"Once saved, always saved"--Fact or Fiction?

[Doubting Thomas]

Originally posted by Briguy:
Hi all, I see that basically none of the depth of my posts have been answered. I asked some very challanging things to you non-OSAS crowd and only the surface of my questions get answered. You have answered a little, kind of like drinking your milk at dinner but leaving the meat on your plate.

I think I may have addressed in passing some of your questions, or rather some assumptions underlying some of your questions. However, I'll try to be more explicit.

Answer this: If God knows that a person is going to get "saved" but end up losing faith and spending eternity in hell (God knows all), why would he save the person in the first place???? What would the point be.??

Who knows. God's ways are higher than ours. However, that line of questioning seems to also underlie the Calvinist's position in limited atonement: "Why would Christ die for anyone who wasn't eternally elect?". Askers of such rhetorical (to them) questions seem to think they have thereby ended the debate. However, without pretending to probe the depths of God's mind I'll say it has something to do with the mysterious dynamic between God's Love and man's free will.

Also, only one person tried to answer the verse about KNOWING we have eternal life.

I'm not sure if you're referring to me or someone else, but I'll start by saying that 1 John 5:13 is one of the most horribly abused verses used by OSASites in support of their position. (I know, because when I myself was an OSASite, I too horribly abused it) Why? Because they yank it out of context of the rest of the epistle. Let's see what else John has to say about "knowing" one has life or not, etc:

"Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says, 'I know Him,' and does not keep His commandments is a liar and the truth is not in him. But whoever keeps His word, truly the love of God is perfected in him. By this we know that we are in Him." (1 John 2:3-5)

"Therefore let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning. If what you heard from the beginning abides in your, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father." (1 John 2:24)

"In this the children of God and the children of the devil are manifest: Whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is he who does not love his brother." (1 John 3:10)

"We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love the brethren. He who does not love his brother abides in death" (1 John 3:14)

"My little children, let us not love in word or in tongue, but in deed and in truth. And by this we know we are of the truth and shall assure our hearts before Him" (1 John 3:18)

Of course, there is a lot more in this one epistle that shows that "knowing" one has eternal life involves much more than a mere recollection of a one time decision in the past to follow Christ. To limit salvation "assurance" to such would be to completely distort John's message that true saving "knowledge" intimately involves what we do.

So once one considers John's expanded criteria for "assurance", then yes, if one meets the criteria listed through out the epistle (ie "these things I have written to you" 1 John 5:13), one can have a present tense assurance of present tense salvation. However, it would be presumptuous to suppose that this would always and automatically continue to be the case. Which leads us to...

Let's review, if I KNOW I have eternal life it is forever and ever. I can't lose what is forever or it was not eternal to begin with. Eternal has to be eternal and if I can know it it is forever the instant I know it. Please answer that.

Just because one has (ie "possesses", present tense) eternal life now doesn't mean he will continue to have it in the future. Why? Because eternal life is not something that is granted exterior to (and irrespective of) one's relationhip with Christ, but eternal life is in Christ Himself. Christ is eternal and has life in Himself. Those who are in Christ therefore have His life. However, if one doesn't abide in Christ but rather cuts himself off from the Source of Life then he obviously no longer has life (see John 15:1-6; Romans 11:19-23). So eternal life is eternal because Christ is eternal. However, our possession of this life is a different story--it has a beginning in time, and, if we do not abide, and ending in time as well.

Also, your child is sliding toward a pool of acid, do you catch him or let him go? Even if you told him the danger of the slide and not to go down it. What would you do??

Anyone can take an illustration such as this, absolutize it, and thereby "prove" their soteriological position as if it is a comphrehensive and exhaustive summary of Biblical teaching on salvation. However, this illustration, though revealing some truth, does not encompass all the Bible teaches about the dynamic between God and man and our salvation. Of course, God initiates salvation, but the NT (and OT, for that matter) is replete with conditional instructions for Christians to "abide", "hold fast", "keep", "stand firm", "endure", "overcome" etc. In other words, God works and we are working as well. This is best summed up by Paul's command to the Philippians to "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure (Phil 2:12-13)." We can either by Grace work with God or against Him. So although God "reached down", and became Incarnate, died on the cross for our sins and rose from the dead without us asking, and by His Spirit draws us to Himself without us asking, we must respond to Him--not just once, but continually til the day we die. If we stumble, we must confess and repent. Those who are faithful until death will be saved.

To whoever mentioned Abraham, Abraham was rigtheous by faith, believing faith, many years before he was obedient with Issac. He was justfied by faith not works.

Abraham was indeed justified many years before he was obedient with Isaac, but you make the mistake of assuming that justification is just a one time, once-for-all occurance. Yes, in Genesis 15:6 it says that Abraham "believed in the Lord and He accounted it to him for righteousness". However, this was not the point of his initial justification. In Hebrews 11:8 it says: "By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to out to the place which he would receive and inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going." Chronologically, this took place years before the justification mentioned in Genesis 15. In other words, since Abraham had already demonstrated obedient faith years before, one can accurately say that he was justified in Genesis 12 as well. So rather than being a one time, once-for-all event, justification is seen biblically as a true description of the faithful one's ongoing relationship with God--that the faithful one is truly considered to be righteous on account of his obedient faith. (Which is why one can never separate justification--being reckoned as righteous--from sanctification--being set apart for God.) This is why James too was correct when he said that Abraham was (again) justified because he offered Isaac...and this of course involved the work of obedient faith. And, of course, faith without works is dead and does not avail for salvation.

The Bible is very clear on that. God does not have to see our works, he knows our hearts. Man has to see our works to have "proof" of our faith, God does not.

When Abraham was about to sacrifice Isaac, it was just Abraham, Isaac, and God--no one else was around. Did God give the command to Abraham to sacrifice his son and then turn around and say: "But you don't actually need to pack up and go. I see in your faith in your heart". Nope. God does say, after He stays Abraham's hand from slaying his son: "For now I know that you fear God, since you have not witheld your son, your only son, from Me (Gen 22:12)." In other words, God wanted Abraham to prove to Him that he still had faith in Him. This goes with the James 2 passage nicely, and with the passage in Hebrews 11. All of this shows that salvation, and the justification which accompanies it, is a life-long dynamic relationship with God in Christ, and not some "hell insurance" resulting merely from a one time past decision to "accept Christ" in one's heart.

(PS: Have fun camping)

[ August 25, 2005, 01:16 PM: Message edited by: Doubting Thomas ]

 

[bmerr]

DT,

bmerr here. For the most part, very well said, sir. The only thing I might like to address is this small comment:

Originally by doubting Thomas:

"...and by His Spirit draws us to Himself without us asking..."

I believe it is in John, where we read words to the effect of, "No man can come to me unless my Father draw him. Whosever hath heard therefore, and learned of me, will come to me." I think it's in John 6. I don't have my Bible with me at the moment, so forgive me for not giving the Scripture reference.

I'd just caution against the idea that God's Spirit miraculously, apart from the Word, draws men to Christ. The word of God is the sword of the Spirit (Eph 6:17?).

Other than that, you correctly point out that many base arguments on false presuppositions, which causes the conclusion of their argument to be false as well.

In Christ,

bmerr

 

[ascund]

Hey mman


First, I know of very few who want to please God through human obedience schemes that know that the Greek behind the KJV John 3:5 "born again" is actual "born from above." Congrats!

The reason so few of your theology know this is that they botch the word "water" to mean water baptism and totally overlook Jesus' contrast between physical and spiritual. Eternal life is from above = spiritual. Lack of eternal life (death) is from below = physical.

Spiritual birth is from above; physical birth is through the waters of birth.


Second, you quote

Originally posted by mman:
The source of faith is God's word (Rom 10:17). When we obey, we do it by faith. Therefore, any action we do, if it is in obedience to God's word, can be said to be done, "by faith", just as Heb 11 points out.

is also exact.

However, one must do more than say exact words, one must also realize why it is exact.

Justification is by faith alone.
Sanctification is by faithfulness.

Justification is God's activity.
Sanctification is mixed activity.
__Past/future is God's domain.
__Present is human activity.

The Hebrews 11 shows justification by faith and the historic records of human faithfulness. You must see that both justification and sanctification are presented together as the summative view one's life.

We don't want the baby to just be born (justification) and remain a baby. We want the baby to grow into an adult.

I am for justification by faith alone. But I'm also for faithfulness. I don't want justification to depend on sanctification. That is a sneaky way of endorsing Catholicism. No thanks for me.

Lot of good stuff from you this time!
Lloyd

 

[bmerr]

Originally by ascund:


posted August 26, 2005 09:51 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey bmerr

I'm in a written debate in a Yahoo group. My time has been devoted to responding against the proposition that water baptism is required for salvation.

Here, you have yet delivered another fine question.

The Bible Knowledge Commentary gives the following:
The Lord was teaching that forgiveness ought to be in direct proportion to the amount forgiven. The first servant had been forgiven all, and he in turn should have forgiven all. A child of God has had all his sins forgiven by faith in Jesus Christ. Therefore when someone sins against him, he ought to be willing to forgive . . . from the heart no matter how many times the act occurs.

I know you are interested in OSAS which was not addressed. Context rules! Let's see what it says.

Saved Peter is asking the question about forgiveness. So we must not push the metaphor beyond what it was originally given to answer.

The question is about forgiveness not security. The Bible has lots of examples of saved believers who were punished or killed for their rebellion. Moses is the best of the examples. One "little" rebellion and - WHAMO! - death in the wilderness. Yet he appeared beside Jesus in the transfiguration. We know he is saved.

I note that the unfaithful servant was only "given to the tormentors" Matt 18:34 - not that he had a part with unbelievers. Isn't it amazing how one's theological bias modifies scripture!

Great question.
Lloyd

Lloyd,

bmerr here. I was talking about Luke 12:42-47. Like I said, I didn't have my Bible with me at the time. I've got it today, though.

Anyway, Jesus contrasts two servants in His parable. One is faithful, one is not. If I remember correctly, you took the position that the servant was one who had been saved, and brought into service to Christ. I'd go along with this view.

Here's the text:

42 And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season?

43 Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doeing.

44 Of a truth I say unto you, that he will make him ruler over all that he hath.

45 But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maid servants, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken;

46 The lorf of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.

47 And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.

48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

Sounds alot like 2 Pet 2:20-22, huh?

In Christ,

bmerr

 

[ascund]

Greetings bmerr

Yes! You pose yet another difficult question. I doubt few today would get to this answer. We are a nation that no longer studies God’s Word. We do the best we can but slide every further – ever faster into national darkness.

This and the parables near it fall within a lengthy polemic between Jesus and the religious leaders (11:14–13:9). This section contains six woes upon the Pharisees, the nation’s religious rulers. Gary T. Meadors, “The Poor in the Beatitudes of Matthew and Luke,” GTJ 6:2 (Fall 85): 313.

This section is part of Luke’s “central section” (viz. 9:51–18:14).

Bob Deffinbaugh describes it best, “I believe that God is saying to Israel that He has turned (or will do so) to the Gentiles because of the rebellion of Israel. His “servants” who eat, and drink, and rejoice are thus those who have turned to Him in faith, and they include both believing Jews and believing Gentiles. Those whom God will “slay” (Isaiah 65:15) are His disobedient people.

“Based upon these premises, my understanding is that the “servant” who is “cut in pieces” is the unbelieving nation of Israel. Unbelieving Israel will be “cut in pieces” (dispersed) and will be cast into hell, along with those heathen they so much disdain and despise. The faithful servant is God’s church, those who have trusted in Jesus Christ as God’s Messiah, and who wait expectantly for His return.” (http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=1112)

Hope this helps. I had to do some digging myself until I see the relation to national Israel. This matches with Paul’s description of the branches in Rom 9-11.

Your tough questions make me dig!
Lloyd

 

[ascund]

Greetings Frank

You must be getting to the end of your smoke and mirror proof to be talking this way.

Originally posted by Frank:
Foolishness. A man that is justified needs no salvation. If God had made him justified. he would have not needed to be saved. The bible clearly teaches Noah and eight souls were saved by water. I Pet. 3;19-21. Again, the implication of what you believe means Noah was justified BEFORE he was saved. This is an absolute falsehood. To borrow your favorite line, read the context. Gen. 6.
The word righteous in the context means a moral uprightness as compared to those of his day. Again, context is the best way to determine meaning of any word. As of late, you have been preaching lot about hermeneutics. Try a novel approach. Use it!

My gut hurts from laughing. You mentioned Gen 6 but pulled the word definition from Genn 7:1. Did you happen to see the words "just" and "perfect" in Gen 6:9?

Howver, every aspect of The Flood happened after Noah's justification. The flood saga demonstrated the severing of ALREADY SAVED Noah’s ties to the old world of corruption and judgment as it ushered him into the new world of life. When Noah disembarked from the Ark, he built an altar to God as an appeal of a cleansed conscience to live the new life under God’s control and direction. Likewise, water baptism is to be used as an AFTER justification appeal to God based upon an ALREADY saved conscience. The altar is Peter’s focus; not the water.

In addition to typology confusion, you contrast the Bible in several key ways. You believe that water saves; Bible shows that water brought death and destruction (II Pet 2:5, 3:6). You want salvation to come through the water; Bible shows that justification came BEFORE the waters (Gen 6:8-9). you seek safety from going through the waters; Bible shows that safety was inside the ARK (a type of Christ). You want baptism to be an appeal to God for justification; context shows that Noah built the altar as an appeal to God to live for Him in the new life for sanctification. You contrast the biblical story at every point.

Water baptism happens AFTER justification as a picture of a dramatic change in life and an appeal to live for God in the new world! How much clearer does it have to be? Only blind loyalty to human-centered self-righteousness could miss such obvious context.

One error at a time!
Lloyd

 

[ascund]

Greetings Frank

You are truly a clanging cymbal. I don’t know where you pull this stuff up.

Originally posted by Frank:
Furthermore, only an obedient faith is rewarded, not a passive one. NO EXCEPTION.You can stomp and whine like a litle child but it will not change the word of God. By the way, Provide on example of a passive faith being saved, rewarded or blessed spiritually. So far, your response has been BOOK 000, CHAPTER 000, VERSE 000. If I were a betting man, I would wager that will be the final answer, too!

Let’s go back to justification. You seem to think you know it. Here are your examples.

PASSIVE VOICE
Acts 13:39; Pres Pass Ind; All who believe are justified
Rom 3:24; Pres Pass Ptcp; Being justified freely by his grace through Jesus’ redemption.
Rom 3:28; Pres Pass Infin; We are justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
Rom 4:5; Pres Act Ptcp; Those who believe in Jesus are justified. Faith is counted for righteousness.
Gal 2:16; Pres Pass Ind; We are not justified by the works of the law.
Gal 3:11; Pres Pass Ind; No one is justified by the law. The just (dikaios) shall live by faith.
Gal 5:4; Pres Pass Ind; Christ is of no effect if you are justified by the law. Ye are fallen from grace.
James 2:24; Pres Pass Ind; A man is justified by works and not by faith only.
Matt 11:19; Aor Pass Ind; Wisdom is justified of her children.
Luke 7:35; Aor Pass Ind; Wisdom is justified by her children.
Rom 3:4; Aor Pass Subj; God’s Word is given that you might be justified.
Rom 4:2; Aor Pass Ind; If Abraham was justified by works he can boast.
Rom 5:1; Aor Pass Ptcp; Being justified by faith, we have peace with God.
Rom 5:9; Aor Pass Ptcp; Being justified by Jesus’ blood, we shall be saved from God’s wrath.
I Cor 6:11; Aor Pass Ind; We are justified and sanctified in Jesus’ name by God’s Spirit.
Gal 2:17; Aor Pass Infin; If we seek to be justified by Christ and found to be sinners, is Christ the minister of sin? God forbid!
Gal 3:24; Aor Pass Subj; The law brought us to Christ that we might be justified by faith.
I Tim 3:16; Aor Pass Ind; God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, believed in the world, and received up into glory.
Tit. 3:7; Aor Pass Ptcp; Being justified by His grace, we should be made heirs.
James 2:21; Aor Pass Ind; Was not Abraham justified by works when he offered up Isaac?
James 2:25; Aor Pass Ind; Rahab was justified by works.
Rev 22:11; Aor Pass Imper; He who is righteous, let him be righteous still.
Matt 12:37; Fut Pass Ind; You will be justified by your words.
Rom 2:13; Fut Pass Ind; The doers of the law will be justified.
Rom 3:20; Fut Pass Ind; No one will be justified by the deeds of the law.
Luke 18:14; Perf Pass Ptcp; The publican went away justified.
Rom 6:7; Perf Pass Ind; He that is dead is freed (justified) from sin.
I Cor 4:4; Perf Pass Ind; I am not yet justified (because of stewardship).

It is a good thing you aren't a betting man!

Hope you have a pipe too!
Lloyd

 

[ascund]

Greetings

Originally posted by Frank:
Col. 2;14 acknowledges the removal of the old testament law as a system. Note verse 16. Again, follow your own advice context.

The Greek word for "handwriting" is cheirographon, used in common Greek for a document written in one's own hand as legal proof of indebtedness. Some modern translations call it a bond of indebtedness. Christ wiped out a note of debt.

Don't you ever get tired of being wrong? I'd try a bit of homework before you get obstreperous. It prevents against public embarassment as well!

Basics get you really hard don’t they!
Lloyd

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by ascund:
Did you happen to see the words "just" and "perfect" in Gen 6:9?

Howver, every aspect of The Flood happened after Noah's justification. The flood saga demonstrated the severing of ALREADY SAVED Noah’s ties to the old world of corruption and judgment as it ushered him into the new world of life. When Noah disembarked from the Ark, he built an altar to God as an appeal of a cleansed conscience to live the new life under God’s control and direction. Likewise, water baptism is to be used as an AFTER justification appeal to God based upon an ALREADY saved conscience. The altar is Peter’s focus; not the water.

In addition to typology confusion, you contrast the Bible in several key ways. You believe that water saves; Bible shows that water brought death and destruction (II Pet 2:5, 3:6). You want salvation to come through the water; Bible shows that justification came BEFORE the waters (Gen 6:8-9). you seek safety from going through the waters; Bible shows that safety was inside the ARK (a type of Christ). You want baptism to be an appeal to God for justification; context shows that Noah built the altar as an appeal to God to live for Him in the new life for sanctification. You contrast the biblical story at every point.

..

What an excellent study!

Thanks!

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by ascund:
Col. 2;14
The Greek word for "handwriting" is cheirographon, used in common Greek for a document written in one's own hand as legal proof of indebtedness. Some modern translations call it a bond of indebtedness. Christ wiped out a note of debt.

You really "do" know everything!

NASB translates it the same way.

NASB

13 When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions,
14 having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.

MSG -- 14the slate wiped clean, that old arrest warrant canceled and nailed to Christ's Cross.

AMP -- 14Having cancelled and blotted out and wiped away the handwriting of the note (bond) with its legal decrees and demands which was in force and stood against us (hostile to us). This [note with its regulations, decrees, and demands] He set aside and cleared completely out of our way by nailing it to [His] cross.

NLT -- 14He canceled the record that contained the charges against us. He took it and destroyed it by nailing it to Christ's cross.
{New Living Translation)

ESV -- 14by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross.
( English Standard Version)

CEV --14God wiped out the charges that were against us for disobeying the Law of Moses. He took them away and nailed them to the cross.
()(Contemporary English Version) )

ASV – (American Standar Version)
14 having blotted out the bond written in ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us: and he hath taken it out that way, nailing it to the cross;

[/quote]

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by Briguy:
On Matthew 18: What we have here is a parable, a teaching tool. The man who was forgiven in the parable was not a saved man headed for Heaven.

... No, when looked at with a little logic Matthew 18 does not refute OSAS.

[/QUOTE]

Brian -- I beg to differ.

Matt 18 strikes a devasting blow to OSAS from which OSAS never recovers.

The context for Matt 18 IS "the Kingdom of heaven" by contrast to your assertion that it is not.

That is just for starters.

... Here we go - back to OSAS.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Lets deal with "the obvious" in Matt 18.

#1. The forgiveness shown OTHERS was to be based on the real forgiveness ALREADY received from God.

#2. The REAL forgiveness received from God was regarding the unpayable DEBT that each one owes to God. The debt of sin.

#3. NO one can be SAVED but UNFORGIVEN.

#4. THIS IS an illustration of "THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN" according to Christ.

#5. This is the SAME instruction we see in Matt 6 in the Lord's prayer "FORGIVE us our debts AS WE forgive others".

#6. The DEBT OWED to the King of kings is RETURNED back to the one who OWED the debt as "payment due" and they are put into torment paying that huge debt of sin! This pay-your-own-debt-of-sin idea is never called "The saved relationship with God" in all of scripture.

#7. Christ says to his own followers "So shall My Heavenly Father do to EACH ONE OF YOU IF you do not forgive...". Christ makes the same point that He made in Matt 6 "For IF YOU do not FORGIVE... then neither will..."

Matt 18 is a clear, irrefutable and obvious case of "forgiveness REVOKED".

The response of those what believe in OSAS will often list reasons why this story "should not be in scripture" (as it were) -- but they never actually address the devastating "details" in Matt 18 regarding OSAS.

That is instructive.

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

Matthew 18
21 Then Peter came and said to Him, ""Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him? Up to seven times?''
22 Jesus said to him, ""I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven.


Matt 18:23-35 Forgiveness revoked – as opposed to blaming God for not “preserving us”.

Matt 18
23 ""For this reason the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his slaves.
24 ""When he had begun to settle them, one who owed him ten thousand talents was brought to him.
25 ""But since he did not have the means to repay, his lord commanded him to be sold, along with his wife and children and all that he had, and repayment to be made.

Here we see that the Kingdom of Heaven is the context – and the servant “owes” in that eternal reality – a debt that is far greater than he and all his substance could ever repay. He is judged as owing the debt and payment is demanded.

So it is for all of humanity – the law points to the debt owed (Romans 6) the “Wages of Sin is death.” And Rev 20 – 21 tells us that this is in fact the suffering and torment of the 2nd death – eternal.

26 ""So the slave fell to the ground and prostrated himself before him, saying, "Have patience with me and I will repay you everything.'
27 ""And the lord of that slave felt compassion and released him and forgave him the debt.

Though the slave undervalues his own debt and over-values his own ability to “repay” – the Lord has mercy on him anyway and “Forgives the Debt” – full and complete forgiveness in the scenario regarding “the Kingdom of Heaven”. This is key to the Arminian point.

But (as Christ points out in His model prayer of Matt 6) those who Are forgiven are under obligation to forgive others.

28 ""But that slave went out and found one of his fellow slaves who owed him a hundred denarii; and he seized him and began to choke him, saying, "Pay back what you owe.'
29 ""So his fellow slave fell to the ground and began to plead with him, saying, "Have patience with me and I will repay you.'
30 ""But he was unwilling and went and threw him in prison until he should pay back what was owed.

Here the case of “the Forgiven” slave is that HE is “unwilling” to show forgiveness to others even though he HAS been forgiven.

Exercising his free-will he is “Unwilling” to give to others that SAME sense of mercy and compassion that HAS been shown him by his Lord.

31 ""So when his fellow slaves saw what had happened, they were deeply grieved and came and reported to their lord all that had happened.
32 ""Then summoning him, his lord said to him, "You wicked slave, I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me.

The Lord does not show any reservation about the full and complete forgiveness that HE gave to His servant.

33 " Should you not also have had mercy on your fellow slave, in the same way that I had mercy on you?'

Here is the direct appeal to the same Point we see Christ making in Matt 6 “Forgive us OUR debts AS WE forgive our debtors” and then adds “For if you do NOT forgive others then…” well you know what He said.

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

Clearly – “forgiveness revoked” with FULL payment made now – by the slave!
.

35 "" My heavenly Father will also do the same to you, if each of you does not forgive his brother from your heart.''

Here many shout “OH NO He will NOT!”. They think that “once forgiven ALWAYS forgiven” applies even to those in rebellion. (A good 4-point Calvinist POV by the way).

Here Christ charges that the point is valid for Christians. He argues that WE have been forgiven by our heavenly Father – and that HE will revoke Our forgiveness just as we see in this story and just as Christ claimed in Matt 6 If “we” do not persevere in showing the Same kind regard for forgiving our brothers.

Rather than God blaming Himself for our lack of perseverance or God claiming that HE failed to preserve us – HE charges that WE are under obligation to obey as He directs or be faced with “forgiveness revoked” just as it is really described in this chapter.

 

[BobRyan]

There is NO case in all of scripture where a person is saved but NOT forgiven sin.

In the case of Moses - he is fully forgiven for the sin of murder- but still dies in old age. (As it turns out so too did David and Samuel and Joshua die in old age).

IF Moses had "paid his own debt of sin" we would see him in the lake of fire.

The DEBT Christ nailed to the cross (the certificate of debt -- decrees written against us for violation of God's Word - His Law) is the debt of the second death!

If Moses had paid such a "huge debt" then HIS would be the death of the lake of fire!

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by Briguy:
Answer this: If God knows that a person is going to get "saved" but end up losing faith and spending eternity in hell (God knows all), why would he save the person in the first place???? What would the point be.??

#1. you are not giving a proof for OSAS - you are simply musing. It is of the form
IF God knew Adam was going to fall why did God create him PERFECT and SINLESS, holy and IN HARMONY with God?? what would the point be??

That kind of speculation does not "prove anything" but in showing the "type" I hope to DISPROVE the attempt to use it for something.

#2. STILL the "Answer" would be that God has the SAME system for the saved and the lost as He points out in Romans 2. He is "impartial" and the system for staying is the same as the one for ENTERING. HENCE we see in Col 2 "AS you have RECEIVED Christ Jesus SO WALK IN Him"

#3. Notice the argument of Paul in 1Cor 9 regarding HIS participation in the GOSPEL.

Now comes that “unpleasant section” for many where Paul points out the seriousness of this Gospel pursuit for the goal of saving people -- so that I may by all means save some. as he says.

23 I do all things for the sake of the gospel, so that I may become a fellow partaker of it.
24 Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but only one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may win.
25 Everyone who competes in the games exercises self-control in all things. They then do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable.
26 Therefore I run in such a way, as not without aim; I box in such a way, as not beating the air;
27 but I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached (the Gospel) to others, I myself will not be disqualified

It is as a “fellow partaker of the GOSPEL” that Paul wants to participate in preaching. He then shows that his own example in persuing that goal of being “A fellow partaker of the Gospel” is the standard/model/role-model for the saints. He has left the realm of “I am a leader and Apostle and so I have special rights” to the perspective of WE ALL want to be “Fellow partakers” of the Gospel for as he has just pointed out when the Gospel is received the people are saved. (; I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some.)

So now in this “fellow partaker of the Gospel” model for ALL that Paul is offering (in the form of his own life example) he shows how it works. He shows the perspective of the saint, the attitude, the focus the Olympic ALL for the Gospel focus that is NEEDED. IN fact he argues that it is critical EVEN for an Apostle for even in this most exaulted case HE is at risk “LEST after preaching the Gospel to other I MYSELF should be disqualified” from that very Gospel!

How instructive!

Yet how fervently ignored by those who find this to be an “unpleasant” section of scripture!

Take each "detail" and show the meaning IN the 1Cor 9 context itself. Let the argument speak for itself IN the text you are exegeting.

Or do you read vs 23-27 and respond with

Are you saved by self discipline of your body?

And so when Paul says

1 Tim 4
14 Do not neglect the spiritual gift within you, which was bestowed on you through prophetic utterance with the laying on of hands by the presbytery.
15 Take pains with these things; be absorbed in them, so that your progress will be evident to all.
16 Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching; persevere in these things, for as you do this you will ensure salvation both for yourself and for those who hear you.

Do you respond with

"Are you saved by your efforts of paying close attention, persevering and taking pains with those disciplines?"

Will your response to each of these displeasing texts be simply to challenge them and show how your view of "other texts" don't allow these unpleasant texts to exist??


When Paul says

Phil 3
8 More than that, I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ,
9 and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith,
10 that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death;
11 in order that I may attain to the resurrection from the dead.
12 Not that I have already obtained it or have already become perfect, but I press on so that I may lay hold of that for which also I was laid hold of by Christ Jesus.
13 Brethren, I do not regard myself as having laid hold of it yet; but one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and reaching forward to what lies ahead,
14 I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.

Do you respond with I would hope that you are humble enough to put no faith in yourself........and at least a little in God!

In an effort to misdirect away from the texts above where Paul is being crystal clear – perhaps when you see yourself needing to “gloss over” the details of these text and you respond to them as “inconvenient” to your views on other texts (like Eph 2 for example) it is a sign that those other texts are being taken to extremes in your interpretation.

When we let THE TEXT speak does it cause you to immediately jump to some other "more comfortable" text?

IF so - it is a sign that you have taken what your comfortable texts do not actually say explicitly and have added "inferences" that were never in those texts to start with.

In the case of these "unpleasant" texts - it is the mere quote of them and the insistence on seeing their details rather than glossing over them that is causes so many to have heart burn.


In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Brian said

Also, only one person tried to answer the verse about KNOWING we have eternal life. Let's review, if I KNOW I have eternal life it is forever and ever.

Does Adam "KNOW" he is sinless and alive?? Does he think "this is just temporary so I don't really KNOW IT"??

Again - the form of puzzle you present is not "proof of anything".

God argues FOR etneral life for Adam when He says He will REMOVE access to the tree of life "Lest he eat and life forever".

EVERY interpretation for the Tree of Life in Gen 2 indicates mankind had full access to it - BEFORE the fall.

But God argues that access is eternal life "living forever".

Your argument simply does not work - from the very start of the Bible.

Brian
I can't lose what is forever or it was not eternal to begin with.

That kind of guesswork would not have worked in Gen 2 and 3 with the tree of life and God's OWN statement about eternal life and "living forever".

Brian --

I feel like I should not answer new questions until you address my earlier questions.

You "feel"??

Is this a post from the west coast??

Brian
Also, your child is sliding toward a pool of acid, do you catch him or let him go?

Are you talking about Adam? Eve? Lucifer? 1/3 of the Angels?

What?

This "proof by puzzle" thing is not working for you.

Brian

To whoever mentioned Abraham, Abraham was rigtheous by faith, believing faith, many years before he was obedient with Issac. He was justfied by faith not works. The Bible is very clear on that.

True. The ONE Gospel worked the SAME in BOTH the OT and the NT.

At least you have the right.

In any case - this is a good topic. Well worth studying.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Frank]

Lloyd:

I thought you were going to address the scriptures. Instead, it is the same tired drivel about passive voice, which in context of what was posted proves nothing. You have arrayed scripture against scripture, or I should say, attempted to pit the Greek against the totality of the harmonious evidence. This is typical of denominationalist. This is simply a feeble attempt to avoid the textual argument.

The passive voice does not preclude man from compling with the conditions of pardon as set forth in the scriptures. Again, EVERY EXAMPLE IN THE BIBLE REQUIRES ONE TO BE BlESSED THROUGH AN OBEDIENT FAITH!. NO EXCEPTIONS. Again,to support your position you offered the example of the infamous NO MAN! if it were so clear, why can't you post us book chapter and verse for the one saved by a do nothing faith.

You still have not revealed to us how language or the science of interpretation functions. You do not want to discuss, Noah, Joshua or Abraham. I would run from the text too if I believed in the do nothing faith like you!! I have read over and over about Abraham and his so called do nothing belief that was accounted for righteousness. In your rush to the do nothing faith you fail to examine the totality of scripture. And, you are lecturing me about study. Pot meet kettle!! What a joke!
Abraham believed and went out from his home.Gen. 12:1-4, cf. Hebs. 11:8. Unless my grammar has failed me, went out is an action verb. I am amazed you purport to know the functioning of the greek language without error. Funny, You cannot even handle our mother tongue. Big words such as and, but, went out, compassed about, seem to stump you. Gen. 12:1-4. cf. Hebs. 11:8.

You demonstrate a lack of knowledge about hermeneutics. As I said earlier, passive voice does not preclude man from submission to the conditions of pardon as set forth by God. No exceptions! I have proved this statement to be true with each example posted. You have yet to provide one example to refute it! Let me make it easy for you. Name an example of a sinner being saved without an obedient faith. Please, post an example that supports your position. I have provided them for mine.


Your contention about Col. 2:14 is simply wrong based on the context. Furthermore, the bible says in Nehemiah 9:13,14, in 13  Thou camest down also upon mount Sinai, and spakest with them from heaven, and gavest them right judgments, and true laws, good statutes and commandments:
14  And madest known unto them thy holy sabbath, and commandedst them precepts, statutes, and laws, by the hand of Moses thy servant:

Nehemiah states the old law included all that was written in Col. 2:14-16. Of course, you know more about the old law than he did. You are truly self deceived.

I suppose you are going to tell us that the coordinating conjunction in Nehemiah 9 does not really links things in likeness. After all, you imply this with the and of Mark 16:16. If a word does not mean what you like. You just change it!!


By the way, the bible says in Galatians 3:26  For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
27  For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
28  There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
29  And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

It will read this way on the day of judgement, too. I hope one day you will finally get it right.

 

[Frank]

Lloyd:

1 Peter 3:19  By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
20  Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
21  ¶The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

1. Noah would have been lost had he not done all God had asked. Genesis. 6:22. Name the directve given by God not essential to the saving of Noah? How do you know this from the text? You cannot prove your propositon because it did not happen as you claim. Noah did all and was saved. You simply made an unsubstantiated assertion. Peter affirms this in the text.
2. Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations. Again, it does not mean he was sinless. The text compares his righteousness to other men ( His generations). God does not use a man's generations to justify or acquit us of sin or consider us right in his eyes, your assertion not withstanding.
3. Noah's character was superior to all men at this time. He was given a reprieve from the flood as a result. How? Through his obedient faith he moved ( action verb) bad word for you, moving to build the ark. Hebrews 11:7. It all harmonizes.

 

[ascund]

Greetings

Originally posted by Frank:
The passive voice does not preclude man from compling with the conditions of pardon as set forth in the scriptures. Again, EVERY EXAMPLE IN THE BIBLE REQUIRES ONE TO BE BlESSED THROUGH AN OBEDIENT FAITH!. NO EXCEPTIONS. Again,to support your position you offered the example of the infamous NO MAN! if it were so clear, why can't you post us book chapter and verse for the one saved by a do nothing faith.

Your statements in the face of monumental scriptural evidence that faith is passive shows your complete misunderstanding of justification and sanctificaiton.

The passive voice shows that there is nothing that can be done for sanctification. The activity of obedience is with sanctification. Your error is to continue forcing the human obedience of sanctification upon God's activity in justification.

Jesus Himself used the LOOK and LIVE motif with the brazen serpent to teach Nicodemus that eternal life comes passively only the the look of faith. "Whosoever believes." NO EXCEPTIONS.

There is not viable example in scripture where justification is by works or baptism. Only blind loyalties to human-centered self-righteousness misses the clear teaching of scripture.

Your demand for obedience belongs to sanctification. Until you get that right you will continue to flounder and perpetrate error.

Abraham next post.
Lloyd

 

[ascund]

Hey Frank

Noah was ALREADY JUST and PERFECT (Gen 6:8-9) and RIGHTEOUS (Gen 7:1 before the flood saga.

The flood saga demonstrated the severing of ALREADY SAVED Noah’s ties to the old world of corruption and judgment as it ushered him into the new world of life. When Noah disembarked from the Ark, he built an altar to God as an appeal of a cleansed conscience to live the new life under God’s control and direction. Likewise, water baptism is to be used as an AFTER justification appeal to God based upon an ALREADY saved conscience. The altar is Peter’s focus; not the water.

You contrast the Bible in several key ways. You believe that water saves; Bible shows that water brought death and destruction (II Pet 2:5, 3:6). You want salvation to come through the water; Bible shows that justification came BEFORE the waters (Gen 6:8-9). You seek safety from going through the waters; Bible shows that safety was inside the ARK (a type of Christ). You want baptism to be an appeal to God for justification; context shows that Noah built the altar as an appeal to God to live for Him in the new life for sanctification. You contrast the biblical story at every point.

Water baptism happens AFTER justification as a picture of a dramatic change in life and an appeal to live for God in the new world! How much clearer does it have to be? Only blind loyalty to human-centered self-righteousness could miss such obvious context. Only denominational mind control makes one twist the focus from the altar's appeal to live for God.

Have you ever read 1 Pet 4?
Context rules!
Lloyd

 

[ascund]

Hey Frank

3. Noah's character was superior to all men at this time. He was given a reprieve from the flood as a result. How? Through his obedient faith he moved ( action verb) bad word for you, moving to build the ark. Hebrews 11:7. It all harmonizes.

A statement made from continued ignorance of justification and sanctification. Noah was ALREADY JUST. He didn't need to build an Ark to be just.

His faithful act of obedience belonged to sanctification. Had he failed and died in the Flood Waters he would still be in heaven.

The Hebrews 11 examples show the combination of justification and sanctification. The saints were justified by faith; and then vindicated this through faithful obedience.

Justification takes precedence. Your process salvation view disintegrates in Heb 11 with Samson. How can suicide by rewarded in a process salvation view without compromising standards (not that you haven't already done that)??

We want the baby to walk and talk. We don't make the baby walk and talk to prove itself ready for birth. Sanctification follows justification. Sanctification is not a requirement for justification.

But you have already dismissed 40 some clear references to the passive voice of justification by clinging to your denominational rhetoric. It is sad to see what happens when humanism is elevated about Christ and God's Word.

Your view doesn't harmonize with Heb 11 - unless you are willing to twist Bible.

Lloyd