Can a TRUE believer turn away from the faith?

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Why cannot I properly assume you are judging my salvation?

 

[DHK]

Your position is simply arrogance personified. You act as if though context can only be decided by DHK and DHK alone, and if it does not fit DHK's liking, you simply say it can be ignored. What a joke.

Your attitude to the Bible seems to be a joke, sadly.
There are some verses in the Bible that are timeless truths, that even when stated apart from context they stand as truths--all the time.
An example: "All have sinned and come short of the glory of God."

BR's example was not a timeless truth. Not every verse in the Bible is a timeless truth. In fact there are many verses, that when taken away from their context they contradict the teaching of the Bible. Example:

"There is no God." Psalm 14:1
"Ye shall not surely die." Gen. 3:4

And some verses that don't make any sense unless you look at the context:
Numbers 22:23 And the ass saw the angel of the LORD standing in the
way.
Zechariah 5:1 Then I turned, and lifted up mine eyes, and looked, and behold a flying roll.

Isaiah 3:18-23 In that day the Lord will take away the bravery of their tinkling ornaments about their feet, and their cauls, and their round tires like the moon, The chains, and the bracelets, and the mufflers, The bonnets, and the ornaments of the legs, and the headbands, and the tablets, and the earrings, The rings, and nose jewels, The changeable suits of apparel, and the mantles, and the wimples, and the crisping pins, The glasses, and the fine linen, and the hoods, and the vails.

Another way that Scripture is taken out of context:
God's will for your life from the Bible:
Judas went out and hung himself.
Go and do thou likewise.
Whatsoever thou doest do quickly.

From post #177 by DHK

I gave you irrefutable arguments many times. No one has refuted them yet. You (they) just go on other rabbit trails. For example, instead of actually trying to refute the argument or evidence that I put forth Bob will go off on some tangent such as "forgiveness revoked," of which the Bible teaches no such thing. There is no such doctrine in the Bible. It is Bob's own made up man-made doctrine. Off to another rabbit trail; but you cannot repudiate the evidence that I have presented can you?

You and Bob have taken lessons from the J.W.'s. When presented with irrefutable evidence you ignore it, and like the J.W.'s I am acquainted with jump to other rabbit trails and avoid the evidence. You can't refute the evidence. You avoid it. If eternal doesn't mean eternal then what does it mean. Did Jesus lie?

 

[DHK]

When Scripture warns you not to act like the pagans do (walk like the gentiles), it is stating one is able to do just that...or the warning is meaningless. We are told not to suppress the Spirit...meaning we can suppress the Spirit. Both the cal's and the arm's get the "P" wrong.

It was a warning not to act like the Gentiles. The Gentiles (a word used for nations or for any person that is not a Jew, not simply a pagan) is thus more akin to the world here--those that are not Christians. Don't act like them. But at their very worst here is what they are like:

Ephesians 4:18-19 Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart: Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness.

The above is not the description of a Christian. No Christian is "alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them," nor ever can be. It is an impossibility. You logic here does not make sense. This is a description of the unsaved of which the saved have been delivered from. We are not to be followers of them or to imitate them. But Paul is describing their nature which we don't have. We have God; they don't.

 

[ccrobinson]

This post must have been missed, or ignored, and I'll assume it was missed.

1 John 5:11-13
And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

There's that pesky eternal word again.

Through John, God tells us that we can know we have eternal life. If eternal doesn't mean eternal, how can we possibly know we have it or not? If we can lose our salvation, how can we ever know that we have it? If God tells us we can know it, then he has to be lying to also say we can lose it, doesn't he?

 

[webdog]

It was a warning not to act like the Gentiles. The Gentiles (a word used for nations or for any person that is not a Jew, not simply a pagan) is thus more akin to the world here--those that are not Christians. Don't act like them. But at their very worst here is what they are like:

Ephesians 4:18-19 Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart: Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness.

The above is not the description of a Christian. No Christian is "alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them," nor ever can be. It is an impossibility. You logic here does not make sense. This is a description of the unsaved of which the saved have been delivered from. We are not to be followers of them or to imitate them. But Paul is describing their nature which we don't have. We have God; they don't.

Verses 18-19 are describing the gentiles, who in the context of speaking to jewish believers would know that a pagan was the intended meaning. Paul warns not to act like the pagans, and describes in detail how they act. Clearly a believer CAN act like the pagan describes in great detail.

 

[webdog]

HP: Without reading into the passage a presupposition not supported by the text itself, where is your evidence of that assumption?

The evidence is the plain reading of the chapter, particularly when v. 13 speaks of being "put to death" and their blood being on their own head. This is not spiritual, but physical. While it is speaking of personal responsibility for our own sin, it is not speaking of losing our salvation as the righteous person who turns from righteousness is still labeled as a righteous person (like Lot was).

 

[DHK]

Verses 18-19 are describing the gentiles, who in the context of speaking to jewish believers would know that a pagan was the intended meaning. Paul warns not to act like the pagans, and describes in detail how they act. Clearly a believer CAN act like the pagan describes in great detail.

There is no lexicon, commentary, or other reference that I can find that supports you "theory" that Gentile should refer to a "pagan". You are just wrong there. The fact that Paul says "other Gentiles" means that he refers to the unsaved Gentiles, not the saved, such as themselves. Ephesus was in Greece, a "Gentile" nation.

Consider Paul's description of the world at that time:
1 Corinthians 10:32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God.
--There are only three groups of people in the world: Jews, Gentiles (unbelievers), and Christians. To use the pejorative "pagan" is completely unnecessary. It is the same as calling you a "Funny-mentalist," as a Christian. Pejoratives are unnecessary. If you are speaking of a specific religion of paganism, it isn't there. Paul was not speaking of a specific religion. Paganism is not mentioned. The word "Gentile" carries no such connotation.

Your guess that the Jews would "know" that the intended meaning would refer to "paganism" is nothing but a claim to extra-biblical revelation.

 

[webdog]

There is no lexicon, commentary, or other reference that I can find that supports you "theory" that Gentile should refer to a "pagan". You are just wrong there. The fact that Paul says "other Gentiles" means that he refers to the unsaved Gentiles, not the saved, such as themselves. Ephesus was in Greece, a "Gentile" nation.

Consider Paul's description of the world at that time:
1 Corinthians 10:32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God.
--There are only three groups of people in the world: Jews, Gentiles (unbelievers), and Christians. To use the pejorative "pagan" is completely unnecessary. It is the same as calling you a "Funny-mentalist," as a Christian. Pejoratives are unnecessary. If you are speaking of a specific religion of paganism, it isn't there. Paul was not speaking of a specific religion. Paganism is not mentioned. The word "Gentile" carries no such connotation.

Your guess that the Jews would "know" that the intended meaning would refer to "paganism" is nothing but a claim to extra-biblical revelation.

You cannot use 1 Corinthians to put Ephesians 4 in context. That is poor hermeneutics. The Gentiles in Ephesus were idol worshipers...do a study of the idolatry in Ephesus. I found half a dozen references supporting my understanding of the text (internet...not a claim to "extra-biblical revelation")
http://74.125.113.132/search?q=cach...tm+Ephesians+4+pagan&cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

At any rate, let's use your understanding for a minute that they were not pagans but "just" reprobates. Fact remains a regenerated person can act like an unregenerate person, hence Paul's warning to NOT live like the reprobate.

 

[DHK]

At any rate, let's use your understanding for a minute that they were not pagans but "just" reprobates. Fact remains a regenerated person can act like an unregenerate person, hence Paul's warning to NOT live like the reprobate.

I think we can agree with that conclusion.

 

[DHK]

This post must have been missed, or ignored, and I'll assume it was missed.

There's that pesky eternal word again.

Through John, God tells us that we can know we have eternal life. If eternal doesn't mean eternal, how can we possibly know we have it or not? If we can lose our salvation, how can we ever know that we have it? If God tells us we can know it, then he has to be lying to also say we can lose it, doesn't he?

Don't you find it odd how HP and Bob ignore and avoid these verses.
When presented with such Scripture they would rather go off on other tangents that start with: "But what about..."

 

[steaver]

Don't you find it odd how HP and Bob ignore and avoid these verses.
When presented with such Scripture they would rather go off on other tangents that start with: "But what about..."

What I find odd is that any Christian would not desire that ALL passages must harmonize with one another. Bob and HP are stuck on specific passages and refuse to take passages such as in 1John 5 and explain what these passages imply or mean. They just ignore them.

On the other hand, those of us who hold to OSAS have given interpretations of Bob's and HP's beloved passages (which they insist declare one can become un-born again) that do not contradict Jesus' words of "eternal life".

Here is the passage HP. Can you explain why it does not say those in Christ have (present tense) eternal life?


11And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
12He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. 13These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

:jesus:

 

[BobRyan]

I hesitate to bring this up, because it's likely to lead HP down another rabbit trail, but it deserves to be mentioned.

1 John 5:11-13
And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

There's that pesky eternal word again.

Through John, God tells us that we can know we have eternal life. If eternal doesn't mean eternal, how can we possibly know we have it or not? If we can lose our salvation, how can we ever know that we have it? If God tells us we can know it, then he has to be lying to also say we can lose it, doesn't he?

Well if we carefully delete the rest of the Bible and look only at that one text - out of context... then we have as you seem to suggest - a good basis for OSAS.

But once we "notice" - Matt 18's "forgiveness revoked"
and John 15's "brances In ME that are removed and cast into the fire"
and Rom 11 "branches broken off due to unbelief ... but he is able to graft them in AGAIN if they do not continue in unbelief"
and Gal 5 "Fallen from Grace -- SEVERED from Christ"

(And the numerous other examples of the same that so quickly unravels the argument for OSAS --)

Well then we get the 360% view that tells us that OSAS does not stand the test of scripture.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by HP
The fact is, you have no irrefutable argument as many have pointed out. Bob Ryan’s argument, just to name one, is sound and Biblical which clearly refutes that position. It certainly did not work that way for Lucifer or Adam and Eve. Bob also makes mention of the Jews mentioned in Romans 11 as well, and it certainly did not work that way for them either. One would have to overlook and ignore warning after warning to take such a position as you hold to DHK.

Originally Posted by DHK
Bob took Scripture out of context. Romans 11 does not apply to us today. Bob failed to mention Rom.11:26--So then all Israel shall be saved.

There is a paucity of logic in your solution DHK - that is more evident to the unbiased objective reader than you might have at first supposed.

Notice how Paul makes the text directly applicable to new testament Christians - when we read the text itself? In fact he makes it apply to the christians of HIS day and to ALL time right down to the END of time -- saying that IN THIS WAY "all Israel" is saved. (With the CONTEXT for Israel being stated explicitly in Romans 9 "They are NOT ALL Israel who are descendants from Abraham" and saying in Romans 2 "He is NOT a Jew who is one OUTWARDLY")

Rom 11
18 do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are arrogant, remember that it is not you who supports the root, but the root supports you.
19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.”


20 Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear;
21 for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either.

22Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness[/b]; otherwise you also will be cut off.
23And [b]they also, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.

24For if you were cut off from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and were grafted contrary to natureinto a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these who are the natural branches be grafted into their own olive tree?


25For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery—so that you will not be wise in your own estimation—that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles [b]has come in[/b];
26and so all Israel will be saved[/b]; just as it is written,

Your problem (as usual) is taking Scripture out of context, and trying to proof text your position. Romans chapters 9-11 are speaking of the nation of Israel.

Israel as a concept that in Romans 2 and Romans 9 is NOT limited to the "children of the flesh" the "literal descendants" for as Paul says in Romans 2 "He is a Jew that is one INWARDLY and circumcision is of the HEART by the Holy Spirit".

In Romans 9 Paul continues with that Romans 2 theme "They are NOT all Israel who are sons of the FLESH" and there Paul emphasises a spiritual Israel "Children of the PROMISE".

In Romans 11 Paul emphasises that Israel is comprised of BOTH Jews and Gentiles when viewed in that broader context.


DHK you seem to be indulging yourself in a bit of fiction as if that will in some way support your as yet unproven accusation above.

The careful objective unbiased reader quickly notices inconvenient details - such as the fact that Rom 11:19-21 refers to the Jews as "natural branches" in the tree that is Christ - and the gentiles as wild branches that were grafted in.

It is impossible to engage in the level of revisionism that would ignore this detail and thus imagine that the text limits the discussion to "just jews".

For you to use this chapter to try and prove your point is ludicrous.

I will grant you that it does not help your case for OSAS - in fact it explictly debunks it. Perhaps you meant to say "for you to use this chapter to prove your point is inconvenient for OSAS"

:laugh:

Perhaps you view subject matter that is not in support of OSAS to be out of place when you are trying to defend that position.

Very "interesting" solution on your part.

But the serious Bible student will have to take into account the deteails of scripture - no matter how they inconvenience the man made tradtin of OSAS.:godisgood:

As it turns out.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

On the other hand, those of us who hold to OSAS have given interpretations of Bob's and HP's beloved passages (which they insist declare one can become un-born again) that do not contradict Jesus' words of "eternal life".

If only that were actually true.

How much easier this whole discussion would be.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

Well if we carefully delete the rest of the Bible and look only at that one text - out of context... then we have as you seem to suggest - a good basis for OSAS.

But once we "notice" - Matt 18's "forgiveness revoked"
and John 15's "brances In ME that are removed and cast into the fire"
and Rom 11 "branches broken off due to unbelief ... but he is able to graft them in AGAIN if they do not continue in unbelief"
and Gal 5 "Fallen from Grace -- SEVERED from Christ"

(And the numerous other examples of the same that so quickly unravels the argument for OSAS --)

Well then we get the 360% view that tells us that OSAS does not stand the test of scripture.

in Christ,

Bob

Let me get this straight. There is only one passage where "eternal means eternal" but you haven't explained even that yet.
And 360% of the Bible that remains eternal doesn't mean eternal and therefore there is no OSAS. What fascinating logic Bob!!

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: There is only one passage where "eternal means eternal" but you haven't explained even that yet.

HP: That is an absolute misconstruing of the truth. You simply will not accept the fact that God’s promises are conditional.

You certainly show the strength of your arguments when you start hitting the delete button. I never ‘personally attacked’ you once, but rather only showed your arguments consistent with a system of necessity. You are acting as a whited wall DHK with the numerous personal attacks you have made on this list. No one has attacked anyone with more offensive language than has came straight from you own keypad. Chickens come home to roost DHK.

 

[steaver]

What I find odd is that any Christian would not desire that ALL passages must harmonize with one another. Bob and HP are stuck on specific passages and refuse to take passages such as in 1John 5 and explain what these passages imply or mean. They just ignore them.

On the other hand, those of us who hold to OSAS have given interpretations of Bob's and HP's beloved passages (which they insist declare one can become un-born again) that do not contradict Jesus' words of "eternal life".

Here is the passage HP. Can you explain why it does not say those in Christ have (present tense) eternal life?


11And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
12He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. 13These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

:jesus:

Still waiting guys.....

:jesus:

 

[steaver]

If only that were actually true.

How much easier this whole discussion would be.

in Christ,

Bob

I know how you love to point out the details Bob. So point away!

Tell us...why this does not say those in Christ have (present tense) eternal life? Show us the details we are missing.
1John 5:
11And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
12He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. 13These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

:jesus:

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Here is what you appear to be overlooking. Just who is it Steaver that is ‘in Christ’ and as such has eternal life? Here is a small sampling of relevant verses.

Mt 7:21 ¶ Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Joh 3:20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
Lu 6:49 But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like a man that without a foundation built an house upon the earth; against which the stream did beat vehemently, and immediately it fell; and the ruin of that house was great.
Joh 3:20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
Joh 3:21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
Joh 9:31 Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth.
Ro 2:9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
Ro 13:4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
Col 3:25 But he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done: and there is NO respect of persons.
1Jo 2:29 If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that every one that doeth righteousness is born of him.
1Jo 3:7 Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.
1Jo 3:10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is NOT of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.
3Jo 1:11 Beloved, follow not that which is evil, but that which is good. He that doeth good is of God: but he that doeth evil hath not seen God.

Steaver, here a just a couple of verses that again tell us just exactly who it is that has eternal life. 1Jo 2:29 If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that every one that doeth righteousness is born of him.
1Jo 3:7 Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.

So much for laying hope in a doctrine of OSAS. The question should be asked is, am I living righteously by the help of the Holy Spirit? If we are not, no doctrine will save you or I. It is simply foolishness to build ones hopes around a word such as 'eternal' and not around obedience.

 

[DHK]

Israel as a concept that in Romans 2 and Romans 9 is NOT limited to the "children of the flesh" the "literal descendants" for as Paul says in Romans 2 "He is a Jew that is one INWARDLY and circumcision is of the HEART by the Holy Spirit".

I will answer you this once. But note that you are avoiding every one that is posting to you concerning:
"eternal", John 10:27-30: 1John 5:10, 1John 5:10,11; John 10:5, Rev.20:10,15; John 5:24; Eph.2:8,9; Rom.6:23, etc.

You avoid these scriptures like the plague. You refuse to answer them. You have no answer for the obvious question that if eternal stopped at any time it wouldn't be eternal any longer but temporary, making Christ a liar, for Christ promised "eternal life," as a gift. You can't work through that, can you. You have never provided an answer for that problematic logistic.

Note: the argument that you have presented here is off-topic. It is a rabbit trail. As I mentioned to HP it is about Israel, not NT believers. That be the case, let's look at your argument this once and see how you have butchered the Scriptures to try and make a point.

You said above that:
"as Paul says in Romans 2 "He is a Jew that is one INWARDLY and circumcision is of the HEART by the Holy Spirit"
So what? What is your point?

In Romans 9 Paul continues with that Romans 2 theme "They are NOT all Israel who are sons of the FLESH" and there Paul emphasises a spiritual Israel "Children of the PROMISE".

And so? What is the point" I am still waiting.

In Romans 11 Paul emphasises that Israel is comprised of BOTH Jews and Gentiles when viewed in that broader context.

And this is where you are wrong. This is where your understanding of Romans 11 is lacking. It is also why I advised HP to have another thread for it. Israel is never viewed as having both Jews and Gentiles together, and never will. Israel is Israel. It is the nation of Israel. The Gentiles are those peoples or nations that are outside of Israel by very definition of the word. You are way off base.

The careful objective unbiased reader quickly notices inconvenient details - such as the fact that Rom 11:19-21 refers to the Jews as "natural branches" in the tree that is Christ - and the gentiles as wild branches that were grafted in.

Paul is speaking in parabolic language. The natural branches are the Jews, but not necessarily in Christ. If they were in Christ they would have not been Christ. Remember they rejected the Messiah and crucified him. They were not in Christ.
The gentiles do not necessarily refer to believers, but simply "gentiles" in general.

It is impossible to engage in the level of revisionism that would ignore this detail and thus imagine that the text limits the discussion to "just jews".

I don't do "revisionism". I am not going to discuss this anymore, unless it is on another thread. I have given you a valid answer on who the Jews are, and who the Gentiles are.

I will grant you that it does not help your case for OSAS - in fact it explictly debunks it. Perhaps you meant to say "for you to use this chapter to prove your point is inconvenient for OSAS"

Romans chapter 11 does not weaken OSAS, but rather strengthens it. Your misinterpretation of it shows your misunderstanding of the Jews in prophesy, and your lack of knowledge of this chapter. And that is all that you are doing by referring to these verses as so-called "proof texts." It doesn't work that way.

Perhaps you view subject matter that is not in support of OSAS to be out of place when you are trying to defend that position.

There is no Scripture out of place in the Bible. All Scripture is consistent with the doctrine of eternal security. Those who don't understand eternal security don't properly understand salvation.

But the serious Bible student will have to take into account the deteails of scripture - no matter how they inconvenience the man made tradtin of OSAS.

To call one of the very basic tenets of salvation itself a man-made doctrine is serious error.