I Don't Think He Did - What Say You?

[Baptist Believer]

Baptist Believer, since the quotation failed above I will quote your responses in underlined bold then offer a reply afterward:

Thanks for the fix. I finished the post and had to leave immediately. I didn't notice that there was a problem until it was too late to do anything about it.

'As someone who does not hold the "free grace" position (although it IS free), I also understand that there can be instances of unbelief and rebellion.'

OK, yet that is different than what I referred to and I also quoted Romans 3:8 which you apparently cut off reference to. There is a huge difference between instances of unbelief and rebellion and final unbelief and rebellion. I think that much was made clear in my statement, if not, it should be clear at this point. But I still think it interesting you cut off the Scriptural point that refutes and points out the FGT error.

Anything "interesting" you see in it is not real. I have never agreed with what is now called the "free grace" position. Back in the 1980s when I was coming out of agnosticism, I used a Ryrie Study Bible as my main reading Bible. I read every note in it and was confused for months until I realized that I didn't have to reconcile what Ryrie said with scripture because scripture is the standard, not Ryrie - even if his words are on the same page. I couldn't reconcile his positions on salvation, dispensationalism, or spiritual gifts with what the scripture taught.

If I had to bet on it, I would think that Judas faces destruction. But I think it is more humble and biblically honorable not to teach something that the scripture does not teach explicitly.

Judas will be judged by Jesus, not you and me.

First and foremost and for the record let me make it clear it is the Scriptures I refer to that do the judging and not myself. I just want to address the accusatory tone and dismiss it altogether as it is not correctly representing me.

Okay, fair enough. One of my pet peeves is speaking dogmatically beyond what the scripture teaches. Lots of bad theology gets created in spiritual communities that way.

You would think Judas faces destruction based upon what brother? You think Judas faces destruction. Surely not on a 'whim'. There has to be some biblical principle that leads you to this somewhere.

The references to Judas, especially in the Gospel of John, indicate that there was something seriously wrong with Judas' faith. He was a thief of the group's money, and Jesus made reference to him several times as one who was something of an outsider. At the same time, I can find any definitive scriptural proof that he faces destruction. Shortly before he killed himself, he exhibited great remorse and perhaps came into repentance is his despair before he ended his life. I don't know.

You say it is more humble and biblically honorable not to teach something that the Scripture does not teach explicitly. Does that mean that you saying you think Judas faces destruction is not humble or honorable and is not Scriptural on your part, or is this true only on the part of others when they say it?

It is humble and honorable to express an opinion that one does not hold to be the last word on the subject. I would not teach or preach that Judas faces condemnation. However, I would teach and preach the biblical text and avoid adding much speculation in my role as a teacher or preacher, since people tend to give those opinions more weight and God judges teachers and preachers more strictly because of the influence they hold. I decided many years ago to be as faithful as possible to the scriptures and not say more that the scriptures say.

The fact remains that the Word has already done this, and this is the only thing upon which we make any conclusion. He is son of perdition, and that says it all.

That is the fact that is in dispute. "Son of perdition" is a Hebrew idiom which means "one destined to perish." Judas had already set in motion a series of events that would lead to his suicidal remorse and the death of Jesus. The question is whether the perished referenced here is simply the death of his body (as opposed to the other 11) before the start of the church in Acts 2, or an eternal condition.

You are probably correct in your interpretation, but I am not going to go there unless there is more evidence. I will simply state what scripture states.

 

[Internet Theologian]

I guess, by your response, you do not believe the verse I quoted.

Grow up and lose your no one believes the bible nonsense, OK?

I also see you respond only with your opinion and nothing to back it up.

The verse applies to the saints, not to Judas. So as I stated, your theology ain't.

From: http://www.ligonier.org/learn/devotionals/our-righteous-advocate/

When John calls Jesus “our Advocate,” he means that our Savior stands before the Father to plead our case. Yet Jesus’ work as our Advocate goes far above and beyond the work of an earthly defense attorney, for His case for us is grounded in the work He has done to secure God’s favorable verdict (Rom. 8:1–4). For those who are in Christ, God is no longer the Judge who condemns us but the Father who adopts us into His family. We are guilty of sin and unable to meet the Lord’s demands, but the perfect righteousness of Jesus, imputed to us in our justification, sets us right with God. Matthew Henry writes: “The clients are guilty; their innocence and legal righteousness cannot be pleaded. It is the advocate’s own righteousness that he must plead for the criminals.”

Simply pasting a proper application and definition does not make the passage apply to those who are lost, so it does not support your fallacious theology. Your theology skips past the necessity of the transformed life inherent in true Gospel conversion, 2 Corinthians 3:18ff, 2 Corinthians 5:17. Judas was a practicing thief and no thief enters the kingdom; 1 Corinthians 6:10. Don't be deceived.

 

[percho]

Grow up and lose your no one believes the bible nonsense, OK?




The verse applies to the saints, not to Judas. So as I stated, your theology ain't.





Simply pasting a proper application and definition does not make the passage apply to those who are lost, so it does not support your fallacious theology. Your theology skips past the necessity of the transformed life inherent in true Gospel conversion, 2 Corinthians 3:18ff, 2 Corinthians 5:17. Judas was a practicing thief and no thief enters the kingdom; 1 Corinthians 6:10. Don't be deceived.

I do have a question concerning : Judas was a practicing thief and no thief enters the kingdom; 1 Corinthians 6:10. Don't be deceived.

Verse 11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

Did that washing come about because, the life in the blood of Jesus having been given for those sins and Jesus having been raised for their justification?

Was the death and resurrection of Jesus applied to the and such were some of you before and after that death and resurrection?

Will David, the man, who had a man murdered and took his wife. be saved because of the death and resurrection of Jesus or because he straightened himself out with God before he, himself, saw death and corruption?

 

[Internet Theologian]

I do have a question concerning : Judas was a practicing thief and no thief enters the kingdom; 1 Corinthians 6:10. Don't be deceived.

Verse 11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

Good verse for a little context...

Did that washing come about because, the life in the blood of Jesus having been given for those sins and Jesus having been raised for their justification?

Yes, they were washed by the blood of the Lamb. Note Titus 3:15. Also Revelation 7:14.

Was the death and resurrection of Jesus applied to the and such were some of you before and after that death and resurrection?

They were such prior to their conversion, and the passage shows this past tense walk. Hence the word 'but' used three times to qualify and solidify their renewal. This is seen in the fact of their washing, of the imputed sanctification, and of their standing in justification. No truly saved person get's to skip out on any of these truths though seemingly many today want to leave off the sanctification part that comes with true conversion.

Will David, the man, who had a man murdered and took his wife. be saved because of the death and resurrection of Jesus or because he straightened himself out with God before he, himself, saw death and corruption?

There is salvation in no other name, Acts 4:12. The fact that he repented shows grace within him.

 

[Calypsis4]

Baptist Believer, since the quotation failed above I will quote your responses in underlined bold then offer a reply afterward:

'As someone who does not hold the "free grace" position (although it IS free), I also understand that there can be instances of unbelief and rebellion.'

OK, yet that is different than what I referred to and I also quoted Romans 3:8 which you apparently cut off reference to. There is a huge difference between instances of unbelief and rebellion and final unbelief and rebellion. I think that much was made clear in my statement, if not, it should be clear at this point. But I still think it interesting you cut off the Scriptural point that refutes and points out the FGT error.

If I had to bet on it, I would think that Judas faces destruction. But I think it is more humble and biblically honorable not to teach something that the scripture does not teach explicitly.

Judas will be judged by Jesus, not you and me.

You would think Judas faces destruction based upon what brother? .

Judas judgment has already been made...by the Lord Jesus Himself:

"While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled." John 17:12.

So why argue about a matter that has already been established?