If you receive the mark of the beast, you will lose eternal life

[steaver]

No, it is keeping true to the very definition of eternal.
.How do you not see the inconsistency here? If you can forfeit something eternal, it is not eternal by the very definition of the word.

Like I said earlier, you are confusing sanctification with justification. When we are justified, we are sealed by Him...not us.

13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.

Its quite clear, He holds the "deed", not us. He calls it eternal, not us.

I often wonder why folks take the gospel which Christ made so emphatically clear that ye are saved by grace through faith and this NOT of YOURSELVES, and turn right around and reject this in favor of a faith plus works gospel. And what is really amazing is they invoke Galatians 5:4 as a proof text against eternal life being eternal, the very text which condemns them for preaching against salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ. They have fallen from grace for teaching works save, yet they are blinded to the obvious rebuke at them in Galatians 5.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

This seems as good a reason as any to not believe in OSAS.

Everything you read and see seems to be "as good a reason as any" not to believe in the sound biblical teaching of eternal security. When I saw the title of the thread, I didn't even have to look to see who posted it. What nonsense!

 

[evangelist-7]

How do you not see the inconsistency here?
If you can forfeit something eternal, it is not eternal by the very definition of the word.

Now you're catching on! ...

It's not eternal life until it actually is eternal life,
which is determined some time after your death ...

Otherwise, we wouldn't have 10+ Scriptures warning us that ...
We must endure faithfully (Eph 1:1) with our faith ... until the end of our lives ... to gain eternal life!
Care to see all of the verses?

This includes being faithful to God's word ... to NOT take the mark of the beast.

Re: gaining/losing eternal life ... some of my personal favorites:

Matt 10:39 • He who loses his old sinful life for Jesus sake will find eternal life.

Matt 16:24-26 • Deny (lose) your old sinful life and follow Jesus to find eternal life.

John 12:25 • He who hates his life in this world will keep his life for eternity.

Rom 8:13 • Follow the Spirit and put to death the works of the flesh to gain eternal life.

Are these phony threats that you do NOT have to worry about?

What happens to the BAC who chooses NOT to do some of these things?
.

 

[webdog]

Now you're catching on! ...

It's not eternal life until it actually is eternal life,
which is determined some time after your death ...

This is contrary to what the Bible teaches about assurance. If it is not eternal life at the moment of salvation, what exactly is it...what kind of salvation is it?

Otherwise, we wouldn't have 10+ Scriptures warning us that ...
We must endure faithfully (Eph 1:1) with our faith ... until the end of our lives ... to gain eternal life!

Complete misapplication of the passage. Nothing in Ephesians 1 teaches it is dependant on us, just read that passage today. Count the "in Him's".

Care to see all of the verses?

This includes being faithful to God's word ... to NOT take the mark of the beast.

Re: gaining/losing eternal life ... some of my personal favorites:

Matt 10:39 • He who loses his old sinful life for Jesus sake will find eternal life.

Matt 16:24-26 • Deny (lose) your old sinful life and follow Jesus to find eternal life.

John 12:25 • He who hates his life in this world will keep his life for eternity.

Rom 8:13 • Follow the Spirit and put to death the works of the flesh to gain eternal life.

Are these phony threats that you do NOT have to worry about?

What happens to the BAC who chooses NOT to do some of these things?

.

Every one of those passages has been eisegeted and proof texted from their context. Some deal with Jews during the Great Tribulation, some to the lost, and some to believers dealing with sanctification. You are all over the place here. How come nobody has dealt with the passage from Ephesians 1 showing we are sealed, and He is the one holding it?

 

[steaver]

Now you're catching on! ...

It's not eternal life until it actually is eternal life,
which is determined some time after your death ...

.

An antichrist doctrine. What does the Bible say?

1John5:11 - "And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.

1John5:12 - "He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life."

1John5:20 - "And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life."

If you say you do not have eternal life now, this day, then you are saying you do not have Jesus Christ in you - Born-Again.


This is just to simple to miss........if one has understanding as John says.

 

[steaver]

How come nobody has dealt with the passage from Ephesians 1 showing we are sealed, and He is the one holding it?

Could be what Jesus called "blind" ??

 

[evangelist-7]

We must endure faithfully (Eph 1:1) with our faith ... until the end of our lives ... to gain eternal life!

Complete misapplication of the passage. Nothing in Ephesians 1 teaches it is dependant on us, just read that passage today. Count the "in Him's".Every one of those passages has been eisegeted and proof texted from their context. Some deal with Jews during the Great Tribulation, some to the lost, and some to believers dealing with sanctification. You are all over the place here. How come nobody has dealt with the passage from Ephesians 1 showing we are sealed, and He is the one holding it?

I'll send you an NT so you will be able to read this one little verse.
Understanding it, however, could be quite another matter.
My ref was to the "faithful" saints.
How many BACs in your choich qualify?
.

 

[webdog]

I'll send you an NT so you will be able to read this one little verse.
Understanding it, however, could be quite another matter.
My ref was to the "faithful" saints.
How many BACs in your choich qualify?
.

Why do you ignore the passage from Ephesians 1 I supplied? Thanks for the offer, but I have more translations and Bibles than I'll ever need.

I have no idea what a BAC is.

 

[steaver]

Why do you ignore the passage from Ephesians 1 I supplied? Thanks for the offer, but I have more translations and Bibles than I'll ever need.

I have no idea what a BAC is.

A BAC is his way of saying born again Christian which he believes children of God end up in hell.

 

[webdog]

A BAC is his way of saying born again Christian which he believes children of God end up in hell.

Thanks. Just the phrase BAC proves in itself the security of the believer. You cannot 'unbirth' yourself.

 

[steaver]

Thanks. Just the phrase BAC proves in itself the security of the believer. You cannot 'unbirth' yourself.

That's absolutely correct! This is why his doctrine is antichrist, it has children of God going to hell.

 

[BobRyan]

Thanks. Just the phrase BAC proves in itself the security of the believer. You cannot 'unbirth' yourself.

You have apparently shot your own argument in the foot on that one.

The very fact that anyone NEEDS to be "born AGAIN" without first having to "UNBirth themselves" from the first birth - is proof that the "unbirth" argument was bogus to start with.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[steaver]

You have apparently shot your own argument in the foot on that one.

The very fact that anyone NEEDS to be "born AGAIN" without first having to "UNBirth themselves" from the first birth - is proof that the "unbirth" argument was bogus to start with.

in Christ,

Bob

Not at all. Jesus spoke of two different births, physical and spiritual. So your objection is bogus to start with. There is one physical birth which as Nicodemus pointed out could not be undone, and there is one spiritual birth which Jesus pointed out could not be undone.

 

[BobRyan]

Actually the point remains because Adam and Eve did not need to be "born again" until after the fall.

To fall they did not need to be "unborn".

The "unborn" gimmick does not work from the very start - and no Bible text mentions it as some sort of idea to be entertained.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

Actually the point remains because Adam and Eve did not need to be "born again" until after the fall.

To fall they did not need to be "unborn".

The "unborn" gimmick does not work from the very start - and no Bible text mentions it as some sort of idea to be entertained.

in Christ,

Bob

A total non sequitor as the new birth is a concept taught in the NT.

 

[webdog]

You have apparently shot your own argument in the foot on that one.

The very fact that anyone NEEDS to be "born AGAIN" without first having to "UNBirth themselves" from the first birth - is proof that the "unbirth" argument was bogus to start with.

in Christ,

Bob

No, the new birth is in comparison to the physical. Its hyperbole.

 

[Sapper Woody]

No, the new birth is in comparison to the physical. Its hyperbole.

Not sure what you were going for there, but a hyperbole is "an exaggeration in order to make a point." Such as "I've told you a million times..."

 

[webdog]

Not sure what you were going for there, but a hyperbole is "an exaggeration in order to make a point." Such as "I've told you a million times..."

...as is literally being born a second time.

 

[Sapper Woody]

...as is literally being born a second time.

I disagree. I think a better word would be simile.

 

[webdog]

I disagree. I think a better word would be simile.

If that is the case Jesus would have told Nicodemus it was like being born again.