Have you repented from this haughty spirit?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Some of the best Conditional “IF” Statements in the NT
- Thread starter Samuels
- Start date
- Status
Jon, God doesn't change all that much.
Actually, He says He doesn't change, period.
He has been giving multitudes of dreams, visions, and words in the Spirit
... warning His people of what is coming upon us.
And he gave America a reprieve (time to repent) by putting Trump into office!
We been marked and sealed by the Holy Spirit, so what/who can overcome Him? Greater in He in us, ten the he in the world, correct?
I think that if you read Rev. 14 you might see that it does not speak if people losing eternal life. This is what I mean about your reconciling passages not to other passages but to your conclusions by bending them to your understanding instead if simply taking them as they come. We need to derive our understanding from Scripture instead of looking to Scripture to support our ideas.
Would you kindly give me the Scripture reference for this quotation, please? I can't seem to find it.
Also, would you regard someone who denied knowing Christ three times as someone who had taken the mark of the beast?
His wording here sound a Lot like SDA, who claim that Sunday Worship in the end days will be Mark of the Beast!
Sure, absolutely ... that's why I'm 99% quoting the NT Scriptures.See how subjective such claims of having a "vision" can be?
Is that okay with you?
Please refresh my memory ...
I thought Rev 13-14 warns of being thrown into the Lake of Fire,
if you take the mark of the beast.
I AM ALWAYS ANXIOUS TO LEARN SPIRITUAL TRUTH!
i.e. I am always willing to be corrected.
Please note:
I came into this without having been deceived by any previous ridiculous false doctrines.
You might just consider it as being a gift.That's quite the oxymoron..."Lose" his "eternal" life...Not quite eternal then is it.
A gift lasts forever unless it is thrown away, destroyed, burned, etc.
Yes, one's eternal life (in Heaven) is lost when one is cast into the fire and burned.
The disobedient are living in unbelief (so says Paul in Hebrews).
He says the OT Israelites were guilty of this, and warns us to not be like them.
And this is just another one of similar warnings, which are ignored/rejected by some.
Reconcile in the NT the so-called OSAS verses with the obvious anti-OSAS verses!
Almighty God has a reason for both sets of verses!
Last edited:
It always causes to me wonder why those people who deny the Gospel message bother to come onto this type of forum and accuse Christ of being a liar, then insisting it is them who are right and us who are terrible sinners.
John 10:28 I give eternal life to them. They will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand.
29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all. No one is able to snatch them out of my Father’s hand.
The Devil can't snatch me from the Father's hand.
Even I can't snatch me from the Father's hand.
When Christ sees me He sees His own Righteousness. Even when we sin.
2 Timothy 2:13 If we are faithless, he remains faithful. For he can’t deny himself.
John 10:28 I give eternal life to them. They will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand.
29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all. No one is able to snatch them out of my Father’s hand.
The Devil can't snatch me from the Father's hand.
Even I can't snatch me from the Father's hand.
When Christ sees me He sees His own Righteousness. Even when we sin.
2 Timothy 2:13 If we are faithless, he remains faithful. For he can’t deny himself.
I can appreciate that you arrived at your conclusions strictly from reading Scripture. This is what I always encourage people to do as much too often it seems some like to read commentaries and adopt one understanding or another. But my caution is this – when you read a passage and come up with an original idea, it is always wrong. Yes, read and draw your own conclusions. But then test your conclusions against the understanding of others.
But to the topic, Revelation 14 simply does not speak of some saints forfeiting their salvation by worshipping the beast and his image, and receiving a mark on his forehead or on his hand. The verse speaks of God pouring out his wrath in full measure on those who worship the beast. But this is not how Scripture describes those who are saved. Paul tells the Thessalonians that God has not appointed or destined the saved to wrath. The author of Hebrews tells us that we have an assurance, if we are saved, that God’s promises will be fulfilled in us because of God’s own faithfulness. Paul tells the Colossians that it is God who has qualified us to share in the inheritance of the saints. And of course, we see in Revelation 3 that those who are called saints, those who are saved (among the people group the Bible refers to as “the elect”), are spoken of as enduring. And then in chapter 19 we are told that this is the perseverance of the saints.
You are blending categories of people. Either you are saved or you are not. There is no between. A saint is not a worshipper of the beast and a worshipper of the beast is not a saint.
The issue is not who will do what, but whether or not conversion is really what Scripture says that it is. If conversion is merely a decision to follow Christ, or some type of dedication towards the Christian religion, then I could see your position. But if conversion is a supernatural act of God whereby He re-creates sinful man, then your interpretation of Revelation cannot be correct.
You just imposed Human reasoning into your beliefs...or in other words...you have made your own reasoning authoritative as opposed to letting scripture dictate your beliefs.
1 Peter 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.
Last edited:
2 peter 2
20For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. 21For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them. 22It has happened to them according to the true proverb, “A DOG RETURNS TO ITS OWN VOMIT,” and, “A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire.”
Example please of someone who has known the way of righteousness and escaped defilements of the world, which could only be known by someone who is saved. And is now is worst off then a hell bound reprobate who does not know the way of righteousness.
Who is this man who is worst then hellbound?
20For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. 21For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them. 22It has happened to them according to the true proverb, “A DOG RETURNS TO ITS OWN VOMIT,” and, “A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire.”
Example please of someone who has known the way of righteousness and escaped defilements of the world, which could only be known by someone who is saved. And is now is worst off then a hell bound reprobate who does not know the way of righteousness.
Who is this man who is worst then hellbound?
That's quite the oxymoron..."Lose" his "eternal" life...Not quite eternal then is it.
No, it's not "oxymoronic"...
"lose" would be a statement of conditionality............
"eternal" would be a temporal statement of duration.
It's so simple...
But no Calvinist preacher wants to teach you the difference. (if they even know it).
There's no oxymoron there...but far be it from logic, reason or the Scriptures to threaten Augustinianism.
Last edited:
They don't deny the "gospel message"...
They reject your Manichean Augustinian spin on it.
They don't call Christ a "liar"....they suggest your Augustinianism is mistaken doctrine....that's hardly calling the Son of God a "liar"....
Had they called Christ a liar...you would have banned them.
But, you didn't....
Why not?
Aren't you a moderator?
Did they call our Saviour a "liar"???
Is that what happened?
Why weren't they banned then, for calling the Messiah a "liar"?
Oh, that's why....because they didn't..and you just "argue" like most Calvinists argue....in preposterous extremes.
Being "right" and being a sinner are two different things....
Sinners are often "right".
And it is usually the Calvinist who publicly flagellates themselves with self-loathing in order to demonstrate their adherence to their Manichean doctrine of "Original Sin".
Thus demonstrating to us all in quite colorful terms how much they hate themselves and how right they must be because they alone appreciate how disgusting a creature God made such as them.
It is Calvinists, not the opposition who insist that everyone is so "sinful" that they can't even distinguish between right and wrong...which makes me wonder why you cry foul so much.
Of course not....
because the active subject of the sentence "the SNATCHER"...
can't be the unwitting object of the crime or the "SNATCHEE"...
from any sentence....
That hardly means they can't walk away...
I can't "Snatch" myself away from anything...an action of my own will would be involved....
But a WOLF can decidedly SNATCH a SHEEP.
That hardly proves your point....
Granted, Satan will never "snatch" a sheep from God...that doesn't mean a sheep can't choose to wander away, and if they do........
No sane person would call that a "SNATCHING" now would they?
Has anyone ever found that argument convincing, like.............EVER???
If so, why?
It's the stupidest argument ever made.
Of course an unwitting agent can't wittingly "snatch" themselves....
But, can't a willing agent walk away?
Do Calvinists honestly think this argument is powerful????
Really?
Weren't you complaining three sentences ago that you were being accused of being "SINNERS"????
Last edited:
I'm curious.....
Why is it that this board accepts people who publicly call Christ a "liar"...why are they allowed to post?
Didn't one of the Administrators of this site just testify that someone called our Lord and Saviour a "liar"?
Didn't that just happen?
Who then is this person?
Why aren't those persons banned?
If they aren't yet banned....
Then which of these is true?
1.) Is it because they were guilty and called our Christ a "liar" and denied his redemptive work and his status as Messiah?.................and Baptist Board accepts that and doesn't care.
or
2.)Were they falsely accused of blasphemy by a supposed brother?
If they did, what action is being taken...
If not, then, are the Administrators on this site falsely accusing others of blasphemy?
Which of the two is it?
I want to know...
Who called our Christ a "LIAR" on this board...
If they didn't who lied and falsely accused them.
Why is it that this board accepts people who publicly call Christ a "liar"...why are they allowed to post?
Didn't one of the Administrators of this site just testify that someone called our Lord and Saviour a "liar"?
Didn't that just happen?
Who then is this person?
Why aren't those persons banned?
If they aren't yet banned....
Then which of these is true?
1.) Is it because they were guilty and called our Christ a "liar" and denied his redemptive work and his status as Messiah?.................and Baptist Board accepts that and doesn't care.
or
2.)Were they falsely accused of blasphemy by a supposed brother?
If they did, what action is being taken...
If not, then, are the Administrators on this site falsely accusing others of blasphemy?
Which of the two is it?
I want to know...
Who called our Christ a "LIAR" on this board...
If they didn't who lied and falsely accused them.
Last edited:
- Status