Some shall depart from the faith.

[steaver]

RAdam had made an interesting post in another thread concerning those who depart from the faith. He believes that these are true children of God and therefore will still be saved.

Here is his post....

RAdam;

It isn't my theology, it is what the bible says. Paul warned that some would depart from the faith. You cannot depart from the faith unless you were part of the faith. It didn't say some would depart from faith, but from the faith. That is, of course, speaking of apostacy from the truth of the gospel. However, the same author told us that if one believes not, yet He abideth faithful, He cannot deny Himself. All of His are part of Him. They belong to Him. He bought them with His own blood. He holds them in His hand, in fact they are graven on His hands. Children of God can apostocize, but they cannot fall finally away and perish eternally because they are preserved by the power of God. That is bible truth.

What is not according to scripture is the calvinist practice of judging another person's salvation. They have erected a false doctrine, that all children of God will perservere in faith. (By the way, I can never get a straight answer on the degree of perserverence. Could that be because there is not one scripture that states this?) In consequence of this false doctrine, they must view someone that departs from the faith as not being a "true born again child of God." Thus, they start judging the salvation of another person. The Lord knoweth them that are His.

Yes, a child of God can depart from the faith. It's sad, but it is true, and it has happened. Nevertheless, what a child of God cannot do is negate the blood of Jesus Christ. Jesus died for them, noone can lay anything to their charge, they are preserved in Him, and will be with Him. That is a comforting thing which the bible clearly declares.

This is an interesting pov, however, I am not sure that this can actually be supported in scripture.

RAdam states, speaking of the faith, "That is, of course, speaking of apostacy from the truth of the gospel.

This raises the first red flag. Jesus said,

Jhn 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
Jhn 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.


If your pov is correct RAdam, then is this word from Jesus a half truth?

I would be interested to see all of the scriptures that you would use to support your view.

As far as the opening title's scripture, it is found here;

1Ti 4:1¶Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
1Ti 4:2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
1Ti 4:3 Forbidding to marry, [and commanding] to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

There isn't any information given in this passage to make a declaration that these spoken of are true children of God. However, there is enough information to suggest that they are not true children of God according to the many scriptures that describe the actions and attitudes of the truly born of God.

I don't think that this pov can withstand the full counsel of God's word. There are just too many scriptures that distinguish between the lost and the saved and how they react to God's word, the gospel.

1Jo 3:10In 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.


There are just so many scriptures that you will be up against to prove this pov. I believe the "never saved to begin with" is going to be the most proven doctrine to hold.

1Jo 2:19They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would [no doubt] have continued with us: but [they went out], that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us

I think it is an up hill battle for you to prove your pov, but I am interested in seeing your selected scriptures and hearing your expositions of them.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

I personally think the struggle here is reconciliation of Calvin's double predestinarian view, and the dogma of Once saved Always saved. The thing is scripture seems to speak of several tenses of scripture. For instance in a past and present tense we have Ephesians 2:8–9

For by grace you have been saved through faith

as a past tense and Philippians 2:12

work out your own salvation with fear and trembling

as a present tense. But there is also a future tense to Pauls discussion of salvation as well such as in Romans 13:11

our salvation is nearer than when we first believed

also in 1 Cor 3:15

If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames

. So the question is in what tense are we speaking of? Then we ask ourselves can a christian apostate? Well, verses like 10:28

I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand.

and Romans 8:39

neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

seem to indicate that no its not possible for a Christian to apostate. yet there are difficult verse that speak contrarily to this point of view like John 15:6

6If anyone does not remain in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned.

Why the warning to the disciples if nothing can cause them to apostate? Jesus seems to be indicating that there must be a conserted effort to remain in him or be cut away and thrown into the flames which seems to represent judgement. And Romans 11:22 is a difficult passage for the OSAS view

Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off

Looking at the later part of that verse God provided kindness and wants you to continue in it or

you also will be cut off

. Another stern warning about abiding in christ or judgement. In Galatians that great discourse on grace we get this from Paul

You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.

another discourse on the possibility of apostate. It seems then that upon receipt of the free gift of (past tense) salvation it is incumbent on the believer to hold to what Romans 1:5 says

Through him and for his name's sake, we received grace and apostleship to call people from among all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith.

or Romans 16:26

26but now revealed and made known through the prophetic writings by the command of the eternal God, so that all nations might believe and obey him

Otherwise there seems to be discord with the writings because one set provides difficulties with the other.

 

[Dr. Walter]

It is the past tense completed action where the doctrine of once truely saved always saved seems to be grounded. For example, note all the proof texts that are used to teach it and the vast majority are found in the past tense completed action. The past tense completed action verbs usually have to do with what God, whether in the Person of the Father (election) or in the Person of the Son (redemption/justification) or in the Person of the Spirit (regeneration) have accomplished.

It is the present tense where the tension seem to exist. For example you quote John 15 and Romans 15:26 in regard to obedience. However, I believe a pertinent question that can be asked, is there an aspect of present tense salvation that can be lost without loss of eternal life?

You gave I Cor. 3:14-15 where a saved person due to a life of "wood, hay and stubble" completely consumed by the fires of God's judgement shall suffer "loss" but he himself shall be saved so as by fire. It would seem that the same fire consumes the branches in John 15 and yet something is not lost in I Cor. 14:15.

Is it possible the three tenses of salvation has to do with the three aspects of our humanity. The inward man, the expressed life and our body? The past tense has to do with regeneration/conversion/justification, while the future tense has to do with the glorification of our body. The present tense having to do with the salvation or loss of our expressed daily life. Every portion of life is redeemed or lost depending upon whether we walk after the Spirit or after the flesh, whether we put off the old and put on the new man, whether we die daily and thus redeem the time? Whatever portion of time we are living we are either making it count for God and eternity or it is lost forever, wasted years? Could the "loss" be more comprehensive than merely the loss of "rewards" (I Cor. 3:14) but the loss of temporal blessings, peace, usefulness, joy, witness, etc.?

Another issue, I don't think you consider, is the role of false profession from the human point of observation. New Testament writers addressing their readers as all professed believers but not necessarily geniune in that profession. Continuance in faith, type of fruits, chastening for sin seems to be a distinctives that distinguish between the "tare" and the true seed of the kingdom.

Romans 11:22 does not deal with individual salvation as those cut off can be regrafted in "again" which the writer of Hebrews says is impossible (Heb. 6:6) to "renew" them again to repentance. Rather Paul is dealing with two kinds of people (Jews versus Gentiles) as spheres of redemption out of which God calls individuals to salvation. God has turned from one people as the primary sphere for calling out a people - Jews, unto another people - Gentiles as the primary sphere for calling out a people. He can just as easily cut off the Gentiles and return to the Jews and will eventually (Rom. 11:25).

I personally think the struggle here is reconciliation of Calvin's double predestinarian view, and the dogma of Once saved Always saved. The thing is scripture seems to speak of several tenses of scripture. For instance in a past and present tense we have Ephesians 2:8–9 as a past tense and Philippians 2:12 as a present tense. But there is also a future tense to Pauls discussion of salvation as well such as in Romans 13:11 also in 1 Cor 3:15 . So the question is in what tense are we speaking of? Then we ask ourselves can a christian apostate? Well, verses like 10:28 and Romans 8:39 seem to indicate that no its not possible for a Christian to apostate. yet there are difficult verse that speak contrarily to this point of view like John 15:6 Why the warning to the disciples if nothing can cause them to apostate? Jesus seems to be indicating that there must be a conserted effort to remain in him or be cut away and thrown into the flames which seems to represent judgement. And Romans 11:22 is a difficult passage for the OSAS view Looking at the later part of that verse God provided kindness and wants you to continue in it or . Another stern warning about abiding in christ or judgement. In Galatians that great discourse on grace we get this from Paul another discourse on the possibility of apostate. It seems then that upon receipt of the free gift of (past tense) salvation it is incumbent on the believer to hold to what Romans 1:5 says or Romans 16:26 Otherwise there seems to be discord with the writings because one set provides difficulties with the other.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Is it possible the three tenses of salvation has to do with the three aspects of our humanity. The inward man, the expressed life and our body? The past tense has to do with regeneration/conversion/justification, while the future tense has to do with the glorification of our body. The present tense having to do with the salvation or loss of our expressed daily life. Every portion of life is redeemed or lost depending upon whether we walk after the Spirit or after the flesh, whether we put off the old and put on the new man, whether we die daily and thus redeem the time? Whatever portion of time we are living we are either making it count for God and eternity or it is lost forever, wasted years? Could the "loss" be more comprehensive than merely the loss of "rewards" (I Cor. 3:14) but the loss of temporal blessings, peace, usefulness, joy, witness, etc.?

By degree you mean. It seems reasonable save for the finality and Personal address as in John 15:6

6If anyone does not remain in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned.

This does not seem to indicate a work or redemption of a day but of an entire person.

Another issue, I don't think you consider, is the role of false profession from the human point of observation. New Testament writers addressing their readers as all professed believers but not necessarily geniune in that profession. Continuance in faith, type of fruits, chastening for sin seems to be a distinctives that distinguish between the "tare" and the true seed of the kingdom.

I selected each verse carefully because they don't refer to those who were not considered to be in the community of the saved. In otherwords these aren't the same people that Paul says they were never with us from the begining. But these are those that abide witht he group and seemingly have fallen away.

Romans 11:22 does not deal with individual salvation as those cut off can be regrafted in "again" which the writer of Hebrews says is impossible (Heb. 6:6) to "renew" them again to repentance. Rather Paul is dealing with two kinds of people (Jews versus Gentiles) as spheres of redemption out of which God calls individuals to salvation. God has turned from one people as the primary sphere for calling out a people - Jews, unto another people - Gentiles as the primary sphere for calling out a people. He can just as easily cut off the Gentiles and return to the Jews and will eventually (Rom. 11:25).

I understand your point however if you look closely at the passage we have the two groups as you have suggested the Jew who have lost it and the saved gentile. It is clear that where I quoted from Paul is speaking to those who are saved (pastence and present tense) from verse 20

20Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid.

Yet Paul warns them

21For if God did not spare the natural branches(JEWS), he will not spare you either.(BELIEVERS REF VERSE 20)

22Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue (BELIEVERS)in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off. (FINALITY OF JUDGEMENT NOT THEIR WORKS)23And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again

Bolded and Parenthasis mine. So its clear that Paul is speaking to those in the community of the saved since they have faith.

 

[Dr. Walter]

By degree you mean. It seems reasonable save for the finality and Personal address as in John 15:6 This does not seem to indicate a work or redemption of a day but of an entire person.

John 15:1-12 is a mixture of metaphor and simile for the purpose to instruct his disciples that absolute dependence upon him is necessary to produce fruit. In verse 3 he speaks of their salvation status as already cleansed. Thus the metaphor of cleansing speaks to their salvation status but the metaphor of the branches speaks to their fruit production status. He says that without him they can DO “nothing.” Could the burning in the fire by men be the metaphorical equivalent to being judged in regard to anything done apart from him as “nothing”?

The idea of being “in Christ” has several different applications in scripture. For example there is the obvious redemptive aspect with various applications. We were chosen “in him” before the foundation of the world by election (Eph. 1:4). However, we were “created IN Christ Jesus UNTO good works” by regeneration (Eph. 2:10). In quite another sense we are “seated in heavenly places IN Christ” speaking of representation rather than election or regeneration.
I know we may differ on this, but I believe we are not merely redemptive “in Christ” in the above various and different senses but we are also metaphorically “in Christ” by metaphorical membership in the local church body as well as symbolically “in Christ” by baptism.

Finally, we are EXPERIENTIALLY “in him” (Col. 2:6) or by our “walk” or daily expression of our life. We can “put on” Christ as well as “take off” the old man as we yield to the Holy Spirit on a moment by moment basis. Fruit production has to do with this aspect “in Christ.” This is how we “redeem the time” and make it count for Christ as we come under the filling or control of the Holy Spirit and act out our daily life in submission to His will by His power (Eph. 5:17-22). Not only can the entirety of our life be BURNED UP IN SMOKE (I Cor. 3:14-15; Jn. 15) but it can progressively in part be burned up or judged as lost as well as only what is saved is what is done by walking “in him.” This is how we keep ourselves in his love (Jn. 15:9-10) and experience the joy of the Lord (Jn. 15:11). Whatever we attempt to do in regard to “fruit” production outside of Him is burned whether it is a part of our daily life or the whole house (I Cor. 3:11-15).

I selected each verse carefully because they don't refer to those who were not considered to be in the community of the saved. In otherwords these aren't the same people that Paul says they were never with us from the begining. But these are those that abide witht he group and seemingly have fallen away.

Yes, but Paul is addressing those he knows to be saved only by profession rather than by omniscience. Hence, there are valid evidences to manifest whether that acknowledged profession is true or false.

I understand your point however if you look closely at the passage we have the two groups as you have suggested the Jew who have lost it and the saved gentile. It is clear that where I quoted from Paul is speaking to those who are saved (pastence and present tense) from verse 20 Yet Paul warns them Bolded and Parenthasis mine. So its clear that Paul is speaking to those in the community of the saved since they have faith.

I see this as warning them as a People not as an individual because you have the same problem if you regard them as individuals as being cut off (lost) and grafted back “again” (saved) which is impossible according to the writer of Hebrews. I see him warning the gentiles against what the Jews as people did. As a people they boasted they were the people of God because salvation was of them. God turned away from them as a people but He did not turn away from his saved “remnant.” The “remnant” refers to those actually saved and they are never “cut off.” Likewise, the remnant among the Gentiles would never be cut off if he cut off the Gentiles as a People and regrafted Israel back “again.”

 

[Thinkingstuff]

John 15:1-12 is a mixture of metaphor and simile for the purpose to instruct his disciples that absolute dependence upon him is necessary to produce fruit. In verse 3 he speaks of their salvation status as already cleansed. Thus the metaphor of cleansing speaks to their salvation status but the metaphor of the branches speaks to their fruit production status. He says that without him they can DO “nothing.” Could the burning in the fire by men be the metaphorical equivalent to being judged in regard to anything done apart from him as “nothing”?

I would consider it that way save the personal pronoun use and the totality of the consequence. Ie... "He will be cut off" Not "his works are cut off"

The idea of being “in Christ” has several different applications in scripture. For example there is the obvious redemptive aspect with various applications. We were chosen “in him” before the foundation of the world by election (Eph. 1:4). However, we were “created IN Christ Jesus UNTO good works” by regeneration (Eph. 2:10). In quite another sense we are “seated in heavenly places IN Christ” speaking of representation rather than election or regeneration.
I know we may differ on this, but I believe we are not merely redemptive “in Christ” in the above various and different senses but we are also metaphorically “in Christ” by metaphorical membership in the local church body as well as symbolically “in Christ” by baptism.

I see no real problem with this "In Christ" as you have said has different application depending on the context. Yet there is always the "continue in" clause.

Finally, we are EXPERIENTIALLY “in him” (Col. 2:6) or by our “walk” or daily expression of our life. We can “put on” Christ as well as “take off” the old man as we yield to the Holy Spirit on a moment by moment basis. Fruit production has to do with this aspect “in Christ.” This is how we “redeem the time” and make it count for Christ as we come under the filling or control of the Holy Spirit and act out our daily life in submission to His will by His power (Eph. 5:17-22). Not only can the entirety of our life be BURNED UP IN SMOKE (I Cor. 3:14-15; Jn. 15) but it can progressively in part be burned up or judged as lost as well as only what is saved is what is done by walking “in him.” This is how we keep ourselves in his love (Jn. 15:9-10) and experience the joy of the Lord (Jn. 15:11). Whatever we attempt to do in regard to “fruit” production outside of Him is burned whether it is a part of our daily life or the whole house (I Cor. 3:11-15).

However, degree isn't indicated in the passage. A totality is. I agree with your analysis of "how we keep ourself in in his love and experiencing the Joy of the Lord" But this doesn't not detract from the consequence of not abiding. Jesus is indicating an Either/or senario rather than and extent senario.

Yes, but Paul is addressing those he knows to be saved only by profession rather than by omniscience. Hence, there are valid evidences to manifest whether that acknowledged profession is true or false.

Paul isn't attempting to give a litmus test in determining the validity of these people's salvation which if you were correct he would be.

I see this as warning them as a People not as an individual because you have the same problem if you regard them as individuals as being cut off (lost) and grafted back “again” (saved) which is impossible according to the writer of Hebrews. I see him warning the gentiles against what the Jews as people did. As a people they boasted they were the people of God because salvation was of them. God turned away from them as a people but He did not turn away from his saved “remnant.” The “remnant” refers to those actually saved and they are never “cut off.” Likewise, the remnant among the Gentiles would never be cut off if he cut off the Gentiles as a People and regrafted Israel back “again.”

Oh, I entirely agree with Pauls address to a group of people. Yet despite a remnant whom Paul believes he is a member does not deminish the fact that there are Jews that have no hope of salvation apart from Christianity. And that Believing Christians may end up in the same boat. Which again goes back to abiding not by degree but entirely.

 

[Dr. Walter]

I would consider it that way save the personal pronoun use and the totality of the consequence. Ie... "He will be cut off" Not "his works are cut off"

Remember, their salvation has been established upon a different metaphor “clean” in verse 3. If Jesus was teaching loss of salvation would not that require the return to the metaphor that established salvation and give the metaphorical equivalent – “unclean”? Are you not reversing metaphors to teach loss of salvation?

Secondly, in I Corinthians 3:11-15 the WHOLE life is burnt up and yet the soul is saved. However, isn’t Paul simply going to the extreme to emphasize that the “house” of works does not determine ultimate salvation at all? In reality, could not part of that house (life) be composed of “gold, silver, precious stones” as much as another part of “wood, hay and stubble” and only the bad works BURNED? Why couldn’t Jesus be going to the same extreme?

Thirdly, isn’t the failure to “abide” equal metaphorically to being “cut off”? Would not “nothing” be metaphorically equivalent of “burned”? Isn’t the ultimate point Jesus is teaching is that they can DO nothing apart from Christ rather than BEING SAVED apart from Christ? It would seem that “fruit” bearing and “gold, silver, precious stones” are equivalent with equivalent negative responses as well and yet ultimate loss of salvation is not in view in 1 Cor. 3:11-15 even when the WHOLE LIFE IS BURNED!

Paul isn't attempting to give a litmus test in determining the validity of these people's salvation which if you were correct he would be.

Isn’t Paul asserting the fruit of genuine salvation? He does not have to make a contrast to assert what true Christians are and do. That in itself presents a litmus test.

Oh, I entirely agree with Pauls address to a group of people. Yet despite a remnant whom Paul believes he is a member does not deminish the fact that there are Jews that have no hope of salvation apart from Christianity. And that Believing Christians may end up in the same boat. Which again goes back to abiding not by degree but entirely.

The problem I see here is that true believers are described in the term “remnant” and the “remnant” is NEVER that which is cut off or grafted in again. The quantitative terms “tree” speak of a people in general that the saved “remnant” may be among but are never the objects of being cut off or grafted in again.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

RAdam had made an interesting post in another thread concerning those who depart from the faith. He believes that these are true children of God and therefore will still be saved.

Here is his post....



This is an interesting pov, however, I am not sure that this can actually be supported in scripture.

RAdam states, speaking of the faith, "That is, of course, speaking of apostacy from the truth of the gospel.

This raises the first red flag. Jesus said,

Jhn 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
Jhn 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.


If your pov is correct RAdam, then is this word from Jesus a half truth?

I would be interested to see all of the scriptures that you would use to support your view.

As far as the opening title's scripture, it is found here;

1Ti 4:1¶Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
1Ti 4:2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
1Ti 4:3 Forbidding to marry, [and commanding] to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

There isn't any information given in this passage to make a declaration that these spoken of are true children of God. However, there is enough information to suggest that they are not true children of God according to the many scriptures that describe the actions and attitudes of the truly born of God.

I don't think that this pov can withstand the full counsel of God's word. There are just too many scriptures that distinguish between the lost and the saved and how they react to God's word, the gospel.

1Jo 3:10In 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.


There are just so many scriptures that you will be up against to prove this pov. I believe the "never saved to begin with" is going to be the most proven doctrine to hold.

1Jo 2:19They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would [no doubt] have continued with us: but [they went out], that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us

I think it is an up hill battle for you to prove your pov, but I am interested in seeing your selected scriptures and hearing your expositions of them.

Cant do that if your a Calvinist.....it's not Cricket as my Anglo-Saxon friends say. Oh I say!

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Remember, their salvation has been established upon a different metaphor “clean” in verse 3. If Jesus was teaching loss of salvation would not that require the return to the metaphor that established salvation and give the metaphorical equivalent – “unclean”? Are you not reversing metaphors to teach loss of salvation?

No. I don't think that when jesus uses the term "clean" he's refering to their salvation entirely.

You are already clean because of the word I have spoken to you.

its a statement about how hearing the word of God or in this case Jesus has the effect of a cleaning. But there is nothing in the passage indicating an eternal security.

Secondly, in I Corinthians 3:11-15 the WHOLE life is burnt up and yet the soul is saved. However, isn’t Paul simply going to the extreme to emphasize that the “house” of works does not determine ultimate salvation at all? In reality, could not part of that house (life) be composed of “gold, silver, precious stones” as much as another part of “wood, hay and stubble” and only the bad works BURNED? Why couldn’t Jesus be going to the same extreme?

I'm not trying to insult you here. I hope you understand this. But it seems that you come perilously close to Catholic doctrine of Purgatory in that there is a purgation of things not subject to Christ in order that the believer may be saved. Are you suggesting this?

Thirdly, isn’t the failure to “abide” equal metaphorically to being “cut off”? Would not “nothing” be metaphorically equivalent of “burned”? Isn’t the ultimate point Jesus is teaching is that they can DO nothing apart from Christ rather than BEING SAVED apart from Christ? It would seem that “fruit” bearing and “gold, silver, precious stones” are equivalent with equivalent negative responses as well and yet ultimate loss of salvation is not in view in 1 Cor. 3:11-15 even when the WHOLE LIFE IS BURNED!

I don't see it that way. Its seems to imply that being cut of is a result of not abiding. Rather than just another term for the same things. And Burning in the sense that Jesus is using it as he does in other metaphorical descriptions implies a judgement. The being cut off seems clearly not that an aspect is cut of or even a majority save the spirit put a whole entire thing.

Isn’t Paul asserting the fruit of genuine salvation? He does not have to make a contrast to assert what true Christians are and do. That in itself presents a litmus test.

The point was he's speaking to believers that he understand are believers and in the passage there is no indicator that he's trying to separate those who are not believers but warning those who are believers that they can fall away rather than showing them how to point out non believers. Thus its not and indicator of a litmus test.

The problem I see here is that true believers are described in the term “remnant” and the “remnant” is NEVER that which is cut off or grafted in again. The quantitative terms “tree” speak of a people in general that the saved “remnant” may be among but are never the objects of being cut off or grafted in again.

The remnant is speaking specifically of Jews who have accepted Jesus as Messiah such as Paul. Not a generality of people in either group.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Cant do that if your a Calvinist.....it's not Cricket as my Anglo-Saxon friends say. Oh I say!

However, is there a difference between departing from saving faith and "the faith"? In 1 Tim. 4:1 "the faith" is in contrast to false "doctrines" rather than a contrast to a lost state! Can a saved person be deceived by false doctrines so as to take a stand against "the faith"?

Secondly, the terms "shall depart from" translates a term composed of "apo" and "istami" which literally means to "stand away from" or stand against." The Greek preposition "ek" usually has the idea of coming "out of" but the preposition used here is "apo" which has the idea of "away from."

 

[RAdam]

What is a "true" child of God? Find me a scriptural determination for that, please.

I get really tired of seeing this label used. It is a man-made term with man-made requirements. One is either a child of God, or one is not. There is no such thing as a "true" child of God. There are some evidences the bible gives for a child of God. Belief is the chief, but there are others, such as Galatians 5 lists.

Now, let's say you have a believer. This believer has faith in Christ, but then someone comes along and preaches heresy to them and deceives them and overturns their faith. That happened, and Paul discussed that happening. The result? Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure having this seal: the Lord knoweth them that are His. The point is, children of God can be deceived, they can be discouraged, they can be lead away from the truth. Constantly the devil is on the attack. How did Solomon go from being such a faithful follower of God to worshipping false gods? There is a devil that attacks God's people. That scene has played out countless times in history. Nevertheless, God knows His people, even if we don't. God preserves His people in grace. He won't lose His people.

Yes, I believe those are children of God that Paul was talking about. Why? Because they were part of the faith. An unregenerate is not part of the faith. A child of God can depart from the faith. That person can believe, and then come to a point where they doubt. How do I know this? Because it is in the bible. For instance, John knew Jesus was Christ. He announced it, he testified of it, he was sure of it. But, when in prison, he becomes discouraged. Wow, I wonder how that happened. Could it have been our adversary attacking him? Anyway, now he doubts and sends disciples to go and ask Jesus if He is indeed the long awaited Messiah. What did Jesus say in response? Did He upbraid John? No. He told them to go show John again. He already knew it, but in a tough place under attacks from Satan he doubted. That happens to God's people. Sometimes they aren't showed again. Sometimes they don't get that reassurance they need. A child of God can depart from the faith. They can give heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. That is why faithful preaching is important. That is why God made men overseers of the flock, to watch dilligently and protect them. That is why we are warned to try the spirits to determine whether they are of God.

 

[Jedi Knight]

What is a "true" child of God? Find me a scriptural determination for that, please.

Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

 

[steaver]

What is a "true" child of God? Find me a scriptural determination for that, please.

.

"True" simply means "born of God" as opposed to a profession of faith in Jesus Christ without the "born of God" requirement. You can read about those who "believed on Him" but were proven to be "not of God" in John 8.

I get really tired of seeing this label used. It is a man-made term with man-made requirements. One is either a child of God, or one is not. There is no such thing as a "true" child of God. There are some evidences the bible gives for a child of God. Belief is the chief, but there are others, such as Galatians 5 lists.

I am a "true" child of God. Don't get to hung up on a harmless adjective.

Now, let's say you have a believer. This believer has faith in Christ, but then someone comes along and preaches heresy to them and deceives them and overturns their faith. That happened, and Paul discussed that happening.

Not sure were you read this. Maybe you could exgesis some scripture on this.

The point is, children of God can be deceived, they can be discouraged, they can be lead away from the truth.

We know they can be lead into false doctrines, but you said they could deny Jesus Christ is Lord. I do not see this in scripture. Maybe you could post it.

For instance, John knew Jesus was Christ. He announced it, he testified of it, he was sure of it. But, when in prison, he becomes discouraged. Wow, I wonder how that happened. Could it have been our adversary attacking him? Anyway, now he doubts and sends disciples to go and ask Jesus if He is indeed the long awaited Messiah. What did Jesus say in response? Did He upbraid John? No. He told them to go show John again. He already knew it, but in a tough place under attacks from Satan he doubted. That happens to God's people.

John the baptist would not be a good example since he was not "born of God". However, lack of assurance is another topic. I want to discuss the "born of God" rejecting Jesus Christ as Lord. Can you show this from scripture?

 

[RAdam]

John the Baptist wasn't born of God? Are you serious? So God had an unregenerate man begin preaching the gospel, baptize people, testify of the Christ, see the Spirit descend on Jesus in the form of a dove, be filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother's womb, leap for joy at the salutation of Mary who was pregnant with Jesus, etc?

Now, departing from the faith is not denying Jesus is Lord. Departing from the faith is leaving the truth of the gospel for fables. Turning one's ears away from the truth and being turned unto fables. It is heaping preachers to oneself in order to scratch their itching ears. A child of God can believe the truth but fall into a state of doubt. John proves that. Children of God can give heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils.

Concerning John 8, Jesus is speaking to a mixed multitude. At one point some believe in Him and He tells them to continue in His word. I know that because the bible there specifically tells me He spoke those words to the beleivers. At this point the unbelievers in the crowd take offense at the idea that they are not free. Jesus goes on to tell them that they are not children of Abraham or God, but rather Satan.

Concerning the faith of some of God's children being overturned by heretical teachings, read 2 Timothy 2. Paul says that two men were preaching that the resurrection was past and the result was that the faith of some was overturned. Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Now, departing from the faith is not denying Jesus is Lord. Departing from the faith is leaving the truth of the gospel for fables. Turning one's ears away from the truth and being turned unto fables. It is heaping preachers to oneself in order to scratch their itching ears. A child of God can believe the truth but fall into a state of doubt. John proves that. Children of God can give heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils.

There is a difference between leaving "faith" and departing from "the faith." I Tim. 4:1 talks about departing from "the faith" which in context has to do with being deceived by false doctrine. Children of God cannot leave "faith" as Christ is the author and finisher and what God begins in them he continues to the end. This is the very issue between God and Satan in the book of Job. Satan contends that he can make Job depart from faith. God puts Job in his hands because God knows that faith is not of Job but of God.

Concerning John 8, Jesus is speaking to a mixed multitude. At one point some believe in Him and He tells them to continue in His word. I know that because the bible there specifically tells me He spoke those words to the beleivers. At this point the unbelievers in the crowd take offense at the idea that they are not free. Jesus goes on to tell them that they are not children of Abraham or God, but rather Satan.

If you look at the pronouns carefully in this passage those that John says "believed" are the very same ones that Jesus says were still children of Satan. In other words, they were tares with a false profession. They were never children of God by birth only by profession.



30 As he spake these words, many believed on him.
31 ¶ Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;
32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
33 They answered him, We be Abraham’s seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?

 

[RAdam]

See, you are speaking of departing from faith. Paul isn't talking about departing from faith, he is talking about departing from the faith. There is a difference between faith and the faith.

Now, why does John say, "then Jesus said to those Jews which believed on him?" Why did he say that? It is not obvious that he is making a difference between those that beleived and the rest of the crowd that is gathered there? These two verses are so different in tone from the rest of the chapter, that it must be a message directed at a different audience. Jesus is before and after this verse telling the people He is talking to that they are going to die in their sins and go to hell. All of the sudden, in the midst of this, many of the people believe on Him, not all but many. To them He says that if they continue in His word they will be disciples indeed, and will know the truth, and truth will make them free. They cannot continue in something they haven't already started in. They are already believing in Him and believe His word, but if they continue they will be disciples indeed and will be made free. They are born again children of God already, and if they will continue in the word of Christ they will be free from the bondage of the Pharisees teachings, which are nothing but heavy burdens that are grevious to be born. He is telling those believers about discipleship.

Then some people answered Him. Who did? Well, some in the crowd. Was it the believers? Well, look at their response to His instructions and look at His response to them. Does it look like these are the believers responding to Him in this way? Doesn't look like it to me. He tells them that they cannot hear His word, they cannot believe, because they are not of God. Now, they don't sound like believers to me. You've got Jesus telling people to continue in His word and then a few verses later telling the same people they cannot hear His word. That doesn't work. How could they have started in His word, much less continue in His word, if they cannot hear it? Obviously, these words are spoken to the arrogant, hard-hearted, unregenerate Jews in that crowd that boasted in being natural descendants of Abraham and totally rejected Jesus.

 

[Dr. Walter]

I understand your analysis and it is possible. However, it would seem to be no "if" as they ARE disciples or they ARE not! I John 2:19 also uses the word "continued" to demonstrate false professors. John 8:34 says "they answered him" and they speak as though the words "ye shall be made free" was direted at them.

However, your analysis is reasonable and you may be correct. I also made the same distinctions between "faith" and "the faith" in my last post - "There is a difference between leaving "faith" and departing from "the faith." "

See, you are speaking of departing from faith. Paul isn't talking about departing from faith, he is talking about departing from the faith. There is a difference between faith and the faith.

Now, why does John say, "then Jesus said to those Jews which believed on him?" Why did he say that? It is not obvious that he is making a difference between those that beleived and the rest of the crowd that is gathered there? These two verses are so different in tone from the rest of the chapter, that it must be a message directed at a different audience. Jesus is before and after this verse telling the people He is talking to that they are going to die in their sins and go to hell. All of the sudden, in the midst of this, many of the people believe on Him, not all but many. To them He says that if they continue in His word they will be disciples indeed, and will know the truth, and truth will make them free. They cannot continue in something they haven't already started in. They are already believing in Him and believe His word, but if they continue they will be disciples indeed and will be made free. They are born again children of God already, and if they will continue in the word of Christ they will be free from the bondage of the Pharisees teachings, which are nothing but heavy burdens that are grevious to be born. He is telling those believers about discipleship.

Then some people answered Him. Who did? Well, some in the crowd. Was it the believers? Well, look at their response to His instructions and look at His response to them. Does it look like these are the believers responding to Him in this way? Doesn't look like it to me. He tells them that they cannot hear His word, they cannot believe, because they are not of God. Now, they don't sound like believers to me. You've got Jesus telling people to continue in His word and then a few verses later telling the same people they cannot hear His word. That doesn't work. How could they have started in His word, much less continue in His word, if they cannot hear it? Obviously, these words are spoken to the arrogant, hard-hearted, unregenerate Jews in that crowd that boasted in being natural descendants of Abraham and totally rejected Jesus.

 

[billwald]

This is only a theoretical discussion because there is no objective test for the state of being regenerated.

 

[Dr. Walter]

This is only a theoretical discussion because there is no objective test for the state of being regenerated.

Jesus says that from the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. He also says that a evil tree cannot bring forth good fruit nor a good tree evil fruit. He also says you "can know them by their fruit."

A very objective test is what their mouth confesses to be the gospel and true salvation. If they speak not according to this word - the word of truth - it is because there is no light in them.

We are told to try the spirits and that we can try the spirits to see whether what a person says is of God (I Jn. 4:1,6). The whole book of First John is dedicated to how one can "KNOW" the difference between the lost and saved.

 

[RAdam]

Consider who He is talking to. There were Jews who were believers in Jesus Christ. Now, a believer is born again, period. The bible clearly declares that. However, some of the Jewish believers didn't follow Jesus. One reason for this was that the Pharisees would put them out of the synagogue, and they loved the praise of men more than that of God.

Jesus, talking to some Jewish believers amongst a crowd that obviously also contains unregenerate Jews, tells the believers that if they continue in His word they will be disciples indeed. If they do this they will also know the truth and will be made free by it. He is talking to people who have already believed, they are already born again. His message to them is to continue. Don't be concerned with what man thinks, or with what man does, rather follow me and you'll be my disciples and will be free. Those that didn't follow Jesus remained in bondage.