Cause and Effect/Conditions of Salvation

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Steaver: How can can one who is created in Jesus Christ able to leave themselves?

HP: Lori will most likely have her own answer but here is how I would answer. I for one believe your question is out in left field, but if there was an answer it might simply be by leaving their first love just as some of the Israelites and others have done.

Here is a Scriptural reference. Re 2:4 Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love.

 

[lori4dogs]

This is an interesting pov.

How can can one who is created in Jesus Christ able to leave themselves?

:jesus:

I believe H.P. gives scriptural support for a person leaving their first love (Jesus).
Personally, I have witnessed too many that have done just that. Recently on the BB we were given a link to a former Baptist pastor-Bart Ehrman- who renounced Christ and is today an agnostic. From his testimony, I find it very difficult to give serious consideration to any claim that he never knew Christ.

 

[steaver]

I believe H.P. gives scriptural support for a person leaving their first love (Jesus).
.

Actually, he didn't.

You will find it impossible to exegesis Rev 2 and show that verse four equates to one leaving Jesus in the sense of "i don't believe in Jesus anymore".

I doubt you could provide any commentary that would suggest such.

The verse in context would be interpreted as an assembly of Christians who have lost their passion for Jesus.

In fact verse 2&3 Jesus is praising them for the good they are doing for His name's sake. So your use of this verse as someone not believing in Christ any longer is a gross error. If you guys honestly read the whole letter to this church you could not have possbly considered verse four the way you have chosen to.

Personally, I have witnessed too many that have done just that. Recently on the BB we were given a link to a former Baptist pastor who renounced Christ and is today an agnostic. From his testimony, I find it very difficult to give serious consideration to any claim that he never knew Christ.

Then you believe he wasn't ever born again in the first place so this is not a case of saved then leaving Christ. There are unsaved amongst most every congregation. Jesus warned against us making that judgment.

Jesus also spoke of those who were never truly born again in Matt 7. As you said, it is hard to believe the man ever knew Jesus to begin with. In fact, it proves that he did not.

So my point remains unanswered.

How can one who is created in Jesus Christ able to leave themselves?


:jesus:

 

[DHK]

HP: God does the keeping, but will not keep apart from my fulfilling the conditions He sets forth. Here is just one of Gods warning to you and me as Gentile believers: Ro 11:21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.

Aaaaah, the good old "promises to the Jews" chapter. An excellent chapter to take Scripture out of context :thumbs: Cults do it all the time. You wouldn't want to miss such an opportunity either would you?
Try this verse instead:

Romans 8:32 He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?
--Three chapters earlier, writing to believers, about believers, for believers, Paul tells us believers about these tremendous promises for believers only that come through Christ only, through faith only, without any conditions whatsoever.
--He gives us freely ALL things. Freely means without condition!
Salvation is without condition.

Forgive me DHK, but I see your position as one of stark contradictions. You say there are no conditions to salvation and yet you say one must accept the gift. Can you tell us how accepting a gift is not meeting a condition?

To meet a condition, one must be able to reason through the transaction so that he can know whether or not he should refuse or reject the transaction which is dependent on the conditions so stated. Is that not correct? Yes or no?
--Today I was babysitting my grandson (13 mo. old). He started to get fussy. I saw his milk and gave it to him. Did he think through a transaction and reason through whether or not conditions had to be met? Your statements are ridiculous HP. He took the milk. He did no work. There was no work involved in receiving the gift of milk given to him. There was no condition involved in me giving the milk to him. He received it. That is not a condition. It is an action, yet not a work. You are a terribly confused man if you cannot differentiate between these terms. You would have us to believe that a 13 mo. old child is working (laboring at minimum wage in a slaughter house), or an accountant reading through the red tape of a transaction to make sure he is meeting all the "conditions" before he drinks his milk.

Would not you also say that if one rejects the gift one cannot be saved? Both accepting and rejecting involve the formation of an intent of the will by man, so why again is accepting a gift not the fulfilling of a condition in order to receive salvation?

Just like a one year old child rejects or accepts his milk.
Was there a formation of an intent of the will?
If there was then according to you every one year old is accountable for choosing between hell or heaven.

 

[lori4dogs]

Actually, he didn't.

You will find it impossible to exegesis Rev 2 and show that verse four equates to one leaving Jesus in the sense of "i don't believe in Jesus anymore".

I doubt you could provide any commentary that would suggest such.

The verse in context would be interpreted as an assembly of Christians who have lost their passion for Jesus.

In fact verse 2&3 Jesus is praising them for the good they are doing for His name's sake. So your use of this verse as someone not believing in Christ any longer is a gross error. If you guys honestly read the whole letter to this church you could not have possbly considered verse four the way you have chosen to.



Then you believe he wasn't ever born again in the first place so this is not a case of saved then leaving Christ. There are unsaved amongst most every congregation. Jesus warned against us making that judgment.

Jesus also spoke of those who were never truly born again in Matt 7. As you said, it is hard to believe the man ever knew Jesus to begin with. In fact, it proves that he did not.

So my point remains unanswered.

How can one who is created in Jesus Christ able to leave themselves?


:jesus:

I think you misread my post. I said "From his testimony, I find it very difficult to give serious consideration to any claim that he never knew Christ. He claims to have been born again as a teenager. In one of his debates he discusses the fruit of his ministry. He claims to have been moved 'from being a committed evangelical Christian to an agnostic.'

I believe it is your theological position which requires you to believe that he was never saved to begin with.

 

[ccrobinson]

He won't leave us, but we can leave Him.

You seem to be confused about who's living inside of who.

Galatians 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

If Christ lives in me, how can I possibly leave him?

How would you explain this away?

 

[BobRyan]

Gal 5:4 NASB
4You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

II Pet 2:20-22, "For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment delivered to them. What the true proverb says has happened to them: "The dog returns to its own vomit, and the sow, after washing herself, returns to wallow in the mire."

Rom 11
18do 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.
19You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.”
20Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith[/b]. Do not be conceited, but fear;
21for 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.

 

[billwald]

>I live by the faith of the Son of God

Text says "of", not "in." It is the faith of Jesus Christ that saves. He doesn't leave us.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: --Today I was babysitting my grandson (13 mo. old). He started to get fussy. I saw his milk and gave it to him. Did he think through a transaction and reason through whether or not conditions had to be met? Your statements are ridiculous HP. He took the milk. He did no work. There was no work involved in receiving the gift of milk given to him. There was no condition involved in me giving the milk to him. He received it. That is not a condition. It is an action, yet not a work. You are a terribly confused man if you cannot differentiate between these terms. You would have us to believe that a 13 mo. old child is working (laboring at minimum wage in a slaughter house), or an accountant reading through the red tape of a transaction to make sure he is meeting all the "conditions" before he drinks his milk.

HP: One thing I do not understand is why when an honest to goodness passage of Scripture is given, and the very word of Jesus or the Apostle is given in direct relationship to a particular issue such as salvation, if it does not fit the mold of OSAS every excuse in the book is given why it cannot possibly mean what it says. Yet when you decide to present your views you can just make up an illustration never once alluded to in Scripture, having absolutely no logical connection with the issue at hand, and about as far from the real issue as one can imagine, yet somehow that must suffice on your mind for some sort of evidence. DHK you strains gnats and swallow camels.

 

[DHK]

HP: One thing I do not understand is why when an honest to goodness passage of Scripture is given, and the very word of Jesus or the Apostle is given in direct relationship to a particular issue such as salvation, if it does not fit the mold of OSAS every excuse in the book is given why it cannot possibly mean what it says. Yet when you decide to present your views you can just make up an illustration never once alluded to in Scripture, having absolutely no logical connection with the issue at hand, and about as far from the real issue as one can imagine, yet somehow that must suffice on your mind for some sort of evidence. DHK you strains gnats and swallow camels.

It is not my fault if you cannot understand that the reception of a gift is not a condition. Inherent in the definition of a condition is something to be done, i.e. a work. There is no work in receiving a gift. You are the one that is straining at gnats and trying to redefine words to fit your own "HP special brand theology."

 

[steaver]

I think you misread my post. I said "From his testimony, I find it very difficult to give serious consideration to any claim that he never knew Christ. He claims to have been born again as a teenager.

Your are correct. You did say "never" and my brain registered "ever".

He claims to have been born again as a teenager. In one of his debates he discusses the fruit of his ministry. He claims to have been moved 'from being a committed evangelical Christian to an agnostic.'

I believe it is your theological position which requires you to believe that he was never saved to begin with.

You are correct again.

While I have not found a passage of scripture that establishes the theology of the born of God becoming unborn, I have found several scriptures that speaks about false believers and warns the reader to examine themselves to see if they have truly received the Spirit of Christ.

I trust you have looked more closely now at Rev 2 and agree that to use verse 4 as an example of a Christian who has left Jesus in the sense of returning to their unborn spiritual state would be wrong.

Do you have another passage in mind that would address my question?

How can one who is created in Jesus Christ able to leave themselves?

:jesus:

 

[BobRyan]

I believe H.P. gives scriptural support for a person leaving their first love (Jesus).
Personally, I have witnessed too many that have done just that. Recently on the BB we were given a link to a former Baptist pastor-Bart Ehrman- who renounced Christ and is today an agnostic. From his testimony, I find it very difficult to give serious consideration to any claim that he never knew Christ.

That is correct. In Rev 2 - Christ said that he would remove the candle representing that church if they were to continue in that condition.

Thus their state would be like the rest of the lost world if they did not choose to heed the warning and turn.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[steaver]

That is correct. In Rev 2 - Christ said that he would remove the candle representing that church if they were to continue in that condition.

Thus their state would be like the rest of the lost world if they did not choose to heed the warning and turn.

in Christ,

Bob

That is a mouth full of conjecture for sure. I would like to see you prove anything you said through a proper exegesis of the passage. Feel free to post some commentaries as well that support your conjecture here.

:jesus:

 

[BobRyan]

Well far be it from me to take the "I think this because an ECF told me to" solution

But if actual scripture is of interest.

Rev 2

1 ""To the angel of the church in Ephesus write: The One who holds the seven stars in His right hand, the One who walks among the seven golden lampstands, says this:
2 " I know your deeds and your toil and perseverance, and that you cannot tolerate evil men, and you put to the test those who call themselves apostles, and they are not, and you found them to be false;
3 and you have perseverance and have endured for My name's sake, and have not grown weary.
4 "But I have this against you, that you have left your first love.
5 "Therefore remember from where you have fallen, and repent and do the deeds you did at first; or I am coming to you and will remove your lampstand out of its place unless you repent

So here we see a church that is approved for their perseverance - but are called to repentance.

In this case the call to repentance is associated with a very dire warning -

Hint the saved condition is not that of being under condemnation of Christ and having the lampstand removed - so as to be in the same darkened condition as the rest of the world.

As for the "LOSS" that is being warned of -- one Bible Commentary speaks specifically of the case of Ephesus this way --

JFB -

remove thy candlestick out of his place--I will take away the Church from Ephesus and remove it elsewhere. "It is removal of the candlestick, not extinction of the candle, which is threatened here; judgment for some, but that very judgment the occasion of mercy for others. So it has been. The seat of the Church has been changed, but the Church itself survives. What the East has lost, the West has gained. One who lately visited Ephesus found only three Christians there, and these so ignorant as scarcely to have heard the names of St. Paul or St. John" [TRENCH].

A similar warning (warning about avoiding such dire consequences) is also given to the saints of Rome -

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; 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.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK, the problem is that there is not one scintilla of Scriptural evidence that a gift cannot have conditions, and there is plenty of Scriptural evidence that salvation does have conditions. Repentance faith and continuance in obedience are all clearly stated conditions. The fulfilling of all three in no wise amount to working for ones salvation any more than dipping seven times in the river Jordon merited healing. Your attempt to liken salvation to poking a bottle of milk down the mouth of a baby has absolutely no basis in Scripture or logic.

When you eliminate all conditions, there is only one possible outcome, i.e., determinism precisely in the same vein as the determinism duly noted in the Calvinistic system. You cannot avoid that end period, except of course in your own mirror. To try and act as if though you do not believe in the ends of Calvinism along with its double predestination is absurd for that is precisely the only logical end of the elimination of all conditions. If it is all of God apart from conditions, it is all determined by God which is the very heart and soul of Calvinistic election and double predestination.

The basis of your error is clear. You have accepted a belief, or should I say an ‘unfounded presupposition,’ simply unsupported in Scripture or reason that a gift cannot have conditions attached and remain a gift. You utilize this unfounded presupposition to interpret away the true conditions of salvation God has established in His Word.

 

[DHK]

Well far be it from me to take the "I think this because an ECF told me to" solution

But if actual scripture is of interest.

Rev 2

1 ""To the angel of the church in Ephesus write: The One who holds the seven stars in His right hand, the One who walks among the seven golden lampstands, says this:
2 " I know your deeds and your toil and perseverance, and that you cannot tolerate evil men, and you put to the test those who call themselves apostles, and they are not, and you found them to be false;
3 and you have perseverance and have endured for My name's sake, and have not grown weary.
4 "But I have this against you, that you have left your first love.
5 "Therefore remember from where you have fallen, and repent and do the deeds you did at first; or I am coming to you and will remove your lampstand out of its place unless you repent

So here we see a church that is approved for their perseverance - but are called to repentance.

In this case the call to repentance is associated with a very dire warning -

Hint the saved condition is not that of being under condemnation of Christ and having the lampstand removed - so as to be in the same darkened condition as the rest of the world.

in Christ,

Bob

What has that got to do with OSAS? Nothing. Is that very church, that local church of Ephesus that existed in the first century still here today? No. Its lampstand has been removed, just as Jesus said that it would at some point in time. It has nothing to do with salvation. It has to do with repentance of certain sins. None of them lost their salvation.

The church that I attend was started in 1971. I hope that it will continue for a good many years, but it won't forever.
The church that my wife attended before we were married was started in the early sixties but closed its doors in 1985.
Surely you don't think that the churches of first century are still around today? And I am not speaking of denominations, but local churches.

 

[BobRyan]

What has that got to do with OSAS? Nothing.

It is entirely possible that people may read my previous post and hope that in some way it does not speak to the subject of falling undercondemnation and being removed by Christ -

I am happy to let the reader decide for themselves.

Surely you don't think that the churches of first century are still around today? And I am not speaking of denominations, but local churches.

Youre argument seems to reduced to Christ warning that "He would do nothing" after all "churches don't last" regardless of their condition of faithfulness.

Are you sure you want to go there?

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

DHK, the problem is that there is not one scintilla of Scriptural evidence that a gift cannot have conditions,

One step at a time.
Demonstrate this first. You like to redefine words. Salvation is a free gift.
Give any example of a free gift that has conditions attached to it.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: Give any example of a free gift that has conditions attached to it.

HP: Salvation for starters. Lu 13:3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. Joh 8:31 ¶ Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;
Col 1:23 If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister; Jas 2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

 

[DHK]

HP: Salvation for starters. Lu 13:3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. Joh 8:31 ¶ Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;
Col 1:23 If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister; Jas 2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

Nice verses HP. I like them too.
But as usual you did not answer my question. It wasn't even Biblical. It was just a simple question, along the lines of what is 2 + 2. You can answer that one right?
So let's try again.

Give any example of a free gift that has conditions attached to it.