The high cost of a believer rejecting Jesus Christ

[icthus]

It is evident from Scripture, that those who have been born-again, can end up rejecting Jesus Christ, and lose their salvation. This is no theory, but the plain teaching of the Holy Bible. I am going to refer to a passage from the book of Hebrews, and would like the Calvinists to have some honest answers.

Hebrews 10:28-31

"Anyone who has rejected Moses’ law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses.Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know Him who said, "Vengeance is Mine, I will repay," says the Lord. And again, "The LORD will judge His people." It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God"

There are some, who are under the false impression, that shuch warnings in Scripture are nothing more than "hypothetical", and are in fact not warnings at all. This view, I believe this a delusion, and one that the enemy would like us to hold to. The reality is, that this, and other warnings found in Scripture are indeed what they are, and ought to be heeded by all those who claim to follow the Lord Jesus Christ.

The identity of those spoken off in the above passage, is claerly of someone who has been born-again by the Holy Spirit. For, they are clearly said to be "sanctified by the blood of Jesus" (v.29), language that would not have been used for someone who is not born-again. Further, we read in verse 30, where it says of these, that, "the Lord shall judge His people". Again, hardly language used of the unsaved.

What are these mentioned in this passage, guilty of? Verse 28 tells us of those who "rejected", or "spurned", the Law of Moses, which in effect, is The Law of God, as He is the Lawgiver. These who treated the Law of God with disdain, were condemned to death with no mercy. Paul, then goes on to speak of the "worse", "more severe" punishment, than those who suffered by rejecting the Law of Moses, were "considered worth of". These "believers" of verse 29, are said to have "trodden under foot the Son of God", which is treat Him with the utmost contempt. They are also guilty of reckoning that the Holy blood of Jesus Christ, by which they had been "sanctified", an "unholy (or common)" thing; and thereby had "insulted" the Holy Spirit. This can only be considered as the ultimate sin against God, which is the "Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit".

I personally cannot see this passage refer to someone who is not truly saved, or even to someone who might be just "seeking" for the Truth, but has not as yet decided to follow Christ. The language does not allow for this, and must be taken to refer to those who have been born-agian by the Spirit of God.

 

[icthus]

Do any Calvinists have any answers here?

 

[4His_glory]

Originally posted by icthus:
Do any Calvinists have any answers here?

Do you enjoy provoking people or what? It seems that you have nothing better to do with your time. The fact is when you are shown the truth you ignore it. Why should any one give you and honest expostion of this passage? It is a waste of their time.

 

[icthus]

Originally posted by 4His_glory:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by icthus:
Do any Calvinists have any answers here?

Do you enjoy provoking people or what? It seems that you have nothing better to do with your time. The fact is when you are shown the truth you ignore it. Why should any one give you and honest expostion of this passage? It is a waste of their time. </font>[/QUOTE]Well, I seem to have got to one!

I like posting thought-provoking stuff, not nonsense. I also like to deal with facts. Why don't you try to respond to the OP?

 

[Pastor Larry]

The high cost would be that God is a liar. He said that once we are his, nothing can take us away from him. In too many passages to list, God promises that the truly saved are always saved. John 6 and John 10, are explicit, as is Phil 1:6, and many many others.

Your Hebrews 10 passage is not answering the question you are asking. The blood by which "he was sanctified" does not have to refer to the unbeliever. It could refer to Christ. It could also be discussing what would happen if someone did turn away. But the Scripture reveals that the truly saved won't. Hebrews 10 is a passage of great import for us and it would do well for us to actually understand it.

This person is an enemy of God. That is not a description of a saved person.

Receiving knowledge of the truth means they heard; it does not mean that they are genuine believers.

"Sanctified" -- The NT uses sanctified of people who aren't saved. 1 Cor 7 talks about a believing spouse and an unbelieving spouse. The unbeliever is sanctified through their believing spouse. That clearly doesn't mean saved. We should be able to agree that such a case would be absurd. The word means simply set apart. It is about a good influence, not a salvation. The marriage should not be dissolved because of that "setting apart." Even in Hebrews we see a use that is not about salvation. In 9:13, the blood and ashes sanctified for the cleansing of the flesh. That is not salvation. The blood of bulls and goats could set things apart, but they could not save (9:14; 10:4). In Heb 10:14, you have a further evidence that this sanctify is not salvation. 10:14 tells us that that those who are saved are made perfect forever. This person, if they fall away, was not. Therefore, they were not sanctified, as in salvation. They were set apart from others by having heard and having consciously and willfully reject it.

YOu reference the end that the Lord will judge his people. If you read what the author was citing from the OT (Deut 32:35,36) you see that the Lord will vindicate his people (clear them from accusation) and will judge others.

Here is a link to a good sermon that will help your understanding: http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?currSection=sermonsspeaker&sermonID=1130392539

Once again, we see someone so desparate that they will say anything to try to prove it. This type of handling of Scripture has historically led to false doctrine that might damn the souls of those affected by it.

Serious study of this passage will show the flaws in the interpretation presented in teh OP. But at least, this passage is actually a challenge to interpret, unlike most passages put forth in refutation of biblical soteriology.

 

[JGrubbs]

I'm not a Calvinist, but I don't believe your OP has made a valid point, you say "This is no theory, but the plain teaching of the Holy Bible." When in reality it is simply your own interpretation of the Holy Bible.

The plain teaching of the Holy Bible says that when a person puts their faith in Christ there is nothing that can take them out of His hands.

If someone is in the "church" (little c) and rejects Christ, they haven't lost their salvation, they were just playing the religious game and got tired of it. When a person gives their life to the Lord and receives the Holy Spirit in their life, there is nothing they can do to kick the Holy Spirit out, they WILL preserver to the end!

 

[ILUVLIGHT]

Hi Larry;

This type of handling of Scripture has historically led to false doctrine that damns the souls of those affected by it.

Exactly how I see the false doctrine of Calvinism and your poor interpretation of scripture.
I wonder do you ever really defend what you believe.

The high cost would be that God is a liar. He said that once we are his, nothing can take us away from him. In too many passages to list, God promises that the truly saved are always saved.John 6 and John 10, are explicit, as is Phil 1:6, and many many others.

My goodness is that all you have. These few would not hold in any court as proof. But these would win Icthus Side of the Argument.
Hebrews 6:4-6, 10:26-29, 12:15-17, Mat 5:13, 2:31-32, 2nd, Peter 2:20-22, 21:24, Luke8:13, 20:18 Romans 11:11 2Peter2:10, 3:17, 1st Jn5:16 Mk 11:26, Rev 22:18-19, 3:16, Jn 15:6. I have more but you wouldn't even look at them anyway.
7 Witnesses from the Word says icthus is right and you're wrong. I believe them. You should too.
May Christ Shine His Light On Us All;
Mike

 

[Pastor Larry]

Exactly how I see the false doctrine of Calvinism and your poor interpretation of scripture.

You are incorrect.

I wonder do you ever really defend what you believe.

Always, and I have defended longer than you have been here. In fact, I gave a solid defense above of the proper interpretation of this passage. I can't help but notice you didn't deal with that, but just ran off on your own little deal. Why not deal with Scripture?

My goodness is that all you have. These few would not hold in any court as proof.

"Too many to list" is not a few, and whatever kind of court you are talking about is irrelevant, since truth is judged by revelation.

Those passages you list all agree with me. Not a one of them teaches you can lose your salvation. God has already made that clear. If you actually studied those passages, you would see that they don't contradict what I have said. You would agree with me. Why not do that? STudy them and then defend them here.

 

[ILUVLIGHT]

Hi Larry;

Always, and I have defended longer than you have been here. In fact, I gave a solid defense above of the proper interpretation of this passage. I can't help but notice you didn't deal with that, but just ran off on your own little deal. Why not deal with Scripture?

Did you read the counter verses which are just as clear if not clearer than what you presented?
If so and you still think you have defended you faith in the "P" Your are incorrect.
Read them your only risk is to have your eyes opened to the truth. Here they are again. I only want you to have the truth Larry.
Hebrews 6:4-6, 10:26-29, 12:15-17, Mat 5:13, 2:31-32, 2nd, Peter 2:20-22, 21:24, Luke8:13, 20:18 Romans 11:11 2Peter2:10, 3:17, 1st Jn5:16 Mk 11:26, Rev 22:18-19, 3:16, Jn 15:6.
OOp's you loose that debate
May Christ Shine His Light On Us All;
Mike

 

[Pastor Larry]

I have read them all. I think I have preached from all of them at one time or another. I have the truth. That is how I know the your position is incorrect. You have not even interacted with what I said above. Did you listen to the message link I posted. You should. It would help your understanding.

Let me ask some questions, and see if you can actually answer this. Don't answer Yes or No, but defend your position, whatever it is.

John 6:40 40 "For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day."

Does this verse mean that some who behold and believe will fail to be raised up at the last day?

John 6:39 39 "This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day.

Does this verse means that who have been given to the Son will be lost by their failure to believe?

Philippians 1:6 6 For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus.

Does this mean that God will not really finish the work that he began but will allow someone to slip away?

 

[TCassidy]

You can't lose what you don't have. Paul said he knew whom he had believed, and was persuaded that He was able to keep that which Paul had committed unto Him.

If you have committed your (eternal) life to Christ, you don't have it so you can't lose it.

If, on the other hand, a person can lose it then it is evident he still has it and thus has not committed it to Christ.

 

[icthus]

Larry, nice try, but you have still not dealt with the issues that i ahve raised in my OP. You still hold to that nonsense, and claim to have the truth, when you say that the passage is speaking of what "could happen". Why would the Bible waste its space on such nonsense, seeing that this could NEVER happen in your books? The Bible teaches facts and not conjecture as you do.

Are you suggesting that the phrase "the blood by which he was sanctified", can be used for an unsaved person? Is this not then Universalism? as it clearly shows that those who are not saved have rejected Christ even before they believe on Him. Surely you must have a better response than this, espacially since you say that you have preached from this passage?

I suppose you also imagine that the phrase in Hebrews 6:4, "were made partakers of the Holy Spirit2, also can be used for an unsaved person. This would mean, that a person who is demon possessed and worships the devil, can be called "a partaker of the Holy Spirit"? You guys should at least be humble enough to admit from time to time that you could be wrong. At least Dr Dabney, one of your own, at least admitted that the Calvinistic twist to John 3:16 and 1 John 2:2, were not sound!

 

[icthus]

Originally posted by TCassidy:
You can't lose what you don't have. Paul said he knew whom he had believed, and was persuaded that He was able to keep that which Paul had committed unto Him.

If you have committed your (eternal) life to Christ, you don't have it so you can't lose it.

If, on the other hand, a person can lose it then it is evident he still has it and thus has not committed it to Christ.

What then did Paul mean by, "fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life..."(1 Timothy 6:12)? What does "lay hold of" (epilambano)? The Greek has the meaning of, "to grasp, hold tight". Why would he need to tell Timothy, who was alread saved, "to grasp", "eternal life", if it could not be lost? Does not make any sense. But, then again, to you this is only showing "what could happen".

 

[Pastor Larry]

Larry, nice try, but you have still not dealt with the issues that i ahve raised in my OP. You still hold to that nonsense, and claim to have the truth, when you say that the passage is speaking of what "could happen". Why would the Bible waste its space on such nonsense, seeing that this could NEVER happen in your books? The Bible teaches facts and not conjecture as you do.

I have taught no conjecture whatsoever. This is not conjecture. It is a statement of fact. If someone does this, they are the enemy of God and there is no other sacrifice than the one they have turned from. They will face God's judgment. That is not conjecture. It is fact.

Surely you do not dispute that someone who has heard the gospel but never truly been saved can walk away from it and face judgment ... or do you?

Are you suggesting that the phrase "the blood by which he was sanctified", can be used for an unsaved person?

I am saying it can be used of Christ, or it can be used of a saved person, or it can be used of an unsaved person (as I gave examples of already, that you didn't bother to deal with). The context tells us which.

Is this not then Universalism? as it clearly shows that those who are not saved have rejected Christ even before they believe on Him.

No, that is nonsense.

Surely you must have a better response than this, espacially since you say that you have preached from this passage?

What better response could I give than accurate exegesis of Scripture? Perhaps you have a higher standard. I don't. I stop with what Scripture says.

I suppose you also imagine that the phrase in Hebrews 6:4, "were made partakers of the Holy Spirit2, also can be used for an unsaved person.

Yes, it can be. Here is something you can study if you are really interested. http://dbts.edu/dbts/journals/1996_1/HEB6.PDF

My suspicion is that you are not that interested in studying through this. If you were, then you would be aware of the issues, even if you didn't agree with me on them.

You guys should at least be humble enough to admit from time to time that you could be wrong.

I have admitted that on many things. I have also demonstrated you to be wrong on many occasions and you have yet to admit it. It gives us pause to wonder whether or not you even understand the issues that are being discussed.

At least Dr Dabney, one of your own, at least admitted that the Calvinistic twist to John 3:16 and 1 John 2:2, were not sound!

I am not aware of what Dabney said on this issue. I am aware of different interpretations of these verses. But I think some Calvinists are wrong on things. We don't all agree on the particulars.

Did you listen to the link I gave above yet? You need to.

 

[ILUVLIGHT]

Hi Larry;

I have read them all. I think I have preached from all of them at one time or another. I have the truth. That is how I know the your position is incorrect. You have not even interacted with what I said above. Did you listen to the message link I posted. You should. It would help your understanding.

I wasn't speaking to the guy in the link you provided. I was speaking to you. Just because you read and preached from them doesn't mean your understanding of them is correct, or my understanding wrong. Your defense doesn't stand because it isn't your's, it's some body elses. Most likely like your sermons. Maybe they are someone elses and not yours. Just no original thought. Paul called it building on another mans ministery. It's alright Larry most pastors do the same thing they rely on the work of someone else. Putting a sermon together is just to much trouble when so many have all ready done that and put them in a book or on the net for all to copy.
May Christ Shine His Light On Us All;
Mike

 

[OSAS]

Originally posted by icthus:
It is evident from Scripture, that those who have been born-again, can end up rejecting Jesus Christ, and lose their salvation. This is no theory, but the plain teaching of the Holy Bible.

What What What???

You mean God is NOT "Omnipotent"?
You mean God is NOT "Omnipresent"?
You mean God is NOT "Omniscient"?

Where in the holy cannon does it say that God is a "liar", and an "indian giver"?

Shall we start by throwing Acts 15:18 "Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world." into the trashcan? We can just rip that page out of the bible and crumple it up?

Wait a minute, I am not going to post two hundred plus verses here to prove a point. So basically what you are saying is to ignore the entire set of Pauline Epistles? Making absolutely sure we tear the entire book of Romans out of the bible in case we are tempted to read what it says????

Ok, lets say all of Paul's letters have been removed from the bible.

What about the words of Jesus? Shall we tear out the gospels where he obviously "lied" as well???

Gosh, there goes the entire chapter 17 of John amongst others.

And of course Revelation 17:8 "The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is."

Ok, so we need to remove all books written by John. (seeing as John spreads lies)

Peter? He lied? 1 Peter 1:20 "Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you," Well, there went the rock that Jesus wanted to build His church on.

Lets scrap old Matthew too... Matthew 25:34 "Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:"

So all we have left that hasn't lied so far is Mark, Jude, and Luke? (if I were you, I wouldn't trust Luke as a writer, he was a Paul sympathizer.) And some say Matt clipped his gospel from Mark, so there went Mark down the chute.

Ooops... Gotta trash Jude and wretched lies too! Jude 1:24 "Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy,

Ok, so now that we realize that the entire New Testement is full of lies, what scripture do we turn to next?????

 

[whetstone]

haha very nicely put (if not quite vehement). but i agree 100%. the alternate position is not Biblical at all.

 

[ILUVLIGHT]

Hi OSAS;
You said this not me;

the entire New Testement is full of lies,

It's nice to know you have no respect for Gods word. You have such a pitiful defense of your false theology that it is laughable. Nice try though. Never know you might do better next time. NOT;
May Christ Shine His Light On Us All;
Mike

 

[icthus]

Originally posted by OSAS:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by icthus:
It is evident from Scripture, that those who have been born-again, can end up rejecting Jesus Christ, and lose their salvation. This is no theory, but the plain teaching of the Holy Bible.

What What What???

You mean God is NOT "Omnipotent"?
You mean God is NOT "Omnipresent"?
You mean God is NOT "Omniscient"?

Where in the holy cannon does it say that God is a "liar", and an "indian giver"?

Shall we start by throwing Acts 15:18 "Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world." into the trashcan? We can just rip that page out of the bible and crumple it up?

Wait a minute, I am not going to post two hundred plus verses here to prove a point. So basically what you are saying is to ignore the entire set of Pauline Epistles? Making absolutely sure we tear the entire book of Romans out of the bible in case we are tempted to read what it says????

Ok, lets say all of Paul's letters have been removed from the bible.

What about the words of Jesus? Shall we tear out the gospels where he obviously "lied" as well???

Gosh, there goes the entire chapter 17 of John amongst others.

And of course Revelation 17:8 "The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is."

Ok, so we need to remove all books written by John. (seeing as John spreads lies)

Peter? He lied? 1 Peter 1:20 "Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you," Well, there went the rock that Jesus wanted to build His church on.

Lets scrap old Matthew too... Matthew 25:34 "Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:"

So all we have left that hasn't lied so far is Mark, Jude, and Luke? (if I were you, I wouldn't trust Luke as a writer, he was a Paul sympathizer.) And some say Matt clipped his gospel from Mark, so there went Mark down the chute.

Ooops... Gotta trash Jude and wretched lies too! Jude 1:24 "Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy,

Ok, so now that we realize that the entire New Testement is full of lies, what scripture do we turn to next????? </font>[/QUOTE]You argue as a fool does. You have failed to deal with my OP. The texts that you have provided only show one side of the argument. All you have done here is to follow Whetstone and rant!

 

[OSAS]

Originally posted by ILUVLIGHT:
Hi OSAS;
You said this not me;

the entire New Testement is full of lies,

Hey! That was a pretty good job of ripping a line of my post out of context! Of course all that practice you have had doing the same with scripture must attribute to your grand talent.