Colossians 1:23

Then why are you arguing like you are? Because everything you are saying here has no basis in Scripture. You claim to believe the way Scripture lays things out, and then you argue against it, using tortured interpretations. That makes no sense to me.

No it's not. I highly doubt that even you believes this.

I believe this. As I said, you are continually misrepresenting my belief.

Why wouild they stop having faith five minutes before they die? That makes no sense. Why would someone who truly believes God stop?

I believe that, so welcome to my position.

But how does this reconcile with the "present state of believing" position on John 3:16. What do you think happens if a person stops believing?

I have never believed this. I have in fact explicitly denied it. Why do you repeat this false statement?

I have put many on the table. John 3:16, Heb 3, Col 1, 2 Peter 1, etc. So to say that I haven't brought any up is not telling the truth. You know I have brought some up, and you have glossed over a couple with superficial explanations and ignored the rest. I find that unconvincing.

There is no contradiction to reconcile. Eph 2:10 tells us what God saved us for. Other passages confirm that what God saved us for will happen. IT doesn't mean we will be perfect in good works. though we should strive for it. But it means that evidence will be shown in our lives.

 

You’re joking right? Everything that I have stated is backed up with Scripture. Just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean it isn’t true. There were a lot of people that didn’t like the way Jesus interpreted “their” Scripture, but guess Who was right.

Now before you go accusing me of comparing myself to Jesus, I am NOT doing that. I am merely showing that just because someone doesn’t like an interpretation doesn’t make it wrong.

None of the Scripture you have shown to date has proved anything other than what I have been stating. And just saying I don’t with your interpretation doesn’t mean it’s wrong. Show me grammatically, linguistically give me something more than I say you are wrong so you are wrong.

So Larry I’m just supposed to dump my beliefs and believe the way you believe just because you say “no it’s not.” I’m supposed to believe you because you are Pastor Larry and Pastor Larry is always right, so everyone believe the way Pastor Larry believes or we are all in trouble? I don’t think so.

And yes I do believe what I have been posting or I wouldn’t be posting it. I don’t have time to waste on silly games.

Well it doesn’t make sense to me either, but there are people who have believed and at some point in their life they stopped believing. Why would they do that? I don’t know because it doesn’t make sense to me either, so you would have to find someone that has done this and ask them why.

But just because something doesn’t make sense to us doesn’t mean it’s not true. I have a friend that says one of the biggest reasons he believes in election instead of free will is because he just doesn’t understand how someone could turn away the free gift of eternal salvation.

Well I don’t either, but that doesn’t deny that people can turn away from it.

Well you say that you believe in a one-time salvation event, but then in the next breath you say no we have to continue to believe until the end. So which is it Larry? It’s not both, because those two ideas don’t square with each other like you want them to.

Either we are saved the very moment we believe or we have to continue to believe until we die and then we are saved. Which is it?

It is impossible to reconcile eternal salvation with a present state of believing, because that is a contradiction. Eternal salvation is a one-time event, which means John 3:16 is speaking of something else.

It really is that plain and simple.

Here’s another reason why John 3:16 isn’t speaking of eternal salvation, because it says those that don’t believe are perishing. That means they are dying at the present moment.

Is and unsaved person dying? No they are already dead in their trespasses and sin. How can a dead man be dying. He can’t. Dead men don’t continue to die. If you are dead you are dead.

Because you say we have to continue to believe. That means you are trusting yourself to continue to believe. That means salvation is based on you, which is a works based salvation.

Anything other than Christ’s finished work at Calvary is man’s works.

And you have been shown a number of times how eternal salvation and John 3:16 can not compliment each other, but actually contradict each other if eternal salvation is the context of John 3:16, but you choose to ignore this fact.

As to your other texts lets deal in specifics. What specifically that I have said contradicts something in those Scripture passages. I’m not going to go do your hunting for you. If you want an answer I will be more than happy to give you one, but state your case first, not just this generality that Hebrews 3 contradicts what you are saying.

What about Hebrews 3 contradicts what I’m saying? What about the others, specifically.

There is an OBVIOUS contradiction there, and you are just choosing to ignore it, because if you recognize it then you will have to admit that you are incorrect. Obedience is not a certainty. Ephesians 2:10 said we SHOULD do the good works, which means we may or may not. Compare that with other Scripture teaching that says there are some that won’t have a single work to show for them.

That’s why Romans 10 says we SHOULD NOT be slaves to sin, because the option is there that we can be, which totally disproves your notion that obedience is a guarantee.

 

Yes, on that part I was kind of joking. But the fact is that you have not really backed up what you have said by the proper use of Scripture. I agree that my likes or dislikes doesn’t determine what is true, and surely you realize that yours doesn’t either. The fact “just because someone doesn’t like an interpretation doesn’t make it wrong” certainly applies to you.

The fact that you predisposed against what the text says does not mean that the verses in question don’t prove anything. In their context and in line with all of Scripture, they prove beyond doubt that my position is correct. But you have imported a view into them.

I don’t either. I have consciously stayed away from what I think here. What I think doesn’t matter. The Bible is the standard and that is why I have called attention to it.

Because they didn’t really believe. One of the marks of salvation is continuing in belief. I know you don’t like that.

Where did I say we “have to continue” until the end? I think I said “we will continue.” Those are two very different statements.

You prove my previous point when I said that you say certain passages can’t mean certain things because of what you believe. John 3:16 can’t be talking about eternal salvation because you believe a certain thing about belief and salvation. That is just bad exegesis and bad theology.

No it doesn’t. That is a aorist subjunctive middle (or deponent) 3ms. But while we are on this topic 2 Cor 4:3 talks about the unsaved as “those who are perishing.” So does 1 Cor 1:18 and 2:15. So apparently they are perishing since God said so, whether you understand it or not. (See your above statements about your understanding not being important when God says something).

Again, where did I say this?

I agree.

That “fact” is incorrect, as comparing Scripture with Scripture will show.

If you were familiar with this topic, you would automatically know what those passages say and how they relate. This type of response from you leads me to believe even stronger that you just don’t know what you are talking about. If you understand this issue, then you know what I am going after.

V. 14 plainly says that you have become a partaker in Christ if you hold firm. The clearly implied negative is that if you don’t hold firm, you didn’t become a partaker of Christ. It is clear from v. 12 that belief or unbelief is the issue since the evil heart of unbelief is what leads to not holding firm.

I won’t lay out each one for the sake of time and because you have not given any indication you are wiling to deal with the text. But if you have studied this topic enough to be reasonably dogmatic, then you should already know. If you don’t know, it’s because you have not wrestled with the relevant texts.

The fact that you think there is a contradiction means that you either don’t understand what a contradiction is or you don’t understand what I am saying. There is no contradiction. Your understanding is faulty. I know what I believe, and I know there is no contradiction.

Remember that no one lives in full obedience. All believers still sin. That is why Rom 10 says not to sin. But God makes clear that believers will have fruit of belief.



You are not even making a reasonable attempt to engage the issues here. Why not?

 

This is a true statement.

This is not a true statement.

This sayeth Larry, so it must be true.

 

So what is the distinction then?

Isn't it obvious from the conversation that we have a different view of the authority and meaning of Scripture? Regardless of who is right, I think that much is obvious. Which makes me wonder why the smart aleck reference. EVerything I say is probably not true across the board. I have been known to make mistakes. On this topic, I am confident in what Scripture says, but certainly with respect to my statement above, you should agree that we view Scripture and authority differently.

 

J.Jump, I have a friend of mine who is in this category, and I have talked to him about it. The biggest thing that led to his departure from being faithful was a bunch of KJVO's screaming and yelling at him that he was going to hell every Sunday.

What they said did not match up with reality (and does not match up with the Scriptures in the original languages), and as such a contradiction, it led him to start doubting.

I pray for him regularly, and as he meets more and more reasonable Christians, he is more open, but his earlier experiences with those who drove him off really built a pretty solid wall.

So, is this where I pull out my experts with more PhD's? I can use them to trump your "proper use os Scripture". Would that be enough of a measuring stick to determine "what is true" for you?

We have laid out Scripture here, and your response has been, "No it isn't! It doesn't matter what it says, it means such-and-such!" When we say precisely what the words say, even if it's something we don't understand, that's what we sould go with, not with the traditions of man.

This is simply an untrue statement. Perhaps you didn't mean it.

What we think and believe is precisely what we are saying here, on both sides.

"If we are saved, we will continue." So, by this logic, if we don't continue, we are not saved. So, we have to continue, or we're not saved.

That's pretty twisted logic.

Perhaps I should pull out this quote every time I disagree with you instead of using reasoning and Scripture.

Well, there is a contradiction with what you said above in that you said you have stayed away from what you think, but I already pointed out that statement as being an untruth. (I won't call it a "lie" because I don't know that there was intent.)

I'm pretty sure you know what you believe, but there are plenty of contradictions, many of which have been pointed out here.

"What must I do to be saved?" "Believe on the Lord Jesus and you will be saved."

If John 3:16 is talking about spiritual salvation, there is a plain and simple contradiction, yet you twist it around in such a way that you don't see it.

But, just because you don't see it, doesn't mean the contradiction isn't there.

So, what's the magic line of obedience above which you have proved that you're saved and below which you just didn't quite believe enough?

This type of response from you leads me to believe even stronger that you just don’t know what you are talking about.

 

The issue is not PhDs. It is the Word. If a PhD contradicts the word, he is wrong.

Yes, but in virtually every case it has been misused Scripture.

No I meant it very much. The issue at hand is the words of Scripture. We are not delving into matters about which orthodox people differ over slight meanings of words. This is a core matter of orthodox theology. What I think about it doesn’t matter. It is what the Scripture says about it.

You certainly twisted it. The point is that we will, not that we have to. You keep missing that distinction.

The next time you use Scripture rightly will be the first time, so far as I can recall. But if I am grossly unfamiliar with a topic and the relevant passages, yes, you should pull it out. And you can use it word for word. The truth is that if Jump doesn’t know how these passages relate, then he is unfamiliar with the topic.

Then point one out. Your lack of understanding an issue doesn’t constitute a contradiction. And so far, all you have pointed out is that you don’t understand what I have said.

I agree.

No there’s not. The verse is plain. If you think there is a contradiction, then you need to lay it out. But when you do, abandon the Greek verbal issues you have tried so far. They don’t work.

I was asked this earlier and I said I don’t know. No one does.

That has been clearly disproven here.



So when will you tell us the distinction between aionios and aionios?

 

Larry again are you kidding me. You don't even know where the line is and no one does. So then how does one know when they are saved and when they have crossed the line.

 

The Spirit bears witness with our spirit that we are the children of God. His work in our lives is evidence of conversion. Some have lots of evidence, some have lesser amounts. But all have some.

 

See this is the game-playing logic that people like you use all the time. You say I don't know what I'm talking about and you throw out tons of generalities and then when I won't go and your homework for you you cry foul and then say ah look he doesn't know what he's talking about because he won't deal with the issues.

Larry that's not dealing with the issues, that's game playing. And I'm not into playing games. If you want to deal with Scripture then let's get down to the details and let's deal with Scripture.

It is not my job to go find your proof for you and then speak against it. If you think I'm wrong lay it out.

I have showed you how you are incorrect in your view of John 3:16. HoG has shown you, but you turn a blind eye to the Truth.

So if I am wrong let's see why. None of this we don't understand what you are saying garbage. I understand perfectly what you are saying, and what you are saying doesn't jive from time to time.

For example you say it's not a matter of us having to believe, but you say we will believe. That is in direct violation of what Scripture says. John 3:16 certainly doesn't say that.

No where in that verse does it say they will absolutely 100% no doubt continue to believe. It really is funny that you have accused me of bad grammar and you just plot along making stuff up that isn't even in the text.

Please show me one text that says all believers will continue to believe. Just one Larry, becuase John 3:16 doesn't say that.

 

You just keep digging your hole bigger and bigger with every post.

So how does this square with the parable of the talent and pounds with the guy that was "totally" disobedient? He didn't have any obedience at all.

 

Steven,

Do not buy into the Kingdom Heresy being perpetuated in this thread. You can know and believe that the entire book of Colossians deals with salvation.

In this book Paul is dealing with some heresy that had come into the church. In this letter he is reminding them of the basics of the gospel, which is salvation in the shed blood of Jesus Christ.

Do not be pulled into this false teaching of the Kingdom which is another gospel. Pray, study, and be very discerning.

 

Okay now we at least have one specific, so let's see what is really at play here.

Right off the bat we can see that eternal salvation is not the context of his verse, because our works are invovled. That would be in direct violation of Ephesians 2:8-9, Acts 16:30-31 and Romans 4 & 5.

Our works play ZERO part in eternal salvation. I thought that's what you said you believed Larry. But again here's another contradiction in your views. You say salvation is by works, but now you are saying that salvation is if WE HOLD ON to Christ.

Larry are works invovled in eternal salvation or aren't they? You are still trying to have it both ways. I know what you have said no works, but then the very next verse you use a verse that would be works based salvation.

This verse doesn't say WE WILL hold firm to Christ because we are saved. That's what you are "trying" to make it say.

What does it say? For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end;

That doesn't say anything like what you are saying Larry. That says IF we (believers) hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast UNTO THE END we will be partakers of Christ.

If you deny works are involved in that Scripture I just don't know what you tell you, becuase it is plain. If works were a snake it would have jumped out of your computer screen and bit you on the nose it's so plain.

again the "we hold" is subjunctive which means we may or may not hold.

So another one bites the dust for you Larry. Care to keep going?

 

Ah it's the ole if you can't disprove them with Scripture just call them heritics card. Well they called Jesus and the apostles heritcs for delivering the same message, so I'm very confident in where we stand.

But I notice Rev. Mitchell you haven't used in Scripture to disprove what we are talking about. Try to come up with something a little more original than calling us heritics just because you can't see it, nor show that it's false.

It's another gospel alright. It's the Bible gospel that the church has forsaken to make sure they have enough cushy bottoms filling their pews so they can raise salaries and build bigger, fancier buildings and have bowling allies and movie theaters and sports arenas.

You put it's a differnt gospel. It's the Right gospel.

Steven I would encourage the same, becuase there are some out there that would have you despise your inheritance as much as they despise it and end up losing it just like Esau and Rueben.

 

The distinction is that "eternal", "everlasting", and "age-lasting" are three different concepts. "Eternal" is without beginning or ending or existing outside of time. "Everlasting" is without ending. "Age-lasting" is limited duration. (Modern English usage has blurred many distinctions.)

Three different concepts represented by three different expressions in the Greek (and in the Hebrew of the OT). "Aidios" means "eternal", "εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων" (from the ages unto the ages) means "everlasting", and "aionios" is of limited duration.

Those who hold to universal reconciliation hold to their view because they see that "aionios" cannot, under any circumstances mean "everlasting" or "eternal", but they fail to take into account "from the ages unto the ages", which is a Greek metaphor for "everlasting".

The word "aion" has been translated 5 different ways in the KJV: world (38x), ever (71x), eternal (2x), evermore (4x), age (2x). Only two of these can be correct, and they are both related in such a way that it creates confusion. (aion/world can be confused easily with kosmos/world.)

No. It's obvious that we have a different view of the authority of Pastor Larry. My view of Scripture is that it's inerrant and infallible. It's obvious that we disagree on what Scripture says, and I don't hold Pator Larry's opinion in as high a regard as you do.

Because your statements show that the authority of Pastor Larry seems to be almost as high as the authority of the Scriptures in Pastor Larry's eyes.

Your statements support this, including the ones I have quoted here.

Scripture is infallible. Larry is not. I believe that Larry is in grave error here.

That statement in no way says that I view the authority of Scripture to be in any way inferior.

 

But, when Scriptures contradict Pastor Larry, he's still right.

Obviously not.

So, if we don't have works, we're not saved, right?

I used to do talk radio. Those people have nothing on your vitriole and venom when they are completely vacuous of anything that resembles reason and logic either.

This type of response from you leads me to believe even stronger that you just don’t know what you are talking about.

Abandoning what the Scriptures actually say in the Greek is the only way to support your interpretation of Scripture.

 

The Kingdom "heresy"?

The phrase “kingdom of God” appears in 68 verses of the NT and the single word “kingdom” appears 158 times in 150 verses, and the vast majority of passages on the kingdom can be easily proven by plain reading to be something that is literal and future and will last a thousand years. The entrance into this kingdom centers around works, and can be forfeited or lost, as contrasted to spiritual salvation which is explicitly stated to not be centered around works and cannot be revoked or forfeited.

 

So if J. Jump and Hope of Glory hold to the True Gospel, then anyone who disagrees must not be saved? That seems to be the attitude of you two. You accuse others of holding to works-based salvation, which is tantamount to accusing them of not being saved.

 

Don't be too quick to start accusing there Andy T. If at any point in someone's life they trust that Christ died on the cross and shed His blood to pay the penalty for their sin they are saved. That's what the Bible says. Now if they are wrongly taught that something else needs to be added then they haven't negated their trust in Christ, they are just off to the wrong step in their walk.

Because their works are on the backside of salvation instead of the front side I don't think it matters because the Bible says believe and you will be saved. So at the very moment you believe you are saved for eternity.

If you think that you have to continue to believe then you have been taught incorrectly because salvation is never brought up again because it's a done deal. There is no reason to continue to believe because our focus is not to be constantly believing that Christ died for us (sure we remember it during the Lord's Supper), but we are to move past salvation and start believing things in regard to the walk of Christ.

Now don't go off the deep end and say that I'm say believe in Christ to be saved and then go off and do your own thing. That's not what I'm talking about. After eternal salvation our focus is not to be on that, becuase it's not a journey it's a one-time event. We are to be focused on the present and the future.

 

Oh well, what does it matter? You righteous ones can have fun in the 1000-year reign. As long as I'm secure of being in heaven for eternity, what's the big deal to wait around 1,000 years? In that case, I think I will live it up here on earth and go live like the devil, since I got my ticket to heaven.