Parable of the sower

[targus]

"These likewise are the ones sown on stony ground who, when they hear the word, immediately receive it with gladness; and they have no root in themselves, and so endure only for a time. Afterward, when tribulation or persecution arises for the word’s sake, immediately they stumble." Mark 4:16-17

So are these people saved?

The verse says that they "hear the word, immediately receive it with gladness" so I would think that they are saved.

But it also says "endure only for a time" so that means they weren't saved?

But that contradicts the first half.

 

[Doubting Thomas]

"These likewise are the ones sown on stony ground who, when they hear the word, immediately receive it with gladness; and they have no root in themselves, and so endure only for a time. Afterward, when tribulation or persecution arises for the word’s sake, immediately they stumble." Mark 4:16-17

So are these people saved?

Initially, yes.

The verse says that they "hear the word, immediately receive it with gladness" so I would think that they are saved.

So would I, particularlarly when a plant began to spring out from the earth from the seed (v5-6)

But it also says "endure only for a time" so that means they weren't saved?

But that contradicts the first half.

Not unless one assumes "once saved always saved". If one doesn't assume OSAS, then it does not contradict the first half.

Luke's version says of this same group: "who believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away" (Luke 8:13). (It doesn't say that they merely pretended to believe or had some sort of "false" belief)

 

[targus]

"These likewise are the ones sown on stony ground who, when they hear the word, immediately receive it with gladness; and they have no root in themselves, and so endure only for a time. Afterward, when tribulation or persecution arises for the word’s sake, immediately they stumble." Mark 4:16-17

So are these people saved?

The verse says that they "hear the word, immediately receive it with gladness" so I would think that they are saved.

But it also says "endure only for a time" so that means they weren't saved?

But that contradicts the first half.

No opinions?

 

[Zenas]

"These likewise are the ones sown on stony ground who, when they hear the word, immediately receive it with gladness; and they have no root in themselves, and so endure only for a time. Afterward, when tribulation or persecution arises for the word’s sake, immediately they stumble." Mark 4:16-17

So are these people saved?

The verse says that they "hear the word, immediately receive it with gladness" so I would think that they are saved.

But it also says "endure only for a time" so that means they weren't saved?

But that contradicts the first half.

No contradiction here. They were saved for a little while. Then when things get a little testy, they fall away. This is only one of dozens of places in scripture where OSAS is refuted.

 

[targus]

What do we do to get saved the second time then?

Is it necessary to make another altar call and pray the sinner's prayer again?

How many times can we do this?

How do we know if we fell away and are no longer saved?

 

[Doubting Thomas]

What do we do to get saved the second time then?

Is it necessary to make another altar call and pray the sinner's prayer again?

How many times can we do this?

How do we know if we fell away and are no longer saved?

Confess and Repent. In fact, one's Christian walk should be one of ongoing confession and repentence as we continue to grow in grace. If we continue to abide in Christ we'll bear fruit. We should continue to examine ourselves to see if we are bearing fruit, and above all we must continue to come before God with humility so He will give more grace (James 4:6).

I could go into more detail but time is short. However, Paul states Christians who currently stand by faith must continue in the goodness of God or else they will be cut off (just as the unbelieving Jews were--Romans 11:17-23)--however, if one doesn't persist in unbelief, that one can be grafted in again.

 

[Marcia]

"These likewise are the ones sown on stony ground who, when they hear the word, immediately receive it with gladness; and they have no root in themselves, and so endure only for a time. Afterward, when tribulation or persecution arises for the word’s sake, immediately they stumble." Mark 4:16-17

So are these people saved?
/quote]


No, I don't think so. Receiving something doesn't mean they were regenerated - just that they heard, liked what they heard, maybe thought they believed but actually didn't.

I think the key is that it says "they have no root in themselves," so the word wasn't rooted in them, it was a superficial reception. It's what some people say is a "professed faith" but not a "confessed faith."

 

[targus]

No, I don't think so. Receiving something doesn't mean they were regenerated - just that they heard, liked what they heard, maybe thought they believed but actually didn't.

I think the key is that it says "they have no root in themselves," so the word wasn't rooted in them, it was a superficial reception. It's what some people say is a "professed faith" but not a "confessed faith."

How do we know if we believe or just think that we believe?

How do we know if we have a professed faith but not a confessed faith?

 

[Marcia]

How do we know if we believe or just think that we believe?

How do we know if we have a professed faith but not a confessed faith?

Because the Holy Spirit "bears witness" to us that we are saved:

The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, Rom 8.16

If one is truly saved, he/she is regenerated by the Holy Spirit and has the desire to read and know God's word, develops a strong hatred of sin, wants to please God, feels a kindred bond with other believers, and is convicted when he/she sins. It is normal for new believers to wonder if they are saved - I think this may go on for a year or two. But also, they should notice new reactions to things (assuming they were saved beyond childhood) versus how they reacted before Christ.

After a time, growth should be noticeable so that the person rejects sinful actions more and desires to deepen his/her relationship with Jesus. Sometimes people get away from this and drift, but usually they are convicted and come back.

 

[drfuss]

drfuss: For practical purposes, the difference between believing in eternal security and believing that a True Christian can stop believing is primarily just a play on words.

Consider the following: A person trusts Christ as Savior and serves Him for a year. For some reason, the person then decides to stop trusting in Christ as Savior and stops serving Him. The person dies not trusting in Christ. Will he go to heaven?

In general, the eternal security believer will claim that person was not really a True Christian in the first place or he would not have stopped trusting Christ; he just thought he was a Christian. OSAS would not be true if that person was a true Christian. Since he was never really a Christian and therefore was not trusting Christ when he dies, he will not go to heaven.

Those not believing in eternal security will say that person could have been a True Christian, but decided to stop trusting Christ as Savior. Since he was not trusting Christ as Savior when he dies, he will not go to heaven.

Both beliefs say that if a person is a Christian, there will be some evidence of it by his service to the Lord.

Note that both beliefs say that the person will not go to heaven because he was not trusting Christ as Savior when he died. In this example, the only real difference between the two beliefs is how they describe that person before he stopped trusting Christ. Since trusting Christ when he dies is what is important, how that person is described before he stopped trusting Christ is the only difference and that is "just a play on words".

 

[Amy.G]

drfuss: For practical purposes, the difference between believing in eternal security and believing that a True Christian can stop believing is primarily just a play on words.

Consider the following: A person trusts Christ as Savior and serves Him for a year. For some reason, the person then decides to stop trusting in Christ as Savior and stops serving Him. The person dies not trusting in Christ. Will he go to heaven?

In general, the eternal security believer will claim that person was not really a True Christian in the first place or he would not have stopped trusting Christ; he just thought he was a Christian. OSAS would not be true if that person was a true Christian. Since he was never really a Christian and therefore was not trusting Christ when he dies, he will not go to heaven.

Those not believing in eternal security will say that person could have been a True Christian, but decided to stop trusting Christ as Savior. Since he was not trusting Christ as Savior when he dies, he will not go to heaven.

Both beliefs say that if a person is a Christian, there will be some evidence of it by his service to the Lord.

Note that both beliefs say that the person will not go to heaven because he was not trusting Christ as Savior when he died. In this example, the only real difference between the two beliefs is how they describe that person before he stopped trusting Christ. Since trusting Christ when he dies is what is important, how that person is described before he stopped trusting Christ is the only difference and that is "just a play on words".

It's not just a play on words. It's an attack on God's authority to keep those who are His.

Yes, both the people you decribed will end up in hell. One by his own choosing, and the other by God's inablility to keep him.


A person who once trusted Christ and then doesn't trust Christ makes zero sense to me. We only stop trusting someone when they prove to be untrustworthy. Christ can never be proven to be untrustworthy.

 

[drfuss]

It's not just a play on words. It's an attack on God's authority to keep those who are His.

Yes, both the people you decribed will end up in hell. One by his own choosing, and the other by God's inablility to keep him.


A person who once trusted Christ and then doesn't trust Christ makes zero sense to me. We only stop trusting someone when they prove to be untrustworthy. Christ can never be proven to be untrustworthy.

drfuss: God is completely sovereign and will keep any Christian who continues to trust Him as Savior. Your claim that this is an attack on
God's authority is not only meaningless, but misrepresents what others believe.

God does not force Himself on anyone including those who trust Him. A Christian who decides to stop trusting Christ makes zero sense to you because OSAS teaches that it is impossible.

There is no scripture that specifically says a Christian can not or will not stop trusting Christ. Only scriptures that OSAS Christians interprete to mean OSAS, such as John 10:26-30 and Romans 8:38,39. On the other hand, there are many scriptures that encourage Christians to continue trusting in Christ.

I do not wish to get into yet another endless OSAS debate. So let's just agree to disagree on this. The difference is not really important anyway since it is "just a play on words".

 

[Rubato 1]

"These likewise are the ones sown on stony ground who, when they hear the word, immediately receive it with gladness; and they have no root in themselves, and so endure only for a time. Afterward, when tribulation or persecution arises for the word’s sake, immediately they stumble." Mark 4:16-17

So are these people saved?

The verse says that they "hear the word, immediately receive it with gladness" so I would think that they are saved.

But it also says "endure only for a time" so that means they weren't saved?

But that contradicts the first half.

The explanation is in the words 'no root in themselves. Christ is not in them.

They recieve the word with gladness because it sounds good, makes sense, or looks like an escape route, etc. without actually trusting God's promise of salvation. This is why they fall away so easily when tribulation comes.

They did not 'loose' the root that was in them; they had no root. They were following what sounded good without true regeneration.

Only a person who was OS can understand OSAS.

 

[Zenas]

Only a person who was OS can understand OSAS.

I regard that as highly insulting (even with the smiley face attached). I am OS, have been OS since I received Christ in 1958, I and still don't understand OSAS. People have tried to explain it to me all my life and I don't get it. It contradicts scripture and it also contradicts reason.

 

[Rubato 1]

...it also contradicts reason.

I'm not gonna go through a long, pointless debate with anybody who has a closed mind.

My favorite example of behavior on earth, Jesus, did not ever deal with the issue of being re-saved, nor explain to someone the need to be re-saved, nor talk to anyone who had lost thier salvation. He always talked about being saved once. As far as I know, he didn't talk to anyone (one-on-one) about salvation more than once. Maybe he forgot to address the important issue of dealing with people who had lost their salvation?

Just like the thing about the sinners' prayer, I ask: if it is such a vital procedure, why did Jesus never participate in it?

 

[LeBuick]

It's not just a play on words. It's an attack on God's authority to keep those who are His.

Yes, both the people you decribed will end up in hell. One by his own choosing, and the other by God's inablility to keep him.


A person who once trusted Christ and then doesn't trust Christ makes zero sense to me. We only stop trusting someone when they prove to be untrustworthy. Christ can never be proven to be untrustworthy.

Good words... :thumbs:

 

[LeBuick]

"These likewise are the ones sown on stony ground who, when they hear the word, immediately receive it with gladness; and they have no root in themselves, and so endure only for a time. Afterward, when tribulation or persecution arises for the word’s sake, immediately they stumble." Mark 4:16-17

So are these people saved?.

There is no secret and there never has been, everyone AT Church is not IN the Church.

 

[Zenas]

I'm not gonna go through a long, pointless debate with anybody who has a closed mind.

My favorite example of behavior on earth, Jesus, did not ever deal with the issue of being re-saved, nor explain to someone the need to be re-saved, nor talk to anyone who had lost thier salvation. He always talked about being saved once. As far as I know, he didn't talk to anyone (one-on-one) about salvation more than once. Maybe he forgot to address the important issue of dealing with people who had lost their salvation?

Just like the thing about the sinners' prayer, I ask: if it is such a vital procedure, why did Jesus never participate in it?

That's not the point Rubato. I agree a debate would be pointless but what I resent is your insinuation that I and those like me who reject OSAS are not saved. Surely you can't mean that adherence to this doctrine is is the sine qua non of salvation.

 

[Rubato 1]

If your salvation may be lost at a given moment, why be upset by a (mistaken) inference that you are not saved?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

drfuss:
"There is no scripture that specifically says a Christian can not or will not stop trusting Christ. Only scriptures that OSAS Christians interprete to mean OSAS, such as John 10:26-30 and Romans 8:38,39. On the other hand, there are many scriptures that encourage Christians to continue trusting in Christ."

GE:
Typical freewill 'logic'. It is only saying, There are many scriptures that encourage Christians to continue trusting in Christ because no scripture specifically says a Christian can not or will not stop trusting Christ. Which is pure nonsensical untruth.

Will God's Word tell you, Persevere, keep on! because you are going to fail? Or, Persevere, keep on! because by my grace you are not going to fail?