Featured SIN TO DEATH

Context is everything!

Galatians 2: 7 But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter 8 (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles), 9 and when James, Peter, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.

 

I'm curious to know what you consider to be "the fury of a fire about to consume the adversaries", i.e., "even now the axe lieth at the root of the trees".

Compare with Matthew 3:7-12; Luke 12:49-53

 

The passages you use to establish your thesis were not written to or about the Body of Christ but to Jewish (and proselyte) believers of the previous dispensation. If Israel had never been cut off and God had not turned instead to the Gentiles through the Apostle Paul then your argument would be iron clad, totally definitive and irrefutable.

The problem, however, is that Israel was cut off and God did turn to the Gentiles and, as a result, we must rightly divide the word of truth so as not to mix teachings meant for believers under the previous dispensation with those meant for us under the current dispensation. The former being ministered to by the Peter, James, John, et al. and the later by the Apostle Paul, as the verse I quoted states so very clearly.

One could very definitely lose their salvation under the previous dispensation because it was a covenant of law, but now Christ is the end of the law for salvation sake and so we cannot lose our salvation. The difference is quite stark and the boundary between the two positions is the Apostle Paul. Those who teach that you can lose your salvation will quote from any and every book of the bible except those written by Paul and those who teach that you cannot lose your salvation will quote from Paul almost entirely.

There have been dozens of books written on this topic and they all go basically along the lines. They spend most of their pages focusing primarily on their proof texts and then they'll spend some time dealing with texts that seem to teach the opposing view by explaining how they don't actually mean what they seem to mean. Those passages that are the proof texts for one side are the problem texts for the other side.

If you rightly divide, however, you end up with no problem texts at all! Notice that I am not saying that the passages you cite do not teach what you are suggesting that they teach. They do teach it! Those passages mean just exactly what it seems like they mean by merely reading them. I feel no need to twist them around, to reinterpret them, to get out my Strong's concordance and explain how a particular word means something that sheds new light on the passage or any other such thing. The passages mean what they say. More than that, I'd expect them to say it! The fact that Peter, James, John, Jesus, Moses, et al. taught that one can lose their salvation is precisely what I'd expect for them to teach and if they didn't teach it, it would be indicative of a very major problem with my understanding of the bible.

What's more is that the question of whether one can lose their salvation is only one of several doctrinal debates within Christian circles that fall along these same lines. Is water baptism required for salvation (perhaps the single most divisive issue in Christian history), will the rapture occur and if so when, do physical miracles happen today, should Christians speak in tongues, should Christians keep the law, are good works required for salvation, etc, etc. Some of these are more starkly delineated along these lines than others, but basically, you can pick any one of those debates and look at how one side argues their position vs. the other and what you'll see is that one side's proof texts will be from Paul and the other side's proof texts will be from the rest of the bible. It's really amazing! Once you've noticed it, it just seems to pop up everywhere!

Indeed, the difference is so stark that there are whole sects of the Christian church, the Messianic Jews in particular, that just flat out ignore Paul's epistles altogether and there is a danger of the opposite happening where grace gospel believers don't ever bother cracking open their bibles to anything other than Paul's epistles. Both are a mistake. All scripture is profitable, even needed, but it must be read and studied in it's intended context and we, during this dispensation of grace, must read the books of the bible written by Peter, James, John, etc as though we are reading someone else's mail or the result will be confusion, to say the least. Basically, they should be read with the same mindset with which one reads the book of Deuteronomy or Isaiah or Micah. They are scripture but they do not apply directly to us because we are not members of the House of Israel and so are not under their "house rules" (oikonomia - Strong's G3622 - "house rules" or "economy" or "dispensation").

Colossians 3:3
For you died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God.

2 Timothy 2:13
If we are faithless, He remains faithful; He cannot deny Himself.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

I do not deny that it is written to believers.

Did you even bother to read my post at all?

Where in it did I ever suggest that anything written by these biblical authors was written to unbelievers? I didn't! What are you even talking about?

 

Read it again, if you read it in the first place.

 

If I'm reading your post correctly, I see that what you are proposing in your understanding of the passage is what Wesley taught ( and many still teach to this day )...loss of salvation.
This is not what God tells His people, because the Lord Jesus will not lose any of those that were given to Him by the Father;

Not one:

"All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day." ( John 6:37-40 )

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


God says no one is more powerful than He is, and not one of His elect will be taken from Him.
Perhaps of you read it again with this in mind, the understanding of it will become clearer.

 

Or….. John is saying if someone sins and it leads to death (physical) there is no need to offer prayers for someone that has died (physically)

That seems supported by the context, not “oh no!! Someone sinned “such n such” therefore they are spiritually dead so no need to pray for them”

peace to you

 

I consider it to be a sin that carries with it the penalty of capital punishment. Certainly not the loss of eternal salvation.

 

Certain people jump to the conclusion that John is talking about believers committing certain sins that lead them to spiritual death, but that does not seem to fit the context - 1 John 5:16 - If anyone sees his brother sinning a sin which does not lead to death, he will ask, and He will give him life for those who commit sin not leading to death. There is sin leading to death. I do not say that he should pray about that. 17 All unrighteousness is sin, and there is sin not leading to death. 18 We know that whoever is born of God does not sin; but he who has been born of God keeps himself, and the wicked one does not touch him.

 

Yes, I did.

I shouldn't have to give my "interpretation" of it, SBG.
The words themselves should be enough for any Christian to see, "hear" and understand ( 1 John 2:27 ).

But, for the sake of those reading this and to clarify your question with an answer...
What is it about what I referenced, that you may not understand?
Is it not evident by what is stated...that Christ will lose none of those who have been given to Him by His Father in Heaven, and that there is no one who has the power to take any of His elect out of His hand...including themselves? Because no man is more powerful than God?

That, my friend, was enough for me to see many years ago now; and it put this question to rest long ago.

If someone who is saved could commit "spiritual suicide" through an act or set of acts against God, then that means that the Lord Jesus lied when He told us what He did through that very same apostle John. But since God is not a liar, then that means that the death being described in 1 John 5:16-17 is physical, not spiritual, right?

Those who are saved have been made spiritually alive ( born again ) in Christ, sealed with the Spirit of their adoption at the time of their hearing His word and believing on Him ( Ephesians 1 ).
Sealed, unto the day of their redemption ( Ephesians 4:30 )....and they can never go back ( neither would they desire to ):

" Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life." ( John 5:24 ).

They are kept by the power of God, not their own power:

" Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time." ( 1 Peter 1:5 ).

 

1 John 5:16 - If anyone sees his brother sinning a sin which does not lead to death, he will ask, and He will give him life for those who commit sin not leading to death. There is sin leading to death. I do not say that he should pray about that. 17 All unrighteousness is sin, and there is sin not leading to death. 18 We know that whoever is born of God does not sin; but he who has been born of God keeps himself, and the wicked one does not touch him.

All sin that is not covered by the blood of Jesus Christ would lead to spiritual death so verses 17 and 18 refute your argument.

 

No, they cannot.

God has answered that already through His apostle John, but it seems that you've completely missed the significance of what I've stated.
I showed you where the Lord puts to rest the idea that one of His saved can lose their salvation and their gift of eternal life.

That same eternal life, which is to know God ( John 17:3 ), has benefits...
One of those is that we participate in the first resurrection unto life ( Revelation 20:1-6 )...spiritual life comes first when a person is born of God, then the latter at the day of Christ's coming.

God's people can not lose their gifts ( Romans 11:29 )....they were never theirs to earn, and they were never theirs to lose.

I wish you well, and may He reveal Himself to you as He has me.

 

You didn't say this to me but it's appropriate that I respond to it because if no one else on this thread has done so, I most certainly have addressed the passages that you quoted in the OP.

Your only response so far is to pretend like you don't see my point. I invite you to read my post again or else stop complaining about people not addressing your argument.