Matt 18 and Matt 6 Disprove OSAS

[evangelist-7]

Every lost person must submit to the convicting message of
the Holy Spirit "who convicts the WORLD of sin and righteousness and judgment" John 16.

This verse should be emphasized to those who are spiritually blind.

The world includes BACs.
Everyone is being convicted of their sins.
BACs are expected to deal with THEIR sins by continual repentance ...

"But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another,
and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.
If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
If we confess (repent of) our sins, He is faithful and just
to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us."
(1 John 1:7-10)

This passage should also be emphasized to those who are spiritually blind.

BACs who do NOT subscribe to this antidote, obviously ...
-- will NOT be continually forgiven and cleansed
-- will be judged as living in unrighteousness
-- will lose their eternal life
.

 

[DHK]

This verse should be emphasized to those who are spiritually blind.

The world includes BACs.
Everyone is being convicted of their sins.
BACs are expected to deal with THEIR sins by continual repentance
.

Now answer clearly:
1. Are you a born again believer in Christ?
2. According to your own post, do you spend your life in continual repentance?
Which is it?

 

[DHK]

You are the liar ... because many such verses HAVE been shown to you.

That is not true. Many verses have been taken out of context and used as pretexts, but when used that way they are meaningless.

Eternal life means eternal, and remains in place ... until one rejects it, or until God revokes it.

This statement is a good example of the above (though it be not a verse). Eternal means eternal. Man cannot reject "eternal". Do you also reject that God is eternal under certain circumstances. Your logic makes no sense. You change the meanings of words to suit your own twisted theology.

True saving belief means to have faith, to trust, and to obey.

No such definition is given in the Bible. That is your own definition, but you can't find it in the Bible.
Expound Eph.2:8,9 and you will find salvation.
1. It is by grace.
2. It is through faith.
3. It is not of yourself; not of works.
4. It is the gift of God.
--There is nothing of obedience in there because obedience is "works," but salvation is not of works, not of yourself. Learn what salvation is. It is a gift, not to be worked for.

No obedience means to no longer have true saving faith, i.e. loss of salvation.

Salvation is a gift; not to be worked. If you worked for your salvation then you never had it in the first place.

This has happened to many BACs throughout history.
However, this never happens to those of Romans 8:28-30, who were elected before the foundation of the world.

When asked you told me that "BAC" means "born again Christian.
You speak of them disparagingly.
The fact is, if you are not one, then you are not saved.

Note: the above is not for you (again), but for others (perhaps for the first time).

Would you care to complete your position and declare to us and to God (again) that cessationism is true?

The gifts of the Spirit mentioned in 1Cor.12:28 were for a temporary period of time, and had ceased by the end of the firsts century. Is that what you want to know?
Can you point to anyone that has the Biblical gift of healing such as Peter did in Acts 5:16, and is able to heal ALL who came to him, thousands upon thousands, without turning away a single person?
No such person exists on earth because the gift is not operable. And that is just one example.

My position (again) is that these are the 2 major doctrines from the very pits of hell.

What two doctrines? soteriology (salvation) and pneumatology (the doctrine of the Holy Spirit)? That is a blasphemous charge to make!

 

[evangelist-7]

What two doctrines? soteriology (salvation) and pneumatology (the doctrine of the Holy Spirit)?
That is a blasphemous charge to make!

Maybe everyone except you understands what I was saying.
A couple of years ago, I asked to complain to an Administrator about you,
and lo and behold, you didn't bother me for a good 6 months!
Perhaps we should do that again.
.

 

[DHK]

Maybe everyone except you understands what I was saying.
A couple of years ago, I asked to complain to an Administrator about you,
and lo and behold, you didn't bother me for a good 6 months!
Perhaps we should do that again.
.

Complain as you will. I am not the posting heresy.
I am not the one posting arrogantly and/or insultingly.

 

[evangelist-7]

Hear ye! ... Hear ye! ... The apostle Paul of the Lord sayeth ...

"If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual let him acknowledge
that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord." (1 Cor 14:37)

PTL, you guys are excused ... because ye are NOT prophets OR spiritual.

Perhaps, we should clarify that Paul meant ...
"ALL the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord."

How many pages of commandments from the Lord (via Paul) shall I embarrass you with?

We iz talking about the ones saying, for example,
"Do not be habitual sinners, or else you cannot enter the kingdom of God."
.

 

[DHK]

Hear ye! ... Hear ye! ... The apostle Paul of the Lord sayeth ...

"If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual let him acknowledge
that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord." (1 Cor 14:37)

PTL, you guys are excused ... because ye are NOT prophets OR spiritual.

That is a judgment that you are NOT QUALIFIED to make.
First you have taken Scripture out of context.
Then you have misapplied it.
Furthermore you have arrogantly set yourself up as judge and jury over others.

1 Corinthians 14:36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?
37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.

The Corinthian church was a carnal church (see 1Cor.3:1-4). Paul could not feed them meat but still had to feed them milk. They also were disobedient to the commandments of the Lord.
In verse 36 they had the attitude (because of the wide range of spiritual gifts that were given to them), that they were, more than others, possessors of NT revelation. Paul rebukes them for this in the following verse
In verse 37 the "commandments" are the commandments that Paul had just given them in chapters 12 to 14, the chapters on the abuse of spiritual gifts. They must follow his commandments in this area because, as he says: "The things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. He is referring back to what he had just written (not the Law)!

Perhaps, we should clarify that Paul meant ...
"ALL the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord."

In context, he is speaking of the last three chapters (12-14), but especially chapter fourteen. The subject matter is spiritual gifts.

How many pages of commandments from the Lord (via Paul) shall I embarrass you with?

You can't; you will only embarrass yourself. :laugh:

We iz talking about the ones saying, for example,
"Do not be habitual sinners, or else you cannot enter the kingdom of God."

.

Paul didn't say that; you are embarrassing yourself!

 

[BobRyan]

E7 has a point about how the Word of God works. Christ said that "His WORD would judge" all mankind. It is a serious thing to turn a blind eye to the Word of God as found in actual scripture. (Protesting Catholics figured that out during the protestant reformation but some people seem to be losing focus on that point in recent times.)

Which is why I keep insisting that "Bible avoidance" of the testing parts of scripture for a given doctrine - is not the end-all solution that some posters here seem to imagine to themselves.

=======================================

Quote:
Originally Posted by steaver
Bob, don't you see how you went from lousing up the "Christian Walk"

I don't think that "paying attention" to the Bible details of Christ's teaching in Matt 18 and Matt 6 is lousing up the Christian Walk the way you seem to think.

================================

Matt 18 is another place where "forgiveness revoked" is a subject of the Bible - often ignored by those clinging to man-made-tradition over the Word of God.

[FONT=&quot]32 ""Then summoning him, his lord said to him, "You wicked slave, I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]33 " Should you not also have had mercy on your fellow slave, in the same way that I had mercy on you?'[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]34 ""And his lord, moved with anger, handed him over to the torturers until he should repay all that was owed him.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]35 "" My heavenly Father will also do the same to you, if each of you does not forgive his brother from your heart.'' [/FONT]


Matt 6

12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.
14 For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:

15 But if you do not forgive others, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions.


There is a long list of other texts that disprove OSAS in the same way - such as those we find in Ezek 18.

===========================

No wonder you can not deal with the 3 easy Bible questions that arise from these two chapters.

You are relying on "Bible avoidance" as the primary strength of support for your traditions when it turns out that sola-scriptura testing of your preferences does not support OSAS.

Why would someone not already married to the man-made tradition of OSAS want to join in such a Bible avoidance endeavor as OSAS?

Why get one's self stuck in a position where you have to run from the 3 easy Bible questions that arise from these two texts?

 

[DHK]

You are relying on "Bible avoidance" as the primary strength of support for your traditions when it turns out that sola-scriptura testing of your preferences does not support OSAS.

Bob, you are the one that is avoiding the Bible. You are given Scripture but cannot and will not answer it. You avoid it. You demand that others answer your petty questions, but avoid the scripture that others post, the scripture that you cannot harmonize with your heretical ideas.

 

[BobRyan]

Bob, you are the one that is avoiding the Bible. You are given Scripture but cannot and will not answer it. You avoid it. You demand that others answer your petty questions

As it turns out - my questions come right from the chapter and the very verses the posters here are most anxious to avoid. Hence... they avoid them.

And even the derailing sideline questions of the "avoidance" group have been answered here by me - that are totally off the chapter "content" about how one who experiences "forgiveness revoked" becomes lost - is then saved again.

As I already posted that answer several times - and it was shown several times that the answer is the basic "ABCs" of the gospel and how the lost become saved.

No change.

But i guess you can repeat your ideas - without any evidence to back them up -- if that is all you have. I will just repeat the texts so many need to avoid - and follow them with the 3 easy questions that come from those very texts - many are so anxious to avoid.

Everyone has free will they can do as they wish.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

Rom_11:29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.

Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Eternal life is a gift that is without repentance.

 

[BobRyan]

OSAS survives by ignoring the disconfirming details "in the text" while engaging in long-reach inference with other text snippets.


Caveat Emptor.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

The bible says faith without works is dead.

If the servant was really saved in the first place, than he wouldn't have had any debt. How can he repay debt that Jesus already paid?

The implication is that if someone is really saved than they will forgive others.

1Jn 2:19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

Forgiveness is a fruit of salvation, not something that have to do to help in our salvation ,which is what you are basically saying.

Works including forgiveness cannot be a part of salvation.

 

[BobRyan]

Speaking of the actual title of the thread - and the chapters that are the focus here --



Back to the 3 easy questions that are being ignored "in real life" on this thread.


I am asking you to respond to the details IN the text.

1. First this one -- where we see an ALREADY FULLY Forgiven servant expected to forgive AS HE WAS TRULY forgiven.

[FONT=&quot]32 ""Then summoning him, his lord said to him, "You wicked slave, I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]33 " Should you not also have had mercy on your fellow slave, in the same way that I had mercy on you?'[/FONT]

2. Then THIS ONE

Where we see forgiveness revoked - full debt returned.

[FONT=&quot]34 ""And his lord, moved with anger, handed him over to the torturers until he should repay all that was owed him.


3. Then THiS ONE
[/FONT]
Where Christ applies the lesson to His listeners - which is obviously OUTSIDE of the parable.

[FONT=&quot]35 "" My heavenly Father will also do the same to you, if each of you does not forgive his brother from your heart.'' [/FONT]

Which is what we also see with Matt 6. (Which is obviously OUTSIDE of a parable)
15 But if you do not forgive others, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions.

So yes that would be "Sola scriptura" testing of your man-made tradition if you can actually address "the Bible details".

Obviously - ducking the these Bible details does not count as addressing them.

======================

Those who think they are responding to these three specific and easy points -- please post your response that pays attention to the Bible details listed -- or else post the link to such a post so we can see if it is fact or myth.

But be careful because as we all know and agree -- "Bible details matter".

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

But if you forgive not men their trespasses,.... On the other hand, where men are not of a forgiving temper to their fellow creatures and fellow Christians, how can they expect forgiveness at the hands of God? or what sense of pardoning grace can there be upon their minds? Had they any right apprehensions of the grace and goodness of God, in the forgiveness of their sins, this would influence their minds, and engage their hearts to forgive such who have offended them: wherefore, where this is wanting, it may be concluded of, and said to such persons,

 

[BobRyan]

The bible says faith without works is dead.

If the servant was really saved in the first place, than he wouldn't have had any debt.

The whole point the king makes is "FULLY FORGIVEN" . You argue from a flawed view of how forgiveness works. It is not a grociery store model that God uses - it is the "Atonement model" and in that model (as we saw in Ezek 18) debt can be returned (as is illustrated in the Day of Atonement Lev 16 model of God).

So in keeping with the actual Bible model for forgiveness - The text says that he is fully forgiven. Even DHK gets the easy point here about "fully forgiven" - this is genuine salvation.

BTW - as even DHk knows - Christ is talking to His disciples and they too are fully forgiven and saved - just like the one in the story.

Jesus is showing them that they have the same "motivation" and "obligation" to forgive others - you say the motivation of the unforgiving servant is that God did NOT in fact forgive him.

Which makes a mockery of the entire chapter.

DHK at least gets this detail right.

Remember when it comes to Bible study "details matter" you cannot eisegete in your own tradition just any-ol place.


You use a circular argument in an effort to spare OSAS - and thus destroy the entire illustration. Even DHK knows that is the wrong place to break the text.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

But if you forgive not men their trespasses,.... On the other hand, where men are not of a forgiving temper to their fellow creatures and fellow Christians, how can they expect forgiveness at the hands of God?

One cannot expect the lost to "First be Christlike and loving in their own sinful nature" and then be "born again" after demonstrating that they can forgive others WITHOUT first experiencing full forgiveness and having the Holy Spirit to then walk them through the path of obedience.

I think "almost all" get that point - even those who differ with me.

Christ tells no story at all about the unforgiven servant - fully forgiving others and then God being inspired by 'the lost' to go and do likewise unto that lost person - fully forgiving him just as the servant had already fully forgiven others.

No sense in standing the parable on it's head in an effort to get OSAS to survive it. Hopefully all can agree on this easy point.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

OSAS survives by ignoring the disconfirming details "in the text" while engaging in long-reach inference with other text snippets.


Caveat Emptor.

in Christ,

Bob

Bob's "text" is a parable. Every person who has even the most rudimentary knowledge of hermeneutics knows that parables do not teach doctrine but only illustrate doctrine already taught. Bob insists that the parable teaches HIS doctrine.

The details of the rest of the Bible he ignores in preferring the heretical "forgiveness revoked" doctrine, never heard before, except from Bob himself.

 

[evangelist-7]

Everyone has free will they can do as they wish.

Not only do these people refuse to heed the Scriptural warnings,
but they do not even realize they have the free will to heed or reject them!

Yes, for many reasons, they are hopeless.
Hence, thou art wastin' your time with them!
.

 

[evangelist-7]

Rom_11:29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.
Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Eternal life is a gift that is without repentance.

Wonderful post ... many hearty congrats! ... thou art sayin' that Paul was a liar, many times over!

Just one simple example for thou ...
1 Cor 6:9-10
"Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God?
Do not be deceived.
Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites,
nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners
will inherit the kingdom of God."

News Flash ... Dis applies to you and to everyone ... Gee, even to Baptists!

Heads Up! ... because God knows you sure do need it ...
The righteous are NOT those who have Christ's imputed righteousness!
The righteous are those who MAINTAIN their imputed righteousness by NOT doing stuff like in da list above!

Everyone except DHK should be able to see this!

But, seeing it, and admitting it, are 2 different things, right?
.