What must it be like -- to be wrong on a doctrinal POV?

[steaver]

Let me add something on works. Works are something that have to be done throughout the saved individuals lifetime. One can not give a cup of cold water in the right manner and then live like a heathen the rest of their life and expect to be well rewarded.

Entrance into the kingdom is about a lifetime of running the race. What you are describing is there are some people that will jump off the starting blocks and then just quit that will receive a prize. Or someone that runs a quarter of the race and then quits and will still receive a prize, or halfway or three quarters of the way. But that's not how it works. One has to "finish" the race before a prize is awarded.

Works should be thought of in this manner.

If a Christian produces just one piece of fruit in their lifetime the will receive what is coming to them, which will not be positive, but it won't be as bad as the person that did nothing.

We can't say that just because someone did "one" thing in their lifetime that they are going to rule and reign with Christ. That makes no sense on so many levels.

The kingdom is another topic and you should start a thread on it because it is not talked about much. I think you would get a huge response.

However, this is about the words of Christ "I never knew you" and you declaring that it is speaking about our (the saved) relationship with Christ viewed only through worthy works.

You can keep your salvation of the soul doctrine and still abandon the clear error in this view of Matt 7. However, i know that when a passage must be abandoned it does begin to raise questions about the whole. This is why we resist abandoning a passage so fervently.

God Bless!

 

[steaver]

(Jump)....Is one not enough? Is two not enough? How many do you need before you will be convinced?

You said there were more than one. Can you give another? Salvation of the soul is another topic and the passage you gave doers not speak about that either. You are trying to have a passage say more than is written.

Do you have another passage that would tell us that a born of God believer can have NO worthy works?

God Bless!

 

[J. Jump]

However, this is about the words of Christ "I never knew you" and you declaring that it is speaking about our (the saved) relationship with Christ viewed only through worthy works.

See that's where you are making your mistake. You are viewing the issue as an eternal salvation issue, when it clearly is not. Works are what are in view. It is their works that are being judged, not whether or not they have accepted the Substitute on their behalf a sinner.

This is a picture of the JSOC where ONLY saved individuals will stand.

So this is a kingdom issue, because the JSOC is determining who is worthy of entrance into the kingdom and who is not.

Eternal salvation isn't even in the context of the Lord, Lord passage.

 

[J. Jump]

Do you have another passage that would tell us that a born of God believer can have NO worthy works?

Again how many do you need? I gave you the parable of the talents and the parable of the pounds. Shouldn't that suffice? I would think that one would be enough.

Salvation of the soul is another topic and the passage you gave doers not speak about that either.

Sure it does. For eternally saved folks, which these people were the only issue that is on the table is the salvation of their soul. So by all means it is the topic of that text, although it's not in so many words. But that's why we compare Scripture with Scripture and build doctrine line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little.

The vast majority of the NT is in regard to the salvation of the soul. Very little is said of eternal salvation, but Christendom today has said that the majority of the NT is about eternal salvation. Which begs the question if eternal salvation is a simple message that even a child can understand why do we need 27 books explaining a message that can be expressed in a paragraph.

 

[steaver]

(Jump)....See that's where you are making your mistake. You are viewing the issue as an eternal salvation issue, when it clearly is not. Works are what are in view. It is their works that are being judged, not whether or not they have accepted the Substitute on their behalf a sinner.

This is a picture of the JSOC where ONLY saved individuals will stand.

So this is a kingdom issue, because the JSOC is determining who is worthy of entrance into the kingdom and who is not.

Eternal salvation isn't even in the context of the Lord, Lord passage.

I wrote that YOU are declaring that Christ is speaking to the saved in relationship to works. I never said that it was a judgment of salvation.

You say works are in view and it takes worthy works to enter into the kingdom. But Jesus said "I never knew you", and you say that Jesus means "I never knew you by your works".

AGAIN, the key word is "NEVER". You could not deal with this word and had to regress into saying that a Christian can be found wiothout even one worthy work and that is just riddiculus and I am certain that you truly know that it is.

God Bless!

 

[steaver]

(Jump)....The vast majority of the NT is in regard to the salvation of the soul. Very little is said of eternal salvation, but Christendom today has said that the majority of the NT is about eternal salvation. Which begs the question if eternal salvation is a simple message that even a child can understand why do we need 27 books explaining a message that can be expressed in a paragraph.__________________

Start a thread. I am sure you will get a huge response. Maybe you can get some converts to your side! :thumbs:

(Jump)....Again how many do you need? I gave you the parable of the talents and the parable of the pounds. Shouldn't that suffice? I would think that one would be enough.

Don't have any do you? There isn't any brother. Born of God believers in Christ will always have some worthy works. Your view of Matt 7 and "I never knew you" is collapsed. Those folks are not saved.

God Bless!

 

[J. Jump]

I never said that it was a judgment of salvation.

You do by your interpretation of the passage, whether you will verbally do it or not. You are saying that Jesus is telling these people that He never knew them in regards to a relationship with them. You are saying the context is eternal salvation.

However their "relationship" is in regard to works. NOTHING is spoken of in regard to the Substitutionary death and shed blood on their behalf a sinner, so eternal salvation CAN NOT be in view.

This is a passage about works. It's a judgment of whether works are worthy or not. The ONLY thing that can be in view, not because I say so, but because of what the TEXT SAYS is the judgment seat of Christ. The ONLY people in view at the JSOC are saved individuals.

At every turn your views are squashed. I have given you two passages that says it's possible that a saved individual can come up with ZERO at the JSOC.

There's nothing more that I can do, but show what Scripture actually SAYS.

My interpretation means NOTHING. The ONLY thing that matters is what does the Scriptures SAY. If we leave the text alone without any outside bias this is a judgment of works, therefore eternal salvation is already a settled matter.

 

[J. Jump]

Don't have any do you?

You amaze me. I gave you two and then you come back with this silly statement of nonsense.

Again this proves my whole post just several posts ago. All these discussions do with folks like you is turn into baseless accusations and name calling. Now you haven't called any names, but it happens with others.

I gave you two Scriptures and instead of dealing with them you come back with "don't have any." Give me a break. I'm done and hopefully next time I can resist the urge to have these pointless conversations.

 

[J. Jump]

Maybe you can get some converts to your side!

By the way I don't want any converts to "my" side. I just want people to take an honest and open look at what the Scriptures ACTUALLY SAY. That's very hard to find these days as has already been discussed.

And one just need a simple glimpse into your past to realize why you want to hold on to the things you are clinging to.

 

[steaver]

You do by your interpretation of the passage, whether you will verbally do it or not. You are saying that Jesus is telling these people that He never knew them in regards to a relationship with them. You are saying the context is eternal salvation.

However their "relationship" is in regard to works. NOTHING is spoken of in regard to the Substitutionary death and shed blood on their behalf a sinner, so eternal salvation CAN NOT be in view.

This is a passage about works. It's a judgment of whether works are worthy or not. The ONLY thing that can be in view, not because I say so, but because of what the TEXT SAYS is the judgment seat of Christ. The ONLY people in view at the JSOC are saved individuals.

At every turn your views are squashed. I have given you two passages that says it's possible that a saved individual can come up with ZERO at the JSOC.

There's nothing more that I can do, but show what Scripture actually SAYS.

My interpretation means NOTHING. The ONLY thing that matters is what does the Scriptures SAY. If we leave the text alone without any outside bias this is a judgment of works, therefore eternal salvation is already a settled matter.

And with all of that said.........

Jesus said "I NEVER knew you". You still have yet to put forth a scripture that states a born of God believer can go through life without even one worthy work.

God Bless!

ps. i could go through all of the doctrinal errors in your last post, but I don't want the point to be lost before you have a chance to answer it sufficiently.

 

[steaver]

(Jump)....I gave you two Scriptures and instead of dealing with them you come back with "don't have any." Give me a break. I'm done and hopefully next time I can resist the urge to have these pointless conversations.

You gave me two? Wasn't that one parable with the same message but penned in two different gospels? Or did I miss one? Please forgive me if I missed one.

And I did deal with the one you gave so that is not a true statement.

God Bless!

 

[J. Jump]

And I did deal with the one you gave so that is not a true statement.

Yes the "same message" was trying to be conveyed. That's the whole point there are two different human authors guided by the Holy Spirit that get the "same" point across. Is that not sufficient evidence for you?

And you did not deal with the text. You simply said he was not saved, but gave now textual evidence to support such a view. And again that's normally where these discussions end up. You run out of Scripture and your final resort is to say simply believe me because I say so. Sorry not going to happen here, but I am sure there will be MANY that will flock to your message should you wish, because people don't want to be held accountable these days. Everyone wants to do their own thing and expect their little piece of heaven no matter how big it is just as long as I squeeze through the gates.

How astonishing and reprehensible such an attitude is, but it is prevelant throughout Christendom . It breaks my heart.

 

[steaver]

(Jump)....And you did not deal with the text. You simply said he was not saved, but gave now textual evidence to support such a view. And again that's normally where these discussions end up. You run out of Scripture and your final resort is to say simply believe me because I say so. Sorry not going to happen here, but I am sure there will be MANY that will flock to your message should you wish, because people don't want to be held accountable these days. Everyone wants to do their own thing and expect their little piece of heaven no matter how big it is just as long as I squeeze through the gates.

What is it you want me to deal with in the text? You pointed me to the text as proof that a born of God believer can go through life without even one worthy work. Can you show me where your reference tells us such?

The text does not say that the man was a child of God and it does not say that he wasn't. So the point is moot and the text is moot to my original request from you to provide a scripture.

God Bless! :thumbs:

 

[steaver]

(Jump)....By the way I don't want any converts to "my" side. I just want people to take an honest and open look at what the Scriptures ACTUALLY SAY. That's very hard to find these days as has already been discussed.

If you want people to understand the kingdom the way you do then you need to engage them. Open up a thread on it and give it your best shot to teach them something. If they will not listen, what is that to you? At least you tried. But please be open to the fact that not every single passage that you provide is really a great source to support the view. Some scriptures can be streched and should really be abandoned as "proofs". (Matt 7 is one of them)

God Bless! :thumbs:

 

[steaver]

(Jump)....I just want people to take an honest and open look at what the Scriptures ACTUALLY SAY.

That cuts both ways brother. You gone beyond what is written in many ways to come up with your conclusions about many positions.

God Bless! :wavey:

 

[J. Jump]

The text does not say that the man was a child of God and it does not say that he wasn't.

You are exactly right, but context tells us whether he was or whether he wasn't. And context tells us he was, so we must go with that evidence and understand the passage in that Light.

There is no contextual way the severant could have been unsaved. So understanding that this text shows us that it is possible that there are going to be those that stand at the JSOC with NOTHING to show for their walk on earth, but a walk in the flesh instead of by the spirit.

 

[J. Jump]

You gone beyond what is written in many ways to come up with your conclusions about many positions.

That is mere opinion and has never been substantiated.

 

[EdSutton]

In answer to the topic heading, I say about the same as being absolutely sure one is right on some point, when in fact the Scriptures may not be all that clear on the subject, or not even address it.

But I am not getting anymore involved with this thread.

"Adios, amigos!"

Ed

 

[steaver]

(Jump).....There is no contextual way the severant could have been unsaved. So understanding that this text shows us that it is possible that there are going to be those that stand at the JSOC with NOTHING to show for their walk on earth, but a walk in the flesh instead of by the spirit.

Actually, in context and refering to the full counsel of God, any person who claims Jesus as Lord (if it be true and not just pretending) will bear good fruits because Jesus Christ lives in them and they are a good branch blooming out of a good Vine. Without the root of Christ a person's works are worthless.

Scripture refutes the thought that the servant personally knew Jesus Christ as Lord. In fact the servant stated..."I knew thee that thou art an hard man"...if the servant had a personal relationship with Jesus Christ he would know that Jesus was not at all a "hard man", but very gentle and forgiving to His sheep. The man's very words condemned him before a loving and kind Master.

Without a solid understanding of "born of God" one will continue to wrestle with these kind of passages. Go back and study what it means to be born of God and then you will see these scriptures in a brand new light. Children of the Light do not act like this slothful servant, therefore another message must be extracted from the parable. The saved are Jesus' sheep and they follow Him!

God Bless! :thumbs:

 

[Hope of Glory]

Yet Jump refuses to change his view about the interpretation of the passage. Would you say that this is what you are eluding to in the OP? Jump will NEVER abandon the position if he cannot see the black and white flaw in his view of Matt 7s "I NEVER knew you".

This actually made me laugh out loud!

I know J. Jump.

He changed his view to this, after reading what the text actually says, instead of what "sounds good" like what you espouse.

However, I can say emphatically, "Steaver wil NEVER abandon his position if he cannot see the black and white flaw in his view of Matth 7s 'I NEVER knew you'."