A bogus way to try and salvage OSAS

[J. Jump]

What was he told?

Yet NOWHERE in that passage were we EVER told that he had returned to his eternally damned state of being.

Again you insert your presuppositions into a text to make it sound like you are preaching truth, but what you are preaching is twisted scripture. Maybe you could start a rock band with that title. Okay bad attempt at humor :laugh:. You know Twisted Sister back in the day. Nevermind .

Mman I'm sure you are a nice guy and I'm sure we would get along if we sat down to visit, but with all due respect you are way off base when it comes to eternal salvation. And not a single text you have pointed to has proven your case to be true. All you have done is show that you are able to rip a text out of its context to prove your pretext.

 

[mman]

Yet NOWHERE in that passage were we EVER told that he had returned to his eternally damned state of being.

Again you insert your presuppositions into a text to make it sound like you are preaching truth, but what you are preaching is twisted scripture. Maybe you could start a rock band with that title. Okay bad attempt at humor :laugh:. You know Twisted Sister back in the day. Nevermind .

Mman I'm sure you are a nice guy and I'm sure we would get along if we sat down to visit, but with all due respect you are way off base when it comes to eternal salvation. And not a single text you have pointed to has proven your case to be true. All you have done is show that you are able to rip a text out of its context to prove your pretext.

If you would carefully and sincerely study what I have presented, especially the scriptures, I promise you that you would have a new understanding that harmonizes beyond your ability to currently comprehend.

Peace - out.

 

[Hope of Glory]

Sonship is not talking about everlasting life. Sonship is talking about the coming kingdom.

Yes, sonship is position within the family, not getting into the family. That's the picture we are given within the Scriptures, and that's why faithfulness is involved.

 

[J. Jump]

If you would carefully and sincerely study what I have presented, especially the scriptures, I promise you that you would have a new understanding that harmonizes beyond your ability to currently comprehend.

Right back at ya!

 

[carpro]

Yet NOWHERE in that passage were we EVER told that he had returned to his eternally damned state of being.

I noticed that immediately.

 

[BobRyan]

I find it quite interesting every time that I get a chance to catch up on these threads that BobRyan sees that these warnings are given to saved individuals, but thinks the penalty is getting kicked out of the family.

Others, who correctly see the truth of OSAS, sadly fail to see the warnings that are given to saved people, simply because there are penalities involved.

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.[/b][/B]

Notice that this state -- the fallen state for those who do not REMAIN in the faith -- is the same fate as the unbelieving Jews.

IF you believe unbelieving Jews "Go to heaven anyway" then you can rescue OSAS from scripture.

The two are not mutually exclusive: A person who is born into the family cannot be unborn. They are in the family forever. Period.

Hint: Adam did not have to be "uncreated" to fall --


in Christ,

Bob

 

[carpro]

Bob....... Jeremiah 6:14 is OT.

You've sent nearly 20,000 technicolor posts (must have a lot of spare time on your hands) and you haven't swayed one single person with your arguments, or with those of Ellen White. Does that tell you something? Anything?

Apparently, he posts mainly for his own edification. I find his parsing of scripture...hmmmm ...interesting.

 

[mman]

Right back at ya!

I have tried and will continue to do so, but you have left me ill equipped.

I showed where Jesus' statements and Paul's statements were in perfect and complete harmony, yet you seem to think that I am somehow pitting one statement against the other. Quite the opposite is true. Re-read what I wrote. In fact, they are only contradictory when I try to understand it from your position, so I guess I don't fully understand your position.

Here's what I need from you to understand your position:

1) Harmonize Mark 16:16 (or Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16, or I Pet 3:21)with Eph 2:8-9 - (I have already done this in a previous post on this thread). What did Jesus really mean when He said what He did in Mark 16:16?

2) Explain how you determine when a verse is talking about eternal salvation and when it is not

3) Show me where and why you think I have taken any verse out of context

4) Show me the scriptures that tell me how to get INTO Christ that exclude baptism and also explain why I must exclude the only verses that specifically deal with the subject

5) Was obedience required to make the walls fall down by the faith of the people as recorded in Heb 11:30 (this will help me understand your definition of faith). Can it be accurately stated, as was done by the Hebrew writer, that the walls fell by faith (of the people) after the people were obedient?

6) Use scripture to explain to me how I come in contact with the blood that flowed at Jesus' death

7) What was the significance of scripture stating that blood and water flowed from Jesus side at his death? Was that meaningful or a useless piece of trivia?

8) Just prior to Eph 2:8-9, Paul talks about the being dead, being made alive, being raised with Christ. When Paul discussed these same topics in Rom 6, does he have the same thing in mind?

I am asking this in all sincerity. I want to fully understand your position.

Right now, I have zero conflicts, with everything harmonizing. All the simultaneous equations have been solved. You also have that confidence. One thing is for certain, one of us, (or possibly both of us) is wrong.

If you or anybody can show me where I am wrong, I will change, I promise you that. I hope that all will be as honest.

If you need any further explaination to understand my position, do not hesitate to ask.

 

[J. Jump]

Here's what I need from you to understand your position:

Why do you need all this? You aren't going to believe it anyway. You and I have had plenty of conversations in the past in which these things were explained to you. Why would this time be any different?

But basically what you are doing is combining the gospel of grace through faith apart from works with the gospel of the kingdom which requires faith and works.

They are not the same message. One has to come before the other one can ever be offered.

I'm just going to leave you with this one Scripture which you still haven't come to terms with the language that is used. Ephesians 2:8-9 has Paul telling his audience you "HAVE BEEN SAVED." You see it was a "completed" act.

The plan of salvation that you espouse is one that will never be finished until a person takes their last breath and are found in the right saving condition.

That DOES NOT harmonize with Paul saying eternal salvation is a completed thing.

To add to that the perfect tense is what is used in the Greek langauge and that verb tense means completed action in the past with the results carrying forward into the present and future.

That verse alone is enough to destroy both your baptism doctrine as well your conditional security doctrine.

So is this time going to be any different? Are you going to believe the text this time? Because it doesn't support what you are saying.

 

[mman]

Why do you need all this? You aren't going to believe it anyway. You and I have had plenty of conversations in the past in which these things were explained to you. Why would this time be any different?

But basically what you are doing is combining the gospel of grace through faith apart from works with the gospel of the kingdom which requires faith and works.

They are not the same message. One has to come before the other one can ever be offered.

I'm just going to leave you with this one Scripture which you still haven't come to terms with the language that is used. Ephesians 2:8-9 has Paul telling his audience you "HAVE BEEN SAVED." You see it was a "completed" act.

The plan of salvation that you espouse is one that will never be finished until a person takes their last breath and are found in the right saving condition.

That DOES NOT harmonize with Paul saying eternal salvation is a completed thing.

To add to that the perfect tense is what is used in the Greek langauge and that verb tense means completed action in the past with the results carrying forward into the present and future.

That verse alone is enough to destroy both your baptism doctrine as well your conditional security doctrine.

So is this time going to be any different? Are you going to believe the text this time? Because it doesn't support what you are saying.

I understand your reluctance to answer my questions. I would be reluctant also, if I were in your position. Those questions were sincere.

In order for me to accept your position, I must first understand it.

I have no idea how you harmonize Mark 16:16 with Eph 2:8-9.

I have no idea how you think we get INTO Christ by ignoring the only verses that deal with the topic.

I have no idea of the other questions I also asked you.

I Cor 15:1-2 Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you— unless you believed in vain.

Believing in vain....an impossibility under your system of beliefs.

That little word IF destroys your position.

 

[Eric B]

To understand "believing in vain", we must remember that many people in the New Testament, beginning with the ministry of Jesus Himself while still here, were hastily accepting Christ, but they did not understand what the purpose of His mission was. So they "believed" (John 8:31), but eventually their true fruits surfaced (v.37ff). Most others of this class, while not disputing Jesus to His face would show their true colors when persecution would come and they quickly abandoned Him. It's in this context that we have all the scriptures on perseverance until the end. Like the others, these people "believed" and followed for the wrong reasons. Remember, Israel was looking for a Messiah for mostly political reasons, so many really did not understand His Gospel message—that they needed to be saved from sin; not the sin of the pagans, but their own sin. They still thought of themselves as the "good guys" waiting for God to put down the "bad guys", yet they were just as sinful as the ruthless pagans. There is no thought of any Spirit bearing witness with their spirit, or them thinking they were saved. They had their agenda, and Jesus showed that they were not really following Him, though they professed. As soon as He began speaking of dying, it knocked their whole agenda for a loop, and even the disciples were ready to deny Him and run and hide. Why believe in Him if He's only going to die and not rise up and crush the Romans and restore the kingdom to Israel right now? Many gentiles had also fallen into a similar misunderstanding or misuse as well. (Such as those described who would rise up and apostasize, drawing away their own following, thus using the Church for control). Yet if people "persevered" in faith, then it would have shown that they truly understood Christ's purpose (i.e. the true Gospel). Today we have many cults, liberals, etc. who "believe" in Christ, but knowingly twist or reject parts of the Bible; in effect creating a whole different concept of Christ (as different as the political Messiah of Israel), and most do not even speak of thinking they are "saved", or if they do, they make up their own idea of how to be saved (being good, keeping certain works, being baptized into their group, etc.). All of these are the people who "believed in vain", not someone who really believed they were saved, but fell into sin.

 

[Hope of Glory]

So, what do you think it means to be "in Christ"?

 

[mman]

To understand "believing in vain", we must remember that many people in the New Testament, beginning with the ministry of Jesus Himself while still here, were hastily accepting Christ, but they did not understand what the purpose of His mission was. So they "believed" (John 8:31), but eventually their true fruits surfaced (v.37ff). Most others of this class, while not disputing Jesus to His face would show their true colors when persecution would come and they quickly abandoned Him. It's in this context that we have all the scriptures on perseverance until the end. Like the others, these people "believed" and followed for the wrong reasons. Remember, Israel was looking for a Messiah for mostly political reasons, so many really did not understand His Gospel message—that they needed to be saved from sin; not the sin of the pagans, but their own sin. They still thought of themselves as the "good guys" waiting for God to put down the "bad guys", yet they were just as sinful as the ruthless pagans. There is no thought of any Spirit bearing witness with their spirit, or them thinking they were saved. They had their agenda, and Jesus showed that they were not really following Him, though they professed. As soon as He began speaking of dying, it knocked their whole agenda for a loop, and even the disciples were ready to deny Him and run and hide. Why believe in Him if He's only going to die and not rise up and crush the Romans and restore the kingdom to Israel right now? Many gentiles had also fallen into a similar misunderstanding or misuse as well. (Such as those described who would rise up and apostasize, drawing away their own following, thus using the Church for control). Yet if people "persevered" in faith, then it would have shown that they truly understood Christ's purpose (i.e. the true Gospel). Today we have many cults, liberals, etc. who "believe" in Christ, but knowingly twist or reject parts of the Bible; in effect creating a whole different concept of Christ (as different as the political Messiah of Israel), and most do not even speak of thinking they are "saved", or if they do, they make up their own idea of how to be saved (being good, keeping certain works, being baptized into their group, etc.). All of these are the people who "believed in vain", not someone who really believed they were saved, but fell into sin.

That's a lot of rationalization to explain away a clear passage. If words have meaning, and I think they do, then let's go back to the passage that mentions it and see what it says.

Let's read it again:

I Cor 15:1-2 Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you— unless you believed in vain.

If the sentence ended with the word saved, you would have no reason to doubt the meaning of the words. However, that little word "if" follows it and the clear meaning of the passage is contrary to your beliefs.

Let's break it down:

1) They had been preached the gospel by Paul many years after Jesus was on this earth

2) They had received the gospel

3) They were standing in the gospel

4) They were being saved by the gospel IF they held it fast

Otherwise, they had believed in vain!

It's meaning is obvious. You have to want it to mean something else to come up with any other view.

So someone who hears the gospel, receives it, stands in it and is being saved by it, then not hold fast and let it slip away and then it can be said that they believed in vain, an IMPOSSIBILITY if OSAS were actually true.

Paul refers to these people as "brothers". Sometimes this term means fellow Jew but it can also mean brother in Christ. Since he further describes their condition as having received the gospel, standing in it, and being saved by it, it is evident that he means brother in Christ.

These brothers needed reminding of something, that they needed to hold fast, otherwise they have believed in vain.

People still need reminding of this today!

 

[J. Jump]

I have no idea how you think we get INTO Christ by ignoring the only verses that deal with the topic.

mman once again I have already answered all your questions in the past. You didn't change your mind then what is different about now?

By the way your statement continues to show your lack of understanding of what eternal salvation is all about. Eternal salvation is not about us getting into Christ, but about the Spirit getting into us and making us spiritually alive.

Getting into Christ has to do with what "Christ" was all about and that is the kingdom. Eternal salvation is not about Jesus as the Christ, but as Jesus as the Lamb of God.

Again you are mixing messages. Until you see this there is no way you are going to be able to go any further.

 

[Eric B]

That's a lot of rationalization to explain away a clear passage. If words have meaning, and I think they do, then let's go back to the passage that mentions it and see what it says.

Let's read it again:

I Cor 15:1-2 Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you— unless you believed in vain.

If the sentence ended with the word saved, you would have no reason to doubt the meaning of the words. However, that little word "if" follows it and the clear meaning of the passage is contrary to your beliefs.

Let's break it down:

1) They had been preached the gospel by Paul many years after Jesus was on this earth

2) They had received the gospel

3) They were standing in the gospel

4) They were being saved by the gospel IF they held it fast

Otherwise, they had believed in vain!

It's meaning is obvious. You have to want it to mean something else to come up with any other view.

So someone who hears the gospel, receives it, stands in it and is being saved by it, then not hold fast and let it slip away and then it can be said that they believed in vain, an IMPOSSIBILITY if OSAS were actually true.

Paul refers to these people as "brothers". Sometimes this term means fellow Jew but it can also mean brother in Christ. Since he further describes their condition as having received the gospel, standing in it, and being saved by it, it is evident that he means brother in Christ.

These brothers needed reminding of something, that they needed to hold fast, otherwise they have believed in vain.

People still need reminding of this today!

Well, if they were just "being" saved, which you earlier emphasized to point out its unfinal nature, then they were not really, fully saved to begin with. Either you are saved, or are not.
But with Paul talking to a group of people, generally accepting his teaching, with more getting saved as time went on, then, in that respect, they were "being saved". Now, a particular individual reader might "believe" for the wrong reason, and thus "in vain". It does not mean he was saved and lost it. Else, there is no real salvation at all. In what way was he saved? "If he had happened to die before his fall away, then he would have gone to Heaven"? God would probably have taken him, then before that happened. Remember, the demons "believe" the truth, but do not remain lost because they did not "hold fast" anything. They believed for the wrong reason. They saw all the facts of Christ and "knew" they were true, but lived to oppose them.
"Receiving" the truth should lead one to salvation. But it doesn't always, as we see. If it doesn't, then THAT is the person who did not "hold [it] fast". Not that he was born again, and then unborn.
(You never did answer someone else's question as to why they would not need to be baptized again.)

 

[BobRyan]

I Cor 15:1-2 Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel

I preached to you,

which you received,

in which you stand,

and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you— unless you believed in vain.

Paul does not argue against (debate against) the fact that they are NOW STANDING in that faith.

Paul does not dispute or argue against the fact that they DID receive the faith.

THE ONLY variable is that Paul says they "ARE BEING SAVED" IF and only IF they CONTINUE in this rock solid walk that he affirms that they have.

Paul argues salvation is only forfeit IF they do not CONTINUE with what they already have gained.

HINT - you can not "fail to persevere in being lost" as the sign "that you believed in vain".

Get it?

If the faith was never there (no matter what Paul says here to the contrary)

If they are NOT standing in the Gospel (no matter what Paul says to the contrary)

Then they have not faith or belief to "FAIL to PERSEVERE in".

You can not measure them in terms of "failing to persevere" in something they never had and then claim that such self-conflicted test/logic is proof that they never had faith to persevere in to start with.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Darron Steele]

...

It is so simple a third grader can understand it. ...
These plain passages don't go away just because you don't believe them....

Mman, you raise valuable points, but it is statements like the ones in color that give me a `bad taste' about anything you have to say.

First of all, no one here deserves to be compared in intelligence against a third grader -- not whomever you attacked, not me, not you.

Second, the person you are attacking is a Bible believer and believes the passages -- just not your opinion of what they say.

Do you find such statements necessary to advance your points? I suggest that if you eliminate them, more people will look with favor at what you have to say. I know I would.

 

[mman]

Well, if they were just "being" saved, which you earlier emphasized to point out its unfinal nature, then they were not really, fully saved to begin with. Either you are saved, or are not.
But with Paul talking to a group of people, generally accepting his teaching, with more getting saved as time went on, then, in that respect, they were "being saved". Now, a particular individual reader might "believe" for the wrong reason, and thus "in vain". It does not mean he was saved and lost it. Else, there is no real salvation at all. In what way was he saved? "If he had happened to die before his fall away, then he would have gone to Heaven"? God would probably have taken him, then before that happened. Remember, the demons "believe" the truth, but do not remain lost because they did not "hold fast" anything. They believed for the wrong reason. They saw all the facts of Christ and "knew" they were true, but lived to oppose them.
"Receiving" the truth should lead one to salvation. But it doesn't always, as we see. If it doesn't, then THAT is the person who did not "hold [it] fast". Not that he was born again, and then unborn.
(You never did answer someone else's question as to why they would not need to be baptized again.)

I Cor 15:1-2 Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you— unless you believed in vain.

Mental gymnastics or it means what it says. If words have meaning, and I believe they do, then here's what this passage means:

Paul preached it, they received it, they were standing in it, they were being saved by it IF they hold it fast, otherwise, they had believed in vain.

(See post 200 of this thread for the discussion on being re-baptized).

 

[J. Jump]

mman is a "brother" a saved individual? Are they a child of God?

 

[mman]

Mman, you raise valuable points, but it is statements like the ones in color that give me a `bad taste' about anything you have to say.

First of all, no one here deserves to be compared in intelligence against a third grader -- not whomever you attacked, not me, not you.

Second, the person you are attacking is a Bible believer and believes the passages -- just not your opinion of what they say.

Do you find such statements necessary to advance your points? I suggest that if you eliminate them, more people will look with favor at what you have to say. I know I would.

That is one of the inherent problems with written communication. You cannot determine the "tone" in which something is written. I can assure you that all my posts are written in love. Yes, I try to provoke thought, get people's attention, challenge what they believe. I want to motivate people to try and prove me wrong. Why? So they will study and have a better understanding God's word.

However, the statement is true. It is so simple a third grader can understand it. To misunderstand it, you have to be motivated. If you accept it for what it says, then there is only one obvious meaning.

Here is the statment in question, "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned." - Mark 16:16

I did not give an intrepetation, only a quotation. Therefore, if anyone came up with a "different" meaning, then they need to examine their beliefs with what scripture teaches. We will never have unity in what we believe until we accept the simple word of God for what it says.

When Jesus said:

"Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned"

Did He really mean:

Whoever believes and is saved will be baptized, but whoever does not believe will be condemned???

Until we become like third graders and accept the clear meaning of the passages, rather than with all the "wisdom" and "understanding" that we have, try and twist the meaning of plain passages to fit some preconceived notion, then we will never be united.

I am completely convinced that there is only one faith (Eph 4:5) and "The" way (not "a" way) is narrow (Matt 3:3, Matt 7:13, Act 9:2). I DO think it matters what one believes, that is why I am so passionate. These statements alone will turn some people off. However, for anyone who is seeking the truth, I assure you, they will find it.

However, I will try to chose my words more carefully next time.