Lordship Salvation?

[DeafPosttrib]

Amy G.,

You are correct on John 3:16.

Why cannot millennial exclusionists understand this verse??? Are they spiritual blind?

Many religions can understand John 3:16 - "eternal life" speaks of heaven and salvation.

Even, when I was boy as Lutheran, I know John 3:16 what mean to me. It talking about salvation and heaven.

Look, millennial exclusionists are working so HARD in their own guessworks and philosophy for make-up in their own intetrpreting verses to satify their teaching. They knew that their teaching is so flaw.

Their biggest problem is deal with scriptures on salvation doctrine. Not only on millennial exclusionists, even also, baptists facing it. While scriptures showing us tons of warnings with conditionals, all of these cannot be unconditional security salvation. I know many baptists dislike what God's Word actual sayng. That why many people like their own itching ears in the last days according 1 Timothy 4:1-2; and 2 Timothy 4:3-4. We must listening what God's Word saying, obey it and follow Christ.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

[DeafPosttrib]

npetreley,

You say,

one last word of support...

2 Peter 3:8 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day

The Greek words are "thousand" and "years", not "eon". Isn't it amazing that these people actually knew how to say 1,000 years when they meant 1,000 years? They weren't so dumb, after all, I guess

Bingo! You are right.

This verse of 'a thousand years' is a figuratively meaning.

The context of 2 Peter 3:3-13 talking about second coming, as Peter gave us the example of Noah's days, what happened to scoffers. During Noah's days, he builted Ark, and he preached to people, warned them, the flood will come and to destroy the world. They were make fun at Noah, and God too. It tells us, Noah builted Ark took him for 120 years. I bet that, during in their period, they heard often the old story of Noah and flood, they thought it is a myth story or fable, do not believe flood will come. Even, throughout centuries of church history, people often heard Christians telling them that, Jesus is coming again. They were expecting the Lord would come in their lifetime. But,. it didn't happen in their lifetime, so the time came and passed, they died. The same thing today, many people heard old story of 'Jesus is coming again', they do not believe in it. They think it will never happen.

So, 2 Peter 3:8's point is, 1000 years seem tooooooo long in our sights and thoughts, but, in the Lord's sights, 1000 years is toooooo short time for him LIKE AS one day. Also, in other words, it speaks of the day of the Lord shall come LIKE AS "thief in the night" shall suddenly took them away without any expecting. People have been heard old gospel saying, "Jesus is coming again' for almost 2000 years already. Now it is year 2007 A.D. It is past almost 2000 years since Christ ascended to heaven. People think Jesus's coming will never happen in the future. Seems feel like 10,000 years go on and on......

But, it warns us, day of the Lord will come so quickly like as thief. That why we ought be watch and be ready for His coming.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

[J. Jump]

Man I leave for a little bit and this thread explodes

So now you're saying that eternal doesn't really mean eternal?

Man that light lasted an eternity. Does that mean forever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever Amy? Of course not. Even in modern-day language eternal or eternity doesn't ALWAYS mean without beginning and end.

The word when used by the KJV translators didn't always carry the forever and ever and ever and ever meaning either. Just look at the etemology of the word.

Again the Greek doesn't even allow for it to mean that. It is an adjective of the noun aion which means age. It is a specific time period. This time period has a beginning and an end. So how can the adjective modifying the noun mean something the noun doesn't mean?

It's not redefining words, it's allowing the words to give us the meaning, not supplying our own.

That is the context as confirmed by Strongs. Or are you going to say Strongs is inaccurate?

Amy do you really think Strongs is on the same level as Scripture and that it is a perfect book?

As we have proven, the word "eternal" in Luke 18:18 means forever.

All you have proven is that Strong's agrees with you. Outside of that you have proven nothing. All you have said is the Greek word that means age really doesn't mean age. Talk about re-defining words to fit a theology . . .

 

[J. Jump]

17 Now as He was going out on the road, one came running, knelt before Him, and asked Him, “Good Teacher, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?”
Oh yeah, the context really demands that it should have been translated, "What shall I do that I may get an extra 1,000 years in the coming kingdom?"

That's SO clear. BAD translators (thwack), bad!

Actually it is not bad translators at all. It's bad interpreters .

Inheritance is a FAMILY matter. His question is what shall I DO (works). Jesus' answer was directed as his question. And the answer was here is what you DO (works).

That's the context of the passage. That can not be ignored and rightly divide this Word of Truth.

 

[J. Jump]

The second is Aionios which means eternal in the sense of no begining and no end.
What you didnt do is use the greek word in the passsage. If you will do that then your theology will have to change.

The problem you are having is that you are using the wrong greek word. Aion is not the greek word in the passage we are speaking of. The correct greek word is "aionios". While Aion is the root of the word the meaning and context is changed when ios is added. I know what gymanstics chitwood and craig use to manipilate scrripture. the ignoring of the "ios" is just one example.

HoG has already brought up some of these points, but I think they are worth repeating.

If aionios means without beginning and without end then how can we have a part in that? Not only are we not without a beginning, but we actually have TWO beginnings. We have a beginning when we are physically born and then we have another beginning when we are born into the family of God.

So just the idea of aionios meaning without beginning or end is laughable. If nothing else this life would have to be everlasting meaning a beginning with no end. However that is not the word used.

And it is BECAUSE the Greek word was looked at that we have this theology, not because we ignore the word.

I love the last paragraph. We are actually supposed to believe that an adjective, which modifies the noun, is supposed to mean something the noun doesn't mean. That's just linguistic nonsense.

 

[J. Jump]

Here is a question that has been lost in these pages that I would like folks to address. How were people saved prior to Jesus' birth and really up to the start of His public ministry?

Again this is a CRITICAL question to understanding the NT.

 

[Amy.G]

Well, Strong's is very weak, and is mostly only a concordance and not a lexicon. However, let's take a look at the English etymology of the word "eternal"

Well, of course it is.
Because if it's right, your interpretation is a flop. The definition I posted for eternal was taken from a lexicon, not Strong's, but I guess it was wrong too.

c.1366 (in variant form eterne), from O.Fr. eternal, from L.L. æternalis, from L. æternus contraction of æviternus "of great age," from ævum "age." Eternity first attested c.1374. In the Mercian hymns, L. æternum is glossed by O.E. ecnisse.

See anything in there about "forever

Is that supposed to convince me that forever doesn't really mean forever?
I can find quotes saying the moon is made of cheese, but that doesn't make it so.

You and JJump have decided that your "knowledge" of the greek languange is superior to that of Strong's and various lexicons because it is the only way you can make scripture say what you want it say. You have made understanding the word of God a thing that only the "elite" can grasp. All the respectable people who have trusted Strong's and other study tools down through the years are just a bunch of idiots who have taught the wrong translation of the word "eternal". We should all throw our lexicons and Strong's con. in the trash because they cannot be trusted. If we cannot trust their translation of the word "eternal" then we cannot trust them for any other word translation.

Your M.E. doctrine is a twisted distortion of the truth of God's word and diminishes the power of Christ. If I can still be punished for any length of time for my sins then Christ died in vain and my faith is vain. And as Paul said, we are to be pitied above all men for believing such a lie.

 

[J. Jump]

Is that supposed to convince me that forever doesn't really mean forever?
I can find quotes saying the moon is made of cheese, but that doesn't make it so.

I'm curious . . . what makes Strong's infallible, but an etemological dictionary faulty?

You and JJump have decided that your "knowledge" of the greek languange is superior to that of Strong's and various lexicons because it is the only way you can make scripture say what you want it say.

This is nothing more than personal slander. And when you can't prove your point this is what most of you folks resort to. I personally know very little about the Greek language. I have been studying it for a short time, but I am actually going from the gudiance of teachers that are degreed in the langauge and have studied it for a great many years.

Again please show me where Strong's is incapable of being wrong?

You have made understanding the word of God a thing that only the "elite" can grasp.

Actually Scripture says it's those that have eyes to see and ears to hear. Now if you want to call that elite then you are more than welcome, but you are going to have to take that up with God, because He's the One that said it.

Your M.E. doctrine is a twisted distortion of the truth of God's word and diminishes the power of Christ.

Opinion. Please prove this opinion with Scripture.

If I can still be punished for any length of time for my sins then Christ died in vain and my faith is vain.

Really? So you can commit sin with no consequences. Can you please show me this in Scripture. This is a new one on me.

 

[Amy.G]

Here is a question that has been lost in these pages that I would like folks to address. How were people saved prior to Jesus' birth and really up to the start of His public ministry?

Again this is a CRITICAL question to understanding the NT.

Poor attempt at diverting attention away from your false teaching.

Here's a question I asked Lacy, but he didn't answer. Maybe you'll be willing to.

In John 3:16 the word eternal is the same word used in Luke 18:18. Your interpretation of eternal means "age lasting". So, how long is the eternal (age lasting) life that Christ offers?
In your own words, Aionios doesn not mean forever, without end. In your own words it means age lasting.

So, in your interpretation the verse should read:

For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have age lasting life.

 

[J. Jump]

Poor attempt at diverting attention away from your false teaching.

Hardly. Again why don't you just answer the question instead of adding your biased commentary to it? How were folks saved prior to the start of Jesus' ministry? It's a simple and straightforward question.

In John 3:16 the word eternal is the same word used in Luke 18:18. Your interpretation of eternal means "age lasting". So, how long is the eternal (age lasting) life that Christ offers?
In your own words, Aionios doesn not mean forever, without end. In your own words it means age lasting.

So, in your interpretation the verse should read:

For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have age lasting life.

That is correct. John 3:16 would be better understood as age-lasting life.

Believes in the Greek is showing a present identity of the person, meaning whoever is a believing one. Which means that this person must continue to be a believing one. Because as soon as this person stops believing then he is no longer entitled to have life, but will perish.

These are subjunctives not indicitives. Believing unto eternal salvation is a one-time event, not based on someone continuing to believe. And the results are indicitive not subjunctive, meaning they are a certainty not a possibility.

There's a great deal more that could be said, but that should suffice.

Now how about my question?

 

[Amy.G]

Hardly. Again why don't you just answer the question instead of adding your biased commentary to it? How were folks saved prior to the start of Jesus' ministry? It's a simple and straightforward question.


That is correct. John 3:16 would be better understood as age-lasting life.

Believes in the Greek is showing a present identity of the person, meaning whoever is a believing one. Which means that this person must continue to be a believing one. Because as soon as this person stops believing then he is no longer entitled to have life, but will perish.

These are subjunctives not indicitives. Believing unto eternal salvation is a one-time event, not based on someone continuing to believe. And the results are indicitive not subjunctive, meaning they are a certainty not a possibility.

There's a great deal more that could be said, but that should suffice.

Now how about my question?

So, how long is age lasting life? I'm not asking how long the believer will believe. I'm asking how long is the "age lasting" life that Christ offers? What is the definition of "age lasting" that Christ is offering?

 

[J. Jump]

What is the definition of "age lasting" that Christ is offering?

That has already been answered. Christ's whole ministry was an offer of the kingdom of the heavens to the lost sheep of the House of Israel. It is age-lasting, meaning the kingdom age. The kingdom age is 1000 years in length.

Now are you going to answer my question?

 

[Amy.G]

That has already been answered. Christ's whole ministry was an offer of the kingdom of the heavens to the lost sheep of the House of Israel. It is age-lasting, meaning the kingdom age. The kingdom age is 1000 years in length.

Now are you going to answer my question?

"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have 1000 years of life.

You are surely not serious. I am speechless.

People were saved in the OT by faith. Same as us.

Abraham was made righteous because he believed God.

 

[npetreley]

"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have 1000 years of life.

You are surely not serious. I am speechless.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

...............

 

[J. Jump]

You are surely not serious.

Yes actually I am. Again let me ask you a couple of questions regarding the text and let's see how serious you are about your thoughts on this verse.

Do you think faith in Jesus as Savior produces a possibility of everlasting life or a certainty of everlasting life.

I'm actually going to go out on a limb here and say that you think everlasting life is a certainty when someone believes on Jesus as Savior.

With that being the case how do you explain that "eternal life" is subjunctive (meaning possibility) in this verse and not indicitive (meaning certainty)?

People were saved in the OT by faith. Same as us.[/qutoe]
Faith in what? Same faith we have to have? Faith in the death and shed blood of Jesus Christ the Lamb of God?

 

[npetreley]

With that being the case how do you explain that "eternal life" is subjunctive (meaning possibility) in this verse and not indicitive (meaning certainty)?

Let's try it.

"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but WOULD have 1000 years of life."

Nope. Doesn't make it any less silly.

 

[Lacy Evans]

Yea none of them believed that heresy either.

None of them believed the heresy that aionios/eternal means age-lasting, so that is why they used it that way in their writings?

I see.

 

[Lacy Evans]

Are you saying you don't know how long "eternity" is when Christ said "should not perish but have eternal life"?

How did you get that from what I said? If the eternal age, that begins after the Kingdom age is the context, then "age-lasting" lasts for that full age, which in my opinion is absolute eternity.

This isn't really that hard. You have continuously ignored evidence from scripture, hiostorical documents, and dictionaries. I have heard the "heresy" word. (What a rock solid argument, "That can't be right. You're a heretic!":tonofbricks: )

Convince me from the evidence. And I'm sorry but Strong's Concordance "exegesis" is simply not good enough for me.

 

[Amy.G]

JJump:

With that being the case how do you explain that "eternal life" is subjunctive (meaning possibility) in this verse and not indicitive (meaning certainty)?

This is a perfect example of what I said earlier about you thinking your intellect is superior to the average reader.

We do not need to understand what subjuctive and indicitive mean in order to understand the scriptures. However, I have shown that eternal means forever and without end, but you don't believe it because lexicons and Strong's can't be trusted to give the correct interpretation, therefore again proving your superiority.

John 3:16 is a verse that is a pillar of Christian witness. By redefining eternal to mean 1000 years, you are redefining the Christian faith. What you are teaching IMHO is heresy.

 

[J. Jump]

Let's try it.

It's not something to be "tried." It just something that is. The verbs are subjunctive. You can't change that.

"loved" - aorist active indicitive meaning God was the one doing the action and His love is a certainty.

"gave" - aorist active indicitive meaning again God was the one doing the action and His giving was a certainty.

"believes" - present active participle - meaning either a continual action or present identity either way its saying the same thing.

"should perish" - is the verb with "not" inserted to negate it. It is Second aorist middle subjunctive (hence the word should). Should is not a certainty, but a possibility.

"have" - present active subjunctive

Again you simply can not change the tenses of the verbs. They are what they are. And we can either believe what they are telling us or we can simply choose to ignore them and continue on with church tradition despite the incorrectness.

So I'll ask you does faith in Jesus as Savior produces certain results or possible results?