment... what have you seen specifically that is the good????

Redeemed by Grace
Feb 5th 2007, 03:57 AM
Rest assured that love is much the driving force behind the discussion on my end. It is clear you are basing this on your own personal experience but that is a pretty broad brush you are using to judge the few passionate folk with! ;)


Show me my error that love is not the motivating factor in the [N]OSAS Debates and I will retract my comment.... Since you pinpointed my comment toward yourself...for which I did not...

First, start with your comments above, for I see accusations and judgment as well, yet I do not see your love for my participation.... for your brush is as broad for you as you say mine is.... ;)

2 Timothy 2:14-16
14 Remind them of these things, and solemnly charge them in the presence of God not to wrangle about words, which is useless and leads to the ruin of the hearers.
15 Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth.
16 But avoid worldly and empty chatter, for it will lead to further ungodliness,

MeanieCalvinist
Feb 5th 2007, 04:53 AM
Folks need to remember... let me state this again because it bears mentioning.

The Epistles were not the message of the gospel. They were letters to the churches teaching them how to act as the body of Christ... how to live, correcting them when wrong and encouraging them when right. This is a piece of information that way too many folks either miss, ignore, or simply don't understand.

:hmm: So were is the message of the Gospel?

Not in Romans, the whole letter?
Not in 1 Corinthians chapter 1?
Not in Galatians chapter 2?
Not in Ephesians chapter 1?
Not in Phillipians chapter 3?
Not in Colossians chapter 2?
Not in Hebrews, the whole letter?
Not in 1 Peter chapter 1?
Not in 1 John the whole letter?
Ect...?
And the above list is just off the top of my head.

This would cause John Wesley to be spinning in his grave if he heard that the none of the epistles contained the gospel message. And George Whitfield would probably just stand up out of the dirt with his hands over his heart.

But all light-heartedness aside, the gospel IS the reason Paul, Peter, John, James and Jude wrote to the churches. They wanted to ensure that the churches stayed clear about the truth that they had spoken to them. All of them wrote about their concerns of a false gospel creeping into the church. They remind the churches what the true gospel is so that they may guard against false gospels.

A good example that the gospel is in the epistles is that in any of the evangelism books you can pick up today will use the "Romans Road to Salvation" using certain passages of Romans to show the gospel of Christ. This is the very presentation that I received when I became converted.

I realize that this topic was written in the OSAS/NOSAS Debate forum. I chose to answer it here so as not to derail that thread.

Owen
Feb 5th 2007, 05:39 AM
Show me my error that love is not the motivating factor in the [N]OSAS Debates and I will retract my comment....

Instead of judging the motives behind Ken's and all others, why don't you instead give people the benefit of the doubt and just allow that the other instances were done not with a lack of love for the whole debate, but a momentary lapse.


Since you pinpointed my comment toward yourself...for which I did not...

But you no doubt meant to include Ken. You post the objection to debate in a thread about Ken's debate. Any person with two eyes can see that you meant to include him in that.

Owen
Feb 5th 2007, 05:40 AM
I'd be willing to consider the good and change my comment... what have you seen specifically that is the good????

http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=70815

DSK
Feb 5th 2007, 12:48 PM
I'd be willing to consider the good and change my comment... what have you seen specifically that is the good????

Many Christian's have based much of what they believe on what a preacher, Christian radio programing, or Christian book author has told them without actually looking to Scripture. We tend to believe and let these folk do all our studying for us because we are lazy, or feel we don't have enough time in our day.
Any discussion that forces us to examine and weigh Scripture to see whether the things being said by radio preachers, pastors, Christian book authors are actually so, in my mind is good. We should be like the Bereans.
Acts 17:11 Now these (Bereans) were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of the mind, examining the Scriptures daily, whether these things were so.

ProjectPeter
Feb 5th 2007, 03:11 PM
Show me my error that love is not the motivating factor in the [N]OSAS Debates and I will retract my comment.... Since you pinpointed my comment toward yourself...for which I did not...I am one of those people that have been in this discussion pretty much since you've been to this forum. So sure, I was one of the ones you were talking about and we've had this discussion way too many times for you to say I wasn't one you were talking about.

It is known to all that have been here for a while that you think debate is sin or if not totally... it is close enough to it. We've all read your threads and various post on the matter. You don't like to debate and you see the very act itself as sinful. Therefore that is your opinion based on your own experience and what you think Scripture teaches. If you think it a sin then don't debate it. For you then it would be sin. I don't think it sin based on what I believe Scripture tells us. Therefore... I will do what I believe to be the correct thing here and debate for a doctrine that I believe correct and against a doctrine that I believe to be error. It really is that simple. I've explained myself and explained the reason why I do what I do. Rest assured that I am not concerned that the explanation is not good enough to appease you because I know it won't. I am simply speaking against what you said because one... it is wrong and two... I don't mind debating you on the fact. ;)



First, start with your comments above, for I see accusations and judgment as well, yet I do not see your love for my participation.... for your brush is as broad for you as you say mine is.... ;)Cool... I can live with that.




2 Timothy 2:14-16
14 Remind them of these things, and solemnly charge them in the presence of God not to wrangle about words, which is useless and leads to the ruin of the hearers.
15 Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth.
16 But avoid worldly and empty chatter, for it will lead to further ungodliness,This is a prime example of someone using a passage of Scripture to suit their own purpose and nevermind anything else spoken in Scripture.

Here... let's post this one.

Luke 21:12 "But before all these things, they will lay their hands on you and will persecute you, delivering you to the synagogues and prisons, bringing you before kings and governors for My name's sake.
13 "It will lead to an opportunity for your testimony.
14 "So make up your minds not to prepare beforehand to defend yourselves;
15 for I will give you utterance and wisdom which none of your opponents will be able to resist or refute.

Titus 1:7 For the overseer must be above reproach as God's steward, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not addicted to wine, not pugnacious, not fond of sordid gain,
8 but hospitable, loving what is good, sensible, just, devout, self-controlled,
9 holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, that he may be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict.

Acts 15:1 And some men came down from Judea and began teaching the brethren, "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved."
2 And when Paul and Barnabas had great dissension and debate with them, the brethren determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain others of them should go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders concerning this issue.


So let's get it clear here and now on this issue. There is a time when one must refute another and debate is often times that form in which it is done. It is not sin. It is not wrong. And done with right motive... it is absolutely correct and what we should do.

ProjectPeter
Feb 5th 2007, 03:21 PM
:hmm: So were is the message of the Gospel?

Not in Romans, the whole letter?
Not in 1 Corinthians chapter 1?
Not in Galatians chapter 2?
Not in Ephesians chapter 1?
Not in Phillipians chapter 3?
Not in Colossians chapter 2?
Not in Hebrews, the whole letter?
Not in 1 Peter chapter 1?
Not in 1 John the whole letter?
Ect...?
And the above list is just off the top of my head.

This would cause John Wesley to be spinning in his grave if he heard that the none of the epistles contained the gospel message. And George Whitfield would probably just stand up out of the dirt with his hands over his heart.

But all light-heartedness aside, the gospel IS the reason Paul, Peter, John, James and Jude wrote to the churches. They wanted to ensure that the churches stayed clear about the truth that they had spoken to them. All of them wrote about their concerns of a false gospel creeping into the church. They remind the churches what the true gospel is so that they may guard against false gospels.

A good example that the gospel is in the epistles is that in any of the evangelism books you can pick up today will use the "Romans Road to Salvation" using certain passages of Romans to show the gospel of Christ. This is the very presentation that I received when I became converted.

I realize that this topic was written in the OSAS/NOSAS Debate forum. I chose to answer it here so as not to derail that thread.And that is now what I said. What I said is that Paul isn't preaching the gospel to them because that wasn't His intent. He was directing them. Various parts of the gospel are certainly mentioned through the passages especially in Galatians where Paul was steering them back on the right track from where they were falling. As to the Romans road... not a fan of that "gospel" message because it is generally lacking. But that is another thread altogether.

My point was simple. The letters to the churches were directing them in how to live now that they have heard the gospel and believed. That message was of first importance because without that message... nothing else mattered beyond that point. But we do not have the actual "gospel message" that those folks heard short bits and pieces of it in the book of Acts as well as much written in the Four Gospels.

Folks want to start a thread on that in Bible Chat... would be a great discussion.

Centurionoflight
Feb 5th 2007, 03:23 PM
pp



CenturionofLight would say that they are going to lose some earthly blessings but even if they continue in this sin until their dying days, they will still inherit eternity with God because that sin isn't counted against them in that regard.
Sin is never counted against man in eternity.
If so then Christ died in vain.

They lose eternal glory, if they dont grow in thier spiritual life.

They may not inherit {ie gain} the kingdom, they instead will cool their heels as a eternal peon in a white skirt.

I have stated this over and over; Heaven will not be equal!!

Some will have great blessings other will not.

Salvation is the birth into the family of heaven; a position that never changes.

ProjectPeter
Feb 5th 2007, 03:24 PM
pp


Sin is never counted against man in eternity.
If so then Christ died in vain.

They lose eternal glory, if they dont grow in thier spiritual life.

They may not inherit {ie gain} the kingdom, they instead will cool their heels as a eternal peon in a white skirt.

I have stated this over and over; Heaven will not be equal!!

Some will have great blessings other will not.

Salvation is the birth into the family of heaven; a position that never changes.
Thanks for the confirmation and correction. Points still the same but you even added more to it that makes it even better.

Centurionoflight
Feb 5th 2007, 03:28 PM
ProjectPeter


Thanks for the confirmation and correction. Points still the same but you even added more to it that makes it even better.

Wanted to make sure it was understood eternal BLESSINGS was on the table as well, not just earthly blessings.

ProjectPeter
Feb 5th 2007, 03:58 PM
ProjectPeter



Wanted to make sure it was understood eternal BLESSINGS was on the table as well, not just earthly blessings.
Semantics but a good point to show how far you go with your position.

Vickilynn
Feb 5th 2007, 04:37 PM
Let me answer from my end and I'll let some of the OSAS folk answer from their end.

It is vital to me simply because of what many (not all mind you) teach when they teach this doctrine. With many, it becomes license. Oh they may tell you that sin will rob you of a blessing here on earth or an eternal jewel in the crown or some such. But I believe it can lead to much worse than that. I believe that there will be many that find the doctrine that they have "rested" in for many years to be wrong and what they will here is "away from me you worker of iniquity, I never knew you." Words that I would wish on no man or woman.

So to me this debate and doctrine is of eternal importance and is one of the reasons why I am one of those that will always discuss it. It has nothing to do with being stubborn/strong willed as RbG put it. It has to do with I find this one of the most important doctrines facing the believer today. Most all of our doctrine and our advice to others is built upon what we believe in this regard.

Example: Someone is caught up in pornography. I am going to tell them that they need to get out of this mess because ultimately their soul is at stake if they don't repent and turn back to God.

CenturionofLight would say that they are going to lose some earthly blessings but even if they continue in this sin until their dying days, they will still inherit eternity with God because that sin isn't counted against them in that regard.

RbG would say, if they continued in this, that they were never saved in the first place.

The only common ground that I can find there would be with RbG because I would at least agree that the person isn't saved now. Where we would differ is in that I believe they well could have been just as born-again as he and I.

But when it is all said and done, in my view... this is a discussion of eternal importance and I will contend with it as long as I can type or speak as the discussion arises. That I will always do because of love of others and I would that no man hear those words of rejection.

Shalom PP,

Thank you SO much for this! I really appreciate you taking the time to answer my question. I have a totally new perspective on the relevance and importance of this debate.

Thank you PP and everyone for showing me why this is so important!
I look forward to following the debate and learning a new thing or two.

Rock on! :thumbsup:

jonny james
Feb 5th 2007, 04:45 PM
pp


Sin is never counted against man in eternity.
If so then Christ died in vain.

They lose eternal glory, if they dont grow in thier spiritual life.

They may not inherit {ie gain} the kingdom, they instead will cool their heels as a eternal peon in a white skirt.

I have stated this over and over; Heaven will not be equal!!

Some will have great blessings other will not.

Salvation is the birth into the family of heaven; a position that never changes. Wonderful post. I probably couldn't have said it better. Salvation is something Christ BUYS with his own blood! ALL of his blood was shed at Calvary and that blood covers you when you are saved. If you try to go away from that, God will rebuke you. WHY? Because you are his SON! The Lord chastens those he LOVES!
"Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap." That's a Christian who must live with the decisions he makes!

Jonny

third hero
Feb 5th 2007, 05:58 PM
ok,
So I am late into the discussion. As any of you that have read any of my posts, I am definitely in the NOSAS crowd, stating that people will lose their salvation if they take on the Mark of the beast. I really want to see how the debate works itself out. plus, this is a time where i can see PP in action. I am very interested in how PP's thread with the OSAS crowd goes.

Ninna
Feb 5th 2007, 06:07 PM
I am pulling up a chair, too, with some iced tea in hand........

jonny james
Feb 5th 2007, 06:12 PM
As any of you that have read any of my posts, I am definitely in the NOSAS crowd, stating that people will lose their salvation if they take on the Mark of the beast. I agree that people will lose their salvation if they take the mark of the beast, but none of us will face that test since that is an event that occurs AFTER the man of sin is revealed, the Antichrist, in the Tribulation. We will be at the marriage supper of the lamb with the Lord waiting to return upon white horses. You just got the timing mixed up there, but yes, people in the tribulation will be on shakey ground with their salvation dependant upon what you DON'T do!

Jonny

moonglow
Feb 5th 2007, 06:19 PM
ok,
So I am late into the discussion. As any of you that have read any of my posts, I am definitely in the NOSAS crowd, stating that people will lose their salvation if they take on the Mark of the beast. I really want to see how the debate works itself out. plus, this is a time where i can see PP in action. I am very interested in how PP's thread with the OSAS crowd goes.

Oh yea!! How could we forget the end time fourm crowd? Some of you might not realize this but we have large groups of members on here that tend to post ONLY on certain fourms...they may stay only on bible chat (there are some on bible chat I never ever see on anything goes, or on the end times fourm, or much of anywhere esle actually on the board, the same with the end times fourm...they rather venture eslewhere on the board..its time consuming enough just to do those intense bible studies on one fourm and they don't have time for others....some members may visit two or three other fourms...but we have 'groups' on here that simply do not post any where on the board but the fourm of their choice. (That doesn't mean they might not at times read on other fourms though) they are an intense group of people dedicated to certain very focused bible studies.

Anyway alot of the end times folks probably are little aware or totally unaware of these type of OSAS debates...it would be very interesting to see their view points such as third hero's here because many on there ARE concerned (deeply) that Christians will be fooled into taking the mark of the beast and thus losing their salvation because the scriptures is clear those taking the mark and worshipping the beast will be thrown into the lake of fire. I don't know how much clearer that could be that they aren't going to Heaven...I don't care how many times they said the sinners prayer either...you cannot worship the beast and expect to go to Heaven.

This is part of the bible (end times/ Revelation) that is never brought up in an OSAS debate ...I don't know if its just been overlooked or what. I have see a few scattered Revelation verse in OSAS debates, but very few. At any rate I would totally love to see what the end times folks take on this would be, especially from their view point of things...:hmm:

I am glad you posted third hero...wish more end times folks would sound in on this. I wonder if a post over there could be done with a link to this thread and ask them to take a minute to just post their thoughts...I don't know if too many would want to get involved in the discussion or not...would be neat to see from their point of view though. I would bet they could post a ton of scriptures never brought up before on this subject. :)

God bless

Centurionoflight
Feb 5th 2007, 06:54 PM
jonny james


I agree that people will lose their salvation if they take the mark of the beast, but none of us will face that test since that is an event that occurs AFTER the man of sin is revealed, the Antichrist, in the Tribulation. We will be at the marriage supper of the lamb with the Lord waiting to return upon white horses. You just got the timing mixed up there, but yes, people in the tribulation will be on shakey ground with their salvation dependant upon what you DON'T do!

The mark of salvation is to believe God;

Abraham believed God {about his heirs} and it was credited for righteousness.

We are told to believe God on his son;

They are told to believe God on the beasts mark.

third hero
Feb 5th 2007, 07:43 PM
I agree that people will lose their salvation if they take the mark of the beast, but none of us will face that test since that is an event that occurs AFTER the man of sin is revealed, the Antichrist, in the Tribulation. We will be at the marriage supper of the lamb with the Lord waiting to return upon white horses. You just got the timing mixed up there, but yes, people in the tribulation will be on shakey ground with their salvation dependant upon what you DON'T do!

Jonny

For the sake of not derailing this thread, I would ask you to take that line of reasoning into the end times room, where I will debate you on that.

third hero
Feb 5th 2007, 07:50 PM
Oh yea!! How could we forget the end time fourm crowd? Some of you might not realize this but we have large groups of members on here that tend to post ONLY on certain fourms...they may stay only on bible chat (there are some on bible chat I never ever see on anything goes, or on the end times fourm, or much of anywhere esle actually on the board, the same with the end times fourm...they rather venture eslewhere on the board..its time consuming enough just to do those intense bible studies on one fourm and they don't have time for others....some members may visit two or three other fourms...but we have 'groups' on here that simply do not post any where on the board but the fourm of their choice. (That doesn't mean they might not at times read on other fourms though) they are an intense group of people dedicated to certain very focused bible studies.

Anyway alot of the end times folks probably are little aware or totally unaware of these type of OSAS debates...it would be very interesting to see their view points such as third hero's here because many on there ARE concerned (deeply) that Christians will be fooled into taking the mark of the beast and thus losing their salvation because the scriptures is clear those taking the mark and worshipping the beast will be thrown into the lake of fire. I don't know how much clearer that could be that they aren't going to Heaven...I don't care how many times they said the sinners prayer either...you cannot worship the beast and expect to go to Heaven.

This is part of the bible (end times/ Revelation) that is never brought up in an OSAS debate ...I don't know if its just been overlooked or what. I have see a few scattered Revelation verse in OSAS debates, but very few. At any rate I would totally love to see what the end times folks take on this would be, especially from their view point of things...:hmm:

I am glad you posted third hero...wish more end times folks would sound in on this. I wonder if a post over there could be done with a link to this thread and ask them to take a minute to just post their thoughts...I don't know if too many would want to get involved in the discussion or not...would be neat to see from their point of view though. I would bet they could post a ton of scriptures never brought up before on this subject. :)

God bless

Thanks moonglow, and honestly, I think that if wpm and some of the others came to this room, that one would find that we are almost all in total agreement as far as the OSAS/NOSAS debate is concerned. As far as I am concerned, the end times is essential to the OSAS debate, because the futures of all mankind hang in the balance.

In Revelation, there are two distinct factions: the believers, and the unbelievers. The believers end up gaining the right to eternal life, and the wicked, called te unbelievers, end up siding withthe man of sin and whether they served God before hand or not, end up in suffering at the hand of the Lord. Because of the many doctrines that cause people to be lazy in their faiths, the pitfalls that Revelation describes will happen will cause many who think they are believers to be found out as really unblievers who were faking the funk so to speak. So, every subject concerning the basic doctrines of faith are at play when it comesto the end times, because the faith of the Believers will be tested, over and over again.

Diggindeeper
Feb 5th 2007, 09:56 PM
I just cannot understand how many OSAS people can take things they have been taught, and believe, and reconcile those beliefs with the Words straight out of the mouth of Jesus!

For example, Matthew chapter 13. Jesus himself said clearly that some gladly receive the Word, but then it is choked right out of them.

Then, there are the "wheat and the tares." From the very mouth of Christ Jesus we hear:

38 The field is the world;
the good seed are the children of the kingdom;
but the tares are the children of the wicked one;

39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil;
the harvest is the end of the world;
and the reapers are the angels.

40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.

41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels,
and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend,
and them which do iniquity;

42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire:
there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

This does definitely reconcile with other scriptues, for example Revelation chapter 14! Matthew 24! Mark 13! Luke 21!

Then, there is the problem of what to do with Revelation chapter 13! Not only is that the "mark of the beast" chapter, but we still must answer how in heaven's name can the beast "make war with the saints, and overcome them" if they had already been raptured out??? No, the saints are still here...we are called to be saints according to 1 Corinthians 1:2!!! (And other verses!) See here...

"Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both their's and our's:"

We are called to be saints, but many, like Project Peter said, proclaim OSAS, regardless of what sins are committed...because Christ forgives all sins, PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE!

Past sins? Yes!He cleans the slate!

Present? Yes! But Jesus himself added the words, "Go and sin NO MORE!"

Future? Wait just a minute...I can't find anywhere as much as ONE scripture that says "Whatever future sins you commit are forgiven before you even commit them."

John146
Feb 5th 2007, 11:19 PM
Oh yea!! How could we forget the end time fourm crowd? Some of you might not realize this but we have large groups of members on here that tend to post ONLY on certain fourms...they may stay only on bible chat (there are some on bible chat I never ever see on anything goes, or on the end times fourm, or much of anywhere esle actually on the board, the same with the end times fourm...they rather venture eslewhere on the board..its time consuming enough just to do those intense bible studies on one fourm and they don't have time for others....some members may visit two or three other fourms...but we have 'groups' on here that simply do not post any where on the board but the fourm of their choice. (That doesn't mean they might not at times read on other fourms though) they are an intense group of people dedicated to certain very focused bible studies.

Anyway alot of the end times folks probably are little aware or totally unaware of these type of OSAS debates...it would be very interesting to see their view points such as third hero's here because many on there ARE concerned (deeply) that Christians will be fooled into taking the mark of the beast and thus losing their salvation because the scriptures is clear those taking the mark and worshipping the beast will be thrown into the lake of fire. I don't know how much clearer that could be that they aren't going to Heaven...I don't care how many times they said the sinners prayer either...you cannot worship the beast and expect to go to Heaven.

This is part of the bible (end times/ Revelation) that is never brought up in an OSAS debate ...I don't know if its just been overlooked or what. I have see a few scattered Revelation verse in OSAS debates, but very few. At any rate I would totally love to see what the end times folks take on this would be, especially from their view point of things...:hmm:

I am glad you posted third hero...wish more end times folks would sound in on this. I wonder if a post over there could be done with a link to this thread and ask them to take a minute to just post their thoughts...I don't know if too many would want to get involved in the discussion or not...would be neat to see from their point of view though. I would bet they could post a ton of scriptures never brought up before on this subject. :)

God bless

You rang? :) Honestly, I've gone back and forth on this issue. It's a tough one, to say the least. I'm glad you bring up Revelation and the mark of the beast, because I think that book is ignored when it comes to this issue, for some reason. You can make arguments both ways just using that book. You can argue in favor of OSAS by looking at the seal of God. I'm not interested in debating the meaning of the 144,000 here, but it's clear that they are believers and have the seal of God. So, what is the seal of God?


21Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God; 22Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts. - 2 Cor 1:21-22

13In 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,
14Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory. - Eph 1:13-14

And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption. - Ephesians 4:30

So, the question is, can the seal be broken, so to speak? Is this an unconditional eternal seal that we receive when we are born again or is there way that the seal can be removed? I tend to think the seal of the Holy Spirit would be awfully hard to break. Also, it says we are sealed unto the day of redemption. That occurs when Christ returns. At that point, we receive our immortal bodies. I don't think we can lose our salvation after that. So...hmmm. :hmm:

But you can also point to verses like the following:

10Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.
11He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death. - Revelation 2:10-11

Okay. So, in this passage Jesus says that if those in the church of Smyrna are faithful unto death, He will give them a crown of life. Is this speaking of eternal life? And is He implying that they could lose their faith and therefore not receive a crown of life? Also, He said "He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death". Does this mean that those who do not overcome will experience the second death and therefore are not saved and are lost and condemned for eternity? I'm not sure. You certainly COULD conclude that from this passage alone.

He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels. - Revelation 3:5

Is Jesus saying here that the one who does not overcome will not be clothed in white raimant and will have their name blotted out of the book of life? It seems like it COULD be interpreted that way, but I'm not certain.

Anyway, I think I've made my point, which is that you can make very strong cases for both sides of the argument, even just by using the book of Revelation, which, like you said, is largely ignored in the debates on this issue, for some reason.

Now, I will proceed to prove that NOSAS is the truth:

20For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
21For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. - 2 Peter 2:20-21

So, the question is, is one who has "escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ" saved? Yeah, I would think so, but I guess I can't prove it. So, this is (possibly) saying that if a person is saved but goes back to their old way of life, then they are worse off than they were before they were saved. Ugh. If they are worse off than before then they must be unsaved again, right? I guess so, anyway. So, can they be saved again? Hebrews 6:4-6 would suggest not. That is, if Hebrews 6:4-6 is speaking of losing salvation.

But wait, what about this:

25Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
26But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
27My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
28And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. 29My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
30I and my Father are one. - John 10:25-30

Hmmmm. So how do we lose our salvation when we are not able to be plucked out of Jesus's hand or the Father's hand? I don't know.

In conclusion, it was my pleasure to bring clarification to this issue so that we no longer need to debate. Clearly, we both can and cannot lose our salvation. Therefore, anyone who takes a side in this issue is wrong. The correct view is MOSASMNOSAS. (M = Maybe) :lol:

Centurionoflight
Feb 5th 2007, 11:26 PM
Diggindeeper


Future? Wait just a minute...I can't find anywhere as much as ONE scripture that says "Whatever future sins you commit are forgiven before you even commit them."

Christ was judged for ALL mans sin; even the sin future


1 John 2


1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

joztok
Feb 6th 2007, 12:46 AM
I don't understand OSAS and NOSAS.
But to me you can't falter or lose salvation if you believe that Christ has covered ALL your sins. This also being if you are living a very sinful life.
Who am I to limit God's grace in my own walk or another believer's?

However, I believe to an extent that you can falter or lose salvation if you believe that Christ's grace is limited! If one finds it too hard to keep turning from their sins. If one finds it really hard not to fall back into their habitual sin. If they are convicted they have to maintain their salvation through being justified through their works, it's much easier to give up and that's where I find works the greatest deception in our walk. They get us totally distracted on the truth that we are saved by God's unmerited favour.
Paul makes that unmistakingly clear in Galations 5:4.

I personally favour the notion OSAS, but I can't say that all who have been deceived, have gone to heaven. I'm sure God shows mercy on his lovers that are confused, or robbed of His promise.

third hero
Feb 6th 2007, 03:36 AM
See Moonglow,
John 146 and I are at almost polar opposites in terms of end times interpretation, but according to this thread, OSAS vs NOSAS, we are in perfect agreement. The same goes with diggindeeper as well. Who knows, maybe all of this "goodwill" will spread into the end times room.... or maybe not. :giveup:

jiggyfly
Feb 6th 2007, 12:15 PM
Salvation is the birth into the family of heaven; a position that never changes.

Here's something to think about, is Heaven eternal?

Revelation 21:1&2
1 Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the old heaven and the old earth had disappeared. And the sea was also gone. 2 And I saw the holy city, the new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven like a beautiful bride prepared for her husband.

moonglow
Feb 6th 2007, 05:11 PM
I just cannot understand how many OSAS people can take things they have been taught, and believe, and reconcile those beliefs with the Words straight out of the mouth of Jesus!

For example, Matthew chapter 13. Jesus himself said clearly that some gladly receive the Word, but then it is choked right out of them.

Then, there are the "wheat and the tares." From the very mouth of Christ Jesus we hear:

38 The field is the world;
the good seed are the children of the kingdom;
but the tares are the children of the wicked one;

39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil;
the harvest is the end of the world;
and the reapers are the angels.

40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.

41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels,
and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend,
and them which do iniquity;

42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire:
there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

This does definitely reconcile with other scriptues, for example Revelation chapter 14! Matthew 24! Mark 13! Luke 21!

Then, there is the problem of what to do with Revelation chapter 13! Not only is that the "mark of the beast" chapter, but we still must answer how in heaven's name can the beast "make war with the saints, and overcome them" if they had already been raptured out??? No, the saints are still here...we are called to be saints according to 1 Corinthians 1:2!!! (And other verses!) See here...

"Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both their's and our's:"

We are called to be saints, but many, like Project Peter said, proclaim OSAS, regardless of what sins are committed...because Christ forgives all sins, PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE!

Past sins? Yes!He cleans the slate!

Present? Yes! But Jesus himself added the words, "Go and sin NO MORE!"

Future? Wait just a minute...I can't find anywhere as much as ONE scripture that says "Whatever future sins you commit are forgiven before you even commit them."


Another point...without repenting of those sins...are they forgiven? no. What happens if a person does not repent of their sins and keeps sinning? Keep in mind here Paul is talking to Christians, not unbelievers.


Romans 6
Sin’s Power Is Broken

1 Well then, should we keep on sinning so that God can show us more and more of his wonderful grace? 2 Of course not! Since we have died to sin, how can we continue to live in it? 3 Or have you forgotten that when we were joined with Christ Jesus in baptism, we joined him in his death? 4 For we died and were buried with Christ by baptism. And just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glorious power of the Father, now we also may live new lives.

5 Since we have been united with him in his death, we will also be raised to life as he was. 6 We know that our old sinful selves were crucified with Christ so that sin might lose its power in our lives. We are no longer slaves to sin. 7 For when we died with Christ we were set free from the power of sin. 8 And since we died with Christ, we know we will also live with him. 9 We are sure of this because Christ was raised from the dead, and he will never die again. Death no longer has any power over him. 10 When he died, he died once to break the power of sin. But now that he lives, he lives for the glory of God. 11 So you also should consider yourselves to be dead to the power of sin and alive to God through Christ Jesus.

12 Do not let sin control the way you live; do not give in to sinful desires. 13 Do not let any part of your body become an instrument of evil to serve sin. Instead, give yourselves completely to God, for you were dead, but now you have new life. So use your whole body as an instrument to do what is right for the glory of God. 14 Sin is no longer your master, for you no longer live under the requirements of the law. Instead, you live under the freedom of God’s grace.

15 Well then, since God’s grace has set us free from the law, does that mean we can go on sinning? Of course not! 16 Don’t you realize that you become the slave of whatever you choose to obey? You can be a slave to sin, which leads to death, or you can choose to obey God, which leads to righteous living. (oh their is that 'choose' word again...amazing isn't it! Even as Christians we can still choose to sin or not..! If we couldn't make that choice, then Paul would have no reason to even write this letter to start with).

17 Thank God! Once you were slaves of sin, but now you wholeheartedly obey this teaching we have given you. 18 Now you are free from your slavery to sin, and you have become slaves to righteous living.

19 Because of the weakness of your human nature, I am using the illustration of slavery to help you understand all this. Previously, you let yourselves be slaves to impurity and lawlessness, which led ever deeper into sin. Now you must give yourselves to be slaves to righteous living so that you will become holy.

20 When you were slaves to sin, you were free from the obligation to do right. 21 And what was the result? You are now ashamed of the things you used to do, things that end in eternal doom. 22 But now you are free from the power of sin and have become slaves of God. Now you do those things that lead to holiness and result in eternal life. 23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord.

Is an unrepenting, sinning Christian still saved? How can that be when these verses clearly show the wages of sin IS death. And God isn't 'making' us behave ourselves either...we are still free to choose sin (as sad as that is...I hate to appear to be aruging for sin in this fashion...my only point being we can still choose to sin which leads to death...though I certainly wouldn't recommend any Christian do this!)

God bless

moonglow
Feb 6th 2007, 05:23 PM
You rang? :) Honestly, I've gone back and forth on this issue. It's a tough one, to say the least. I'm glad you bring up Revelation and the mark of the beast, because I think that book is ignored when it comes to this issue, for some reason. You can make arguments both ways just using that book. You can argue in favor of OSAS by looking at the seal of God. I'm not interested in debating the meaning of the 144,000 here, but it's clear that they are believers and have the seal of God. So, what is the seal of God?


21Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God; 22Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts. - 2 Cor 1:21-22

13In 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,
14Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory. - Eph 1:13-14

And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption. - Ephesians 4:30

So, the question is, can the seal be broken, so to speak? Is this an unconditional eternal seal that we receive when we are born again or is there way that the seal can be removed? I tend to think the seal of the Holy Spirit would be awfully hard to break. Also, it says we are sealed unto the day of redemption. That occurs when Christ returns. At that point, we receive our immortal bodies. I don't think we can lose our salvation after that. So...hmmm. :hmm:

But you can also point to verses like the following:

10Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.
11He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death. - Revelation 2:10-11

Okay. So, in this passage Jesus says that if those in the church of Smyrna are faithful unto death, He will give them a crown of life. Is this speaking of eternal life? And is He implying that they could lose their faith and therefore not receive a crown of life? Also, He said "He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death". Does this mean that those who do not overcome will experience the second death and therefore are not saved and are lost and condemned for eternity? I'm not sure. You certainly COULD conclude that from this passage alone.

He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels. - Revelation 3:5

Is Jesus saying here that the one who does not overcome will not be clothed in white raimant and will have their name blotted out of the book of life? It seems like it COULD be interpreted that way, but I'm not certain.

Anyway, I think I've made my point, which is that you can make very strong cases for both sides of the argument, even just by using the book of Revelation, which, like you said, is largely ignored in the debates on this issue, for some reason.

Now, I will proceed to prove that NOSAS is the truth:

20For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
21For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. - 2 Peter 2:20-21

So, the question is, is one who has "escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ" saved? Yeah, I would think so, but I guess I can't prove it. So, this is (possibly) saying that if a person is saved but goes back to their old way of life, then they are worse off than they were before they were saved. Ugh. If they are worse off than before then they must be unsaved again, right? I guess so, anyway. So, can they be saved again? Hebrews 6:4-6 would suggest not. That is, if Hebrews 6:4-6 is speaking of losing salvation.

But wait, what about this:

25Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
26But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
27My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
28And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. 29My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
30I and my Father are one. - John 10:25-30

Hmmmm. So how do we lose our salvation when we are not able to be plucked out of Jesus's hand or the Father's hand? I don't know.

In conclusion, it was my pleasure to bring clarification to this issue so that we no longer need to debate. Clearly, we both can and cannot lose our salvation. Therefore, anyone who takes a side in this issue is wrong. The correct view is MOSASMNOSAS. (M = Maybe) :lol:

:lol: :lol: oh yea you cleared things up well for us there! :lol: :lol:

That is funny...lol.

Some things to notice though...


But wait, what about this:

25Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
26But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
27My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
28And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. 29My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
30I and my Father are one. - John 10:25-30

Hmmmm. So how do we lose our salvation when we are not able to be plucked out of Jesus's hand or the Father's hand? I don't know.

He says no 'man' is able to pluck them out of His Father's hands...doesn't say they, themselves cannot decide on their own, to leave the Father's hands.


And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption. - Ephesians 4:30

So, the question is, can the seal be broken, so to speak? Is this an unconditional eternal seal that we receive when we are born again or is there way that the seal can be removed? I tend to think the seal of the Holy Spirit would be awfully hard to break. Also, it says we are sealed unto the day of redemption. That occurs when Christ returns. At that point, we receive our immortal bodies. I don't think we can lose our salvation after that. So...hmmm. :hmm:

Why the warning to not grieve the Holy Spirit in that passage if their is nothing to worry about?

Just a few thoughts on that one too.

God bless

moonglow
Feb 6th 2007, 05:26 PM
Diggindeeper



Christ was judged for ALL mans sin; even the sin future


1 John 2


1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.





So I can sin and not worry about repenting or changing my ways then because I believe in Jesus and have nothing to worry about, right?

third hero
Feb 6th 2007, 05:27 PM
I find this ironic. The end times crowd, which debate just about everything in that room, is in complete agreement here. What this proves to me that although most of us hail from differing disciplines, we are all in agreement in saying that to just confess your sins once, and then going out to sin some more without repenting for them, aka living in sin, does not make you a Christian, nor does it save you. Paul stated that we war against opur flesh daily, and that we die to our flesh daily.

I totally understand that setiment, because for the last few nights, I have been having inappropriate, illecit dreams that I am constantly dismissing when I wake up, and using scripture to do that. Salvation is a free gift, but it has requirements. Those requirements are to simply follow Jesus. The only way to do that is to read what He says we are to do, and do as He commands us. Deviations will lead to the foolish person who built their house on sand, and also the wicked servant in Matthew 7. Notice that neither gained access to the Kingdom of Heaven.

Centurionoflight
Feb 6th 2007, 05:48 PM
moonglow



So I can sin and not worry about repenting or changing my ways then because I believe in Jesus and have nothing to worry about, right?


Sure if you wish to be a eternal peon in heaven for ever;

Your only witness in eternal heaven will be to how hard God can spank his sons.

third hero
Feb 6th 2007, 06:01 PM
moonglow



Sure if you wish to be a eternal peon in heaven for ever;

Your only witness in eternal heaven will be to how hard God can spank his sons.

I am sorry, but this is one aspect about calvanist thinking that I can not stand. Show me anywhere where the actions of a person affect their reward in heaven. Moreover, show me anywhere in the bible that says that you do not have to follow Christ's commands and still enter the Kingdom of Heaven, because according to this passage in Matthew, thatjust ain't happening.

Matthew 7:21
Not everyone that saith to me Lord, Lord, shall enter the kingdom of heaven; BUT he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

In other words, not everyone who prays the sinner's prayer will enter into the Kingdom, but rather those who follow afterthe will of The Father, and the only way to do that is to follow the words of Christ, and DO THEM!

moonglow
Feb 6th 2007, 06:03 PM
See Moonglow,
John 146 and I are at almost polar opposites in terms of end times interpretation, but according to this thread, OSAS vs NOSAS, we are in perfect agreement. The same goes with diggindeeper as well. Who knows, maybe all of this "goodwill" will spread into the end times room.... or maybe not. :giveup:

I don't know if everyone on the end times fourm would agree though...I would be interested in seeing what those with the Amill view would be since they feel the beast, the mark, etc are over and done with? :hmm: Not that there isn't some tough times ahead though!

Clearly we still have this to deal with:

Revelation 20

The Thousand Years

1 Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven with the key to the bottomless pit and a heavy chain in his hand. 2 He seized the dragon—that old serpent, who is the devil, Satan—and bound him in chains for a thousand years. 3 The angel threw him into the bottomless pit, which he then shut and locked so Satan could not deceive the nations anymore until the thousand years were finished. Afterward he must be released for a little while.

Now in my views (currently though its not set in stone or anything) Satan is already bound FROM decieving the nations...meaning in the OT the belief in the living God did not spread to pagan nations until after Jesus did the work on the cross...THEN we see people from all nations being saved! Before that the belief could not spread because satan was decieving the nations...now he is bound and cannot stop the spread of the gospel...

Even if no one agrees with that view (which is fine you don't have too) I think we are in agreement at some point in time satan will be released from his prison and will once again be able to decieve the nations. What are the nations? pieces of land? no....nations are made up of people...including those that believe in God...and satan is on the loose once again able to decieve...what would be the point of him ONLY being able to decieve nonbelievers though? They are already blinded and lost...right? I suppose he could try to prevent them from becoming believers by decieving them like in the OT...but is the limit on what he can do?

What about this passage?

2 Thessalonians 2

The Great Apostasy

1 Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you, 2 not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come. 3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.

5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? 6 And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. 9 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, 10 and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, 12 that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

I put in red the verses that indicate those losing their faith because they weren't believing in the truth...as we see they chose to be fooled by these 'signs and wonders' of what we refer too as the antichrist usually. How many times have we sweated over those verses on the board wondering if we are one of those God will send a delusion on, because we were believing in the wrong things...OR that this would happen to us in some future date? Most are either arrogance and claim they have no worries that what they believe is the truth and right...OR those not worried really are resting in their faith in God. I don't think its wrong to look deeply at ourselves and our 'doctines' especially, to see if we are indeed on the right track...as Jesus says, the way IS narrow...and here we have a board full of a 'wide' varity of beliefs...:hmm:

I am not so sure that is a good thing...you know what I mean?

And its not about questioning God or our salvation...its about questioning ourselves...are we spending SO much time studying the Word, we forget about the living Word in our day to day interactions with Him?

Its like I can study and study my car manuel..work on the car, know excatly how it runs, why it runs and everything about it....yet still not know how to drive the car!

I see people like this all the time, they know the bible inside and out ...can even do things like this:

Matthew 7:22
On judgment day many will say to me, ‘Lord! Lord! We prophesied in your name and cast out demons in your name and performed many miracles in your name.’

yet look at how Jesus responds to them...

23 But I will reply, ‘I never knew you. Get away from me, you who break God’s laws.’

Pretty shocking isn't it! To know the bible so well...to have what appears to be spiritual gifts yet have Jesus say He never knew you!

No relationship was build...like knowing the manuel to your car but never learning to drive it.

There comes a point when time runs out and God hardens them to the truth by sending a strong delusion so they WILL believe lies!

Now back to the parts I put in blue in that 2 Thessalonians 2 passage...it lines up with the passage about what happens in Revelation:

Revelation 13

3 And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast. 4 So they worshiped the dragon who gave authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?” (delusion)

5 And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months. 6 Then he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven. 7 It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation. 8 All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

9 If anyone has an ear, let him hear. 10 He who leads into captivity shall go into captivity; he who kills with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.

The Beast from the Earth

11 Then I saw another beast coming up out of the earth, and he had two horns like a lamb and spoke like a dragon. 12 And he exercises all the authority of the first beast in his presence, and causes the earth and those who dwell in it to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. (delusion) 13 He performs great signs, so that he even makes fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men. 14 And he deceives those who dwell on the earth by those signs which he was granted to do in the sight of the beast, telling those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the beast who was wounded by the sword and lived.

Revelation 20

7 Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number is as the sand of the sea. 9 They went up on the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city. And fire came down from God out of heaven and devoured them. 10 The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

look again at 2 Thessalonians 2 and compare it to Revelation 13 and 20:

2 Thessalonians 2

3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.

8 And then the lawless one will be revealed,[COLOR="Blue"] whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. 9 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, 10 and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish,[COLOR="Red"] because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

If you notice all of these verse include satan being allowed to decieve...delusion brought directly to people from God...now ask yourself, why go to all this trouble to just decieve those already lost? Those already unsaved? What would be the point is decieving those that have already decieved themselves?

moonglow
Feb 6th 2007, 06:07 PM
moonglow



Sure if you wish to be a eternal peon in heaven for ever;

Your only witness in eternal heaven will be to how hard God can spank his sons.

Uh? :confused Can you post the verses you are thinking about here so I can follow your train of thought? thanks.

I wouldn't care if I was a peon...already am actually...I would be thrilled just to be in Heaven with the Lord! :pp :pp

Centurionoflight
Feb 6th 2007, 06:13 PM
third hero



I am sorry, but this is one aspect about calvanist thinking that I can not stand. Show me anywhere where the actions of a person affect their reward in heaven.

1 cor 3

11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

12Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;

13 Every 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.

14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.




Moreover, show me anywhere in the bible that says that you do not have to follow Christ's commands and still enter the Kingdom of Heaven, because according to this passage in Matthew, thatjust ain't happening.

IF following Christs "commands"{not defined; thus I read legalism} was required to enter heaven then salvation would be a wage; not a gift.



Matthew 7:21
Not everyone that saith to me Lord, Lord, shall enter the kingdom of heaven; BUT he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

THe will of the father is for man to believe on his son.



In other words, not everyone who prays the sinner's prayer will enter into the Kingdom, but rather those who follow afterthe will of The Father, and the only way to do that is to follow the words of Christ, and DO THEM!


I agree "praying" some "sinners prayer" saves no one.
Believing on Christ is salvation, that is doing what Christ says.

John 3
14And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:

15That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.

Centurionoflight
Feb 6th 2007, 06:22 PM
moonglow




Uh? Can you post the verses you are thinking about here so I can follow your train of thought? thanks.

I wouldn't care if I was a peon...already am actually...I would be thrilled just to be in Heaven with the Lord!


Ok

If that is the witness you wish to eternally bear before God is "peon".

A Good faithful servent or a title of "Those who love God" would be much better than "peon".

Frankly he has much greater blessings in store for us.



1 cor 3


11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

12Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;

13 Every 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.

14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

slightlypuzzled
Feb 6th 2007, 06:23 PM
Interesting how as many debates are in the Peanut Gallery as in the main thread.........:lol:

I came into Christianity out of atheism, and just started reading the NT. I had never heard of OSAS, and could not even imagine a christian believing it, after reading the emphasis on belief, maturity, and the Apostles drive to keep his people believing and growing in the faith. Well, I am thirty-five years older and wiser.

Aside from the warnings of Paul to the Galatians, and the people Paul talks about in his Pastoral Epistles, I have always looked at 2Peter 1:1-11. Peter makes it fairly plain that you use all that He has given us, and you grow in a certain direction while using the promises he has given us.

slightlypuzzled
Feb 6th 2007, 06:24 PM
moonglow




Ok

If that is the witness you wish to eternally bear before God is "peon".

A Good faithful servent or a title of "Those who love God" would be much better than "peon".

Frankly he has much greater blessings in store for us.



1 cor 3


11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

12Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;

13 Every 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.

14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.


If you look at the full context of that section, Paul is talking about those who preach and build up various churchs.

ProjectPeter
Feb 6th 2007, 06:24 PM
moonglow




Ok

If that is the witness you wish to eternally bear before God is "peon".

A Good faithful servent or a title of "Those who love God" would be much better than "peon".

Frankly he has much greater blessings in store for us.



1 cor 3


11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

12Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;

13 Every 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.

14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

I am pretty sure what folks are asking is where do you get that whole "peon" theory from Scripturally? That'd be my bet anyway! ;)

slightlypuzzled
Feb 6th 2007, 06:33 PM
I am pretty sure what folks are asking is where do you get that whole "peon" theory from Scripturally? That'd be my bet anyway! ;)

In the strictest sense of the word's etymology we will all be 'peones' to the Don Padre' on that great Hacienda in the sky......to coin a badly weather beaten phrase.....

*I hope I did not butcher the Spanish too much*

Centurionoflight
Feb 6th 2007, 06:35 PM
slightlypuzzled



If you look at the full context of that section, Paul is talking about those who preach and build up various churchs.


And it addresses each and EVERY believer.

1 cor 3



12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;

13 Every 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.

14 Ifany man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

ProjectPeter
Feb 6th 2007, 06:37 PM
slightlypuzzled



And it addresses each and EVERY believer.

1 cor 3



12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;

13 Every 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.

14 Ifany man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

It would require that whole passage in context! ;) I'll post it for those following alone. But then you know what... it'll come up in the debate thread I figure. You always jump on that one. :lol:

slightlypuzzled
Feb 6th 2007, 06:37 PM
slightlypuzzled



And it addresses each and EVERY believer.

1 cor 3



12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;

13 Every 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.

14 Ifany man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.


But what is the 'any man' doing in the context of that section of scripture?

Centurionoflight
Feb 6th 2007, 07:03 PM
But what is the 'any man' doing in the context of that section of scripture?


Guess he must be making a point about any man who has a foundation of Christ.

slightlypuzzled
Feb 6th 2007, 07:30 PM
Guess he must be making a point about any man who has a foundation of Christ.

Actually, he is talking about any man who is building on the foundation that is already laid

But before we continue, I am curious, do you believe the chapter and verse markings were inspired by God or not?

Centurionoflight
Feb 6th 2007, 11:32 PM
slightlypuzzled



Actually, he is talking about any man who is building on the foundation that is already laid

But before we continue, I am curious, do you believe the chapter and verse markings were inspired by God or not?
And Christ laid that foundation.

1 cor 3
11For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

Just a note.

It is much easier to just spit out the doctrine you are trying to make rather than some "continuance", or asking wierd questions about verse markings.

slightlypuzzled
Feb 7th 2007, 12:08 AM
slightlypuzzled


And Christ laid that foundation.

1 cor 3
11For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

Just a note.

It is much easier to just spit out the doctrine you are trying to make rather than some "continuance", or asking wierd questions about verse markings.

No, Christ is the foundation that Paul laid in his work in Corinth:

10According to the grace of God which was given to me, like a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building on it. But each man must be careful how he builds on it.

11For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

Part of Paul's argument is that he and Apollos might plant and water, but God gives the growth:

6I planted, Apollos watered, but God was causing the growth.

7So then neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but God who causes the growth.

No strange doctrine, I was just puzzled as to how you can not see the whole context of that particular passage?

Centurionoflight
Feb 7th 2007, 12:12 AM
slightlypuzzled


No strange doctrine, I was just puzzled as to how you can not see the whole context of that particular passage?

And then Paul goes on to make another point.

That being a eternal reward for growth

1 cor 3

16 have ye not known that ye are a sanctuary of God, and the Spirit of God doth dwell in you?
17if any one the sanctuary of God doth waste, him shall God waste; for the sanctuary of God is holy, the which ye are.






So we are to build of fine stones; not of wood hay and stubble.

slightlypuzzled
Feb 7th 2007, 12:19 AM
slightlypuzzled



And then Paul goes on to make another point.

That being a eternal reward for growth

1 cor 3

16 have ye not known that ye are a sanctuary of God, and the Spirit of God doth dwell in you?
17if any one the sanctuary of God doth waste, him shall God waste; for the sanctuary of God is holy, the which ye are.






So we are to build of fine stones; not of wood hay and stubble.

Well, Paul is again talking about what people will do to that sanctuary:

17If any man destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him, for the temple of God is holy, and that is what you are.

God will destroy the one who destroys the erected temple. The tempo of the chapter is still talking about the divisions in the Corinthian church caused by their vastly stunted growth. They are still fleshly and not truly spiritual.

1And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to men of flesh, as to infants in Christ.

Centurionoflight
Feb 7th 2007, 12:24 AM
15If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

16Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?


This is more on a personal level; not a group level.
I think you are seeing it as a group level; Pauls starts that way then drives it into a personal level.

John146
Feb 7th 2007, 12:48 AM
:lol: :lol: oh yea you cleared things up well for us there! :lol: :lol:

That is funny...lol.

Some things to notice though...


He says no 'man' is able to pluck them out of His Father's hands...doesn't say they, themselves cannot decide on their own, to leave the Father's hands.



Why the warning to not grieve the Holy Spirit in that passage if their is nothing to worry about?

Just a few thoughts on that one too.

God bless

Those are valid points. More to ponder. :)

jiggyfly
Feb 7th 2007, 02:23 AM
moonglow



Sure if you wish to be a eternal peon in heaven for ever;

Your only witness in eternal heaven will be to how hard God can spank his sons.

Again I'll ask you is heaven eternal?

Revelation 21:1
Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the old heaven and the old earth had disappeared. And the sea was also gone.

third hero
Feb 7th 2007, 08:05 AM
I don't know if everyone on the end times fourm would agree though...I would be interested in seeing what those with the Amill view would be since they feel the beast, the mark, etc are over and done with? :hmm: Not that there isn't some tough times ahead though!

Clearly we still have this to deal with:

Revelation 20

The Thousand Years

1 Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven with the key to the bottomless pit and a heavy chain in his hand. 2 He seized the dragon—that old serpent, who is the devil, Satan—and bound him in chains for a thousand years. 3 The angel threw him into the bottomless pit, which he then shut and locked so Satan could not deceive the nations anymore until the thousand years were finished. Afterward he must be released for a little while.

Now in my views (currently though its not set in stone or anything) Satan is already bound FROM decieving the nations...meaning in the OT the belief in the living God did not spread to pagan nations until after Jesus did the work on the cross...THEN we see people from all nations being saved! Before that the belief could not spread because satan was decieving the nations...now he is bound and cannot stop the spread of the gospel...

Even if no one agrees with that view (which is fine you don't have too) I think we are in agreement at some point in time satan will be released from his prison and will once again be able to decieve the nations. What are the nations? pieces of land? no....nations are made up of people...including those that believe in God...and satan is on the loose once again able to decieve...what would be the point of him ONLY being able to decieve nonbelievers though? They are already blinded and lost...right? I suppose he could try to prevent them from becoming believers by decieving them like in the OT...but is the limit on what he can do?

What about this passage?

2 Thessalonians 2

The Great Apostasy

1 Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you, 2 not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come. 3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.

5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? 6 And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. 9 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, 10 and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, 12 that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

I put in red the verses that indicate those losing their faith because they weren't believing in the truth...as we see they chose to be fooled by these 'signs and wonders' of what we refer too as the antichrist usually. How many times have we sweated over those verses on the board wondering if we are one of those God will send a delusion on, because we were believing in the wrong things...OR that this would happen to us in some future date? Most are either arrogance and claim they have no worries that what they believe is the truth and right...OR those not worried really are resting in their faith in God. I don't think its wrong to look deeply at ourselves and our 'doctines' especially, to see if we are indeed on the right track...as Jesus says, the way IS narrow...and here we have a board full of a 'wide' varity of beliefs...:hmm:

I am not so sure that is a good thing...you know what I mean?

And its not about questioning God or our salvation...its about questioning ourselves...are we spending SO much time studying the Word, we forget about the living Word in our day to day interactions with Him?

Its like I can study and study my car manuel..work on the car, know excatly how it runs, why it runs and everything about it....yet still not know how to drive the car!

I see people like this all the time, they know the bible inside and out ...can even do things like this:

Matthew 7:22
On judgment day many will say to me, ‘Lord! Lord! We prophesied in your name and cast out demons in your name and performed many miracles in your name.’

yet look at how Jesus responds to them...

23 But I will reply, ‘I never knew you. Get away from me, you who break God’s laws.’

Pretty shocking isn't it! To know the bible so well...to have what appears to be spiritual gifts yet have Jesus say He never knew you!

No relationship was build...like knowing the manuel to your car but never learning to drive it.

There comes a point when time runs out and God hardens them to the truth by sending a strong delusion so they WILL believe lies!

Now back to the parts I put in blue in that 2 Thessalonians 2 passage...it lines up with the passage about what happens in Revelation:

Revelation 13

3 And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast. 4 So they worshiped the dragon who gave authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?” (delusion)

5 And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months. 6 Then he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven. 7 It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation. 8 All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

9 If anyone has an ear, let him hear. 10 He who leads into captivity shall go into captivity; he who kills with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.

The Beast from the Earth

11 Then I saw another beast coming up out of the earth, and he had two horns like a lamb and spoke like a dragon. 12 And he exercises all the authority of the first beast in his presence, and causes the earth and those who dwell in it to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. (delusion) 13 He performs great signs, so that he even makes fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men. 14 And he deceives those who dwell on the earth by those signs which he was granted to do in the sight of the beast, telling those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the beast who was wounded by the sword and lived.

Revelation 20

7 Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number is as the sand of the sea. 9 They went up on the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city. And fire came down from God out of heaven and devoured them. 10 The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

look again at 2 Thessalonians 2 and compare it to Revelation 13 and 20:

2 Thessalonians 2

3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.

8 And then the lawless one will be revealed,[color="Blue"] whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. 9 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, 10 and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish,[color="Red"] because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

If you notice all of these verse include satan being allowed to decieve...delusion brought directly to people from God...now ask yourself, why go to all this trouble to just decieve those already lost? Those already unsaved? What would be the point is decieving those that have already decieved themselves?

Everything that you have written equals one very well tested phrase. "My people perish for LACK of KNOWLEDGE. (It's somewhere in Isaiah). THe point is that according to the scriptures that deal with the end times, the facts are what are going to save a person's soul from the incredibly strong delusion that the Lord is allowing Satan to inflict the world with. So, doctrines such as OSAS have to pass the scrutiny tests,and REvelation alone destroys OSAS into shreds. In that book, there are at least three passages that warn of loss of salvation, which includes Chapter 22, 14, and 1-3. Imagine that. In reality, those who have even a limited understanding of the end times, and how it relates to sound doctrines, can easily figure out whether OSAS is scripturally sound or not.

Centurionoflight
Feb 7th 2007, 12:50 PM
third hero



Everything that you have written equals one very well tested phrase. "My people perish for LACK of KNOWLEDGE. (It's somewhere in Isaiah). THe point is that according to the scriptures that deal with the end times, the facts are what are going to save a person's soul from the incredibly strong delusion that the Lord is allowing Satan to inflict the world with. So, doctrines such as OSAS have to pass the scrutiny tests,and REvelation alone destroys OSAS into shreds. In that book, there are at least three passages that warn of loss of salvation, which includes Chapter 22, 14, and 1-3. Imagine that. In reality, those who have even a limited understanding of the end times, and how it relates to sound doctrines, can easily figure out whether OSAS is scripturally sound or not.

Yah;

Trusting Christ in faith for salvation and in faith to keep salvation; is so satanic.

That is real demonic doctrine right there.



1 Peter 2:6
For this is contained in Scripture:" BEHOLD, I LAY IN ZION A CHOICE STONE, A PRECIOUS CORNER stone,AND HE WHO BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED."
Exactally how does people leaning their trust to Christ serve satan?

Exactally how does people not trusting Christ; rather they put trust in their legalism; their human view of Good and evil; serve satan?

Well for one; it would be calling God a liar; and calling God untrust worthy.
Then would a lying and untrustworthy God; be just to judge satan and the lost?

The bible is Full of man trying to put trust in any thing but Christ.

The bible is full Man putting trust in signs and wonders;

Like a pillar of fire; we can trust that.
Gods word and promise; now that is not so stable.

The bible is full of mans lack of trust on God and Christ.

From Cain putting his trust in his way of doing things to Israel putting their trust in the law.

So what you post is nuthin new; it is a old doctrine of distrust of God.


If Christians are busy trying to keep their salvation then they are not growing in spirit.
They are nullified in the spiritual battle before them.

That really serves God now dont it?



Galatians 3:11

Now that no one is justified by the Law before God is evident; for, " THE RIGHTEOUS MAN SHALL LIVE BY FAITH."
Exactally how does NOT trusting Christ to keep our salvation a sign of living by faith?

So before you start throwing around how trusting in Christ to even keep your salvation is somehow satanic;

You must show how not trusting Christ in ALL is divine.

moonglow
Feb 7th 2007, 07:23 PM
sorry Centurionoflight, I totally missed your reply yesertday...


Centurionoflight:

moonglow


Quote:
Uh? Can you post the verses you are thinking about here so I can follow your train of thought? thanks.

I wouldn't care if I was a peon...already am actually...I would be thrilled just to be in Heaven with the Lord!

Ok

If that is the witness you wish to eternally bear before God is "peon".

A Good faithful servent or a title of "Those who love God" would be much better than "peon".

Frankly he has much greater blessings in store for us.



1 cor 3

11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

12Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;

13 Every 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.

14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

Matthew 20:16
“So those who are last now will be first then, and those who are first will be last.”

God bless

Centurionoflight
Feb 7th 2007, 07:43 PM
moonglow


Matthew 20:16
“So those who are last now will be first then, and those who are first will be last.”

Not sure why you posted that verse;

We are told to finish the course to maturity.

Heb 12

1Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us,


Those who finsih will recive reward and glory; and it is Gods to give. Those who dont finish will lose their prize, their inheritance. Those are the ones who are peons; are inheritless.

Paul speaks of it.

2 Tim 4


7 the good strife I have striven, the course I have finished, the faith I have kept,


8 henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of the righteousness that the Lord -- the Righteous Judge -- shall give to me in that day, and not only to me, but also to all those loving his manifestation.{Those who have complete the course, and have the same love and thinking of Christ; ie the mature believers.}


Those who finish the course to maturity; recive reward; inheritance.
They will be the first, while people we put first today; who dont finish the course; rather they use legalism and impression to men; will be the last.

moonglow
Feb 7th 2007, 08:05 PM
moonglow



Not sure why you posted that verse;

We are told to finish the course to maturity.

Heb 12

1Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us,


Those who finsih will recive reward and glory; and it is Gods to give. Those who dont finish will lose their prize, their inheritance. Those are the ones who are peons; are inheritless.

Paul speaks of it.

2 Tim 4


7 the good strife I have striven, the course I have finished, the faith I have kept,


8 henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of the righteousness that the Lord -- the Righteous Judge -- shall give to me in that day, and not only to me, but also to all those loving his manifestation.{Those who have complete the course, and have the same love and thinking of Christ; ie the mature believers.}


Those who finish the course to maturity; recive reward; inheritance.
They will be the first, while people we put first today; who dont finish the course; rather they use legalism and impression to men; will be the last.




What excatly will I be losing? :confused

I will still be saved, still in Heaven with the Lord and I am content with that. I am not a Christian for any rewards I might get...that seems like of arrogant to be working for rewards don't you think?

Centurionoflight
Feb 7th 2007, 08:15 PM
moonglow


What excatly will I be losing? :confused
The inheritance.

Colossians 3:24
Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ.


I will still be saved, still in Heaven with the Lord and I am content with that.

We are not told to be content with that; we are told to finish the course.

1 Corinthians 9:24
Know ye not that they which run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize? So run, that ye may obtain.


I am not a Christian for any rewards I might get...that seems like of arrogant to be working for rewards don't you think?

There is a work that is demanded of those of a living faith; that work is spiritual growth and testing.

Those who finish the course are givin a prize.

Was Paul arrogant when he stated; a reward that awaits him?
A reward that; not every person will get?

2 tim 4
8 henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of the righteousness that the Lord -- the Righteous Judge -- shall give to me in that day, and not only to me, but also to all those loving his manifestation.

DSK
Feb 7th 2007, 08:17 PM
I am not a Christian for any rewards I might get...that seems like of arrogant to be working for rewards don't you think?

O Lord, Your beautiful, Your face is all I seek And when Your eyes are on this child Your grace abounds to me.
O Lord please light the fire, that once burned bright and clear Restore the lamp of my first love That burns with holy fear
O Lord you’re merciful, your love is all I need. And when your love is on this child, Forgiveness I receive
Oh Lord you’re wonderful, your touch is all I need And when your hands are on this child, Your healing I receive

chorus

I want to take your light and shine it all around First help me just to live it, Lord. And when I’m doing well help me to never seek a crown, For my reward is giving glory to you.

- lyrics by Keith Green

moonglow
Feb 7th 2007, 08:23 PM
O Lord, Your beautiful, Your face is all I seek And when Your eyes are on this child Your grace abounds to me.
O Lord please light the fire, that once burned bright and clear Restore the lamp of my first love That burns with holy fear
O Lord you’re merciful, your love is all I need. And when your love is on this child, Forgiveness I receive
Oh Lord you’re wonderful, your touch is all I need And when your hands are on this child, Your healing I receive

chorus

I want to take your light and shine it all around First help me just to live it, Lord. And when I’m doing well help me to never seek a crown, For my reward is giving glory to you.

:pp :pp excatly DSK....



Centurionoflight you aren't explaining what this inheritance is..or why I would want it...and what is this 'course' I am to 'finish' just to get a reward?

Paul didn't say he was seeking after his reward, he already knew he had it...he was simply stating a fact...so no I don't see that as arrogance.

God bless

DSK
Feb 7th 2007, 08:26 PM
He who loves with purity considers not the gift of the lover, but the love of the giver. Thomas a`Kempis

Centurionoflight
Feb 7th 2007, 08:29 PM
DSK



O Lord, Your beautiful, Your face is all I seek And when Your eyes are on this child Your grace abounds to me.
O Lord please light the fire, that once burned bright and clear Restore the lamp of my first love That burns with holy fear
O Lord you’re merciful, your love is all I need. And when your love is on this child, Forgiveness I receive
Oh Lord you’re wonderful, your touch is all I need And when your hands are on this child, Your healing I receive

chorus

I want to take your light and shine it all around First help me just to live it, Lord. And when I’m doing well help me to never seek a crown, For my reward is giving glory to you.


That is all sweet.

However what is it Christ demands of us?

Romans 12:2

And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

Is it to sit around and make warm sweetness or to finish the course he has laid before us.

Is it to move from spiritual infantcy to maturity, that we may understand and grasp the doctrines of Christ?

1 Corinthians 3


1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.
2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.

Christ didnt suffer all that on the cross to just have a heaven full of spiritual infants.

He has a task for us; and that is to spiritually grow.

This task comes with eternal reward.

Centurionoflight
Feb 7th 2007, 08:38 PM
moonglow



Centurionoflight you aren't explaining what this inheritance is..or why I would want it...and what is this 'course' I am to 'finish' just to get a reward?


Understanding the crowns and reward;

James 2:5
Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?

Love him; is a referance to those that have finished the course to have the thinking of Christ; they know him thus they know what it is they love.

This is beyond those who just believed on him for salvation; these LOVE him; and have showin that love thru their growth.


In Rome the crowns came with more than just something to wear on the head;
in fact many of the crowns was made of perishable plant material.

They came with them a sign of rank and status.

Think of it as a VIP club of heaven.

Access to spots others will have no access to.
Responsibilities that is fitting of a higher class.





Paul didn't say he was seeking after his reward, he already knew he had it...he was simply stating a fact...so no I don't see that as arrogance.

God bless


If he wasnt seeking it; how would he know he had it.
If you wasnt trying to finish a race; how would you know when you have?

moonglow
Feb 8th 2007, 03:25 AM
moonglow



Understanding the crowns and reward;

James 2:5
Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?

Love him; is a referance to those that have finished the course to have the thinking of Christ; they know him thus they know what it is they love.

This is beyond those who just believed on him for salvation; these LOVE him; and have showin that love thru their growth.


In Rome the crowns came with more than just something to wear on the head;
in fact many of the crowns was made of perishable plant material.

They came with them a sign of rank and status.

Think of it as a VIP club of heaven.

Access to spots others will have no access to.
Responsibilities that is fitting of a higher class.





If he wasnt seeking it; how would he know he had it.
If you wasnt trying to finish a race; how would you know when you have?

VIP in Heaven? Unless you can show scriptures on this...I am pretty doubtful about it...sorry. I am honestly having a very difficult time understanding your post here or what you are trying to explain...sorry.

As far as I know no one who is saved, doesn't love Jesus! That wouldn't make a lot of sense to me. I am just not seeing any scriptures about some being higher up in the ranks in Heaven then others and it seems very wrong actually...almost prideful like..."look at me! I have a billion crowns and get to sit next to Jesus and you don't!" Doesn't Christ call us to be servants as He was?

God bless

slightlypuzzled
Feb 8th 2007, 06:51 AM
VIP in Heaven? Unless you can show scriptures on this...I am pretty doubtful about it...sorry. I am honestly having a very difficult time understanding your post here or what you are trying to explain...sorry.

As far as I know no one who is saved, doesn't love Jesus! That wouldn't make a lot of sense to me. I am just not seeing any scriptures about some being higher up in the ranks in Heaven then others and it seems very wrong actually...almost prideful like..."look at me! I have a billion crowns and get to sit next to Jesus and you don't!" Doesn't Christ call us to be servants as He was?

God bless

John records that very thing in the thirteenth chapter of his gospel:

John 13
Washing His Disciples' Feet
1-2 Just before the Passover Feast, Jesus knew that the time had come to leave this world to go to the Father. Having loved his dear companions, he continued to love them right to the end. It was suppertime. The Devil by now had Judas, son of Simon the Iscariot, firmly in his grip, all set for the betrayal.

3-6Jesus knew that the Father had put him in complete charge of everything, that he came from God and was on his way back to God. So he got up from the supper table, set aside his robe, and put on an apron. Then he poured water into a basin and began to wash the feet of the disciples, drying them with his apron. When he got to Simon Peter, Peter said, "Master, you wash my feet?"

7Jesus answered, "You don't understand now what I'm doing, but it will be clear enough to you later."

8Peter persisted, "You're not going to wash my feet—ever!"

Jesus said, "If I don't wash you, you can't be part of what I'm doing."

9"Master!" said Peter. "Not only my feet, then. Wash my hands! Wash my head!"

10-12Jesus said, "If you've had a bath in the morning, you only need your feet washed now and you're clean from head to toe. My concern, you understand, is holiness, not hygiene. So now you're clean. But not every one of you." (He knew who was betraying him. That's why he said, "Not every one of you.") After he had finished washing their feet, he took his robe, put it back on, and went back to his place at the table.

12-17Then he said, "Do you understand what I have done to you? You address me as 'Teacher' and 'Master,' and rightly so. That is what I am. So if I, the Master and Teacher, washed your feet, you must now wash each other's feet. I've laid down a pattern for you. What I've done, you do. I'm only pointing out the obvious. A servant is not ranked above his master; an employee doesn't give orders to the employer. If you understand what I'm telling you, act like it—and live a blessed life.

third hero
Feb 8th 2007, 09:15 AM
The reward is the kept promise of eternal life, living with God forever. What else is needed? A mansion in heaven? Do you not even know that heaven itself is going to be destroyed? What ar you working for? A building in heaven, when God is going to live on the New Earth? This is one of the many fallacies that I have found in the OSAS teachings. Not only does it allow the wicked to enter the kingdom of heaven, but the reward is changed from being saved, to gaining houses and gold ina temporal place that God is not going to be at anyway. Makes as much sense as running a marathon for a reward that never existed. Congratulations, you wasted your time fro nothing.

third hero
Feb 8th 2007, 09:18 AM
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/1021/churchsignym5.jpg


Wow PP,
I thought I was the only one that had entire churches attacking me because I didn't walk in lock-step with them. Keep up the good work:lol:

Centurionoflight
Feb 8th 2007, 06:06 PM
moonglow



VIP in Heaven? Unless you can show scriptures on this...I am pretty doubtful about it...sorry. I am honestly having a very difficult time understanding your post here or what you are trying to explain...sorry.

Some will have GREAT rewards; Glory; access; others will not.
It is part of the inheiritance.

We are to set our focus on that;

Colossians 3:2 Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth.




As far as I know no one who is saved, doesn't love Jesus!

If they love him; then why dont they learn his doctrine and grow in his thinking?
Oh yeah
It is way more fun to do other things, like serve the flesh.

They rather build wood; hay' and stubble, than good stones.

1 cor 3:15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.





That wouldn't make a lot of sense to me. I am just not seeing any scriptures about some being higher up in the ranks in Heaven then others and it seems very wrong actually...almost prideful like..."look at me! I have a billion crowns and get to sit next to Jesus and you don't!" Doesn't Christ call us to be servants as He was?

God bless

That is human view point;

Remember in Heaven there will be no sin nature.

And the Lord will Give his faithful reward and responsibility.

Matthew 25:23
His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.

This is not a picture of equality.

We are givin much; thus much is expected of us.

Christ has givin us eternal life; we are expected to mature in that life.

Centurionoflight
Feb 8th 2007, 06:39 PM
third hero



The reward is the kept promise of eternal life, living with God forever. What else is needed?



Heb 11:35 Women received their dead raised to life again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection:

There is a " better resurrection" one full of great blessing and reward.



A mansion in heaven? Do you not even know that heaven itself is going to be destroyed? What ar you working for? A building in heaven, when God is going to live on the New Earth?

1 pet 1:4 To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you,

Seems like our inheritance is secure and will never fade away.

And something to be excited about.





This is one of the many fallacies that I have found in the OSAS teachings.

You have found?




Not only does it allow the wicked to enter the kingdom of heaven, but the reward is changed from being saved, to gaining houses and gold ina temporal place that God is not going to be at anyway. Makes as much sense as running a marathon for a reward that never existed. Congratulations, you wasted your time fro nothing.

Serving God as a faithful servant is a waste of time?

Is that your point?

For you for sure are not helping people to finish the course before them.
Instead what you state is a distracting; is it to cause your christian brothers to stumble.

All that to protect the lie called "insecure salvation".

Your doctrine will bring shame at his return;

1Jn.2:28 "And now, little children, abide in Him , so that when He appears, we may have confidence and not shrink away from Him in shame at His coming"

moonglow
Feb 8th 2007, 07:48 PM
moonglow


Some will have GREAT rewards; Glory; access; others will not.
It is part of the inheiritance.

We are to set our focus on that;

Colossians 3:2 Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth.



If they love him; then why dont they learn his doctrine and grow in his thinking?
Oh yeah
It is way more fun to do other things, like serve the flesh.

They rather build wood; hay' and stubble, than good stones.

1 cor 3:15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.




That is human view point;

Remember in Heaven there will be no sin nature.

And the Lord will Give his faithful reward and responsibility.

Matthew 25:23
His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.

This is not a picture of equality.

We are givin much; thus much is expected of us.

Christ has givin us eternal life; we are expected to mature in that life.

I am getting ready to leave so have to make this short...actually I agree with you on the rewards though not in the same way you believe in them...I believe any rewards we get we will give BACK to Jesus as without Him we can do nothing...are nothing!

We will cast our crowns before His feet...

Revelation 4:9-11

9 Whenever the living creatures give glory and honor and thanks to Him who sits on the throne, who lives forever and ever, 10 the twenty-four elders fall down before Him who sits on the throne and worship Him who lives forever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying:
11 “ You are worthy, O Lord,
To receive glory and honor and power;
For You created all things,
And by Your will they exist and were created.”

And I believe those that truly love Jesus are learning and growing in Him and striving to run the race. The replies I gave you were the replies I got when I tried to tell people about the rewards in Heaven...that they aren't carnal 'rewards' like we get in school....because while we obeyed and did the work we needed to do...its not possible without Jesus..it all goes back to Jesus...the focus should always remain on Him and not what we might gain.

I have more to say about your reply but will have to do it later.

God bless

Centurionoflight
Feb 8th 2007, 08:13 PM
moonglow






I am getting ready to leave so have to make this short...actually I agree with you on the rewards though not in the same way you believe in them...I believe any rewards we get we will give BACK to Jesus as without Him we can do nothing...are nothing!

At this point those with crowns ARE something; that being a faithful servent.





We will cast our crowns before His feet...


Yet the passage states

10 the twenty-four elders fall down before Him who sits on the throne and worship Him who lives forever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying:


The elders are throwing their crowns, not us.

Remember; the Crowns of Rome represented something more than some thing to wear on the head; they came with reward; status; position.

Christ gives us reward based on performace;
We are not going to throw his blessing back in his face.




And I believe those that truly love Jesus are learning and growing in Him and striving to run the race. The replies I gave you were the replies I got when I tried to tell people about the rewards in Heaven...that they aren't carnal 'rewards' like we get in school....because while we obeyed and did the work we needed to do...its not possible without Jesus..it all goes back to Jesus...the focus should always remain on Him and not what we might gain.

There is a focus of gain; of striving to be a good and faithful servent.

We are to focus on keeping our growth for reward.

Rev.3:11 "I am coming quickly; hold fast what you have, in order that no one take your crown"

moonglow
Feb 8th 2007, 11:31 PM
moonglow





At this point those with crowns ARE something; that being a faithful servent.





Yet the passage states

10 the twenty-four elders fall down before Him who sits on the throne and worship Him who lives forever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying:


The elders are throwing their crowns, not us.

Remember; the Crowns of Rome represented something more than some thing to wear on the head; they came with reward; status; position.

Christ gives us reward based on performace;
We are not going to throw his blessing back in his face.



There is a focus of gain; of striving to be a good and faithful servent.

We are to focus on keeping our growth for reward.

Rev.3:11 "I am coming quickly; hold fast what you have, in order that no one take your crown"

wow you really don't get it do you? The idea isn't to throw our rewards IN His face as a rejection...but to show we owe it all to Him! Everything...every breath we take, everything we do is owed to Him.

I will try to put something together for you with scriptures either later today or maybe not until tomorrow..I don't like being on here much when my son is home...don't want to neglect him.

But I do have a couple of quick questions for you. Do you personally feel you know everything there is to know about the bible? Or do you feel you know it all and are not open one bit to learning anything new...or even considering you might be wrong about some things? I am just wondering. As for myself I know I could study the bible for the next 500 yrs and still be learning! Its that amazing...and that endless. I try very hard to remember I don't know everything, nor am I right all the time either. you post scriptures but seem to assume an awful lot about them...yet when others post scriptures you only go in the strictest sense of them and don't allow for assuming anything...have you notice you have a habit of doing that? Maybe pondering on who the 24 elders are...who they represent will help a little in understanding what I am talking about...until later...

God bless

threebigrocks
Feb 9th 2007, 02:24 AM
Posted by PP in the debate thread:



You have to stand firm in your belief, hold fast, endure to the end, etc all of your life. That is what I am saying. If you do not then you will not receive the promise.


Reminded me of this:

Ephesians 6


13 This is why you must take up the full armor of God, so that you may be able to resist in the evil day, and having prepared everything, to take your stand. 14 Stand, therefore,

with truthlike a belt around your waist,
righteousness like armor on your chest,
15 and your feet sandaled with readiness for the gospel of peace.
16 In every situation take the shield of faith,
and with it you will be able to extinguish
the flaming arrows of the evil one.
17 Take the helmet of salvation,
and the sword of the Spirit, which is God's word. 18 With every prayer and request, pray at all times in the Spirit, and stay alert in this, with all perseverance and intercession for all the saints.


We need to make a stand, not let sin overtake us. We must resist the devil and his ways, and dress oursleves with things of the Lord, we are to persevere.

Diggindeeper
Feb 9th 2007, 05:40 AM
Such emphasis on "believe" in the arena...
"even to them that believe on His name"
"He that believeth on Him is not condemned"
" and believeth on Him, may have everlasting life"
"He that believeth on Me hath everlasting life"
"'Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved"
"believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing ye might have life through His name"

All one has to do is "believe" and once you do, you are OSAS for all eternity??

Well, I'm reminded of Simon the sorcerer in Acts 8:13...
"Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done. "

He wanted that POWER like the Apostles.

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.

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


So, this man believed, and he was even baptised... But Peter said "Your money perish with you!" To simply believe is futile. We are to put on righteousness, follow Christ, endure...in other words, it's the bride that makes herself ready!



James 2:19-20
19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

DSK
Feb 9th 2007, 12:17 PM
Whenever the subject of "eternal security" is discussed, it becomes crucial to look at verb tenses, especially the tense of the word "believe" and it's relation to salvation.

John 20:31 But these have been written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing (pisteuo) you may have life in His name.

Notice that pisteuo is in the present tense which describes those who are continuously believing. That’s not in the perfect tense, "who once believed." It’s not in the aorist tense, "who believed at one point in time." It’s a present participle which means "we must believe and keep on believing.

Jerome H. Smith Author, The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge points out that when belief is said to lead to eternal life the present tense of continuous action is always used, and the aorist tense of a single or momentary action is never used.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life.

Smith says in a quote: “In the New Testament, when belief is said to lead to eternal life, as is the case here [John 3:16], the tense expressing continuous action is always used while the tense expressing a single action is never used. The stress is thus placed on a continuous faith rather than on an isolated moment of faith. Never in these passages expressing belief in eternal life is one’s eternal security said to be guaranteed by a single, isolated act of faith.”

1 John 5:13 These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God. (NKJV)

We must also continue in the grace of God, and continue in the faith.
"continue in the grace of God." (Acts 13:43)
"exhorting them to continue in the faith," (Acts 14:22)
"If ye continue in the faith" (Col 1:23)

Centurionoflight
Feb 9th 2007, 05:57 PM
moonglow



wow you really don't get it do you? The idea isn't to throw our rewards IN His face as a rejection...but to show we owe it all to Him! Everything...every breath we take, everything we do is owed to Him.


Ok;
That is a givin

But that is not the point of the Christian life.

The point is we are to mature; in that Christ has a return on the price he payed for us.




But I do have a couple of quick questions for you. Do you personally feel you know everything there is to know about the bible? Or do you feel you know it all and are not open one bit to learning anything new...or even considering you might be wrong about some things?


New stuff should not conflict with old stuff.



I am just wondering. As for myself I know I could study the bible for the next 500 yrs and still be learning! Its that amazing...and that endless.


We dont have 500 years; so we better get with it.



I try very hard to remember I don't know everything, nor am I right all the time either. you post scriptures but seem to assume an awful lot about them...yet when others post scriptures you only go in the strictest sense of them and don't allow for assuming anything...have you notice you have a habit of doing that?


It is simple

Their assumptions conflict with other sound doctrines.

Therefore they are incorrect.

Thru conflict of the newer doctrine; the false views stand out quite fast.



Maybe pondering on who the 24 elders are...who they represent will help a little in understanding what I am talking about...until later...


Ok they are not the church.

FYI; for they have their crowns;

They exist before the bride{Church} is ready.
The bride when she is ready has her crowns, and is purified.

The bride cant cast her crowns when she doesnt have them yet.

Rev 19
7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.
8 And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.

Centurionoflight
Feb 9th 2007, 06:08 PM
Diggindeeper




Such emphasis on "believe" in the arena...
"even to them that believe on His name"
"He that believeth on Him is not condemned"
" and believeth on Him, may have everlasting life"
"He that believeth on Me hath everlasting life"
"'Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved"
"believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing ye might have life through His name"

All one has to do is "believe" and once you do, you are OSAS for all eternity??


Umm yeah;

All Adam had to do was disbelieve once and he was unrighteous for all eternity.
Thru Christ we believe once and are found righteous for all eternity.

Somehow this is unfair.




Well, I'm reminded of Simon the sorcerer in Acts 8:13...
"Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done. "

He wanted that POWER like the Apostles.

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.

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


So, this man believed, and he was even baptised... But Peter said "Your money perish with you!" To simply believe is futile. We are to put on righteousness, follow Christ, endure...in other words, it's the bride that makes herself ready!

Perish; referance to a perishing of the human body


He was living by the flesh; not the spirit.


This in no way show he "lost" salvation.

Acts 8
20 And Peter said unto him, `Thy silver with thee -- may it be to destruction! because the gift of God thou didst think to possess through money;
21 thou hast neither part nor lot in this thing, for thy heart is not right before God;
22 reform, therefore, from this thy wickedness, and beseech God, if then the purpose of thy heart may be forgiven thee,



Simon wanted to give the spirit; what a noble thing to want.

Yet that desire was wickedness.

This occurs alot today; with people thinking they speak tongues; when that gift doesnt even exist today.

Are those people unsaved?

This also occurs with people "tithing" to buy Gods blessings.
They give so that God will come thru for them on some money deal, a bit of a bribe so to speak.


Are those people unsaved?






James 2:19-20
19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

If the devils believed God; then they would not oppose him.

Sure they beleive there IS a GOD, but to them GOd is a liar, cant be trusted.

slightlypuzzled
Feb 9th 2007, 06:10 PM
The point is we are to mature; in that Christ has a return on the price he payed for us.

Peter makes it quite plain, we either mature or we lose out completely....there is no middle ground. So, I would agree with the first part.
Now the 'return on the price He paid for us' I am still working on....you have a point in that one, we are told 'You were bought with a price, so glorify God in your bodies.' We belong to Him totally.....


We dont have 500 years; so we better get with it.

Here, and in your last post, it seems like your premillenial outlook colors your interpretation of the OSAS doctrine? or maybe not?

Centurionoflight
Feb 9th 2007, 06:13 PM
DSK


Whenever the subject of "eternal security" is discussed, it becomes crucial to look at verb tenses, especially the tense of the word "believe" and it's relation to salvation.

John 20:31 But these have been written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing (pisteuo) you may have life in His name.

Notice that pisteuo is in the present tense which describes those who are continuously believing. That’s not in the perfect tense, "who once believed." It’s not in the aorist tense, "who believed at one point in time." It’s a present participle which means "we must believe and keep on believing.



And when we fail in our belief;

Christ who is a LIVING GOD.

Is still faithful to us; who are in him from a spiritual birth.

2 tim 2:13 If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.







1 John 5:13 These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God. (NKJV)

We must also continue in the grace of God, and continue in the faith.
"continue in the grace of God." (Acts 13:43)
"exhorting them to continue in the faith," (Acts 14:22)
"If ye continue in the faith" (Col 1:23)


Yes we are to grow in the spirit; this is not about the foundation Christ did; of salvation.

Centurionoflight
Feb 9th 2007, 06:17 PM
slightlypuzzled



Peter makes it quite plain, we either mature or we lose out completely....there is no middle ground. So, I would agree with the first part.
Now the 'return on the price He paid for us' I am still working on....you have a point in that one, we are told 'You were bought with a price, so glorify God in your bodies.' We belong to Him totally.....

Lose out on what?

Not Salvation, that is secure.

The loss is of reward and inheritance.



Here, and in your last post, it seems like your premillenial outlook colors your interpretation of the OSAS doctrine? or maybe not?

Context:

Moonglow stated: As for myself I know I could study the bible for the next 500 yrs and still be learning!

Now unless people are living for 500 years.
That makes time kinda short for moonglow.

third hero
Feb 10th 2007, 07:59 PM
slightlypuzzled


Lose out on what?

Not Salvation, that is secure.

The loss is of reward and inheritance.


Context:

Moonglow stated: As for myself I know I could study the bible for the next 500 yrs and still be learning!

Now unless people are living for 500 years.
That makes time kinda short for moonglow.

Please show me a quote that says, "Go ahead, pray the sinner's prayer and scontinue to live in sin, and all will be well with you in the Lord"/ Because I have just to name a few, that completely contradicts that notion.

Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, will enter into the kingdom og heaven: BUT HE THAT DOETH THE WILL OF MY FATHER WHICH IS IN HEAVEN. Matthew 7:21

What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? GOD FORBID. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Romans 6:1-2

And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God SHALL TAKE AWAY his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things written in this book. Revelation 22:19

ANd the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark on his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation: and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb Revelation 14:9-10

Do you notice a few things? No one can sin and still enter the Kingdom of Heaven. People can do things that can cause them to lose that gift of salvation. And God will remove names from the Book of Life, whoever takes words away from that book of prophecy. This is textbook NOSAS, as written in the scriptures. Not my idea, but God's. If OSAS was the case, then why isn't all of Israel saved yet, since they had the law of Moses, which is the words of God?

threebigrocks
Feb 10th 2007, 08:17 PM
Matthew 10:22—And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved.

As shared by PP in the other thread.

If this is indeed talking about physically enduring to the end in a time of this world, then what other sort of 'saved' are we all missing out on?

This verse is simply stating, even when taken into context, that the one who endures because of the name of Christ for their own lifetime on this earth will be saved.

In any reasoning it does indeed show a process to be saved that goes beyond confessing with one's mouth. It's not unconditional, but conditional: but he that endureth to the end...

It doesn't say that he who perserveres or endures today, or only while under condemnation, or hard times, but the one who in despite of the trials that continues on to the end of their own life is saved.

There is no 'kinda sorta' type Christian with God. You are, or you aren't.

BadDog
Feb 12th 2007, 04:25 AM
Saw that new OSAS thread that Peter's having fun with. :D I had something to share regarding that Colossians 1:23 text - which Madeline handled very nicely. WIA suggested that I post it here rather than in the thread since I will be too busy to interact with any responses for Peter, and that wouldn't be fair. So here goes:

Madeline,

Nice comments. I think you explained that text nicely. Perhaps the following will give a bit of technical support for such a position. Anyway, let's look at the text in a little detail:

EI GE EPIMENETE TH PISTEI TEQEMELIWMENOI KAI EDRAIOI
If indeed (emphasis) you are firm in the faith, having laid the foundation (established) and being steadfast

KAI MH METAKINOUMENOI APO KAI THS ELPIDOS TOU EUAGGELIOU OU HKOUSATE
And without shifting from the hope of the gospel which you’ve heard.

The particle GE emphasizes the conditional EI EPIMENETE... ("if you remain firm..." - 1st class condition). A 1st class condition, as Madeline said, is often best translated "since" because the possibility is assumed to be true. IOW, Paul is not considering a possible defection of these believers. In this case, Paul is very confident (GE) - "indeed" that his readers will not stray away from the hope of the gospel. (Hope is used differently than we do - a confidence about what has not been received yet, but will be.) "The faith" is a reference to the set of beliefs which they follow. It is not expressing a possibility that they may stop believing something. This same confidence is seen later...

Colossians 2:5 For even though I am absent in body, nevertheless I am with you in spirit, rejoicing to see your good discipline and the stability of your faith in Christ.

Notice what confidence Paul has in them.

METAKINEO (METAKINOUMENOI is a plural present passive participle) - "without shifting" - The idea is of being caused to be shaken from the hope which they have. When believers are not "firmly planted in the faith" they become easily disturbed and confused, moving from one insecure anchor of "hope" to another. Paul is expressing confidence that these Colossian Christians are not in such a state. They are not going from one teacher to another, searching for truth. They have found the truth in Christ.

The expression regarding the "hope of the gospel" is simply expressing confidence in the hope which the gospel stirs up. The "hope" (ELPIS) is a confident expectation. Paul is not saying, "you guys need to keep hoping that somehow..." It is a hope only in the sense that it is in the future, and not realized yet.

The verb QEMELIOW (TIQEMELIWMENOI - perfect passive participle) - the perfect tense of the verb “established” stresses something which happened at a point in time in the past, and which continues in a state of being established. The passive voice shows this to be a work which God accomplishes in believers as they hold fast to the person and work of Christ as the source for their salvation and spiritual growth in their lives. The root idea is of a foundation, and the expression “firm in the faith” is the natural result of being built on such a foundation. Later in that same paragraph Paul referred to the "hope of glory." At the BEMA seat of Christ is where we have an opportunity to share in His glory, as joint-heirs of Christ. Then in 1:28 Paul says that he proclaims Christ, "admonishing every person and teaching every person with all wisdom, that we may present every man mature in Christ."

That's why I'm confident this is what Paul is talking about.

Paul is concluding a section (1:13-23) with a strong conditional sentence (1st class condition). It consists of both a very positive (GE emphasis) affirmation and confidence on Paul's part, but also a negative warning. But this warning has nothing to do with possible condemnation. The negative warning, "without shifting from the hope of the gospel which you've heard," indicates a very real danger of not being presented before the Lord at the BEMA seat of Christ as a mature disciple of Christ who has been consistently maturing in Christ.

This warning is shown to be the same kind of emphasis Paul is making later in 2:8 and 2:19...

Colossians 2:8; 18, 19 See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.

Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of the angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen, inflated without cause by his fleshly mind, and not holding fast to the head, from whom the entire body, being supplied and held together by the joints and ligaments, grows with a growth which is from God.

Here we see as well the false teaching of which Paul was concerned. This was the specific danger Paul saw - that they might become confused by such doctrines about angels (that we should worship them). There were apparently many false teachers and false prophets making all kinds of claims and drawing people after them.

In conclusion, one thing I wanted to make clear here: grammatically, this is a 1st class condition. Any 1st-year Greek grammar will tell you that this is written in such a way as assumes the positive. In English, some Bibles seem to read as if Paul was concerned about their remaining firmly established in the faith. That is not what Paul is saying here. The particle GE makes it clear that Paul was very confident about this.

Some may not agree with my comments about the BEMA seat of Christ, but the other is really not arguable.

Debates like this are nice because it helps us all to better understand the other side's approach to various scripture texts. We do not want to just put down the opponent's arguments, but to better understand our brotehr or sister in Christ's position.

Take care, Peter.

Bob

BadDog
Feb 12th 2007, 04:39 AM
Perhaps just quoting this in another translation will clear things up:

Matthew 10:18, 19; 22 You will even be brought before governors and kings because of Me, to bear witness to them and to the nations. But when they hand you over, don't worry about how or what you should speak. For you will be given what to say at that hour,

You will be hated by everybody because of My name. And the one who endures to the end will be delivered.

This is speaking of the tribulation period. The deliverance is not speaking of gaining eternal life. The context is very clear about that. Usually when SWTERIA/SWZW is used in the NT it is not referring to gaining eternal life.

Later in this chapter Jesus speaks of how valuable our lives are to the Father. Then he says...

Matthew 10:32, 33 "Therefore, everyone who will acknowledge Me before men, I will also acknowledge him before My Father in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father in heaven."

This is speaking of the BEMA seat of Christ, as in 2 Timothy 2:11-13. Do you want to hear, "Well done, good and faithful servant"?

But if this text is speaking about enduring until the end of our lives, then it is simply impossible to ever know for sure that you will be saved. There would be absolutely no assurance of salvation, and salvation is then not by faith, but by works. Faith would merely be the 1st step.

BD

Centurionoflight
Feb 12th 2007, 06:46 AM
Interesting twist.


I find those who delve into the language of scripture {Greek; latin; and Hebrew} Tend to lean to OSAS.

Those who;

1) Go by "holy" mens commentaries
{Dear Dr. So-N-so said it so that makes it true}

Warning: 2 Timothy 4:3:
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
2) Live by emotion
{I feel it should be this way; therefore it is}

Warning: Romans 16:18
For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly{emotion}; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.
3) Ignore the language of scripture
{PP#79, You can go on about tenses and exegesis and all that you often go on about. I honestly don't concern myself with all that going on.}

Warning: Acts 17:11
These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

2 tim 2:15
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

They Tend to lean NOSAS.

This is why a debate cant occur on this topic, the sides will never see eye to eye.

Two different frame of referances are occuring.

One is of human viewpoint; the other is of scripture.

ProjectPeter
Feb 12th 2007, 02:23 PM
Saw that new OSAS thread that Peter's having fun with. :D I had something to share regarding that Colossians 1:23 text - which Madeline handled very nicely. WIA suggested that I post it here rather than in the thread since I will be too busy to interact with any responses for Peter, and that wouldn't be fair. So here goes:

Madeline,

Nice comments. I think you explained that text nicely. Perhaps the following will give a bit of technical support for such a position. Anyway, let's look at the text in a little detail:

EI GE EPIMENETE TH PISTEI TEQEMELIWMENOI KAI EDRAIOI
If indeed (emphasis) you are firm in the faith, having laid the foundation (established) and being steadfast

KAI MH METAKINOUMENOI APO KAI THS ELPIDOS TOU EUAGGELIOU OU HKOUSATE
And without shifting from the hope of the gospel which you’ve heard.

The particle GE emphasizes the conditional EI EPIMENETE... ("if you remain firm..." - 1st class condition). A 1st class condition, as Madeline said, is often best translated "since" because the possibility is assumed to be true. IOW, Paul is not considering a possible defection of these believers. In this case, Paul is very confident (GE) - "indeed" that his readers will not stray away from the hope of the gospel. (Hope is used differently than we do - a confidence about what has not been received yet, but will be.) "The faith" is a reference to the set of beliefs which they follow. It is not expressing a possibility that they may stop believing something. This same confidence is seen later...

Colossians 2:5 For even though I am absent in body, nevertheless I am with you in spirit, rejoicing to see your good discipline and the stability of your faith in Christ.

Notice what confidence Paul has in them.

METAKINEO (METAKINOUMENOI is a plural present passive participle) - "without shifting" - The idea is of being caused to be shaken from the hope which they have. When believers are not "firmly planted in the faith" they become easily disturbed and confused, moving from one insecure anchor of "hope" to another. Paul is expressing confidence that these Colossian Christians are not in such a state. They are not going from one teacher to another, searching for truth. They have found the truth in Christ.

The expression regarding the "hope of the gospel" is simply expressing confidence in the hope which the gospel stirs up. The "hope" (ELPIS) is a confident expectation. Paul is not saying, "you guys need to keep hoping that somehow..." It is a hope only in the sense that it is in the future, and not realized yet.

The verb QEMELIOW (TIQEMELIWMENOI - perfect passive participle) - the perfect tense of the verb “established” stresses something which happened at a point in time in the past, and which continues in a state of being established. The passive voice shows this to be a work which God accomplishes in believers as they hold fast to the person and work of Christ as the source for their salvation and spiritual growth in their lives. The root idea is of a foundation, and the expression “firm in the faith” is the natural result of being built on such a foundation. Later in that same paragraph Paul referred to the "hope of glory." At the BEMA seat of Christ is where we have an opportunity to share in His glory, as joint-heirs of Christ. Then in 1:28 Paul says that he proclaims Christ, "admonishing every person and teaching every person with all wisdom, that we may present every man mature in Christ."

That's why I'm confident this is what Paul is talking about.

Paul is concluding a section (1:13-23) with a strong conditional sentence (1st class condition). It consists of both a very positive (GE emphasis) affirmation and confidence on Paul's part, but also a negative warning. But this warning has nothing to do with possible condemnation. The negative warning, "without shifting from the hope of the gospel which you've heard," indicates a very real danger of not being presented before the Lord at the BEMA seat of Christ as a mature disciple of Christ who has been consistently maturing in Christ.

This warning is shown to be the same kind of emphasis Paul is making later in 2:8 and 2:19...

Colossians 2:8; 18, 19 See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.

Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of the angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen, inflated without cause by his fleshly mind, and not holding fast to the head, from whom the entire body, being supplied and held together by the joints and ligaments, grows with a growth which is from God.

Here we see as well the false teaching of which Paul was concerned. This was the specific danger Paul saw - that they might become confused by such doctrines about angels (that we should worship them). There were apparently many false teachers and false prophets making all kinds of claims and drawing people after them.

In conclusion, one thing I wanted to make clear here: grammatically, this is a 1st class condition. Any 1st-year Greek grammar will tell you that this is written in such a way as assumes the positive. In English, some Bibles seem to read as if Paul was concerned about their remaining firmly established in the faith. That is not what Paul is saying here. The particle GE makes it clear that Paul was very confident about this.

Some may not agree with my comments about the BEMA seat of Christ, but the other is really not arguable.

Debates like this are nice because it helps us all to better understand the other side's approach to various scripture texts. We do not want to just put down the opponent's arguments, but to better understand our brotehr or sister in Christ's position.

Take care, Peter.

BobBD,

NKJ

if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.

NIV

if you continue in your faith, established and firm, not moved from the hope held out in the gospel. This is the gospel that you heard and that has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven, and of which I, Paul, have become a servant.

ASV

if so be that ye continue in the faith, grounded and stedfast, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel which ye heard, which was preached in all creation under heaven; whereof I Paul was made a minister.

KJV

If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;

HCSB

if indeed you remain grounded and steadfast in the faith, and are not shifted away from the hope of the gospel that you heard. This gospel has been proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and I, Paul, have become a minister of it.

NLT

But you must continue to believe this truth and stand in it firmly. Don't drift away from the assurance you received when you heard the Good News. The Good News has been preached all over the world, and I, Paul, have been appointed by God to proclaim it.

NRSV

provided that you continue securely established and steadfast in the faith, without shifting from the hope promised by the gospel that you heard, which has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven. I, Paul, became a servant of this gospel.

I mean here you say that it is Greek 101 stuff and such and such is a much better translation and all of these other Greek scholar folk just hosed this one all up! I mean let's face it here. If what you and madeline are saying is the fact... then that whole verse has to be totally changed to read completely different than how all these other translator's figured it should read. You change that to since then here is how it should read.

Colossians 1:21 And although you were formerly alienated and hostile in mind, engaged in evil deeds,
22 yet He has now reconciled you in His fleshly body through death, in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach --
23 SINCE indeed you continue in the faith firmly established and steadfast, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel that you have heard, which was proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, was made a minister.

That is a total rewrite, meaning something totally different, if you are correct and every other major translation that we have out there just messed this all up as you guys seem to be trying to get us to believe. Gotta be honest with you here... you know I ain't going to buy that! ;)

ProjectPeter
Feb 12th 2007, 02:44 PM
Perhaps just quoting this in another translation will clear things up:

Matthew 10:18, 19; 22 You will even be brought before governors and kings because of Me, to bear witness to them and to the nations. But when they hand you over, don't worry about how or what you should speak. For you will be given what to say at that hour,

You will be hated by everybody because of My name. And the one who endures to the end will be delivered.

This is speaking of the tribulation period. The deliverance is not speaking of gaining eternal life. The context is very clear about that. Usually when SWTERIA/SWZW is used in the NT it is not referring to gaining eternal life.

Later in this chapter Jesus speaks of how valuable our lives are to the Father. Then he says...

Matthew 10:32, 33 "Therefore, everyone who will acknowledge Me before men, I will also acknowledge him before My Father in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father in heaven."

This is speaking of the BEMA seat of Christ, as in 2 Timothy 2:11-13. Do you want to hear, "Well done, good and faithful servant"?

But if this text is speaking about enduring until the end of our lives, then it is simply impossible to ever know for sure that you will be saved. There would be absolutely no assurance of salvation, and salvation is then not by faith, but by works. Faith would merely be the 1st step.

BDWhat in that passage makes you think that this is speaking of the tribulation period in and of itself? It pretty much describes the life of the Apostles to a tee don't you think?

Then keep going on and follow the flow that Jesus is giving these men here.


Matthew 10:17 "But beware of men; for they will deliver you up to the courts, and scourge you in their synagogues;
18 and you shall even be brought before governors and kings for My sake, as a testimony to them and to the Gentiles.
19 "But when they deliver you up, do not become anxious about how or what you will speak; for it shall be given you in that hour what you are to speak.
20 "For it is not you who speak, but it is the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you.
21 "And brother will deliver up brother to death, and a father his child; and children will rise up against parents, and cause them to be put to death.
22 "And you will be hated by all on account of My name, but it is the one who has endured to the end who will be saved.
23 "But whenever they persecute you in this city, flee to the next; for truly I say to you, you shall not finish going through the cities of Israel, until the Son of Man comes.
24 ¶"A disciple is not above his teacher, nor a slave above his master.
25 "It is enough for the disciple that he become as his teacher, and the slave as his master. If they have called the head of the house Beelzebul, how much more the members of his household!
26 "Therefore do not fear them, for there is nothing covered that will not be revealed, and hidden that will not be known.
27 "What I tell you in the darkness, speak in the light; and what you hear whispered in your ear, proclaim upon the housetops.
28 "And do not fear those who kill the body, but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
29 "Are not two sparrows sold for a cent? And yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father.
30 "But the very hairs of your head are all numbered.
31 "Therefore do not fear; you are of more value than many sparrows.
32 "Everyone therefore who shall confess Me before men, I will also confess him before My Father who is in heaven.
33 "But whoever shall deny Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven.

So whatever seat of judgment and all that... Jesus is making it pretty clear. If they denied Him before men... he'd deny them before the Father. Don't fear men and therefore deny Him... fear God instead.

We see that in action for example when Peter and John told the counsel that whom were they to obey... men or God? No matter the price it would cost, they wouldn't deny Him and for them to remain silent would have been doing just that. The apostles stood before officials and they were hated for His name sake... etc. So no clue why one would attribute this to the tribulation although the persecution and all will certainly be similar come that day... although I dare say even worse.

ProjectPeter
Feb 12th 2007, 02:46 PM
Interesting twist.


I find those who delve into the language of scripture {Greek; latin; and Hebrew} Tend to lean to OSAS.

Those who;

1) Go by "holy" mens commentaries
{Dear Dr. So-N-so said it so that makes it true}

Warning: 2 Timothy 4:3:
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
2) Live by emotion
{I feel it should be this way; therefore it is}

Warning: Romans 16:18
For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly{emotion}; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.
3) Ignore the language of scripture
{PP#79, You can go on about tenses and exegesis and all that you often go on about. I honestly don't concern myself with all that going on.}

Warning: Acts 17:11
These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

2 tim 2:15
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

They Tend to lean NOSAS.

This is why a debate cant occur on this topic, the sides will never see eye to eye.

Two different frame of referances are occuring.

One is of human viewpoint; the other is of scripture.Um... yeah... there ya go! :rolleyes:

moonglow
Feb 12th 2007, 04:08 PM
Centurionoflight...I am sorry I couldn't get back to this thread sooner...got busy....life happens.



moonglow

Quote:
wow you really don't get it do you? The idea isn't to throw our rewards IN His face as a rejection...but to show we owe it all to Him! Everything...every breath we take, everything we do is owed to Him.


Centurionoflight: Ok;
That is a givin

But that is not the point of the Christian life.

The point is we are to mature; in that Christ has a return on the price he payed for us.

The point of our Christian life isn't to have Christ at the center of it? That was the point I was making in saying we can do nothing without Christ...not get rewards, let alone breath...

I never said we weren't to mature. You seem to totally and completely misunderstand my posts and others because you read things into them that aren't there...it makes trying to even have a conversation with you extremely difficult. Why do you always assume I and others have the worse intentions anyway? That is how I feel...that you think we are all lower then scumbags and you are the might and great Christian because you are maturing in Christ (while putting the rest of us down)...I wouldn't call that mature, let alone maturing in Christ actually. I am getting a tad bit annoyed with the holier then thou talk to me on here actually.

Why can't we just simply talk to each other? Without assuming when I say something I must mean something esle? Why can't you just take ONLY what I have written and not add to it?


Quote moonglow:
But I do have a couple of quick questions for you. Do you personally feel you know everything there is to know about the bible? Or do you feel you know it all and are not open one bit to learning anything new...or even considering you might be wrong about some things?


Centurionoflight:
New stuff should not conflict with old stuff.

See this is what I am talking about right here...I am not talking about 'new' as in new doctines or new ideas. Lets say I never read the book of Daniel before...and one day I sat down and started reading it. Now it would be new to me, wouldn't it? I would be learning something new! Even though it was written thousands of years ago, its new to me. THAT is what I meant by new...ok? When I was born I didn't just know the bible...I first had to grow and learn and learn to read....then I certainly couldn't sit and read through the whole thing and just know it, could I? very few of us have photgraphic memories where they know the whole bible! So all I was saying it we are all always learning from the bible! So to us whatever we read or are studying may be 'new' to us...so I was asking you if you were willing to learn something new that you didn't know about the bible? And that was all I meant.


Quote:moonglow:
I am just wondering. As for myself I know I could study the bible for the next 500 yrs and still be learning! Its that amazing...and that endless.


Centurionoflight:
We dont have 500 years; so we better get with it.

Again you totally missed what I was saying...I study the bible all the time and am always learning...its so amazing we COULD literally study it for 500 years and still not know everything about it. God never said we had to know everything in it anyway...as it states, He puts the knowledge of Him in all of us anyway..:) Our only goal in life shouldn't just be studying the bible ...but putting into practice.


Quote moonglow:
I try very hard to remember I don't know everything, nor am I right all the time either. you post scriptures but seem to assume an awful lot about them...yet when others post scriptures you only go in the strictest sense of them and don't allow for assuming anything...have you notice you have a habit of doing that?


Centurionoflight:It is simple

Their assumptions conflict with other sound doctrines.

Therefore they are incorrect.

Thru conflict of the newer doctrine; the false views stand out quite fast.

:giveup:


Quote moonglow:
Maybe pondering on who the 24 elders are...who they represent will help a little in understanding what I am talking about...until later...


Centurionoflight: Ok they are not the church.

FYI; for they have their crowns;

They exist before the bride{Church} is ready.
The bride when she is ready has her crowns, and is purified.

The bride cant cast her crowns when she doesnt have them yet.

Rev 19
7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.
8 And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.

What? you don't think the elders aren't part of the church? What are they then? demons? They have to be something don't they?

I can see this conversation has been fruitless...:giveup: you can't even understand the simplest things I am trying to say here...I will be praying for you.

Centurionoflight
Feb 12th 2007, 04:52 PM
ProjectPeter


Um... yeah... there ya go!

Correct.

I have yet to see one posting on this board who has a focus on language like BadDog or Madeline, take up the NOSAS position.

Instead its a bunch of "nuh-uh"; or charges of false doctrine; or I would dump a unfaithful worshiper therefore God would too.

Centurionoflight
Feb 12th 2007, 05:04 PM
moonglow



The point of our Christian life isn't to have Christ at the center of it? That was the point I was making in saying we can do nothing without Christ...not get rewards, let alone breath...
Cant have Christ as the center if you dont know him; you dont know him until you grow up in the spirit and leanr what he is all about and is.




I never said we weren't to mature. You seem to totally and completely misunderstand my posts and others because you read things into them that aren't there...it makes trying to even have a conversation with you extremely difficult. Why do you always assume I and others have the worse intentions anyway? 1) That is how I feel...that you think we are all lower then scumbags and 2) you are the might and great Christian because you are maturing in Christ (while putting the rest of us down)...I wouldn't call that mature, let alone maturing in Christ actually. 3) I am getting a tad bit annoyed with the holier then thou talk to me on here actually.

1) Feelings tend to mislead.

2) I never stated I was better than you; or that I was even near any sort of maturity. To state that I did is frankly a human view point that is riled up because some one stated something you didnt like.

3) Is not that human emotion to focus on the talk over the message.




Why can't we just simply talk to each other? Without assuming when I say something I must mean something esle? Why can't you just take ONLY what I have written and not add to it?
What we write has meaning and implications.





See this is what I am talking about right here...I am not talking about 'new' as in new doctines or new ideas. Lets say I never read the book of Daniel before...and one day I sat down and started reading it. Now it would be new to me, wouldn't it? I would be learning something new! Even though it was written thousands of years ago, its new to me. THAT is what I meant by new...ok? When I was born I didn't just know the bible...I first had to grow and learn and learn to read....then I certainly couldn't sit and read through the whole thing and just know it, could I? very few of us have photgraphic memories where they know the whole bible! So all I was saying it we are all always learning from the bible! So to us whatever we read or are studying may be 'new' to us...so I was asking you if you were willing to learn something new that you didn't know about the bible? And that was all I meant.
Again if the "new" doctrine conflicts with learned doctrine the new is in error.





Again you totally missed what I was saying...I study the bible all the time and am always learning...its so amazing we COULD literally study it for 500 years and still not know everything about it. God never said we had to know everything in it anyway...as it states, He puts the knowledge of Him in all of us anyway.. Our only goal in life shouldn't just be studying the bible ...but putting into practice.
Ok;

Logic error with your method: is you cant put into practice what you dont know.


Romans 12:2
And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.


We are to renew our MIND FIRST; then we are able to act.

So yes we are to sit down and study the Bible.

Bible study and learning of its doctrine should be THE first Goal of the Christian life.

Instead peopel want to geting the action stage with out proper training.

So if one doent know it; what exactally are they putting into practice?
Historical trends show people put legalism into practice if they dont know doctrine.



What? you don't think the elders aren't part of the church? What are they then? demons? They have to be something don't they?
What ever they are; they are not the church.

Therefore that pretty picture that gets christians all watery eyed;
The picture of casting their crowns at christs feet
It is a myth.

ProjectPeter
Feb 12th 2007, 05:08 PM
Actually what it is CoL is just keeping it biblically real. Notice that I don't have to change ten other different translations to make it work for NOSAS. But many others have to go and use the "bad translation" argument for their doctrine to fit the passage and in doing so... they change totally the words being said.

But I will give Madeline and BadDog credit in that at least they discuss the Bible as opposed to some who try and present their case. ;)

And for keeping thing totally honest here.... Matt14 has gone Greek for Greek with Baddog as has Owen. There are plenty of NOSAS folk that can do that to should they wish to do it. And I assure you that BadDog would be the first to acknowledge that as a stone cold fact. So again... you are the one appealing to emotion while fussing at the folks that disagree with you for doing that very thing. Because what you said in that post is at best... very logically challenged.

Pilgrimtozion
Feb 12th 2007, 05:11 PM
What ever they are; they are not the church.

Therefore that pretty picture that gets christians all watery eyed;
The picture of casting their crowns at christs feet
It is a myth.

Mate, it sounds a lot like you are saying "it doesn't fit my doctrine, so the elders are not the church". I want to be careful in drawing that conclusion, however, and thus want to ask you two things:
1. How do you know they are not the church?
2. If they are not the church, what are they?

Thanks,
Benjamin

Centurionoflight
Feb 12th 2007, 06:13 PM
ProjectPeter



Notice that I don't have to change ten other different translations to make it work for NOSAS.


The scripture was not written in a traslation.
Thus what a translation says; is only a translation.




But I will give Madeline and BadDog credit in that at least they discuss the Bible as opposed to some who try and present their case.


My focus is on doctrine and its operation.

They know language stuff even better than me.

Events of doctrine are logical and dont conflict;

As I Posted before;

NOSAS conflicts with other doctrine; therefore I scorn it.




And for keeping thing totally honest here.... Matt14 has gone Greek for Greek with Baddog as has Owen. There are plenty of NOSAS folk that can do that to should they wish to do it. And I assure you that BadDog would be the first to acknowledge that as a stone cold fact. So again... you are the one appealing to emotion while fussing at the folks that disagree with you for doing that very thing. Because what you said in that post is at best... very logically challenged.


I am only posting what I am exposed to.

That is

#1 your avoidance of the posting of Romans 5;
#2 your avoidance of language understanding.
#3 your avodiance of any doctrinal system of operation.

With you it seems to be line upon line;

Isa 28

10For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

I gather no knowledge or understanding from your positions.

Centurionoflight
Feb 12th 2007, 06:19 PM
Pilgrimtozion



Mate, it sounds a lot like you are saying "it doesn't fit my doctrine, so the elders are not the church". I want to be careful in drawing that conclusion, however, and thus want to ask you two things:


As I covered before.



1. How do you know they are not the church?


They are not the church; for they have their crowns;

They exist before the bride{Church} is ready.
The bride when she is ready has her crowns, and is purified.

The bride cant cast her crowns when she doesnt have them yet.

Rev 19

7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.
8 And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.




2. If they are not the church, what are they?



They are the 12 elders.

ProjectPeter
Feb 12th 2007, 06:30 PM
ProjectPeter



The scripture was not written in a traslation.
Thus what a translation says; is only a translation.Right! From the Greek and Hebrew from folks that understand the Greek and Hebrew from folks who trained to understand the Greek and Hebrew just like what you said right? Study the Greek and Hebrew! ;)



My focus is on doctrine and its operation.

They know language stuff even better than me.

Events of doctrine are logical and dont conflict;Where do you get your doctrine from?


As I Posted before;

NOSAS conflicts with other doctrine; therefore I scorn it.You've said that oh.. a time or two. :rolleyes:



I am only posting what I am exposed to.

That is

#1 your avoidance of the posting of Romans 5;
#2 your avoidance of language understanding.
#3 your avodiance of any doctrinal system of operation.Um... #1. I didn't at all avoid Romans 5. If two questions and a long post on it is avoiding it in your book then I dare say that we have a vast difference in understanding the English language.

#2. I am avoiding nothing there and again it must be an English language thing. Just because a person ain't agreeing with you doesn't mean you are being avoided.

#3. And apply #2.

That is the reality of it and again... keeping it honest.


With you it seems to be line upon line;How can I be doing anything line upon line and be as you call it "avoiding" everything?


Isa 28

10For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

I gather no knowledge or understanding from your positions.That happens and that doesn't change whether something is true or false simply because you don't get it for whatever your reasoning.

Centurionoflight
Feb 12th 2007, 06:40 PM
ProjectPeter



Right! From the Greek and Hebrew from folks that understand the Greek and Hebrew from folks who trained to understand the Greek and Hebrew just like what you said right? Study the Greek and Hebrew!
We should learn greek and hebrew.
We are talking about eternity; and learning how those languages operate is a good first step.





Where do you get your doctrine from?
Scripture.




Um... #1. I didn't at all avoid Romans 5. If two questions and a long post on it is avoiding it in your book then I dare say that we have a vast difference in understanding the English language.
Umm you did;

Your questions was to try and distract from the scriptures up for discussion.

They nailed you and you was in spin mode.




#2. I am avoiding nothing there and again it must be an English language thing. Just because a person ain't agreeing with you doesn't mean you are being avoided.
You can disagree;
however your disagreement is empty of any sort of doctrine to replace what you are disagreeing with.

Again
You offer nothing; to replace that which you reject.

That is my biggest issue with you.

There is nothing behind your positions.



#3. And apply #2.

That is the reality of it and again... keeping it honest.
Yes doctrine is the reality.,

2 John 1:9
Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.

You are offering no doctrine; no teaching.

Just line upon line.
Rule upon rule.

ProjectPeter
Feb 12th 2007, 06:47 PM
ProjectPeter



We should learn greek and hebrew.
We are talking about eternity; and learning how those languages operate is a good first step.So then it is your belief that until one knows Greek and Hebrew just as well as their own language... they can't understand Scripture? Translated Scripture in their own language to boot? Interesting. And since you mentioned that you don't know it that well... why in the world would you argue with anyone about anything since you haven't much a clue (your own logic) of what the Bible really says?


Scripture.You already made it clear you don't understand Greek and Hebrew that well... so Scripture according to whom?



Umm you did;
You questions was to try and distract from the scriptures up for discussion.
They nailed you and you was in spin mode.Um... actually it was you that brought up Romans 5 and it was you that I responded to. ;) And as to the spin mode whatever... is that what you call the last part of Romans 5 and chapter 6? That is after all what i quoted.


You can disagree;
however your disagreement is empty of any sort of doctrine to replace what you are disagreeing with.Um... okie dokie!




Again
You offer nothing; to replace that which you reject.

That is my biggest issue with you.

There is nothing behind your positions.Okie dokie!



Yes doctrine is the reality.,

2 John 1:9
Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.

You are offering no doctrine; no teaching.

Just line upon line.
Rule upon rule. SCRIPTURE!!! What is the doctrine of Christ?

Centurionoflight
Feb 12th 2007, 06:53 PM
ProjectPeter



So then it is your belief that until one knows Greek and Hebrew just as well as their own language... they can't understand Scripture? Translated Scripture in their own language to boot? Interesting. And since you mentioned that you don't know it that well... why in the world would you argue with anyone about anything since you haven't much a clue (your own logic) of what the Bible really says?

You already made it clear you don't understand Greek and Hebrew that well... so Scripture according to whom?
Simple;
I can research and learn more on those languages in areas where I feel I am weak.




Um... actually it was you that brought up Romans 5 and it was you that I responded to. And as to the spin mode whatever... is that what you call the last part of Romans 5 and chapter 6? That is after all what i quoted.

Yes I did bring up romans 5; because it nails the NOSAS position into irrelevence.

Rather than discuss that chapter you jump into the post salvation commands.



Um... okie dokie!

Okie dokie!

Wow! SCRIPTURE!!! What is the doctrine of God?

Does it even bother you that I find no doctrine in your positions?

There nothing to live by or apply, no trust, no love, no faith.

Just a nice set of rules; that if you screw up; then off to hell with yah.

After all heaven is only for those who can follow the rules.

ProjectPeter
Feb 12th 2007, 07:01 PM
Tell you what... let's just skip the tit for tat stuff! How about an answer to that question.

Centurionoflight
Feb 12th 2007, 07:24 PM
ProjectPeter


I see! And we can all research and given ten minutes and an Internet connection... one can find someone that will agree with any position they feel they want to take. There is no shortage of scholars out there. Again... that is a very simple reality.
For perhaps that is what you look for; some one who agrees with your position.

My focus is on "What is the truth?"

My position be dammed.




According to you perhaps but what I did was call bringing it into context.
I disagree; you was in spin mode.



You call them post salvation commands but then there is no such mention in Scripture of any such thing. So again... it don't fly nor was it avoided as you make claim.
There was merit and I posted that with romans 5.




No because I know your doctrine and it wouldn't allow for my doctrine even an inch. Ultra-grace doctrine next to my doctrine is as far as east is from west. No surprise at all that you cannot see it. That's an awful long way!
Ok

So another brother

who does not understand your doctrine and consistantly tests it

You write em off?

No desire to rephrase it, relay it, rediscuss it; maybe so they can understand;

Just to hell with them if they dont get it, they should have been smarter.

Is that how it is?







COL:

There nothing to live by or apply, no trust, no love, no faith.

Just a nice set of rules; that if you screw up; then off to hell with yah.

After all heaven is only for those who can follow the rules.


And I have never taught any such thing in this forum in now over 15,000 post. Again... just wanting to keep things honest.
Since we are keeping things honest.

That is the essence of what you teach.

Thread: Losing one's salvation -vs- grace.

#52

You posted;


Acts 26:20 but kept declaring both to those of Damascus first, and also at Jerusalem and then throughout all the region of Judea, and even to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, performing deeds appropriate to repentance.



#73


if they endure to the end, persevering in good deeds, they will see eternal life.



Trying to tie "deeds appropriate to repentance." and "persevering in good deeds" as excuse for that nice little rule set to get into heaven.

And we have your little Check list in 1 cor 6.

Lets see I am not a:
1) fornicators
2) idolaters
3) adulterers
4) effeminate
5) abusers of themselves with mankind
6) thieves
7) covetous
8) drunkards
9) revilers
10) extortioners
Therefore if I dont do any of that {well maybe I can do a little of that; but if it dont do it well then I am not practiced in that sin.} then I am a shoo in for heaven.


However you missed the very first point and this is the point Romans 5 Nails you on.

1 cor 6
9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God?
We are declared righteous, at salvation.

Romans 5
16and not as through one who did sin [is] the free gift, for the judgment indeed [is] of one to condemnation, but the gift [is] of many offences to a declaration of `Righteous,'
That is OSAS, no check list needed.

ProjectPeter
Feb 12th 2007, 07:37 PM
ProjectPeter
For perhaps that is what you look for; some one who agrees with your position.

My focus is on "What is the truth?"

My position be dammed.


I disagree; you was in spin mode.

There was merit and I posted that with romans 5.


Ok

So another brother

who does not understand your doctrine and consistantly tests it

You write em off?

No desire to rephrase it, relay it, rediscuss it; maybe so they can understand;

Just to hell with them if they dont get it, they should have been smarter.

Is that how it is?


Since we are keeping things honest.

That is the essence of what you teach.

Thread: Losing one's salvation -vs- grace.

#52

You posted;


Acts 26:20 but kept declaring both to those of Damascus first, and also at Jerusalem and then throughout all the region of Judea, and even to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, performing deeds appropriate to repentance.



#73


if they endure to the end, persevering in good deeds, they will see eternal life.



Trying to tie "deeds appropriate to repentance." and "persevering in good deeds" as excuse for that nice little rule set to get into heaven.

And we have your little Check list in 1 cor 6.

Lets see I am not a:
1) fornicators
2) idolaters
3) adulterers
4) effeminate
5) abusers of themselves with mankind
6) thieves
7) covetous
8) drunkards
9) revilers
10) extortioners
Therefore if I dont do any of that {well maybe I can do a little of that; but if it dont do it well then I am not practiced in that sin.} then I am a shoo in for heaven.


However you missed the very first point and this is the point Romans 5 Nails you on.

1 cor 6
9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God?
We are declared righteous, at salvation.

Romans 5
16and not as through one who did sin [is] the free gift, for the judgment indeed [is] of one to condemnation, but the gift [is] of many offences to a declaration of `Righteous,'
That is OSAS, no check list needed.
And about that question?

Centurionoflight
Feb 12th 2007, 07:39 PM
ProjectPeter


And about that question?Doode

U R Spinning.

Like a Top.

http://img.tfd.com/dict/6D/63737-spinning-top.jpg

ProjectPeter
Feb 12th 2007, 07:41 PM
ProjectPeter

Doode

U R Spinning.

Like a Top.

http://img.tfd.com/dict/6D/63737-spinning-top.jpg
Asking you a question in regard to a passage you posted is spinning? Again Centurion... English language issues. You posted a passage and made a comment and I asked you to define it... that is called clarification so as to know what you actually mean by using such a phrase etc. What is the doctrine of Christ?

Centurionoflight
Feb 12th 2007, 07:58 PM
ProjectPeter

Asking you a question in regard to a passage you posted is spinning? Again Centurion... English language issues. You posted a passage and made a comment and I asked you to define it... that is called clarification so as to know what you actually mean by using such a phrase etc. What is the doctrine of Christ?Docrine of Christ

2 John 1:9
Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.

The Doctrine or teaching of Christ is the doctrines {As the spirit of the teachings} contained with in scripture.

1 tim 6

3If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;


This is what I am looking for in the doctrine you teach; is it wholesome; is of godliness; is it in conformation with other doctrines.

I am finding your position to be empty and non-conforming with other doctrines.

AS I have posted before.

With NOSAS..

Where is the peace with God?
Where is the foundation on which to grow from in NOSAS?
Where is Gods love for those who are personally his in NOSAS?

The Doctrine of Peace with God is established to occur at salvation.

Romans 5:1
1Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

The foundational Doctrine of which to grow on is also established to occur at salvation.

1 cor 3
11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

The Doctrine of Gods personal love to those in Christ and Christs personal love to us.

Romans 8

35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?

39 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.



You seem unwilling or unable to address things at a doctrinal level.
Instead its a line here; or a verse there.

ProjectPeter
Feb 12th 2007, 08:29 PM
ProjectPeter
Docrine of Christ

2 John 1:9
Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.

The Doctrine or teaching of Christ is the doctrines {As the spirit of the teachings} contained with in scripture.

1 tim 6

3If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;But then I see you go on and on about this "list of rules" and now you post 1 Timothy 6! Thanks for that because again I get to bring yet another passage into context!

We can begin at the start of the letter and go through it a bit to see what all Timothy was told correct doctrine was!

1 Timothy 1:8 But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully,
9 realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous man, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers
10 and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching,
11 according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.

I highlighted that "sound teaching" part for you because what with Paul laying out a list of what is contrary to sound doctrine and all... and then adding that it is according to the GOSPEL... wouldn't want you to accuse me of actually doing that all on my own!

1 Timothy 2:1 First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men,
2 for kings and all who are in authority, in order that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity.
3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,
4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

1 Timothy 2:9 Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments;
10 but rather by means of good works, as befits women making a claim to godliness.
11 Let a woman quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness.

1 Timothy 3:2 An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach,
3 not addicted to wine or pugnacious, but gentle, uncontentious, free from the love of money.
4 He must be one who manages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity
5 (but if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?);
6 and not a new convert, lest he become conceited and fall into the condemnation incurred by the devil.
7 And he must have a good reputation with those outside the church, so that he may not fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

1 Timothy 3:8 Deacons likewise must be men of dignity, not double-tongued, or addicted to much wine or fond of sordid gain,
9 but holding to the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience.
10 And let these also first be tested; then let them serve as deacons if they are beyond reproach.
11 Women must likewise be dignified, not malicious gossips, but temperate, faithful in all things.
12 Let deacons be husbands of only one wife, and good managers of their children and their own households.

1 Timothy 4:4 For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected, if it is received with gratitude;
5 for it is sanctified by means of the word of God and prayer.

And then Paul says something amazing right after this list of many things!

1 Timothy 4:6 ¶In pointing out these things to the brethren, you will be a good servant of Christ Jesus, constantly nourished on the words of the faith and of the sound doctrine which you have been following.

We can continue because Paul amazingly enough kept on writing!

1 Timothy 4:7 But have nothing to do with worldly fables fit only for old women. On the other hand, discipline yourself for the purpose of godliness;
8 for bodily discipline is only of little profit, but godliness is profitable for all things, since it holds promise for the present life and also for the life to come.
9 It is a trustworthy statement deserving full acceptance.
10 For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers.
11 Prescribe and teach these things.
12 Let no one look down on your youthfulness, but rather in speech, conduct, love, faith and purity, show yourself an example of those who believe.
13 Until I come, give attention to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation and teaching.
14 Do not neglect the spiritual gift within you, which was bestowed upon you through prophetic utterance with the laying on of hands by the presbytery.
15 Take pains with these things; be absorbed in them, so that your progress may be evident to all.
16 Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching; persevere in these things; for as you do this you will insure salvation both for yourself and for those who hear you.

1 Timothy 5:1 Do not sharply rebuke an older man, but rather appeal to him as a father, to the younger men as brothers,
2 the older women as mothers, and the younger women as sisters, in all purity.
3 Honor widows who are widows indeed;

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.

1 Timothy 5:17 ¶Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching.
18 For the Scripture says, "YOU SHALL NOT MUZZLE THE OX WHILE HE IS THRESHING," and "The laborer is worthy of his wages."
19 Do not receive an accusation against an elder except on the basis of two or three witnesses.

20 Those who continue in sin, rebuke in the presence of all, so that the rest also may be fearful of sinning.
21 I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of His chosen angels, to maintain these principles without bias, doing nothing in a spirit of partiality.

1 Timothy 6:1 Let all who are under the yoke as slaves regard their own masters as worthy of all honor so that the name of God and our doctrine may not be spoken against.
2 And let those who have believers as their masters not be disrespectful to them because they are brethren, but let them serve them all the more, because those who partake of the benefit are believers and beloved. Teach and preach these principles.


Then Paul goes and says it again and adds a super touch to it at the end!

1 Timothy 6:3 ¶If anyone advocates a different doctrine, and does not agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness,
4 he is conceited and understands nothing; but he has a morbid interest in controversial questions and disputes about words, out of which arise envy, strife, abusive language, evil suspicions,

That there is the sound doctrine that Paul is speaking of in his letter to Timothy... both in spirit and in letter. :)




[/B]This is what I am looking for in the doctrine you teach; is it wholesome; is of godliness; is it in conformation with other doctrines. Um... is of godliness conforming with other doctrines? That isn't even close to what that passage says! It must conform with godliness... that is what it says and that is exactly what the doctrine that I am teaching does. Let me highlight that first passage again.

1 Timothy 1:8 But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully,
9 realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous man, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers
10 and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching,
11 according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.


The doctrine that says you can do those things and still be a Christian... that is the doctrine that is contrary to sound doctrine as well as contrary to the gospel that Paul preached.



I am finding your position to be empty and non-conforming with other doctrines.It is certainly not empty although "non-conforming" to other doctrines... that is sort of one of those "um... ya think" type statements. As I stated... it is as far as the east is from the west with your ultra-grace doctrine.


AS I have posted before.

With NOSAS..

Where is the peace with God?
Where is the foundation on which to grow from in NOSAS?
Where is Gods love for those who are personally his in NOSAS?

The Doctrine of Peace with God is established to occur at salvation.

Romans 5:1
1Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

The foundational Doctrine of which to grow on is also established to occur at salvation.

1 cor 3
11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

The Doctrine of Gods personal love to those in Christ and Christs personal love to us.

Romans 8

35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?

39 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.



You seem unwilling or unable to address things at a doctrinal level.
Instead its a line here; or a verse there.When the doctrine comes from the Bible as opposed to what we want God to be like... that happens. ;)

My doctrine comes from the book. Not here a little and there a little, pick a passage, toss that one away! Color me sort of odd like that.

moonglow
Feb 12th 2007, 08:41 PM
moonglow

Cant have Christ as the center if you dont know him; you dont know him until you grow up in the spirit and leanr what he is all about and is.


1) Feelings tend to mislead.

2) I never stated I was better than you; or that I was even near any sort of maturity. To state that I did is frankly a human view point that is riled up because some one stated something you didnt like.

3) Is not that human emotion to focus on the talk over the message.


What we write has meaning and implications.



Again if the "new" doctrine conflicts with learned doctrine the new is in error.



Ok;

Logic error with your method: is you cant put into practice what you dont know.


Romans 12:2
And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.


We are to renew our MIND FIRST; then we are able to act.

So yes we are to sit down and study the Bible.

Bible study and learning of its doctrine should be THE first Goal of the Christian life.

Instead peopel want to geting the action stage with out proper training.

So if one doent know it; what exactally are they putting into practice?
Historical trends show people put legalism into practice if they dont know doctrine.

What ever they are; they are not the church.

Therefore that pretty picture that gets christians all watery eyed;
The picture of casting their crowns at christs feet
It is a myth.

:eek: :eek: The scriptures I posts about the casting of crowns is a myth? wow!

Just for your information my dear, I do know Christ personally..thanks. :) And not only do I study the bible, but I actually put it into practice too!

Maybe you can understand ProjectPeters posts better then mine so I will let you two discuss things on here...I have grown weary of repeating myself over and over again...God bless!

Centurionoflight
Feb 12th 2007, 08:49 PM
ProjectPeter



But then I see you go on and on about this "list of rules" and now you post 1 Timothy 6! Thanks for that because again I get to bring yet another passage into context!

We can begin at the start of the letter and go through it a bit to see what all Timothy was told correct doctrine was!
With you its still, Line upon line.

You dont get it; I dont think you are able to.

If you have to paste entire books; then you really dont get it.

Nor can you even try to have me understand your point there.

Cause your point is totally lost to me




The doctrine that says you can do those things and still be a Christian... that is the doctrine that is contrary to sound doctrine as well as contrary to the gospel that Paul preached.
Snap quick with those check lists aint yah.

It does not say any thing about those people being christians And losing their righteousness if they do those things.

And you are totally missing his point.

That being the Righteous man is not under the law.

{That is about The only part you didnt highlight.}

1 tim 1

9 realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous man, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers



Therefore why are you judgeing the righteous man by the law?




My doctrine comes from the book. Not here a little and there a little, pick a passage, toss that one away! Color me sort of odd like that.
I disagree

You sure toss away Romans 5 when it doesnt fit your view.

Centurionoflight
Feb 12th 2007, 08:53 PM
moonglow



The scriptures I posts about the casting of crowns is a myth? wow!



Yeah the church is not going to be casting their crowns.
The 24 elders will.





Just for your information my dear, I do know Christ personally..thanks. And not only do I study the bible, but I actually put it into practice too!


thats nice.



Maybe you can understand ProjectPeters posts better then mine so I will let you two discuss things on here...I have grown weary of repeating myself over and over again...God bless!


:P

ProjectPeter
Feb 12th 2007, 09:04 PM
ProjectPeter

With you its still, Line upon line.

You dont get it; I dont think you are able to.

If you have to paste entire books; then you really dont get it.

Nor can you even try to have me understand your point there.

Cause your point is totally lost to me Oh I know better than the idea that you didn't get the point. Your next comment makes that perfectly clear that you did. But call it line upon line if you want too CoL... simple fact of the matter is that this is EXACTLY the sound doctrine that Paul was passing on to Timothy to teach. To ignore that is to ignore the context of the many times Paul mentions those as being sound doctrine. It sure does seem that you have an awful lot of problem with Scripture... and hopefully folks see that it is in fact you who doesn't address the Bible as it is written and for the purpose it is written. ;)



Snap quick with those check lists aint yah.It was Paul's list. Not mine. You'll have to come to peace with that fact... I cannot help that he wrote it out like that!


It does not say any thing about those people being christians And losing their righteousness if they do those things.If it is contrary to sound teaching and if it is contrary to the gospel... oh sure it mentions that very thing. Remember the many times you toss out that Galatians passage to those whom you think are speaking a different gospel? That would very much apply to those who teach a contrary doctrine to the gospel that Paul preaches. That gospel includes that there list.


And you are totally missing his point.

That being the Righteous man is not under the law.

{That is about The only part you didnt highlight.}

1 tim 1

9 realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous man, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers



Therefore why are you judgeing the righteous man by the law?And the point is CoL... the person that does those things aren't the righteous man. ;) Keep reading it and maybe you will actually see that.


I disagree That is not a shock.




You sure toss away Romans 5 when it doesnt fit your view.go back and read what I posted back when you were "participating" in the debate. Nothing tossed away about it.

Centurionoflight
Feb 12th 2007, 09:13 PM
ProjectPeter



Oh I know better than the idea that you didn't get the point. Your next comment makes that perfectly clear that you did. But call it line upon line if you want too CoL... simple fact of the matter is that this is EXACTLY the sound doctrine that Paul was passing on to Timothy to teach. To ignore that is to ignore the context of the many times Paul mentions those as being sound doctrine. It sure does seem that you have an awful lot of problem with Scripture... and hopefully folks see that it is in fact you who doesn't address the Bible as it is written and for the purpose it is written.
Actally I have no issue with Scriptures, you are making a charge there that really is unfounded.




It was Paul's list. Not mine. You'll have to come to peace with that fact... I cannot help that he wrote it out like that!
First Defense of a legalist. {1) Its not my list}

Grats on at least stating there is a "following" of a check list, which was part of my point.




If it is contrary to sound teaching and if it is contrary to the gospel... oh sure it mentions that very thing. Remember the many times you toss out that Galatians passage to those whom you think are speaking a different gospel? That would very much apply to those who teach a contrary doctrine to the gospel that Paul preaches. That gospel includes that there list.
There was no tossing of galations; the point is you lacked understanding that

If the legalism of the law of moses is rejected; then other forms of legalism which is built on lesser things should also be rejected.




And the point is CoL... the person that does those things aren't the righteous man. Keep reading it and maybe you will actually see that.
The point is; that is does not state that.

It states the Law is not givin to the righteous man.

We at salvation are made righteous.

Therefore you are in error to judge a righteous man by the law.




go back and read what I posted back when you were "participating" in the debate. Nothing tossed away about it.
You was twisitng and turning and avoiding the solid point I had made.
Looking for the little legal loophole.

ProjectPeter
Feb 12th 2007, 09:52 PM
ProjectPeter

Actally I have no issue with Scriptures, you are making a charge there that really is unfounded.Then which one of those passages have I taken out of the context of being "sound doctrine?"



First Defense of a legalist. {1) Its not my list}Careful CoL... toes are getting pretty close to over the line.


Grats on at least stating there is a "following" of a check list, which was part of my point.And again... try discussing that passage in context? If those things are contrary to both sound doctrine and the gospel.. how is it you suppose they are things done by someone "righteous?"



There was no tossing of galations; the point is you lacked understanding that

If the legalism of the law of moses is rejected; then other forms of legalism which is built on lesser things should also be rejected.Same question then. If those things are contrary to both sound doctrine and the gospel.. how is it you suppose they are things done by someone "righteous?"


The point is; that is does not state that.

It states the Law is not givin to the righteous man.

We at salvation are made righteous.

Therefore you are in error to judge a righteous man by the law.I am judging no one by the "law". It is contrary to sound doctrine and the gospel that Paul preaches. To say that one can live such as that and be righteous... regardless of the fact that they aren't even in line with the gospel, seems a tad off don't you think? That is what he said about those things is it not... that it is contrary to the gospel he preached?



You was twisitng and turning and avoiding the solid point I had made.
Looking for the little legal loophole.
Actually... I was simply posting Scripture which shows clearly whom the righteous was. If you want to call that a "legal loophole" then that's your call!

Centurionoflight
Feb 12th 2007, 10:15 PM
ProjectPeter


how is it you suppose they are things done by someone "righteous?"
How does doing those things make one God has declared righteous; unrighteous?

They are not even under the law to begin with, thus how can violation of a law they are not under be a means of taking away their salvation?

Can man {Thru some sin Christ covered} undo Gods declarations?



Actually... I was simply posting Scripture which shows clearly whom the righteous was. If you want to call that a "legal loophole" then that's your call!
They are not righteous based on what they do or dont do.

They are righteous based on what Christ has done.

Those who are righteous thru Christ are not under the law.

It is error to judge them by the law.

ProjectPeter
Feb 12th 2007, 10:44 PM
ProjectPeter
How does doing those things make one God has declared righteous; unrighteous?

They are not even under the law to begin with, thus how can violation of a law they are not under be a means of taking away their salvation?If they are those things then they are most assuredly under the law and not righteous. That is the point.


Can man {Thru some sin Christ covered} undo Gods declarations?

They are not righteous based on what they do or dont do.Someone forgot to mention that to the apostle John!

1 John 3:4 Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.
5 And you know that He appeared in order to take away sins; and in Him there is no sin.
6 No one who abides in Him sins; no one who sins has seen Him or knows Him.
7 Little children, let no one deceive you; the one who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous;
8 the one who practices sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning. The Son of God appeared for this purpose, that He might destroy the works of the devil.

Don't be deceived.



They are righteous based on what Christ has done.

Those who are righteous thru Christ are not under the law.

It is error to judge them by the law.And see above.

Centurionoflight
Feb 12th 2007, 11:18 PM
ProjectPeter



If they are those things then they are most assuredly under the law and not righteous. That is the point.


Those who are righteous are not under the law, for thru Christ they died to the law.

Romans 6 {Which occurs after the OSAS salvation of Romans 5; at least in my Bible.}

14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.

15 What then? shall we sin{SIn is a possibility to a believer, who is declared righteous}, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.

16have ye not known that to whom ye present yourselves servants for obedience, servants ye are to him to whom ye obey, whether of sin to death, or of obedience to righteousness?


We have a choice;

we can serve death
or
We can serve righteousness

Salvation gives us the foundational ability to serve righteousness.




Someone forgot to mention that to the apostle John!

1 John 3:

4 Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.
5 And you know that He appeared in order to take away sins; and in Him there is no sin.
6 No one who abides in Him sins; no one who sins has seen Him or knows Him.
7 Little children, let no one deceive you; the one who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous;
8 the one who practices sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning. The Son of God appeared for this purpose, that He might destroy the works of the devil.

Don't be deceived.



Its good not to be decived; who is the point of 1 John

The point is you can be declared RIGHTEOUS; and PRACTICE sin or you can PRACTICE righteousness.

Those who PRACTICE righteousness is righteous{in fellowship and in deed vs 6}, even as Christ.

Those {Believers} who practice sin are of the devil; under demonic doctrine;

Nothing states they are declared unrighteous;

This concept is covered many times across the New testament.

ProjectPeter
Feb 12th 2007, 11:32 PM
You know what man... if you think that passage is saying that you can "practice sin and be righteous" then there is absolutely no question as to why you don't have a clue what I say! There is a time when it is just best to ignore something... it would have likely been better had you taken that road than try and make that passage say what you are going on about here!

Centurionoflight
Feb 13th 2007, 12:27 AM
ProjectPeter


You know what man... if you think that passage is saying that you can "practice sin and be righteous" then there is absolutely no question as to why you don't have a clue what I say! There is a time when it is just best to ignore something... it would have likely been better had you taken that road than try and make that passage say what you are going on about here!It actally is you that is trying to bring a passage into saying something it doesnt;
That being loss of salvation.

1 John 2
1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
We are not righteous based on us; it is upon Christs righteousness.
A righteousness that doesnt come and go.

There is a plea for them to remain in his word;
5But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.
A plea is to reamin faithful and not have shame from being unfaithful, thus to have shame would mean they are saved but have failed to do as they should.

1 john 2
28And now, little children, abide in him; that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming.
It is also a plea to understand those who come to seduce them away from truth.
1 john 2:26 These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you.
They are to look at several factors; one being are those who are coming to them practicing sin.
If they are then they are using a human or demonic frame of referance rather than a divine one.

So you are confusing a evalution of peoples acts and deeds with the foundation of salvation.

A common mistake you seem to make.

ProjectPeter
Feb 13th 2007, 12:36 AM
ProjectPeter

It actally is you that is trying to bring a passage into saying something it doesnt;
That being loss of salvation.

1 John 2
1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
We are not righteous based on us; it is upon Christs righteousness.
A righteousness that doesnt come and go.

There is a plea for them to remain in his word;
5But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.
A plea is to reamin faithful and not have shame from being unfaithful, thus to have shame would mean they are saved but have failed to do as they should.

1 john 2
28And now, little children, abide in him; that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming.
It is also a plea to understand those who come to seduce them away from truth.
1 john 2:26 These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you.
They are to look at several factors; one being are those who are coming to them practicing sin.
If they are then they are using a human or demonic frame of referance rather than a divine one.

So you are confusing a evalution of peoples acts and deeds with the foundation of salvation.

A common mistake you seem to make.Folks can read and decide. Your doctrine is way out there Centurion and I figure you are doing well in letting folks know that! So keep typing... you help me out a whole lot more than you'll ever know! ;)

Centurionoflight
Feb 13th 2007, 12:56 AM
ProjectPeter


Folks can read and decide. Your doctrine is way out there Centurion and I figure you are doing well in letting folks know that! So keep typing... you help me out a whole lot more than you'll ever know!

I notice a lack of a desire to really get at the truth;

Instead its a popularity game.

Remember this as I stated before.

If my beliefs was "mainstream" that would give me cause for alarm.

Matt 7

13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:


14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

ProjectPeter
Feb 13th 2007, 01:01 AM
ProjectPeter



I notice a lack of a desire to really get at the truth;

Instead its a popularity game.

Remember this as I stated before.

If my beliefs was "mainstream" that would give me cause for alarm.

Matt 7

13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:


14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.






Then I figure you are about the only one that sees that. Not like there hasn't been plenty of Scripture posted and you rarely, if at all, touch it. And Scripture is the only truth I desire to get in. But again... thanks for posting and I do mean that!

Centurionoflight
Feb 13th 2007, 01:05 AM
ProjectPeter


Then I figure you are about the only one that sees that. Not like there hasn't been plenty of Scripture posted and you rarely, if at all, touch it. And Scripture is the only truth I desire to get in. But again... thanks for posting and I do mean that!

Even the devil posted scripture.

Matt 4

5Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple,

6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.


The devil however could not seem to grasp doctrine.

moonglow
Feb 13th 2007, 01:05 AM
Folks can read and decide. Your doctrine is way out there Centurion and I figure you are doing well in letting folks know that! So keep typing... you help me out a whole lot more than you'll ever know! ;)

I can't even figure out what Centurionoflight doctrine is actually....good thing I know what Jesus is though, since He is the only one I need to be concerned about anyway...:D

ProjectPeter
Feb 13th 2007, 01:14 AM
ProjectPeter



Even the devil posted scripture.

Matt 4

5Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple,

6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.


The devil however could not seem to grasp doctrine.
See... you can do the Scripture thing when you want to! It isn't that bad at all! ;)

moonglow
Feb 13th 2007, 01:14 AM
ProjectPeter



I notice a lack of a desire to really get at the truth;

Instead its a popularity game.

Remember this as I stated before.

If my beliefs was "mainstream" that would give me cause for alarm.

Matt 7

13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:


14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.







Then you should be alarmed....the OSAS is extremely popular in mainstream Christianity...(even my pastor's wife believes in it...but then she is worried about her blacksliden brother too). Do a poll on here sometime and have people vote which they believe in just to get an idea. Tell them they don't have to make themselves known you are just gathering information...I think you will find the No-osas is very unpopular actually...

Centurionoflight
Feb 13th 2007, 01:24 AM
moonglow



Then you should be alarmed....the OSAS is extremely popular in mainstream Christianity...(even my pastor's wife believes in it...but then she is worried about her blacksliden brother too). Do a poll on here sometime and have people vote which they believe in just to get an idea. Tell them they don't have to make themselves known you are just gathering information...I think you will find the No-osas is very unpopular actually...
All ready done.

http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=75527


59.57 % here are NOSAS

Owen
Feb 13th 2007, 01:30 AM
moonglow

All ready done.

http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=75527


59.57 % here are NOSAS

Incidentally, if we did a poll on who here believed in the Trinity, I would guess it would reach 99-100%. I guess that means the Trinity is incorrect also.

moonglow
Feb 13th 2007, 04:19 AM
moonglow

All ready done.

http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=75527


59.57 % here are NOSAS

out of only 94 votes though...there are how many members on this board? I wouldn't say that was at all accurate...with the added Tongues part that really confuses the issue I think...

But Owen is right you certainly cannot go by what the popular view is...as he put it everyone would vote on there, their belief in a Holy Spirit...that being the majority does it make it wrong? This kind of thinking makes no sense at all...

Oh and I believe in the Amill end times view...actually more of the partial preterism view which is very much in the minority and very unpopular especially on this board where so many believe in the pre-trib rapture view...but I must be right since its not a popular view by your standards of measuring things....:hmm:

Centurionoflight
Feb 13th 2007, 04:18 PM
Owen


Incidentally, if we did a poll on who here believed in the Trinity, I would guess it would reach 99-100%. I guess that means the Trinity is incorrect also.
moonglow


But Owen is right you certainly cannot go by what the popular view is...as he put it everyone would vote on there, their belief in a Holy Spirit...that being the majority does it make it wrong? This kind of thinking makes no sense at all...
The doctrine of the trinity is not under attack like the doctrine of Trusting in Christ, or eternal security.

The goal of evil doctrine is to keep Christians unstable; nothing does that better than NOSAS.

If we are consistantly in doubt about our position; then how can we solidly grow in the spirit?

Therefore to tell me that absolute faith in Christ to keep my salvation is "is way out there".

To even cite "popular" views as to what is way out there and what is way in there; shows a human view point rather than a divine viewpoint.

A Lack of total faith in Christ I see as corrupt.

Once again

Can we trust Christ to keep our salvation secure, even when we stray?

The answer so far is "NO!"; we cant trust Christ.

That is saying Christ is a bad shepherd; he lets his sheep out of his sight and loses them.

That is saying we need to keep our self in salvation since the shepherd is feeble and scatter brained; losing his sheep left and right.

That line of reasoning I dont believe.

John 10
11 I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.


"And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand." -John 10:28

Owen
Feb 13th 2007, 05:57 PM
Owen
moonglow
The doctrine of the trinity is not under attack like the doctrine of Trusting in Christ, or eternal security.

The goal of evil doctrine is to keep Christians unstable; nothing does that better than NOSAS.

If we are consistantly in doubt about our position; then how can we solidly grow in the spirit?

Therefore to tell me that absolute faith in Christ to keep my salvation is "is way out there".

To even cite "popular" views as to what is way out there and what is way in there; shows a human view point rather than a divine viewpoint.

A Lack of total faith in Christ I see as corrupt.

Once again

Can we trust Christ to keep our salvation secure, even when we stray?

The answer so far is "NO!"; we cant trust Christ.

That is saying Christ is a bad shepherd; he lets his sheep out of his sight and loses them.

That is saying we need to keep our self in salvation since the shepherd is feeble and scatter brained; losing his sheep left and right.

That line of reasoning I dont believe.

John 10
11 I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.


"And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand." -John 10:28

But the point remains. You can not say a doctrine isn't true because the majority believe it.

Centurionoflight
Feb 13th 2007, 06:15 PM
Owen


But the point remains. You can not say a doctrine isn't true because the majority believe it.Counter that with;

You cant say a doctrine is false because a majority DONT believe it.

Which is what was being implied.

Frankly I dont care what most men believe or not.


To me;
It is;

What does the doctrine of Christ say on the issue.

The Doctrine of Christ states I can have all faith and trust on him, even for salvation.

1 Peter 2:6
For this is contained in Scripture:" BEHOLD, I LAY IN ZION A CHOICE STONE, A PRECIOUS CORNER stone,AND HE WHO BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED."

Owen
Feb 13th 2007, 06:17 PM
Owen



Counter that with;

You cant say a doctrine is false because a majority DONT believe it.

Which is what was being implied.

No one else is implying anything. You are the one, and the only one I might add, who brought up the amount of people believing it correlates with the truth of the belief. I am just correcting that incorrect conclusion.

ProjectPeter
Feb 13th 2007, 06:21 PM
Oh goodness. The majority of Christian folk believe in OSAS in various forms by a long shot. If one wants to look it up then check with Barna who did a survey on it back a year or so ago. It isn't what the majority of Christian folk believe, not that it ultimately matters at all anyway! What does the Book say. That's what matters and everything else is just man appealing to some sort of logic that works for them in their minds. That is the point folks are making CoL!

Centurionoflight
Feb 13th 2007, 06:30 PM
Owen



No one else is implying anything. You are the one, and the only one I might add, who brought up the amount of people believing it correlates with the truth of the belief. I am just correcting that incorrect conclusion.
Owen again in CONTEXT;


Post #144


PP:
Folks can read and decide. Your doctrine is way out there Centurion and I figure you are doing well in letting folks know that! So keep typing... you help me out a whole lot more than you'll ever know!


Way out there;
I take that to mean when compared with the position of others, with the result that the position I have is one that is crazy. Thus false.

That Standard of compare was not started by me.

Owen
Feb 13th 2007, 06:33 PM
Owen


Owen again in CONTEXT;


Post #144


PP:
Folks can read and decide. Your doctrine is way out there Centurion and I figure you are doing well in letting folks know that! So keep typing... you help me out a whole lot more than you'll ever know!


Way out there;
I take that to mean when compared with the position of others, with the result that the position i have is one that is crazy. Thus false.

That Standard of compare was not started by me.

That isn't a numbers thing. It is a comparison to the Bible, because that is how PP works. Hence when he says "folks can read and decide."

Centurionoflight
Feb 13th 2007, 06:36 PM
Owen



That isn't a numbers thing. It is a comparison to the Bible, because that is how PP works. Hence when he says "folks can read and decide."
I disagree, with it being towards the bible;

"Read" can also refer to the posts on this board.

And it was a appeal to numbers; hence the term way out there.

Owen
Feb 13th 2007, 06:40 PM
Owen



I disagree,

"Read" can also refer to the posts on this board.

Ok. If that is the case, the point remains and I am not going to belabor this point because to continue past this would be pointless. PP wasn't talking about numbers at all. You can read into it all you want, but the fact is that wasn't what PP was trying to do. Only you made it an issue of numbers.

moonglow
Feb 13th 2007, 06:47 PM
Owen
moonglow
The doctrine of the trinity is not under attack like the doctrine of Trusting in Christ, or eternal security.

The goal of evil doctrine is to keep Christians unstable; nothing does that better than NOSAS.

If we are consistantly in doubt about our position; then how can we solidly grow in the spirit?

Therefore to tell me that absolute faith in Christ to keep my salvation is "is way out there".

To even cite "popular" views as to what is way out there and what is way in there; shows a human view point rather than a divine viewpoint.

A Lack of total faith in Christ I see as corrupt.

Once again

Can we trust Christ to keep our salvation secure, even when we stray?

The answer so far is "NO!"; we cant trust Christ.

That is saying Christ is a bad shepherd; he lets his sheep out of his sight and loses them.

That is saying we need to keep our self in salvation since the shepherd is feeble and scatter brained; losing his sheep left and right.

That line of reasoning I dont believe.

John 10
11 I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.


"And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand." -John 10:28

No we aren't talking about whether we can trust Christ or not...at least that hasn't been what I have been talking about...maybe you think so, but that isn't what I was talking about. In fact we spent most of our time in this thread in talking about rewards, not salvation...and I couldn't even discuss that with you. You read things in my posts that aren't there....so then I spend all my time and engery correcting this and trying to make myself clearer to you...we haven't even touched on the salvation issue since we can't even make any progress past rewards to get to that discussion!

I ask you simply questions and can't get an answer from you about it...so then we spend the next three or four posts with me yet again trying to explain what I meant and you talking about things that don't have a thing to do with the current topic. Its almost like you read someone else's post and are replying to it yet quoting me. I am having an extremely difficult time understanding your post...its almost like english isn't your first lanuage...now sometimes that happens on a message board where two people can't seem to understand each other...but its apparent I am not the only one struggling to make sense of your posts. I understand scriptures fine when you post those but then you add your own thoughts to them that don't make any sense to me.


Therefore to tell me that absolute faith in Christ to keep my salvation is "is way out there".

I never said any such thing to you or anyone else on here.


To even cite "popular" views as to what is way out there and what is way in there; shows a human view point rather than a divine viewpoint.

you are the one that brought it up as a popularity thing..not us.


Once again

Can we trust Christ to keep our salvation secure, even when we stray?

The answer so far is "NO!"; we cant trust Christ.

That is saying Christ is a bad shepherd; he lets his sheep out of his sight and loses them.

That is saying we need to keep our self in salvation since the shepherd is feeble and scatter brained; losing his sheep left and right.

That line of reasoning I dont believe.

I haven't seen one person say any of this stuff you are saying...who said Christ was feeble or scatterbrained? no one. I think you need to be careful about falsely accussing people of saying things they never said...'do not bear false witness'...

Centurionoflight
Feb 13th 2007, 06:58 PM
moonglow



I haven't seen one person say any of this stuff you are saying...who said Christ was feeble or scatterbrained? no one. I think you need to be careful about falsely accussing people of saying things they never said...'do not bear false witness'...
It is not false witness; it is taking a point to its end.

People do that here all the time; when they say to me;

You mean "You can sin all you want and still be saved" then start listing bad sins. "Followed with; I cant believe that"


Therefore on the counter;

If our sin can twart Christs promises; then Christ is weak.
Unable to keep us.
A bad shepherd who lets his sheep stray.
A shepherd who is scatter brained to let his sheep go where they shouldnt and lose them.

This is thought in what people are saying when they state we can walk away.

Exactally what sort of shepherd is Christ?
A good shepherd will not lose his sheep.

slightlypuzzled
Feb 13th 2007, 07:07 PM
moonglow

It is not false witness; it is taking a point to its end.

People do that here all the time; when they say

"You can sin all you want and still be saved" then start listing all the sins.

Therefore on the counter;

If our sin can twart Christs promises; then Christ is weak.
Unable to keep us.
A bad shepherd who lets his sheep stray.
A shepherd who is scatter brained to let his sheep go where they shouldnt and lose them.

This is thought in what people are saying when they state we can walk away.

Exactally what sort of shepherd is Christ?
A good shepherd will not lose his sheep.

So, Jesus keeps all sheep with Him, and if anyone tries to leave he will throw them down and hogtie them to keep them with him? Do we see Jesus carrying rope and leather thongs to achieve this purpost?

Is there a line of understanding for this metaphor across which it all becomes more literal than the speaker/writer intended for it to be?

Pilgrimtozion
Feb 13th 2007, 07:07 PM
moonglow

It is not false witness; it is taking a point to its end.

People do that here all the time; when they say

"You can sin all you want and still be saved" then start listing all the sins.

Therefore on the counter;

If our sin can twart Christs promises; then Christ is weak.
Unable to keep us.
A bad shepherd who lets his sheep stray.
A shepherd who is scatter brained to let his sheep go where they shouldnt and lose them.

This is thought in what people are saying when they state we can walk away.

Exactally what sort of shepherd is Christ?
A good shepherd will not lose his sheep.

CoL,

I understand your reasoning. One aspect, however, I believe you missing. An essential element of being human is being the ability to choose. We are made in God's image and the freedom to choose is an essential element in that concept.

Knowing that, it becomes easier to see that the straying is not so much an inability of Christ to keep us but our choice to stray anyway. This element of choice makes all the difference in the world. No indeed, nobody can snatch us out of the hand of Christ. We can, however, choose to walk away and stop following.

Let me go a step further. I agree with you that nobody can snatch the elect out of the hands of Christ. If we are elect, we will remain in Christ until the very end. The point is, we determine whether we are elect or not by our choice and our perseverance.

Centurionoflight
Feb 13th 2007, 07:14 PM
slightlypuzzled




So, Jesus keeps all sheep with Him, and if anyone tries to leave he will throw them down and hogtie them to keep them with him? Do we see Jesus carrying rope and leather thongs to achieve this purpost?

Is there a line of understanding for this metaphor across which it all becomes more literal than the speaker/writer intended for it to be?


That hook on the end of his staff is not just to look cool with.

They Hook that thing around a sheep that is in a thorn bush and yank it outa there.
Plus shepherds also would carry a rod; to beat those sheep that would stray.


Psalm 23:4
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.


Pilgrimtozion


Knowing that, it becomes easier to see that the straying is not so much an inability of Christ to keep us but our choice to stray anyway. This element of choice makes all the difference in the world. No indeed, nobody can snatch us out of the hand of Christ. We can, however, choose to walk away and stop following.
And a good shepherd will go back and put you back on track with his rod and staff.

Let me go a step further. I agree with you that nobody can snatch the elect out of the hands of Christ. If we are elect, we will remain in Christ until the very end. The point is, we determine whether we are elect or not by our choice and our perseverance.Sheep choose nothing about who owns them.
Does some lamb say I want you to own me; but not that guy?
NO!!
It has zero choice in the issue.

Once we believe we are Christs, he bought us and died for us.

1 Corinthians 6:20
For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.
Also another note;

Sheep are just plain dumb.
They will do they wierdest things and get into the worst situations possible.
They are not something holy or elect.
They are dim witted beasts.
Something really good to compare believers with to a people who know what sheep are.
They know sheep stray and get into trouble.
They know how hard it is to keep them in line.

Christ the good shepherd is able to keep us; even when we in our dim wits go wandering off.

third hero
Feb 13th 2007, 07:53 PM
Hey PP,
I have not ever seen someone systematically dismantle the OSAS doctrine in such a way as you have just done. I am truly impressed. It is my desire that in the verry same way you have destroyed the OSAS doctrine, I will do the same in te end times forum and bring the light of the scriptures to all, for all to plainly see, without the need for vain interpretations. I like simple Jesus. I like simple end times, and I love the simple Gospel. Thank you and keep it up.

third hero
Feb 13th 2007, 08:07 PM
Pilgrimtozion

That hook on the end of his staff is not just to look cool with.

They Hook that thing around a sheep that is in a thorn bush and yank it outa there.
Plus shepherds also would carry a rod; to beat those sheep that would stray.





Psalm 23:4
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.
And a good shepherd will go back and put you back on track with his rod and staff.
Sheep choose nothing about who owns them.
Does some lamb say I want you to own me; but not that guy?
NO!!
It has zero choice in the issue.

Once we believe we are Christs, he bought us and died for us.




1 Corinthians 6:20
For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.Also another note;

Sheep are just plain dumb.
They will do they wierdest things and get into the worst situations possible.
They are not something holy or elect.
They are dim witted beasts.
Something really good to compare believers with to a people who know what sheep are.
They know sheep stray and get into trouble.
They know how hard it is to keep them in line.

Christ the good shepherd is able to keep us; even when we in our dim wits go wandering off.

So, as you put it, man are not the image of God, they are merely sheep, and on top of that, Christ shepherds the sheep and they never get lost...right? Well, did not Jesus even have a parable about a shepherd who has 100 sheep, and leaves the 99 when one sheep ends up missing?

Even sheep can stray, and this is the point in which the metaphor of Christ's elect being likened to sheep. Because sheep can even choose to go wonder astray, as most shepherds past and present can attest to. Therefore, the OSAS is still founded on sand, because the premise that you have used, the "sheep" doctrine, falls on it's face when apllied to reality as well.

Moreover, Scripture disproves your sheep doctrine, and the word is getting out fast about that. It seems that only calvanists keep holding on to that doctrine when every other denomination has been led away from it. Oh well, I guess the sheep doctrine doesn't hold up there either.

Just face it, salvation only comes from doing what God tells us to do through His Son's words until we die. This requires us to believe in Him as the Son of God, and believe in what He saays, and practice what He says we are to put into practice. Nothing particularly difficult about those terms, except that only God can get a person to do just that. So it involves a person humbling him/herself to God, and let Him do the change in you, causing you to be "born again" and being able to do what ever the Lord says we are to do.

In fact, the only OSAS I believe is once we are dead, and God gives us our incorruptible flesh, then we will always be saved. I truly believe that, and scripture supports that.

Centurionoflight
Feb 13th 2007, 08:26 PM
third hero



So, as you put it, man are not the image of God, they are merely sheep, and on top of that, Christ shepherds the sheep and they never get lost...right? Well, did not Jesus even have a parable about a shepherd who has 100 sheep, and leaves the 99 when one sheep ends up missing?


Christ is the good shepherd; they cant stray out of his hand.




Even sheep can stray, and this is the point in which the metaphor of Christ's elect being likened to sheep. Because sheep can even choose to go wonder astray, as most shepherds past and present can attest to. Therefore, the OSAS is still founded on sand, because the premise that you have used, the "sheep" doctrine, falls on it's face when apllied to reality as well.


Christ is the good shepherd; they cant stray out of his hand.


John 10:11
I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.


He gives his life for us.



Moreover, Scripture disproves your sheep doctrine, and the word is getting out fast about that. It seems that only calvanists keep holding on to that doctrine when every other denomination has been led away from it. Oh well, I guess the sheep doctrine doesn't hold up there either.


??



Just face it, salvation only comes from doing what God tells us to do through His Son's words until we die. This requires us to believe in Him as the Son of God, and believe in what He saays, and practice what He says we are to put into practice. Nothing particularly difficult about those terms, except that only God can get a person to do just that. So it involves a person humbling him/herself to God, and let Him do the change in you, causing you to be "born again" and being able to do what ever the Lord says we are to do.


Then salvation is a wage; not a gift.




In fact, the only OSAS I believe is once we are dead, and God gives us our incorruptible flesh, then we will always be saved. I truly believe that, and scripture supports that.


For a scripture free post,

Why state scripure supports your position?

If it did you would at least post some of it.

moonglow
Feb 13th 2007, 08:41 PM
moonglow

It is not false witness; it is taking a point to its end.

People do that here all the time; when they say to me;

You mean "You can sin all you want and still be saved" then start listing bad sins. "Followed with; I cant believe that"


Therefore on the counter;

If our sin can twart Christs promises; then Christ is weak.
Unable to keep us.
A bad shepherd who lets his sheep stray.
A shepherd who is scatter brained to let his sheep go where they shouldnt and lose them.

This is thought in what people are saying when they state we can walk away.

Exactally what sort of shepherd is Christ?
A good shepherd will not lose his sheep.

:hmm: So basically you are carrying it this far because you think others are being unfair with you in your posts? Is that it?

what if folks simply posted scriptures (including you) and made no comments at all...would that work with you, or not?

The thing I was trying to say it this (which you never responded too) its fine for you to be passionate about something and want to refute what you believe is wrong...but unless you can make yourself understood you aren't going to help anyone on here which I assume is your goal. You said you want to refute an evil doctine...in order to do that people have to beable to understand what you are saying...but your posts are very confusing. Do you think you have been able to show anyone on here that OSAS is true by your posts?

Everyone has a reason for debating an issue...and usually its to help others...do you feel you have been able to do that on here?

Centurionoflight
Feb 13th 2007, 08:49 PM
moonglow



So basically you are carrying it this far because you think others are being unfair with you in your posts? Is that it?

what if folks simply posted scriptures (including you) and made no comments at all...would that work with you, or not?

The thing I was trying to say it this (which you never responded too) its fine for you to be passionate about something and want to refute what you believe is wrong...but unless you can make yourself understood you aren't going to help anyone on here which I assume is your goal. You said you want to refute an evil doctine...in order to do that people have to beable to understand what you are saying...but your posts are very confusing. Do you think you have been able to show anyone on here that OSAS is true by your posts?

Everyone has a reason for debating an issue...and usually its to help others...do you feel you have been able to do that on here?
Missing how this has any thing to do with the position I stated.

You stated:

I haven't seen one person say any of this stuff you are saying...who said Christ was feeble or scatterbrained? no one. I think you need to be careful about falsely accussing people of saying things they never said...'do not bear false witness'...


I answered How I came to the conclusions I did.

That being Christ as the good shepherd does not lose any of his flock.

To say he does; is to say Christ is not a good shepherd.

I dont see how I can make it any more simple.

Christ is the finisher of our salvation.

NOT US.

Heb 10:10By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

To state we need to finish our salvation {Foundational} is to state Christ is not quite enough to secure it or Christ is lacking in that ability..

ProjectPeter
Feb 13th 2007, 09:35 PM
Christ is the finisher of our salvation.

NOT US.

Heb 10:10By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

To state we need to finish our salvation {Foundational} is to state Christ is not quite enough to secure it or Christ is lacking in that ability..
I'm sure you aren't going to want to discuss Hebrews 10 in the actual context that it is written but you know I ain't letting that slide!!!

This passage is simply speaking of the fact that the blood of Christ is sufficient in the fact that Jesus was sacrficed... there is no more need for blood of bulls and goats because that really never could satisfy in the first place. The old way is done away with and now we have a new. Another sacrifice for sin is not needed.

Hebrews 10:4 For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.
5 Therefore, when He comes into the world, He says, "SACRIFICE AND OFFERING THOU HAST NOT DESIRED, BUT A BODY THOU HAST PREPARED FOR ME;
6 IN WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN THOU HAST TAKEN NO PLEASURE.
7 "THEN I SAID, `BEHOLD, I HAVE COME (IN THE ROLL OF THE BOOK IT IS WRITTEN OF ME) TO DO THY WILL, O GOD.´"
8 After saying above, "SACRIFICES AND OFFERINGS AND WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN THOU HAST NOT DESIRED, NOR HAST THOU TAKEN PLEASURE in them" (which are offered according to the Law),
9 then He said, "BEHOLD, I HAVE COME TO DO THY WILL." He takes away the first in order to establish the second.
10 By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
11 And every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins;
12 but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD,
13 waiting from that time onward UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE A FOOTSTOOL FOR HIS FEET.
14 For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.
15 And the Holy Spirit also bears witness to us; for after saying,
16 "THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THEM AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS UPON THEIR HEART, AND UPON THEIR MIND I WILL WRITE THEM," He then says,
17 "AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE."
18 Now where there is forgiveness of these things, there is no longer any offering for sin.

Centurionoflight
Feb 13th 2007, 10:11 PM
ProjectPeter



I'm sure you aren't going to want to discuss Hebrews 10 in the actual context that it is written but you know I ain't letting that slide!!!

This passage is simply speaking of the fact that the blood of Christ is sufficient in the fact that Jesus was sacrficed... there is no more need for blood of bulls and goats because that really never could satisfy in the first place. The old way is done away with and now we have a new. Another sacrifice for sin is not needed.

So what was out of context?


Heb 10: 10 By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

ProjectPeter
Feb 13th 2007, 10:36 PM
ProjectPeter



So what was out of context?


Heb 10: 10 By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
We (believers) have been sanctified through the body of Christ crucified. That is in no way a "guarantee" that one is once saved always saved. Matter of fact Hebrews... yeah well... I'll be bringing that up in the debate thread. No sense going at it in here too.

Centurionoflight
Feb 13th 2007, 10:40 PM
ProjectPeter



We (believers) have been sanctified through the body of Christ crucified. That is in no way a "guarantee" that one is once saved always saved. Matter of fact Hebrews... yeah well... I'll be bringing that up in the debate thread. No sense going at it in here too.
Then how do you justify to ignore the "once for all" and "forever" type statements?

Heb 10
10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

17And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.

ProjectPeter
Feb 13th 2007, 11:20 PM
That is speaking of the sacrifice of Christ being once and for all... there was no more need for the sacrificial system. His one sacrifice was good for ever. Because of that sacrifice it perfect forever those that are sanctified.

You just gave a perfect example of the problem CoL.. it isn't verse 10, 12, 14, and 17. Pay attention to verses 1-11, 13, 15, 16 etc. as well. That helps with that whole context thing. What is perfected forever is the sacrifice... here is the where that discuss begins which sets the tone for you right nicely.

Hebrews 9:24 For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;
25 nor was it that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood not his own.
26 Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.
27 And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment,
28 so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, shall appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him.

ProjectPeter
Feb 13th 2007, 11:24 PM
And hey... why not. I don't tire of discussing the Bible so here or there or both makes no difference. Because of what Christ has done in that once needed sacrifice.

Hebrews 10:19 ¶Since therefore, brethren, we have confidence to enter the holy place by the blood of Jesus,
20 by a new and living way which He inaugurated for us through the veil, that is, His flesh,
21 and since we have a great priest over the house of God,
22 let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.
23 Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful;
24 and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds,
25 not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more, as you see the day drawing near.

This is what we are to do! Don't you love these list! ;) Why do these things? Here comes the warning.

26 ¶For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins,
27 but a certain terrifying expectation of judgment, and THE FURY OF A FIRE WHICH WILL CONSUME THE ADVERSARIES.
28 Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses.
29 How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?
30 For we know Him who said, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY." And again, "THE LORD WILL JUDGE HIS PEOPLE."
31 It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
32 ¶But remember the former days, when, after being enlightened, you endured a great conflict of sufferings,
33 partly, by being made a public spectacle through reproaches and tribulations, and partly by becoming sharers with those who were so treated.
34 For you showed sympathy to the prisoners, and accepted joyfully the seizure of your property, knowing that you have for yourselves a better possession and an abiding one.
35 Therefore, do not throw away your confidence, which has a great reward.
36 For you have need of endurance, so that when you have done the will of God, you may receive what was promised.
37 FOR YET IN A VERY LITTLE WHILE, HE WHO IS COMING WILL COME, AND WILL NOT DELAY.
38 BUT MY RIGHTEOUS ONE SHALL LIVE BY FAITH; AND IF HE SHRINKS BACK, MY SOUL HAS NO PLEASURE IN HIM.
39 But we are not of those who shrink back to destruction, but of those who have faith to the preserving of the soul.

Centurionoflight
Feb 13th 2007, 11:32 PM
ProjectPeter


That is speaking of the sacrifice of Christ being once and for all... there was no more need for the sacrificial system. His one sacrifice was good for ever. Because of that sacrifice it perfect forever those that are sanctified.
OSAS

Case closed.

Heb 10:10 By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

ProjectPeter
Feb 13th 2007, 11:55 PM
Maybe you're stuck? :lol:

Centurionoflight
Feb 14th 2007, 12:08 AM
ProjectPeter



Maybe you're stuck? Maybe you failed to make you point; thru posting of mass scripture.

That may work for others;

However I am look more at whole doctrines rather than "this line" or "that line".

I look at the over all ideas and their application rather than "a little here" or
"a little there".

I am not looking for, "Isa 28:10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:"

The whole doctrine you are not posting, instead you are going line upon line..

ProjectPeter
Feb 14th 2007, 12:13 AM
ProjectPeter

Maybe you failed to make you point; thru posting of mass scripture.

That may work for others;

However I am look more at whole doctrines rather than "this line" or "that line".

I look at the over all ideas and their application rather than "a little here" or
"a little there".

I am not looking for, "Isa 28:10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:"

The whole doctrine you are not posting, instead you are going line upon line..
Like I said... you're stuck. If you ain't getting your doctrine from those lines then you ain't getting your doctrine from the right place. And your doctrine in turn ain't right doctrine. Tis how it works!

Centurionoflight
Feb 14th 2007, 12:22 AM
ProjectPeter

Like I said... you're stuck. If you ain't getting your doctrine from those lines then you ain't getting your doctrine from the right place. And your doctrine in turn ain't right doctrine. Tis how it works!

Sweethart;

It is you that is stuck; not me.

I am very secure in my position and have been able to make it known quite well.

Your position is vague and hides behind this huge impossible use of passages; whose only context you can grasp.

ProjectPeter
Feb 14th 2007, 12:31 AM
ProjectPeter


Sweethart; :huh: :wasup: :eek: :o Does your wife know? :lol:


It is you that is stuck; not me.

I am very secure in my position and have been able to make it known quite well.

Your position is vague and hides behind this huge impossible use of passages; whose only context you can grasp.My doctrine doesn't hide. Goodness. It is there in all its glory amid all of Scripture. Isn't that great that the doctrine comes from the whole of Scripture as opposed to here a little and there a little! Come on man... that is how it is supposed to be. Doctrine comes from Scripture and it isn't a verse or two of Scripture. So your "secure in my position" aside... many are and in the end that won't matter if your position ain't right.

Centurionoflight
Feb 14th 2007, 12:43 AM
ProjectPeter



My doctrine doesn't hide. Goodness. It is there in all its glory amid all of Scripture. Isn't that great that the doctrine comes from the whole of Scripture as opposed to here a little and there a little! Come on man... that is how it is supposed to be. Doctrine comes from Scripture and it isn't a verse or two of Scripture.


Yes your doctrine hides;

You cant lay it out; nor have I seen it layed out.

Mass posteing of the bible chapters; with high lights is not laying out doctrine.

That is the beginning of a migrain.

The doctrine is alive; it is not some dead words in a book.




So your "secure in my position" aside... many are and in the end that won't matter if your position ain't right.




I have faith in the saving work of Christ; not my own.

That position is never incorrect with God.

ProjectPeter
Feb 14th 2007, 12:46 AM
ProjectPeter



Yes your doctrine hides;

You cant lay it out; nor have I seen it layed out.

Mass posteing of the bible chapters; with high lights is not laying out doctrine.

That is the beginning of a migrain.

The doctrine is alive; it is not some dead words in a book.






I have faith in the saving work of Christ; not my own.

That position is never incorrect with God.
"dead words in a book?" Um... alrighty then.

Centurionoflight
Feb 14th 2007, 01:04 AM
ProjectPeter


"dead words in a book?" Um... alrighty then.

The doctrine of God is alive.
It breaths and it is with us.


Heb 4
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.
We can use the thinking of Christ every day.


It is not dead words in a book to be manipulated this way or that way to cover a result we wish.

What I am trying to see is the thinking, the doctrine, that you are posting.

Instead I just see you using line upon line.

ProjectPeter
Feb 14th 2007, 01:07 AM
Then treat it with more respect when folks are discussing it. You choose not to and that is your call. But treat it with respect when others do.

Centurionoflight
Feb 14th 2007, 01:15 AM
ProjectPeter


Then treat it with more respect when folks are discussing it. You choose not to and that is your call. But treat it with respect when others do.Treat what with more respect?

People twisting and turning words; or laying out doctrines.

Titus 3
9and foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about law, stand away from -- for they are unprofitable and vain.
10A sectarian man, after a first and second admonition be rejecting,
11having known that he hath been subverted who [is] such, and doth sin, being self-condemned.

My intrest is in the correct doctrine; not strife over this rule or that rule.

Doctrine it flows and merges; there is no strife in it.

When you state NOSAS this creates strife.

It conflicts with other doctrines;


Conflicts with
1) Faith in Christ does not result in disappointment.
2) The good shepherd
3) Positional santification
4) Doctrine of Born again.
5) Salvation being a gift.

etc..

ProjectPeter
Feb 14th 2007, 01:33 AM
Again... you appeal to emotions. That's sweet and all but it don't make it truth. Scripture does. You fail in contending with what is written, writing it off as some dead words written on paper. But contend... it is lacking.

moonglow
Feb 14th 2007, 01:43 AM
ProjectPeter
OSAS

Case closed.

Heb 10:10 By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

2 Peter 2

18 For when they speak great swelling words of emptiness, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through lewdness, the ones who have actually escaped from those who live in error. 19 While they promise them liberty, they themselves are slaves of corruption; for by whom a person is overcome, by him also he is brought into bondage. 20 For if, after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the latter end is worse for them than the beginning. 21 For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them. 22 But it has happened to them according to the true proverb: “A dog returns to his own vomit,” and, “a sow, having washed, to her wallowing in the mire.”

http://www.searchgodsword.org/com/bcc/view.cgi?book=2pe&chapter=002
Coffman Commentaries

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.

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.

BadDog
Feb 14th 2007, 03:13 AM
BD,



I mean here you say that it is Greek 101 stuff and such and such is a much better translation and all of these other Greek scholar folk just hosed this one all up! I mean let's face it here. If what you and madeline are saying is the fact... then that whole verse has to be totally changed to read completely different than how all these other translator's figured it should read. You change that to since then here is how it should read.
Peter,

I did not say nor imply that. What I did say is that the idea of being assumed to be true is the idea behind the Greek 1st class condition. That is a fact. The translators knew that - every one of them. It cannot be said, or perhaps I should say, "should not be said" that it is always best to use "since" rather than "if." I did not say that - I was very careful about that.

Peter, all I am saying is that Paul was not assuming that these Colossian believers were about to tank it, but that he had much confidence that they would continue steadfastly. I did not say nor did I imply that most of the modern or older translations out there have messed up here. I was just pointing out something which does not communicate in English in the same natural manner as it does in NT Greek.

Rather than criticize me here without verifying what I have said, please check out what I said with ANY Greek professor, grammar, or whatever. I do not appreciate such treatment. That is one reason why I generally have refused to participate in such debates in the Arena in the past.


That is a total rewrite, meaning something totally different, if you are correct and every other major translation that we have out there just messed this all up as you guys seem to be trying to get us to believe. Gotta be honest with you here... you know I ain't going to buy that! ;)
What I said about the grammar IS correct. If you think I'm wrong, then please list a grammar or other source. Otherwise, please be more respectful in how you respond.

Did I say that it should always be translated as "since"?

OK, here are a few online Greek soruces and what they say about the 1st class condition:

http://www.nauman.org/funk-bighg/?f=l59
FIRST CLASS CONDITION - 856. In a first class condition the protasis is a simple conditional assumption with emphasis on the reality of the assumption (but not on the reality of what is being assumed). It is therefore taken to be a real case, though it may, in fact, be an unreal case.

and

http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/2000-April/010818.html
> What I understand the first class conditional to imply is that the grammar of the sentence assumes a condition to be true, regardless of whether or not it is in fact true. In both the conditions in Matt 12:27-28, Jesus uses "if" to suppose that a condition is true. Whether it is actually true or not is a matter of history and reality, not a matter of grammar.

You can read the other guy's response.
The point of the 1st class conditional statement is simply that of assuming something to be true. If you'll notice, I did comment on the warning Paul gave as well. I did not say that this verse means something totally different than what this or that Bible says. I used the Greek grammar to point out an emphasis - not some mysterious knowledge which only the initiated can grasp.

What I did was correct, honest, and fair. I did not use any knowledge that I have of Greek to twist things to say something differently than is translated. You have implied that I did do so - for that purpose. Here was what I posted re. what I thought was being said:

EI GE EPIMENETE TH PISTEI TEQEMELIWMENOI KAI EDRAIOI
If indeed (emphasis) you are firm in the faith, having laid the foundation (established) and being steadfast

KAI MH METAKINOUMENOI APO KAI THS ELPIDOS TOU EUAGGELIOU OU HKOUSATE
And without shifting from the hope of the gospel which you’ve heard.

I translated it as "if indeed," and commented on the purpose of the particle GE to add emphasis. What you have said about what I did was wrong, and it was unfair. I can't help it, Peter. I love to really dig deep when studying the Word. I do use the Greek all the time when studying the Word. It's just my nature.

Please address these concerns that I have, Peter, and next time, please give me the benefit of the doubt, from our long relationship on this board.

BD

Edited-added: In addition, it seems that since you can participate in the Arena, and others, in general (for whatever reasons), cannot, it is only fair to focus your inputs there. I addressed a single text. I wanted to do so in the arena, but was told that it was probably best not to do so. I did not want to get involved, actually, am not free to do so. But I did want to comment on a passage briefly (for me). Also, I will not likely be very free for a day or two to get back to this board, so please - no one assume that I got angry and in a huff left this thread. :P I did get angry, but that's not why I won't be available for awhile.

Diggindeeper
Feb 14th 2007, 03:23 AM
Can I jump in here to just say one little thing???

I'll tell you what. If there was any part of me that could consider the possibility that OSAS is the RIGHT doctrine...it is now gone. I am now FULLY convinced that it is WRONG!

What I have seen presented in all this long argument by Centurionoflight is no more than A FULL-BLOWN LICENSE TO SIN OR LIVE ANYWAY I WANT and still have the promise of eternal security and eternity with Christ Jesus!

He sure has convinced me that it is the wrong doctrine! I am forever convinced! Thank you, Centurian, for showing me what not to believe, because it is absolutely contrary to scripture!

moonglow
Feb 14th 2007, 04:05 AM
Peter,

I did not say nor imply that. What I did say is that the idea of being assumed to be true is the idea behind the Greek 1st class condition. That is a fact. The translators knew that - every one of them. It cannot be said, or perhaps I should say, "should not be said" that it is always best to use "since" rather than "if." I did not say that - I was very careful about that.

Peter, all I am saying is that Paul was not assuming that these Colossian believers were about to tank it, but that he had much confidence that they would continue steadfastly. I did not say nor did I imply that most of the modern or older translations out there have messed up here. I was just pointing out something which does not communicate in English in the same natural manner as it does in NT Greek.

Rather than criticize me here without verifying what I have said, please check out what I said with ANY Greek professor, grammar, or whatever. I do not appreciate such treatment. That is one reason why I generally have refused to participate in such debates in the Arena in the past.


What I said about the grammar IS correct. If you think I'm wrong, then please list a grammar or other source. Otherwise, please be more respectful in how you respond.

Did I say that it should always be translated as "since"?

OK, here are a few online Greek soruces and what they say about the 1st class condition:

The point of the 1st class conditional statement is simply that of assuming something to be true. If you'll notice, I did comment on the warning Paul gave as well.

What I did was correct, honest, and fair. I did not use any knowledge that I have of Greek to twist things to say something differently than is translated. You have implied that I did do so - for that purpose.

Please address these concerns that I have, Peter, and next time, please give me the benefit of the doubt, from our long relationship on this board.

BD

I haven't gone back and read what is being discussed that BadDog is talking about here, but I do know that sometimes when a verse just isn't clear for some reason and people are assuming something, that going back to the orginal lanuage can really clear things up. Though I don't find this to be a common problem though. There are occasions where a word in the orginal lanuage they didn't have an english word for it...that it was close but sometimes close isn't enough. One time I got involved in a long discussion about a verse in the bible on trying to figure out if this father had really scarficed his daughter or not by killing her. Right now the passages escapes me...its late and I am tired. It appeared on the surface the father had killed her as he had promised the Lord he would scarifice the first thing that came to greet him when he got home...which happened to be his daughter. But we also know God spoke against human scarifices too...it didn't fit with the rest of the bible. But then the part about her crying about her virginity confused everyone...I said if he was about to kill her why in the world would she cry over that? Seems like she would be crying about losing her life!

Anyway it all came down to one key verse in which one word was used that made all the difference in what really happened to her... its orginal meaning...as to whether the scarifce was her having to go serve in the temple the rest of her life and never marrying which being this man's only child would be no one to carry on his name (that was a big deal then too). Or whether he actually killed her....the orginal Hebrew word though cleared it up...he did not kill her. I couldn't image he would and God not be outraged by that...but many on that thread were convinced he did kill her inspite of what the rest of the bible said about God's nature...:cool:

Anyway I hope this can be resolved on here...at times the orginal lanuage is important but overall I think scripture in english is pretty clear.

God bless

BadDog
Feb 14th 2007, 05:10 AM
Can I jump in here to just say one little thing???

I'll tell you what. If there was any part of me that could consider the possibility that OSAS is the RIGHT doctrine...it is now gone. I am now FULLY convinced that it is WRONG!

What I have seen presented in all this long argument by Centurionoflight is no more than A FULL-BLOWN LICENSE TO SIN OR LIVE ANYWAY I WANT and still have the promise of eternal security and eternity with Christ Jesus!

He sure has convinced me that it is the wrong doctrine! I am forever convinced! Thank you, Centurian, for showing me what not to believe, because it is absolutely contrary to scripture!Diggindeeper,

IOW, you've decided to stop digging for the truth? ...to stop digging deeper? :P That doesn't seem to fit in with the username you've chosen, which I appreciate, BTW. May I suggest that you not make theological decisions too hastily based on people... we all mess up - quite often, actually. Base such decisions on the Word of God alone. ...not on experience. ...not on emotions. ...not on what this or that person whom you respect has said (or upon something that someone has said which you do not respect). God's Word. Period. That is the standard.

Now, may I point out one assumption you've made about OSAS which is a common misunderstanding about this issue? I realize that you didn't address this to me, so I'll keep this brief. You essentially said that people who hold to eternal security do so because that frees them up to live like the devil.

Nothing could be farther from the truth. They do so out of the same fervor that Paul had in holding to the truth of the gospel - salvation by grace alone through faith alone. You see, I am convinced that if people do not have a firm grasp on this truth that they are not able to live for Christ with the same intensity. We need solid confidence and firm conviction about His unconditional love for us. That frees us up to live wholeheartedly for Christ, and #@*& those torpedoes. Many very godly young men and women have struggled in their walk with Christ simply because they did not understand the freedom - the liberating power - of the gospel. People who are OSAS are not any less commited to Christ and do not have any less godly walks. They are just more firmly convinced about God's unconditional love for them than NOSAS dudes. Now this latter statement is pretty hard to refute - that's the main basis behind the debate.

One side says that God loves us - but there are certain conditions to that love, while the other side says that he does discipline us, as a parent does their children, but His love is without restriction. THAT is the focal point of the argument. Can there be any doubt about that?

Another way to put it is that one side (OSAS) wants to emphasize the love of God, while the other side (NOSAS) wants to emphasize the justice of God. I do not doubt the sincerity of Peter and other's motives or commitment to the Lord. Why a couple of people PMed me about Peter, and they could verify that I strongly supported him, and appreciated his heart for people and for the Lord, and I encouraged them to give him the benefit of the doubt. He has contacted people often on this board in trying to help them as a pastor does his sheep - actually traveling to see them in person! So I can not agree with Peter and others who may differ with me on some crucial doctrine, and yet still respect and love them in the Lord. That other Arena debate on OSAS ( a couple of years ago) was handled in a very respectful manner. Though this is but the peanut-gallery - let's keep it the same.

That's what this is about. Plus there is a desire by both sides to say that if God said A it is A - period. (Problem is - we cannot agree on what the texts really say, or mean. :D ) Now can I suggest that we all try not to assume anything about the motives of those posting?

Thx,

BD

Centurionoflight
Feb 14th 2007, 06:49 AM
moonglow




20for, if having escaped from the pollutions of the world, in the acknowledging of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, and by these again being entangled, they have been overcome, become to them hath the last things worse than the first,

21for it were better to them not to have acknowledged the way of the righteousness, than having acknowledged [it], to turn back from the holy command delivered to them,

22and happened to them hath that of the true similitude; `A dog did turn back upon his own vomit,' and, `A sow having bathed herself -- to rolling in mire.'




There is more to life than just salvation.

It is worse for them;

For;

1) now they have a father in heaven who will flay them alive
2) They build up a harden heart {Which occurs when one consistanly ignores truth} with leads to bitterness; they then become a living example of divine disipline on a living man.
3) They cant turn to Salvation; for they are all ready saved.

Centurionoflight
Feb 14th 2007, 06:55 AM
Diggindeeper




What I have seen presented in all this long argument by Centurionoflight is no more than A FULL-BLOWN LICENSE TO SIN OR LIVE ANYWAY I WANT and still have the promise of eternal security and eternity with Christ Jesus!
Really;

What post did I state that wish for a "FULL-BLOWN LICENSE TO SIN!!!"? :rolleyes:

Sometime perhaps you will grow and realize OSAS is a FULL-BLOWN LICENSE TO PUSH TO SPIRITUAL GROWTH!!

Nothing can stop you; not sin; not human need;

You have a eternal foundation of Christ under you; now you can run to the goal on solid ground.

Heb 12


1Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us,

2Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

Why is it you desire to look side to side at your brothers, to see if they slip a sin or two in there?

Why is it you want to make their ground unsteady; thru doubt of Christs promise; why make them stumble?

Focus on Christ and run the race before you.

BadDog
Feb 14th 2007, 01:30 PM
cof,

Amen to those last two posts. I think there is a real misunderstanding about OSAS in those areas.

One thing I hate about NOSAS is what it does to believers - tearing them up spiritually. They are told that they have eternal life as a guarantee. Then, "Not so fast..." They try to encourage them to have assurance, then pull the rug out from under them and base their assurance of salvation on works. They end up with no real assurance at all.

Sometimes OSAS adherrants are guilty of something similar... they tell believers that they have eternal life unconditionally, then later tell them that if they had REALLY trusted in Christ, then they would walk faithfully. Hence, they must not have truly trusted in Christ in the 1st place. "Oops. I thought you had trusted in Christ, but I see that I was wrong."

Bah humbug! Assurance needs to be based on faith alone in what Christ alone did in our behalf. He didn't just do it for us - He did it all - in our place.

But I think it is time for these discussions to focus on the texts, and not the supposed motives of individuals. What do you guys think? Followers of both positions believe, with varying conviction, that they are right. The issue is not to beat people about the head and shoulders, but to clarify certain texts. And it is a good thing for one side to better understand the other side.

And remember, we are all brothers and sisters for whom Christ died. All of these conversations need to express love for one another and patience with one another.

BD

ProjectPeter
Feb 14th 2007, 02:22 PM
Peter,

I did not say nor imply that. What I did say is that the idea of being assumed to be true is the idea behind the Greek 1st class condition. That is a fact. The translators knew that - every one of them. It cannot be said, or perhaps I should say, "should not be said" that it is always best to use "since" rather than "if." I did not say that - I was very careful about that.

Peter, all I am saying is that Paul was not assuming that these Colossian believers were about to tank it, but that he had much confidence that they would continue steadfastly. I did not say nor did I imply that most of the modern or older translations out there have messed up here. I was just pointing out something which does not communicate in English in the same natural manner as it does in NT Greek.

Rather than criticize me here without verifying what I have said, please check out what I said with ANY Greek professor, grammar, or whatever. I do not appreciate such treatment. That is one reason why I generally have refused to participate in such debates in the Arena in the past.


What I said about the grammar IS correct. If you think I'm wrong, then please list a grammar or other source. Otherwise, please be more respectful in how you respond.

Did I say that it should always be translated as "since"?

OK, here are a few online Greek soruces and what they say about the 1st class condition:

The point of the 1st class conditional statement is simply that of assuming something to be true. If you'll notice, I did comment on the warning Paul gave as well. I did not say that this verse means something totally different than what this or that Bible says. I used the Greek grammar to point out an emphasis - not some mysterious knowledge which only the initiated can grasp.

What I did was correct, honest, and fair. I did not use any knowledge that I have of Greek to twist things to say something differently than is translated. You have implied that I did do so - for that purpose. Here was what I posted re. what I thought was being said:

EI GE EPIMENETE TH PISTEI TEQEMELIWMENOI KAI EDRAIOI
If indeed (emphasis) you are firm in the faith, having laid the foundation (established) and being steadfast

KAI MH METAKINOUMENOI APO KAI THS ELPIDOS TOU EUAGGELIOU OU HKOUSATE
And without shifting from the hope of the gospel which you’ve heard.

I translated it as "if indeed," and commented on the purpose of the particle GE to add emphasis. What you have said about what I did was wrong, and it was unfair. I can't help it, Peter. I love to really dig deep when studying the Word. I do use the Greek all the time when studying the Word. It's just my nature.

Please address these concerns that I have, Peter, and next time, please give me the benefit of the doubt, from our long relationship on this board.

BD

Edited-added: In addition, it seems that since you can participate in the Arena, and others, in general (for whatever reasons), cannot, it is only fair to focus your inputs there. I addressed a single text. I wanted to do so in the arena, but was told that it was probably best not to do so. I did not want to get involved, actually, am not free to do so. But I did want to comment on a passage briefly (for me). Also, I will not likely be very free for a day or two to get back to this board, so please - no one assume that I got angry and in a huff left this thread. :P I did get angry, but that's not why I won't be available for awhile.
I didn't say Paul was freaking out because he was afraid they were packing it in. Just simply that it is a passage that is telling them you are IF. It is a conditional statement and if that word is better translated "since" then that is a HUGE change from the text as written by the other translations and there is no getting around that fact. And you made it clear that you thought Madeline was spot on and BD that is what madeline was saying.

I am totally and completely unsure how you think that would be better translated as "since" in that spot because as I showed... if you change that to "since" as she said was a better translation for that word... then that does in fact totally change the text. I don't need a Greek lexicon to see that.

If you continue... since you continue.... two totally different statements by any definition.

If you do agree with that as Madeline believes it should be then that is most assuredly changing the text as it is written in those translations. That's how I see it man and if you can't understand that it truly does make me scratch my head then you are not giving me what you apparently desire and that is the benefit of the doubt. I didn't say with any malice or intent to slander you nor to cause you any grief and because of our long relationship on the board I figured you of all people would in fact know that. This is simply how I see it and until you can show me how that ain't changing the text then I stand on what I posted. It's all I can do.

moonglow
Feb 14th 2007, 02:58 PM
cof,

Amen to those last two posts. I think there is a real misunderstanding about OSAS in those areas.

One thing I hate about NOSAS is what it does to believers - tearing them up spiritually. They are told that they have eternal life as a guarantee. Then, "Not so fast..." They try to encourage them to have assurance, then pull the rug out from under them and base their assurance of salvation on works. They end up with no real assurance at all.

No that is not what non-osas is about at all actually. Of course the assurance is there, the whole title no-osas isn't even correct...its very misleading. The Lord doesn't take salvation from anyone...but we can walk away from it...give it back. There are verses that are undieable on that. If its not possible for a person to reject God, then why all the warnings in the bible? The warnings of not falling back into sin...the warnings of the great need to constantly be spiritually growing in Christ, because if we don't, we are endanger of spiritually drying up and dying. The warnings on 'faith without works is dead'...the warnings on casting out demons and doing wonders in the Name of Jesus for their own personal gain, of how Jesus will say, "I never knew you" on judgement day...the warnings go on and on and on.

God saves us...its soild yes and we can count on it...but we don't lose our free will from that point on to walk away from Him. People have time and time again...usually because they went through something horrible in their life and instead of turning to God for comfort and strength they turn on Him and blame Him and walk away...:( They start to hate Him. Its truly horrible to see actually. Some just drift away from Him too, starting out with a little sin that grows and grows and they decide that sin is worth it, and turn their backs on Him never coming back. There are as many reasons for rejecting the Lord as their are people actually. Here is just one story about the well know evangelists Charles Templeton who rejected God and gave up his salvation: http://www.christiancourier.com/penpoints/skepticReflects.htm

Sometimes OSAS adherrants are guilty of something similar... they tell believers that they have eternal life unconditionally, then later tell them that if they had REALLY trusted in Christ, then they would walk faithfully. Hence, they must not have truly trusted in Christ in the 1st place. "Oops. I thought you had trusted in Christ, but I see that I was wrong."

Bah humbug! Assurance needs to be based on faith alone in what Christ alone did in our behalf. He didn't just do it for us - He did it all - in our place.

But I think it is time for these discussions to focus on the texts, and not the supposed motives of individuals. What do you guys think? Followers of both positions believe, with varying conviction, that they are right. The issue is not to beat people about the head and shoulders, but to clarify certain texts. And it is a good thing for one side to better understand the other side.

And remember, we are all brothers and sisters for whom Christ died. All of these conversations need to express love for one another and patience with one another.

BD

Post like Centurionoflight don't help us understand the osas views at all....his idea is people are saved no matter what they do...if they misbehave they lose rewards and God will 'flay them alive in Heaven'...which I take to mean 'skin us alive'...now what kind of picture of God is that? That He will torture His own IN Heaven because they went back to sin or didn't live up to certain standards?

I know you want to get into scriptures here but I think we need to first get back to the basic of what excatly is OSAS as you say we aren't understanding it and by the last two posts of yours it seems you don't fully understand what no-osas is about yourself actually.

Maybe this will help:

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:

1. Such people don’t believe in grace.

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

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

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

5. Such people believe in a works salvation.

6. Such people are in legalism

7. Such people believe in sinless perfection.

8. Such people are trying to save themselves.

9. Such people are unsaved.

10. 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:

1. 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.

2. 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.

3. 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).

4. 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.).

5. 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).

6. 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.

7. 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.).


8. 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).


9. 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.).

10. 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

The whole bible is about having a relationship with God...while He draws us and saves us, it is up to us to do our part in maintaining that relationship as we would any relationship. If we aren't...then the relationship becomes very one sided doesn't it? And you think the Lord will torlerant that? Especially when that person is sinning, unrepenting, doesn't care what God thinks, which is nothing more then a slap in the face to what Jesus did for us.

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.

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.


God bless

moonglow
Feb 14th 2007, 03:04 PM
Diggindeeper


Really;

What post did I state that wish for a "FULL-BLOWN LICENSE TO SIN!!!"? :rolleyes:

Sometime perhaps you will grow and realize OSAS is a FULL-BLOWN LICENSE TO PUSH TO SPIRITUAL GROWTH!!

Nothing can stop you; not sin; not human need;

You have a eternal foundation of Christ under you; now you can run to the goal on solid ground.

Heb 12


1Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us,

2Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

Why is it you desire to look side to side at your brothers, to see if they slip a sin or two in there?

Why is it you want to make their ground unsteady; thru doubt of Christs promise; why make them stumble?

Focus on Christ and run the race before you.

Everything I bolded is excatly what those of us that are on the no-osas side of things are saying too! So how about that...there are many things we are in agreement about...:pp

moonglow
Feb 14th 2007, 03:42 PM
is this the verse in question on greek translation:

Colossians 1:21-23

21 And you, who once were alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now He has reconciled 22 in the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy, and blameless, and above reproach in His sight— 23 if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.

And some are saying the 'indeed' should be translated to 'since'? That isn't what I am finding on the lexion at all.

1:23 [ Greek Font Size: – / + | Toggle Font ] [ View in: BYZ / TR | Side-by-side | Greek Lexical Parser ]

if indeed you continue in the faith firmly established and steadfast, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel that you have heard, which was proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, was made a minister.

ei ge epimenete (5719) th pistei teqemeliwmenoi (5772) kai edraioi kai mh metakinoumenoi (5746) apo thv elpidov tou euaggeliou ou hkousate, (5656) tou khruxqentov (5685) en pash ktisei th upo ton ouranon, ou egenomhn (5633) egw Paulov diakonov.

if

Strong's Number: 1487 eiÎ
Original Word Word Origin
eiÎ a primary particle of conditionality
Transliterated Word Phonetic Spelling
Ei i
Parts of Speech TDNT
Conjunction None
Definition


1. if, whether

Translated Words
KJV (291) - if, 242; misc, 3; not tr, 20; that, 6; whether, 20;

NAS (389) - although, 1; if, 341; no, 1; only, 11; suppose, 1; though, 5; unless, 5; until, 1; whatever, 1; whether, 19; whoever, 3;

indeed

Strong's Number: 1065 geÑ
Original Word Word Origin
geÑ a primary particle of emphasis or qualification (often used with other particles prefixed)
Transliterated Word Phonetic Spelling
Ge gheh
Parts of Speech TDNT
particle None
Definition


1. indeed, truly, at least
2. even
3. if indeed, seeing that

Translated Words
KJV (9) - at least, 1; beside, 1; doubtless, 1; not tr, 4; yet, 2;

NAS (7) - indeed, 1; least, 1; so, 1; though, 1; well, 1; yet, 2;

indeed is not translated to 'since'....its not even in the defination at all.

check for yourself: http://www.studylight.org/isb/bible.cgi?query=mt+5%3A24&section=0&it=nas&oq=mt%25205%3A24&ot=bhs&nt=na&new=1&nb=col&ngt=Go+To%3A&ng=1&ncc=5

Also continuing on in that verse: 23 if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.

I went through all the tenses in this verse too on that page...the verse is clear and straighforward and doesn't seem to be affected by any translation problems.

God bless

Pilgrimtozion
Feb 14th 2007, 04:01 PM
From what I understand, Moonglow, they are saying that the verb in the sentence starting with "if" is a first conditional. This means that the author is implying the actual fact of the thing stated. In this case, it would mean that Paul is stating as a fact that he knows they will continue in the faith.

In all honesty, it sounds like a typical Greek construction that I would hear in the five years of classical Greek I studied in school. I still do not see how it changes the point made by using the verse, however, for the conditional statement is still conditional...

slightlypuzzled
Feb 14th 2007, 04:04 PM
Saw that new OSAS thread that Peter's having fun with. :D I had something to share regarding that Colossians 1:23 text - which Madeline handled very nicely. WIA suggested that I post it here rather than in the thread since I will be too busy to interact with any responses for Peter, and that wouldn't be fair. So here goes:

Madeline,

Nice comments. I think you explained that text nicely. Perhaps the following will give a bit of technical support for such a position. Anyway, let's look at the text in a little detail:

EI GE EPIMENETE TH PISTEI TEQEMELIWMENOI KAI EDRAIOI
If indeed (emphasis) you are firm in the faith, having laid the foundation (established) and being steadfast

KAI MH METAKINOUMENOI APO KAI THS ELPIDOS TOU EUAGGELIOU OU HKOUSATE
And without shifting from the hope of the gospel which you’ve heard.

The particle GE emphasizes the conditional EI EPIMENETE... ("if you remain firm..." - 1st class condition). A 1st class condition, as Madeline said, is often best translated "since" because the possibility is assumed to be true. IOW, Paul is not considering a possible defection of these believers. In this case, Paul is very confident (GE) - "indeed" that his readers will not stray away from the hope of the gospel. (Hope is used differently than we do - a confidence about what has not been received yet, but will be.) "The faith" is a reference to the set of beliefs which they follow. It is not expressing a possibility that they may stop believing something. This same confidence is seen later...

Colossians 2:5 For even though I am absent in body, nevertheless I am with you in spirit, rejoicing to see your good discipline and the stability of your faith in Christ.

Notice what confidence Paul has in them.

METAKINEO (METAKINOUMENOI is a plural present passive participle) - "without shifting" - The idea is of being caused to be shaken from the hope which they have. When believers are not "firmly planted in the faith" they become easily disturbed and confused, moving from one insecure anchor of "hope" to another. Paul is expressing confidence that these Colossian Christians are not in such a state. They are not going from one teacher to another, searching for truth. They have found the truth in Christ.

The expression regarding the "hope of the gospel" is simply expressing confidence in the hope which the gospel stirs up. The "hope" (ELPIS) is a confident expectation. Paul is not saying, "you guys need to keep hoping that somehow..." It is a hope only in the sense that it is in the future, and not realized yet.

The verb QEMELIOW (TIQEMELIWMENOI - perfect passive participle) - the perfect tense of the verb “established” stresses something which happened at a point in time in the past, and which continues in a state of being established. The passive voice shows this to be a work which God accomplishes in believers as they hold fast to the person and work of Christ as the source for their salvation and spiritual growth in their lives. The root idea is of a foundation, and the expression “firm in the faith” is the natural result of being built on such a foundation. Later in that same paragraph Paul referred to the "hope of glory." At the BEMA seat of Christ is where we have an opportunity to share in His glory, as joint-heirs of Christ. Then in 1:28 Paul says that he proclaims Christ, "admonishing every person and teaching every person with all wisdom, that we may present every man mature in Christ."

That's why I'm confident this is what Paul is talking about.

Paul is concluding a section (1:13-23) with a strong conditional sentence (1st class condition). It consists of both a very positive (GE emphasis) affirmation and confidence on Paul's part, but also a negative warning. But this warning has nothing to do with possible condemnation. The negative warning, "without shifting from the hope of the gospel which you've heard," indicates a very real danger of not being presented before the Lord at the BEMA seat of Christ as a mature disciple of Christ who has been consistently maturing in Christ.

This warning is shown to be the same kind of emphasis Paul is making later in 2:8 and 2:19...

Colossians 2:8; 18, 19 See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.

Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of the angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen, inflated without cause by his fleshly mind, and not holding fast to the head, from whom the entire body, being supplied and held together by the joints and ligaments, grows with a growth which is from God.

Here we see as well the false teaching of which Paul was concerned. This was the specific danger Paul saw - that they might become confused by such doctrines about angels (that we should worship them). There were apparently many false teachers and false prophets making all kinds of claims and drawing people after them.

In conclusion, one thing I wanted to make clear here: grammatically, this is a 1st class condition. Any 1st-year Greek grammar will tell you that this is written in such a way as assumes the positive. In English, some Bibles seem to read as if Paul was concerned about their remaining firmly established in the faith. That is not what Paul is saying here. The particle GE makes it clear that Paul was very confident about this.

Some may not agree with my comments about the BEMA seat of Christ, but the other is really not arguable.

Debates like this are nice because it helps us all to better understand the other side's approach to various scripture texts. We do not want to just put down the opponent's arguments, but to better understand our brotehr or sister in Christ's position.

Take care, Peter.

Bob

Hey Dude, long time no see....glad to see you are still around....;)

The problem I see with your interpretation is this point. The first is this; the verse in question might not be a normal 'first class conditional sentence' at all. I state that because of the real absence of an 'if-then' kind of relationship between any part of that verse. It is all one point, in that verse Paul is describing how and who will stand '...before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach--...'. You might do better to take the apodosis from vers 22...'...in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach--
....'
But, to carve up verse 23 is to interrupt the flow of the verbs, the main verb with its supporting participles. So, I agree with Vincent that verse 23 is a clause which clarifies the last part of 22. I guess its the fundamental 'if-then' that makes it hard to really carve up 23. Robertson calls it a FCC, but then does not identify the apodosis in the verse. I am struggling to really see how you can pull apart the chain of thought form 22 into 23 like that.
You are right, the words 'ei ge' add emphasis to the verse, but as Vincent says it emphasizes the 'staying steadfast' '...in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach--...'

Centurionoflight
Feb 14th 2007, 04:13 PM
moonglow


Everything I bolded is excatly what those of us that are on the no-osas side of things are saying too! So how about that...there are many things we are in agreement about...
Cant grow or build with out a secure foundation, that foundation is Christ.
Therefore I disagree with the implication that NOSAS is for growth too.

Matt 7

24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: 25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.



The Rock is Christ unmovable, if we dont build on the SECURITY that is Christ then we are building on sand. Which is the NOSAS position; building on insecurity.



26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:
27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.
The unstable NOSAS doctrine can not stand to the pressures like those built on the rock.

Centurionoflight
Feb 14th 2007, 04:20 PM
baddog


But I think it is time for these discussions to focus on the texts, and not the supposed motives of individuals. What do you guys think? Followers of both positions believe, with varying conviction, that they are right. The issue is not to beat people about the head and shoulders, but to clarify certain texts. And it is a good thing for one side to better understand the other side.
Determining motives is the purpose of the texts.

Heb 4:12
12For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
Is the heart using human or divine view point,

If it is using human viewpoint; then the texts are just another dead rule book that must be blankly followed.

Those in human viewpoint will not be able to teach or learn doctrine.
For doctrine is of the spirit, they are thinking of the flesh.

ISA 28
9 Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts.

10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:
To those of human view its about the letter; not the doctrine.

Therefore people must be of the right heart FIRST; then the texts can be studied.

slightlypuzzled
Feb 14th 2007, 04:35 PM
moonglow


Cant grow or build with out a secure foundation, that foundation is Christ.
Therefore I disagree with the implication that NOSAS is for growth too.

Matt 7

24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: 25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.



The Rock is Christ unmovable, if we dont build on the SECURITY that is Christ then we are building on sand. Which is the NOSAS position; building on insecurity.



26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:
27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.
The unstable NOSAS doctrine can not stand to the pressures like those built on the rock.

All you are doing is throwing out generalities, I am NOSAS, always have been before I knew anyone even believed in an 'OSAS' position. I have always felt quite secure in the love of the Lord as His beloved child:

Eph. 5
1 Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children;

He loved while I was still dead in my sins:

Romans 5:
8But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

Therefore, don't accuse us of any Freudian shortcomings you might feel...:D
This whole thread is going the usual way of all threads, but PP is doing what he feels called to do, so I will stick by him out of a deep respect for him and what he does best on the 'Net. ;)

moonglow
Feb 14th 2007, 05:12 PM
From what I understand, Moonglow, they are saying that the verb in the sentence starting with "if" is a first conditional. This means that the author is implying the actual fact of the thing stated. In this case, it would mean that Paul is stating as a fact that he knows they will continue in the faith.

In all honesty, it sounds like a typical Greek construction that I would hear in the five years of classical Greek I studied in school. I still do not see how it changes the point made by using the verse, however, for the conditional statement is still conditional...

That is all I was saying...on the debate thread some brought up the greek translation changing the meaning of the verse from 'if indeed' to 'since' as if Paul were saying 'Since" instead...which would change the verse from saying this:

23 if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.

to this: "Since" you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.

But the greek shows the word 'indeed' in our lanuage does not mean 'since' in greek. (this was from the other thread which I can't post on) so I might have caused confusion over here...sorry about that.

So what I am saying is...the english translation is correct and that is all. make sense?

God bless

moonglow
Feb 14th 2007, 05:15 PM
moonglow


Cant grow or build with out a secure foundation, that foundation is Christ.
Therefore I disagree with the implication that NOSAS is for growth too.

Matt 7

24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: 25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.



The Rock is Christ unmovable, if we dont build on the SECURITY that is Christ then we are building on sand. Which is the NOSAS position; building on insecurity.



26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:
27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.
The unstable NOSAS doctrine can not stand to the pressures like those built on the rock.

Maybe that is what you think we are saying...but its not. I wholeheartily agree Christ IS our Rock we can securely build on...:)


Determining motives is the purpose of the texts.

Heb 4:12

12For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

Is the heart using human or divine view point,

If it is using human viewpoint; then the texts are just another dead rule book that must be blankly followed.

Those in human viewpoint will not be able to teach or learn doctrine.
For doctrine is of the spirit, they are thinking of the flesh.

ISA 28

9 Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts.

10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

To those of human view its about the letter; not the doctrine.

Therefore people must be of the right heart FIRST; then the texts can be studied.



What do you think our motives are, if not to encourage people to grow in Christ?

Centurionoflight
Feb 14th 2007, 06:11 PM
moonglow




Maybe that is what you think we are saying...but its not. I wholeheartily agree Christ IS our Rock we can securely build on..
Unless of course you get caught up in sin etc; then Christ becomes sand.


What do you think our motives are, if not to encourage people to grow in Christ?Growth doesnt occur following line upon line.

It comes thru renewal of our minds to the thinking of Christ; this can only be done by a new creature that is reborn spiritually alive.

Once born one can not return to that which they was before they was born.

Therefore since its line upon line; the motivation is perhaps bondage to some form of legalism.

Maybe cant stand this;

That there are other people are "living it up"; and they are just as saved as you are who follow every rule that one can think of..

Centurionoflight
Feb 14th 2007, 06:19 PM
slightlypuzzled


All you are doing is throwing out generalities, I am NOSAS, always have been before I knew anyone even believed in an 'OSAS' position. I have always felt quite secure in the love of the Lord as His beloved child:

Eph. 5
1 Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children;

He loved while I was still dead in my sins:

Romans 5:
8But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

Therefore, don't accuse us of any Freudian shortcomings you might feel...
Ok I see no "shortcomings" in the doctrine I stand on, now who is making "generalities".

Also if you state we are his children; then you are having to at least acknowledge the positional truth that comes with that status. A child in family; is part of that family thru birth. Thus they can never be not part of that family for they was born into it.

We are born of the spirit, ie born again.
We can not return to being unborn of the spirit.

That birth is OSAS, for we are a new creature, one that is found righteous to God; thru the work of Christ.
We cant be unborn; walk away; do some great sin; that will change what we are born as.

The NOSAS is in opposition to the doctrine of "Born again" and the security that comes with that.




This whole thread is going the usual way of all threads, but PP is doing what he feels called to do, so I will stick by him out of a deep respect for him and what he does best on the 'Net.
That is all sweet;

However there is a lot of ignoring of passages and very liberal context play.

In addition to a avoidance of whole doctrines and teachings to focus on "line upon line" type of mentality, which result in nothing but emptiness.

Centurionoflight
Feb 14th 2007, 06:35 PM
moonglow



Post like Centurionoflight don't help us understand the osas views at all....his idea is people are saved no matter what they do...if they misbehave they lose rewards and God will 'flay them alive in Heaven'...which I take to mean 'skin us alive'...now what kind of picture of God is that? That He will torture His own IN Heaven because they went back to sin or didn't live up to certain standards?
Sheez jumped on that quicker than a Duck on a June Bug;

The father is "in heaven"; the flaying occurs while they are in the flesh ON EARTH.

That also is very quick to ignore the Doctrine of No sorrow or Tears for the believer in heaven.

This is the flaw with line upon line mentality.

slightlypuzzled
Feb 14th 2007, 06:54 PM
slightlypuzzled
Ok I see no "shortcomings" in the doctrine I stand on, now who is making "generalities".

Also if you state we are his children; then you are having to at least acknowledge the positional truth that comes with that status. A child in family; is part of that family thru birth. Thus they can never be not part of that family for they was born into it.

We are born of the spirit, ie born again.
We can not return to being unborn of the spirit.

That birth is OSAS, for we are a new creature, one that is found righteous to God; thru the work of Christ.
We cant be unborn; walk away; do some great sin; that will change what we are born as.

The NOSAS is in opposition to the doctrine of "Born again" and the security that comes with that.


That is all sweet;

However there is a lot of ignoring of passages and very liberal context play.

In addition to a avoidance of whole doctrines and teachings to focus on "line upon line" type of mentality, which result in nothing but emptiness.

We are His children, but that is not the only metaphor the bible uses to describe our walk with Him. The 'positional truth' in that scripture underlines His deep love for us. The first part is a command, and cannot be divorced from the second part. We are imitators of God also. You cannot have one without the other.......

slightlypuzzled
Feb 14th 2007, 06:57 PM
moonglow

Sheez jumped on that quicker than a Duck on a June Bug;

The father is "in heaven"; the flaying occurs while they are in the flesh ON EARTH.

That also is very quick to ignore the Doctrine of No sorrow or Tears for the believer in heaven.

This is the flaw with line upon line mentality.

And that is my point with the 'child' metaphor....you have to take them all, as in Eph. 5:1, to get the whole picture of our relationship with God.
We are 'slaves to righteousness' also. We are sheep that will one day be judged. The 'parent' metaphor is not the only one the scripture uses.

Centurionoflight
Feb 14th 2007, 06:58 PM
slightlypuzzled



We are His children, but that is not the only metaphor the bible uses to describe our walk with Him. The 'positional truth' in that scripture underlines His deep love for us. The first part is a command, and cannot be divorced from the second part. We are imitators of God also. You cannot have one without the other.......






And that is my point with the 'child' metaphor....you have to take them all, as in Eph. 5:1, to get the whole picture of our relationship with God.
We are 'slaves to righteousness' also. We are sheep that will one day be judged. The 'parent' metaphor is not the only one the scripture uses.


If you are not part of the family you have no claim to a inheritance.

Therefore it is not a sweet "metaphor", it is a fact;
We are part of the royal family of heaven.

We are described as being "IN CHRIST" as we was "IN ADAM" again this shows a absoluteness of our position,.

moonglow
Feb 14th 2007, 07:35 PM
moonglow


Unless of course you get caught up in sin etc; then Christ becomes sand.

Growth doesnt occur following line upon line.

It comes thru renewal of our minds to the thinking of Christ; this can only be done by a new creature that is reborn spiritually alive.

Once born one can not return to that which they was before they was born.

Therefore since its line upon line; the motivation is perhaps bondage to some form of legalism.

Maybe cant stand this;

That there are other people are "living it up"; and they are just as saved as you are who follow every rule that one can think of..

Sorry...I have no idea what you are talking about with this line upon line ...I do agree that yes we have to be born again. I don't agree when we sin Christ becomes sand....why do you think that?

moonglow
Feb 14th 2007, 07:49 PM
moonglow

Sheez jumped on that quicker than a Duck on a June Bug;

The father is "in heaven"; the flaying occurs while they are in the flesh ON EARTH.

That also is very quick to ignore the Doctrine of No sorrow or Tears for the believer in heaven.

This is the flaw with line upon line mentality.

How could I ingore that verse of no tears in Heaven when you didn't post it nor bring it up? I was responding to what you said here:


There is more to life than just salvation.

It is worse for them;

For;

1) now they have a father in heaven who will flay them alive
2) They build up a harden heart {Which occurs when one consistanly ignores truth} with leads to bitterness; they then become a living example of divine disipline on a living man.
3) They cant turn to Salvation; for they are all ready saved.


http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1152837&postcount=196

The way you worded it, it appeared as if this flaying would take place in Heaven...excuse me for misunderstanding what you said...(since scripture wasn't posted I wasn't responding to it...but only to your post)

Maybe if you posted the scriptures you were refering too it would avoid alot of this confusion in us trying to 'guess' at what verses in the bible you are refering to...eh?


2) They build up a harden heart {Which occurs when one consistanly ignores truth} with leads to bitterness; they then become a living example of divine disipline on a living man.

post scriptures please for this...thanks.

moonglow
Feb 14th 2007, 07:58 PM
Centurionoflight:


moonglow
What do you think our motives are, if not to encourage people to grow in Christ?


growth doesnt occur following line upon line.

It comes thru renewal of our minds to the thinking of Christ; this can only be done by a new creature that is reborn spiritually alive.

Once born one can not return to that which they was before they was born.

Therefore since its line upon line; the motivation is perhaps bondage to some form of legalism.

Maybe cant stand this;

That there are other people are "living it up"; and they are just as saved as you are who follow every rule that one can think of..

Again I ask...what do you think our motives are for posting the no-osas idea? If you answered it in this post, I sure don't see that...can you clarify please? what do you think our motives are?

slightlypuzzled
Feb 14th 2007, 08:07 PM
slightlypuzzled









If you are not part of the family you have no claim to a inheritance.

Therefore it is not a sweet "metaphor", it is a fact;
We are part of the royal family of heaven.

We are described as being "IN CHRIST" as we was "IN ADAM" again this shows a absoluteness of our position,.

We are also called 'slaves of righteousness'........do we wear chains then??? Again, you are twisting it for more than it contains. We are not children allowed to run free, and we are not forced to stay where we do not want to be.....if we do not want to be there.......

slightlypuzzled
Feb 14th 2007, 08:28 PM
Okay, even though I am not giving up my stance on the point of the sonship metaphor being one of several that describe our relationship with God; I will just point to the parable of the Prodigal Son. He decided he wanted the money and left his father's house. He gave up the legal right to an inheritance. The father pointed out, twice, that he was dead and is now alive...........

DSK
Feb 14th 2007, 09:31 PM
Who is it that the Lord preserves?

Once again today that question was answered for me while reading Psalm 31

Ps. 31:23 Oh love Jehovah, all ye his saints: Jehovah preserveth the faithful, And plentifully rewardeth him that dealeth proudly.

To be faithful takes responsibility. And I could also say that if there were to be written a negative side to Ps. 31:23, then it would be this; "The Lord doesn't perserve the unfaithful.

For the Lord preserveth the faithful - "The faithful; those who put their trust in him; those who do not give up in despondency and despair in time of danger and trouble; those who do not forsake him even though for a time he seems to forsake them. What God looks for mainly in his people is confidence; faithfulness; trust; fidelity." - A Barnes

moonglow
Feb 14th 2007, 10:32 PM
Who is it that the Lord preserves?

Once again today that question was answered for me while reading Psalm 31

Ps. 31:23 Oh love Jehovah, all ye his saints: Jehovah preserveth the faithful, And plentifully rewardeth him that dealeth proudly.

To be faithful takes responsibility. And I could also say that if there were to be written a negative side to Ps. 31:23, then it would be this; "The Lord doesn't perserve the unfaithful.

For the Lord preserveth the faithful - "The faithful; those who put their trust in him; those who do not give up in despondency and despair in time of danger and trouble; those who do not forsake him even though for a time he seems to forsake them. What God looks for mainly in his people is confidence; faithfulness; trust; fidelity." - A Barnes

Very good...a post was done just recently about faith too. I really don't think God just 'carries' us through everything...that some effort needs to be made from us...and for those that don't...it depends...we see alot of different examples of that in the bible...from backsliders, to those just struggling with their faith, to those that lose faith...I think this is what gets everyone so confused too.

thanks for posting. :)

God bless

Centurionoflight
Feb 14th 2007, 11:53 PM
slightlypuzzled

We are also called 'slaves of righteousness'........do we wear chains then???


We dont own our self Christ owns us.



Again, you are twisting it for more than it contains.


Perhaps you are twisting it to mean less?



We are not children allowed to run free, and we are not forced to stay where we do not want to be.....if we do not want to be there.......


Just because Christ allows us to doing something; doesnt mean we are in control.

Centurionoflight
Feb 14th 2007, 11:55 PM
slightlypuzzled



Okay, even though I am not giving up my stance on the point of the sonship metaphor being one of several that describe our relationship with God; I will just point to the parable of the Prodigal Son. He decided he wanted the money and left his father's house. He gave up the legal right to an inheritance. The father pointed out, twice, that he was dead and is now alive...........




At what point did he cease being his fathers son?

Even in his states of "death" he knew he had a father; and the father knew he had a son.

Centurionoflight
Feb 14th 2007, 11:57 PM
DSK



Ps. 31:23 Oh love Jehovah, all ye his saints: Jehovah preserveth the faithful, And plentifully rewardeth him that dealeth proudly.

To be faithful takes responsibility. And I could also say that if there were to be written a negative side to Ps. 31:23, then it would be this; "The Lord doesn't perserve the unfaithful.

For the Lord preserveth the faithful - "The faithful; those who put their trust in him; those who do not give up in despondency and despair in time of danger and trouble; those who do not forsake him even though for a time he seems to forsake them. What God looks for mainly in his people is confidence; faithfulness; trust; fidelity." - A BarnesIn that case; Christ would have let Peter drown when he started to sink.


Mat 14
28And Peter answered him and said, Lord, if it be thou, bid me come unto thee on the water.
29And he said, Come. And when Peter was come down out of the ship, he walked on the water, to go to Jesus.
30But when he saw the wind boisterous, he was afraid; and beginning to sink, he cried, saying, Lord, save me.
31And immediately Jesus stretched forth his hand, and caught him, and said unto him, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?
32And when they were come into the ship, the wind ceased.


Even though man can let down God; God will never let down man.

ProjectPeter
Feb 15th 2007, 12:07 AM
Okay, even though I am not giving up my stance on the point of the sonship metaphor being one of several that describe our relationship with God; I will just point to the parable of the Prodigal Son. He decided he wanted the money and left his father's house. He gave up the legal right to an inheritance. The father pointed out, twice, that he was dead and is now alive...........
OSAS folk don't much like that part of the story! ;)

Centurionoflight
Feb 15th 2007, 12:11 AM
ProjectPeter



OSAS folk don't much like that part of the story!
I have stated to you many number of times.

We CAN LOSE INHEIRTANCE {reward}; however we will still have a eternal home in heaven, as a PEON.

Which is the part the NOSAS folk dont like:P

Centurionoflight
Feb 15th 2007, 12:15 AM
moonglow



Again I ask...what do you think our motives are for posting the no-osas idea? If you answered it in this post, I sure don't see that...can you clarify please? what do you think our motives are?


How would I know what goes thru other peoples heads?

I do know that causing others to stumble in their faith is not a positive thing.

ProjectPeter
Feb 15th 2007, 12:20 AM
ProjectPeter

I have stated to you many number of times.

We CAN LOSE INHEIRTANCE {reward}; however we will still have a eternal home in heaven, as a PEON.

Which is the part the NOSAS folk dont like:PYou are going to have an extremely difficult time proving biblically this whole "peon in heaven" theory. ;)

Centurionoflight
Feb 15th 2007, 12:22 AM
ProjectPeter


You are going to have an extremely difficult time proving biblically this whole "peon in heaven" theory.

I have posted it many times; but you line by line folks will never get it.

1 cor 3


11For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
12Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;
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.




Some will have reward; others will have ash.
The ash guys are the peons.

ProjectPeter
Feb 15th 2007, 12:46 AM
ProjectPeter



I have posted it many times; but you line by line folks will never get it.

1 cor 3


11For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
12Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;
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.




Some will have reward; others will have ash.
The ash guys are the peons.




If you think that is talking about being made an eternal peon in heaven then you are dang skippy! I ain't never going to understand. Your whole take on that is horribly out of context!

Is that the only passage you have for this here "doctrine"?

Centurionoflight
Feb 15th 2007, 01:01 AM
ProjectPeter


If you think that is talking about being made an eternal peon in heaven then you are dang skippy! I ain't never going to understand. Your whole take on that is horribly out of context!

Context is there and very plain.

What part of "any man" and "every man" do you have trouble understanding?

moonglow
Feb 15th 2007, 01:32 AM
gee unless I am going totally daffy here, I think the last four posts or so I just read, were also at the beginning of this thread....I remember saying being a peon in Heaven was fine with me...:hmm: Maybe we have reached the point we are starting to repeat ourselves here? Seems like in all topics it eventually circles back around to the beginning and everyone just repeats themselves over and over again...:rolleyes:

I am not going to play that game though...first why don't we figure out what is not inherited in the first place? Its not just rewards either...the bible clearly says the unrighteous cannot inherite the kingdom of God....which is what? Even Jesus says certain people cannot pass through the gates into the New city in Revelation.

1 Corinthians 6:8-10

8 No, you yourselves do wrong and cheat, and you do these things to your brethren! 9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.

http://www.studylight.org/com/acc/view.cgi?book=1co&chapter=006
The Adam Clarke Commentary
Verse 9. The unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom
The unrighteous, αδικοι, those who act contrary to right, cannot inherit, for the inheritance is by right. He who is not a child of God has no right to the family inheritance, for that inheritance is for the children. If children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ, Romans 8:17. There are here ten classes of transgressors which the apostle excludes from the kingdom of God; and any man who is guilty of any one of the evils mentioned above is thereby excluded from this kingdom, whether it imply the Church of Christ here below, or the state of glory hereafter.

Several of the evils here enumerated will not bear to be particularly explained; they are, however, sufficiently plain of themselves, and show us what abominations were commonly practised among the Corinthians.

(yes I realize at this point I am not talking about a adopted child of God...a saved sinner...right now I am posting what excatly is inherited.)

Centurionoflight, For you to say a sinful, wayward saved Christian only loses their inheriates makes no sense at all...not once you fully understand what is being inheriated...if they lose it, it means they lost their salvation..not just a few rewards here or there...a parent can and they do at times disown a child (usually we only see this in the very rich or at least only hear about that then on the news) they disown an unruly horrible adult child and take them out of their will...they lose their inheritance...

Revelation 21:7-9

7 He who overcomes shall inherit all things, and I will be his God and he shall be My son. 8 But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”

http://www.studylight.org/com/acc/view.cgi?book=re&chapter=021
The Adam Clarke Commentary
Verse 7. Inherit all things
Here he had no inheritance; there he shall inherit the kingdom of heaven, and be with God and Christ, and have every possible degree of blessedness.

Verse 8. But the fearful
δειλοις Those who, for fear of losing life or their property, either refused to receive the Christian religion, though convinced of its truth and importance; or, having received it, in times of persecution fell away, not being willing to risk their lives.

And unbelieving
Those who resist against full evidence. And sinners, καιαμαρτωλοις, is added here by about thirty excellent MSS., and is found in the Syrian, Arabic, some of the Slavonic, and in Andreas and Arethas. On this evidence Griesbach has admitted it into the text.

The abominable
εβδελυγμενοις Those who are polluted with unnatural lust.

And murderers
φονευσι Those who take away the life of man for any cause but the murder of another, and those who hate a brother in their heart.

And whoremongers
πορνοις Adulterers, fornicators, whores, prostitutes, and rakes of every description.

Sorcerers
φαρμακοις Persons who, by drugs, philtres, fumigations, by spiritual agency.

Idolaters
ειδωλολατραις Those who offer any kind of worship or religious reverence to any thing but God. All image worshippers are idolaters in every sense of the word.

And all liars
καιπασιτοιςψευδεσι Every one who speaks contrary to the truth when he knows the truth, and even he who speaks the truth with the intention to deceive; i.e., to persuade a person that a thing is different from what it really is, by telling only a part of the truth, or suppressing some circumstance which would have led the hearer to a different end to the true conclusion. All these shall have their portion, τομερος, their share, what belongs to them, their right, in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone. This is the second death, from which there is no recovery.


Revelation 22

12 “And behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to give to every one according to his work. 13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last.”
14 Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city. 15 But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie.


http://www.studylight.org/com/acc/view.cgi?book=re&chapter=022
The Adam Clarke Commentary

Verse 14. Blessed are they that do his commandments
They are happy who are obedient.

That they may have right to the tree of life
The original is much more expressive, ιναεσταιηεξουσιααυτονεπιτοξυλοντης ζωης That they may have authority over the tree of life; an authority founded on right, this right founded on obedience to the commandments of God, and that obedience produced by the grace of God working in them. Without grace no obedience; without obedience no authority to the tree of life; without authority no right; without right no enjoyment: God's grace through Christ produces the good, and then rewards it as if all had been our own.

Verse 15. Without are dogs
All those who are uncircumcised in heart. The Jews call all the uncircumcised dogs. "Who is a dog? Ans. He who is not circumcised." Pirkey Elieser, chap. 29.

And sorcerers
See Clarke on Revelation 21:8.

Clearly...those that practice certain things will not be going to Heaven. Many of these claim to be Christians...believe in fact they are! How many homosexual 'Christians' are out there right now truly believing they are in a relationship with God? How do we know they were or weren't saved? How do we know they didn't get into this lifestyle until after they were saved and for whatever reason they think its ok...the bible clearly says they will not recieve/inherit the kingdom of God...it does not say, they will just lose some rewards or God will flay them on earth until they straighten up...in fact the bible states, especially on the practice of homosexually that God 'gives them up' to their wicked ways....

Romans 1

24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.

you stated God would let them harden their hearts or He would harden them..I forget excatly how you put it...but here is your perfect example of that...but these will not inherite a thing from God...let alone salvation...

ProjectPeter
Feb 15th 2007, 01:38 AM
it's in the post in the debate section but just in case folks reading along here missed it... and just for you... here ya go!


1 Corinthians 3:4 For when one says, "I am of Paul," and another, "I am of Apollos," are you not mere men?

This is where Paul is taking them. Their was faction between the various church groups as Paul makes clear earlier in the writing.


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.

Paul makes it clear that they are just the laborers. They can only plant and water but that is as much as they can do. It is God that causes the growth. They are mere men working in the fields.

8 Now he who plants and he who waters are one; but each will receive his own reward according to his own labor.

They are equal... both the planter and the one that waters. But each of them will receive their own reward. Each of who? The planter and the one that waters. Not the field. Speaking of the laborers

9 For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, God's building.

God's fellow workers... you (the church) are God's field, God's building. Keep in mind who gets the reward... the worker. Not the field or the 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.

Paul laid the foundation in Corinth. Apollos is building on that foundation. There were others we know of as well. Each builder that was building on that foundation laid needed to be careful how they build upon the foundation. The house nor the field are the builders... keep that in mind.

11 For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

The others building on the building... or watering and planting... the analogy would be the same.

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.

Remember... each worker will receive his own reward. Their work will become evident because come one day it will be revealed with fire and that fire will test their work.

14 If any man's work which he has built upon it remains, he shall receive a reward.

Each man's work... building upon the foundation laid with Christ as the cornerstone... if it remains he will receive an award. Remember earlier where Paul made this clarification that each worker will receive his own 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.

The good work will survive and the bad work won't. The minister will 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.

If any man (worker) destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him. The temple is holy... you are holy... God will destroy those who destroys the temple.

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.

STOP BOASTING IN MEN. You belong to Christ. Not Paul. Not Apollos. Not Peter... etc.

1 Corinthians 4:1 Let a man regard us in this manner, as servants of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God.

Look at us as stewards of the mysteries of God. Nothing more, nothing less. Don't hold up your pastor to a standard higher than this. You follow Christ... not man. Be wise. This whole thing is speaking of ministers and their building on the foundation... planting... watering. It is speaking of them... not the building itself nor the field. This is enough to make the point but you can continue reading a few more verses and you will see that it is continuing to talk about the stewards.

Centurionoflight
Feb 15th 2007, 01:47 AM
ProjectPeter



The good work will survive and the bad work won't. The minister will be saved... yet so as through fire.



All believers are priests; therefore why Paul used ANY MAN{refering to a believer.}.

We all have the spirit dwelling in us.
We all have production God will test, for reward.

This is why your limit of context does not work.

Centurionoflight
Feb 15th 2007, 01:49 AM
moonglow



you stated God would let them harden their hearts or He would harden them..I forget excatly how you put it...but here is your perfect example of that...but these will not inherite a thing from God...let alone salvation...


Salvation is a gift; Inheritance is earned.

moonglow
Feb 15th 2007, 01:51 AM
ProjectPeter



I have posted it many times; but you line by line folks will never get it.

1 cor 3


11For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
12Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;
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.




Some will have reward; others will have ash.
The ash guys are the peons.





I hate to see a whole doctine built on one passage. Anyway this is what this passage means...which I know you won't agree, but I am going to post it for the readers anyway.

http://www.studylight.org/com/acc/view.cgi?book=1co&chapter=003
The Adam Clarke Commentary
Verse 11. Other foundation can no man lay
I do not speak particularly concerning the foundation of this spiritual building; it can have no other foundation than Jesus Christ: there cannot be two opinions on this subject among the true apostles of our Lord. The only fear is, lest an improper use should be made of this heavenly doctrine; lest a bad superstructure should be raised on this foundation.

Verse 12. If any men build-gold, silver, entering into curious criticisms relative to these different expressions, it may be quite enough for the purpose of edification to say, that, by gold, silver, and precious stones, the apostle certainly means pure and wholesome doctrines: by wood, hay, and stubble, false doctrines; such as at that time prevailed in the Corinthian Church; for instance, that there should be no resurrection of the body; that a man may, on his father's death, lawfully marry his step-mother; that it was necessary to incorporate much of the Mosaic law with the Gospel; and, perhaps, other matters, equally exceptionable, relative to marriage, concubinage, fornication, frequenting heathen festivals, and partaking of the flesh which had been offered in sacrifice to an idol; with many other things, which, with the above, are more or less hinted at by the apostle in these two letters.

Verse 13. The day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire
There is much difference of opinion relative to the meaning of the terms in this and the two following verses. That the apostle refers to the approaching destruction of Jerusalem I think very probable; and when this is considered, all the terms and metaphors will appear clear and consistent.

The day is the time of punishment coming on this disobedient and rebellious people. And this day being revealed by fire, points out the extreme rigour, and totally destructive nature, of that judgment.

And the fire shall try every man's work
If the apostle refers to the Judaizing teachers and their insinuations that the law, especially circumcision, was of eternal obligation; then the day of fire-the time of vengeance, which was at hand, would sufficiently disprove such assertions; as, in the judgment of God, the whole temple service should be destroyed; and the people, who fondly presumed on their permanence and stability, should be dispossessed of their land and scattered over the face of the whole earth. The difference of the Christian and Jewish systems should then be seen: the latter should be destroyed in that fiery day, and the former prevail more than ever.

Verse 14. If any man's work abide
Perhaps there is here an allusion to the purifying of different sorts of vessels under the law. All that could stand the fire were to be purified by the fire; and those which could not resist the action of the fire were to be purified by water, Numbers 31:23. The gold, silver, and precious stones, could stand the fire; but the wood, hay, and stubble, must be necessarily consumed. So, in that great and terrible day of the Lord, all false doctrine, as well as the system that was to pass away, should be made sufficiently manifest; and God would then show that the Gospel, and that alone, was that system of doctrine which he should bless and protect, and none other.

He shall receive a reward.
He has not only preached the truth, but he has laboured in the word and doctrine. And the reward is to be according to the labour. See Clarke on 1 Corinthians 3:8.

Verse 15. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss
If he have preached the necessity of incorporating the law with the Gospel, or proclaimed as a doctrine of God any thing which did not proceed from heaven, he shall suffer loss-all his time and labour will be found to be uselessly employed and spent. Some refer the loss to the work, not to the man; and understand the passage thus: If any man's work be burned, IT shall suffer loss-much shall be taken away from it; nothing shall he left but the measure of truth and uprightness which it may have contained.

But he himself shall be saved
If he have sincerely and conscientiously believed what he preached, and yet preached what was wrong, not through malice or opposition to the Gospel, but through mere ignorance, he shall be saved; God in his mercy will pass by his errors; and he shall not suffer punishment because he was mistaken. Yet, as in most erroneous teachings there is generally a portion of wilful and obstinate ignorance, the salvation of such erroneous teachers is very rare; and is expressed here, yet so as by fire, i.e. with great difficulty; a mere escape; a hair's breadth deliverance; he shall be like a brand plucked out of the fire.

The apostle obviously refers to the case of a man, who, having builded a house, and begun to dwell in it, the house happens to be set on fire, and he has warning of it just in time to escape with his life, losing at the same time his house, his goods, his labour, and almost his own life. So he who, while he holds the doctrine of Christ crucified as the only foundation on which a soul can rest its hopes of salvation, builds at the same time, on that foundation, Antinomianism, or any other erroneous or destructive doctrine, he shall lose all his labour, and his own soul scarcely escape everlasting perdition; nor even this unless sheer ignorance and inveterate prejudice, connected with much sincerity, be found in his case.

The popish writers have applied what is here spoken to the fire of purgatory; and they might with equal propriety have applied it to the discovery of the longitude, the perpetual motion, or the philosopher's stone; because it speaks just as much of the former as it does of any of the latter. The fire mentioned here is to try the man's work, not to purify his soul; but the dream of purgatory refers to the purging in another state what left this impure; not the work of the man, but the man himself; but here the fire is said to try the work: ergo, purgatory is not meant even if such a place as purgatory could be proved to exist; which remains yet to be demonstrated.

another commentary:

http://www.searchgodsword.org/com/bcc/view.cgi?book=1co&chapter=003
Coffman Commentaries
Verse 11
For other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

In Matthew 16:15, Jesus declared that his church would be built upon the rock, and here is revealed what the rock is; it is Christ. "Paul said that Christ is the only foundation that can be laid." F16 No man may begin anywhere else. "This is still worthy of emphasis in a day when so many build their `Christianity' without Christ, on a foundation of good works, humanism or science." F17 Of course, this is not the only metaphor of Christ's preeminence in his kingdom. He is also called the door of the sheepfold (John 10:7), the chief corner stone (Ephesians 2:20), the head of the body (Ephesians 1:22,23), etc.


Verse 12
But if any man buildeth on the foundation gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay, stubble.

Two widely held misconceptions are grounded on this verse, which is understood (1) as "applicable primarily, if not exclusively to teachers," and (2) as applying to DOCTRINES of two classes, (a) gold, etc., and (b) wood, etc. It is evident, of course, that the six kinds of building materials are of two classes: (1) the valuable and permanent and (2) the cheap and destructible; but the conviction of this writer is that the two kinds of people built into God's temple, the church, constitute the reality indicated here.

If these words had been directed primarily to Christian teachers, it seems inconceivable that Paul would have used the words "each man" and "any man" no less than six times in 1 Cor. 3:10-15. Ministers as a class of persons different from the rank and file of Christians were not a feature of the churches of that era, every Christian being a builder in God's temple; and such is indicated by these words.

Regarding the view that the six classes of materials are various doctrines used in building God's temple, a view advocated by an unbelievably large number of scholars, was nevertheless refuted by Macknight thus:

As the apostle is speaking of the Christian church, consisting of the believers of all nations, of which church Christ is the foundation, it is evident that the materials built on this foundation (gold, silver, etc.) cannot represent the doctrines, but the disciples of Christ ... In no passage of scripture is the temple or church of God said to consist of doctrines, but of the disciples of Christ, who are called living stones built up of a spiritual house or temple (1 Peter 2:5,6)

In addition to the views of Macknight cited here, there is also the consideration that all of the true doctrine of Christianity is comprehensively included in Christ himself, that the totality of his doctrine is the foundation, and that there remain no more doctrines of gold, silver, hay or stubble that are to be built into God's church by men. The two classes of materials must refer, therefore, to the two kinds of people built into God's temple (the church) by the advocates of Christianity, whether by ministers and teachers, or by the so-called laity. As for seeing only two classes in these six kinds of materials, McGarvey observed that:

The first three kinds were found in their fireproof temples, materials worthy of sacred structures; and the latter three were used in their frail, combustible huts, but which were in no way dedicated to divinity.

McGarvey made the application of this verse as follows:

The church should be built of true Christians, the proper material; and not of worldly-minded hypocrites, or of those who estimate the oracles of God as on a par with the philosophies of men. The day of judgment will reveal the true character of all who are in the church.


Verse 13
Each man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it is revealed in fire; and the fire itself shall prove each man's work of what sort it is.

The day ...
according to McGarvey, and many others, is a reference to the judgment day when Jesus shall be revealed from heaven "in flaming fire" (2 Thessalonians 1:7); but some have understood it as a day of terrible persecutions such as the "fiery trial" (1 Peter 4:12) prophetically mentioned by both Paul and Peter. Despite the fact of there being an element of testing in times of great persecution, agreement is felt with Morris who declared: "THE DAY is clearly the day when Christ returns, the day of judgment." F22

Only the judgment day will reveal what is and what is not a part of the true temple of God; and, according to Christ himself it will be a time of many surprises (Matthew 7:15-23; 25:34-46).


Verses 14, 15
If any man's work shall abide which he built thereon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved, yet so as through fire.

The fact that people do not fully understand this passage is implicit in the truth that some have built up the theory of purgatory, based partly on what is stated here. The whole concept of purgatory is foreign to the word of God, but the advocates of it are still deriving immense revenues through the preaching of it. Again from Macknight:

The Romish clergy, seeing that this doctrine properly managed, might be made an inexhaustible source of wealth to their order, have represented this fire of purgatory as lighted up from the very beginning of the world, and have kept it burning ever since, and have assumed to themselves the power of detaining souls in that fire, and of releasing them from it; whereby they have drawn great sums of money from the ignorant and superstitious.

This writer is grieved to know that even now there are some, who were once baptized into Christ and served as elders of God's church, whose children are paying to get them prayed out of purgatory!

What this verse actually means is that the persons led to Christ through the efforts of any Christian may defect from the faith, proving themselves wood, hay or stubble, and that the loss of such souls will not affect the salvation of a Christian teacher, whose reward would in some manner unknown to us have been far greater if they had not defected, and whose salvation "so as through fire" is understood by such language to be only by the narrowest margin, "by the skin of his teeth" (Job 19:20).

Yet so as through fire ...
has the meaning of "something resembling" an escape from fire, as in "snatching them out of the fire" (Jude 1:23); and it is certain that this phrase has absolutely nothing in it of actual fire. It is a figure of speech, prompted possibly by Paul's reference to the judgment and the fire of that day, but not to be identified as the same thing.

While commentaries are not the Word of God, they are good resources...they give different angles of what is being talked about and usually back up their thoughts with other scriptures which is very valuable. They can also give historical information too helping us to understand the setting in that time, what the writer was dealing with since people tend to put things in 'their time' which while human behavior hasn't changed, as this author pointed out they didn't have churches like we do today by any means...though I have to disagree with him about their being no Christian teachers...there are plently of scriptures showing Christians teaching others in the NT. While the setting wasn't like what we have in today's churches, it still happened...it had to happen in order for everyone to do as Christ commanded...spread the gospel. Just a handful of disciples couldn't have caused the tremendous spread of Christianity in such a short period of time anyway...plus Jesus said to make disciples of all nations and nations are made up of people, aren't they?

God bless

moonglow
Feb 15th 2007, 01:55 AM
moonglow



Salvation is a gift; Inheritance is earned.

post scriptures showing that please..thanks

moonglow
Feb 15th 2007, 01:59 AM
it's in the post in the debate section but just in case folks reading along here missed it... and just for you... here ya go!


1 Corinthians 3:4 For when one says, "I am of Paul," and another, "I am of Apollos," are you not mere men?

This is where Paul is taking them. Their was faction between the various church groups as Paul makes clear earlier in the writing.


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.

Paul makes it clear that they are just the laborers. They can only plant and water but that is as much as they can do. It is God that causes the growth. They are mere men working in the fields.

8 Now he who plants and he who waters are one; but each will receive his own reward according to his own labor.

They are equal... both the planter and the one that waters. But each of them will receive their own reward. Each of who? The planter and the one that waters. Not the field. Speaking of the laborers

9 For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, God's building.

God's fellow workers... you (the church) are God's field, God's building. Keep in mind who gets the reward... the worker. Not the field or the 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.

Paul laid the foundation in Corinth. Apollos is building on that foundation. There were others we know of as well. Each builder that was building on that foundation laid needed to be careful how they build upon the foundation. The house nor the field are the builders... keep that in mind.

11 For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

The others building on the building... or watering and planting... the analogy would be the same.

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.

Remember... each worker will receive his own reward. Their work will become evident because come one day it will be revealed with fire and that fire will test their work.

14 If any man's work which he has built upon it remains, he shall receive a reward.

Each man's work... building upon the foundation laid with Christ as the cornerstone... if it remains he will receive an award. Remember earlier where Paul made this clarification that each worker will receive his own 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.

The good work will survive and the bad work won't. The minister will 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.

If any man (worker) destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him. The temple is holy... you are holy... God will destroy those who destroys the temple.

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.

STOP BOASTING IN MEN. You belong to Christ. Not Paul. Not Apollos. Not Peter... etc.

1 Corinthians 4:1 Let a man regard us in this manner, as servants of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God.

Look at us as stewards of the mysteries of God. Nothing more, nothing less. Don't hold up your pastor to a standard higher than this. You follow Christ... not man. Be wise. This whole thing is speaking of ministers and their building on the foundation... planting... watering. It is speaking of them... not the building itself nor the field. This is enough to make the point but you can continue reading a few more verses and you will see that it is continuing to talk about the stewards.

this makes more sense then the bible commentaries I posted...:lol: I agree!

slightlypuzzled
Feb 15th 2007, 02:29 AM
this makes more sense then the bible commentaries I posted...:lol: I agree!


Yeah...context would agree more with the one given than smith or even good ol' J Burton............:rolleyes: Thought I am re-reading them for another point of view.......:D

Centurionoflight
Feb 15th 2007, 04:04 AM
moonglow



COL: Salvation is a gift; Inheritance is earned.

post scriptures showing that please..thanksSalvation;

Romans 6:23
For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Wage/ reward.

Colossians 3:24
Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ.


There should be at lest some base doctrines that have no need to be defined in every discussion.

Centurionoflight
Feb 15th 2007, 04:09 AM
moonglow


I hate to see a whole doctine built on one passage. Anyway this is what this passage means...which I know you won't agree, but I am going to post it for the readers anyway.Ok commentaries are nice and fun to read, when you are bored and to fill the time cant find a dentist to pull your teeth .

however posting them all the time with out a opportunity to cross check the author is kinda with out sense.

They are not writings of the spirit and most of them are full of error.

Is this like a catholic forum where we should give a rip what this pope or that pope thought?

If so I withdrawl.

I dont want to get into a commentary hash.

If you can have one of the authors post here then of course I will get into the hash with them.

slightlypuzzled
Feb 15th 2007, 01:01 PM
moonglow

Salvation;

Romans 6:23
For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Wage/ reward.

Colossians 3:24
Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ.


There should be at lest some base doctrines that have no need to be defined in every discussion.

I quite agree....the two are pointing to the same thing; that is just axiomatic, ain't it..........

slightlypuzzled
Feb 15th 2007, 01:03 PM
moonglow

Ok commentaries are nice and fun to read, when you are bored and to fill the time cant find a dentist to pull your teeth .

however posting them all the time with out a opportunity to cross check the author is kinda with out sense.

They are not writings of the spirit and most of them are full of error.

Is this like a catholic forum where we should give a rip what this pope or that pope thought?

If so I withdrawl.

I dont want to get into a commentary hash.

If you can have one of the authors post here then of course I will get into the hash with them.

You are admitting that you are not up to 'reading and comprehending' what is put in the post? After all this......:rolleyes:

slightlypuzzled
Feb 15th 2007, 01:05 PM
Is this like a catholic forum where we should give a rip what this pope or that pope thought?

From some of the arguments floating around in here, I would have sworn this was a Calvinist forum....:D

slightlypuzzled
Feb 15th 2007, 01:28 PM
moonglow

Salvation;

Romans 6:23
For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Wage/ reward.

Colossians 3:24
Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ.


There should be at lest some base doctrines that have no need to be defined in every discussion.

Gal. 3
29And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's descendants, heirs according to promise.

1 Peter 1
4to obtain an inheritance which is imperishable and undefiled and will not fade away, reserved in heaven for you,

Acts 26
18to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the dominion of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who have been sanctified by faith in Me.'

Yup....Promised.....in heaven....and given to all who are sanctified by faith...axiomatic...

moonglow
Feb 15th 2007, 04:25 PM
moonglow

Salvation;

Romans 6:23
For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Wage/ reward.

Colossians 3:24
Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ.


There should be at lest some base doctrines that have no need to be defined in every discussion.

The way you word things, I think yes, the scriptures need to be posted so folks can see what you are refering too. As I said over and over again, your posts are extremely hard to understand and very confusing...alot of the times you are refering to a scripture that only you seem to know...like this 'line upon line' thing...which you finally posted the verse for but still what that has to do with this discussion, I haven't a clue!

Anyway you said this:
COL: Salvation is a gift; Inheritance is earned.



And posted these two scriptures:


Salvation;

Romans 6:23
For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Wage/ reward.

Colossians 3:24
Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ.


I don't see a verse that says Inheritance is earned though....


Originally Posted by Centurionoflight
moonglow

Ok commentaries are nice and fun to read, when you are bored and to fill the time cant find a dentist to pull your teeth .

however posting them all the time with out a opportunity to cross check the author is kinda with out sense.

They are not writings of the spirit and most of them are full of error.

Is this like a catholic forum where we should give a rip what this pope or that pope thought?

If so I withdrawl.

I dont want to get into a commentary hash.

If you can have one of the authors post here then of course I will get into the hash with them.

Why do I need to cross check the authors? I already stated these are written by men (meaning they are falliable...which means yes they can contain errors but none the less are educational)...I enjoy reading them...at any rate you have no idea if these men are God inspired or not.

At any rate I think I have run out of patience playing word games with you and wasting my time in a very fruitless discussion where you only show spite and resentment and refuse to actually have a discussion with us..

2 Timothy 2

23 Again I say, don’t get involved in foolish, ignorant arguments that only start fights. 24 A servant of the Lord must not quarrel but must be kind to everyone, be able to teach, and be patient with difficult people. 25 Gently instruct those who oppose the truth. Perhaps God will change those people’s hearts, and they will learn the truth. 26 Then they will come to their senses and escape from the devil’s trap. For they have been held captive by him to do whatever he wants.

I pray you at least learn how to be kinder to your brothers and sisters in Christ...for these are the fruits of the spirit:

Galatians 5

16 I say then: Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh. 17 For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary to one another, so that you do not do the things that you wish. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.
19 Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, 20 idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/contentions), jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions (dissension), heresies, 21 envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law. 24 And those who are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. 25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. 26 Let us not become conceited, provoking one another, envying one another.

Sadly that is what alot of these discussion ends up as...its too bad that as adults and Christians, we cannot discuss these things without provoking one another and causing dissension. I don't mind truly having an honest discussion where both parties exchange ideas as Paul did with the Roman's but when things get 'emotional' in not a good way, I don't want to be apart of it...and I have done wrong in staying in this discussion as long as I have with Centurionoflight...so I am bowing out now before we sin further on this thread.

God bless
Julie

Centurionoflight
Feb 15th 2007, 04:27 PM
slightlypuzzled


"You are admitting that you are not up to 'reading and comprehending' what is put in the post? After all this."



I admited I am not going to debate commentaries.

Why is that so hard to understand?

Centurionoflight
Feb 15th 2007, 04:33 PM
slightlypuzzled


I quite agree....the two are pointing to the same thing; that is just axiomatic, ain't it..........
moonglow




I don't see a verse that says Inheritance is earned though....

Colossians 3:24
Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ.


Reward.

antapodosis {an-tap-od'-os-is}

1) recompence, to reward or repay someone

Salvation is a gift not a reward, recompence, or repayment.

Inheritance is a reward, recompence, or repayment.

Centurionoflight
Feb 15th 2007, 04:58 PM
moonglow



I pray you at least learn how to be kinder to your brothers and sisters in Christ...for these are the fruits of the spirit:

Truth is also a fruit of the spirit.

Ephesians 5:9 - For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;

To state we can lose salvation is not truth; is not faith; and is not goodness.

Is that showing love to your brother;
When instead of Christ; you make them and their actions the base for salvation.
This is something man can never live up to; we cant match the righteousness of Christ.