Saved by Grace Through Faith, Not by Works

[GodsGrace]

Not really. I have to assume it is related to the idea that having free will means the freedom to undo what God does when one believes. Or something like that.


He already did "share in the inheritance". Before he left the father and wandered into the far country.


Seems you've finally come to the realization that one has eternal security. Sweet!

Sorry FG
I was being a bit sarcastic on the last one.

The Prodigal Son got his share BEFORE he left. But he would get nothing after the father died.

Jesus had to die for us to get our inheritance. I'm sure you now this is why it's called a Testament.
We get plenty of blessings before Jesus dies while we are at His die.
But will we get the final inheritance once WE die?
I think not.

And, yes, you did guess at why I was asking about free will.
No use to rehash.
If we DO have free will, why does it get taken away once we're saved??
Just explain this to me.

 

[GodsGrace]

When does he get the inheritance? Do you force him to take it if he does not want it? Wouldn't he have to come back and receive it?

What if he dies before you give it to him?

I think people miss the aspect of the story that the son repented and returned home. He did not show up expecting anything, which is a clear sign of his repentance. The fact he returned was a clear sign of his faith.

I'm sorry Nathan.

I haven't been following along and really do not know your position.

He got his inheritance when he left. He asked for it and the Father gave it.

THAT was the end of his inheritance. There might have been more available upon the death of the father, but the Pr Son would not share in it.


Once the inheritance was given, that was it. LIke I mentioned to FreeGrace, we also get many blessings from God when we are in His presence, but if we leave it...that's the end of our blessings.


The PS did come back, and he then also did receive any other inheritance available at the time of the father's death.

I agree with your last paragraph. Are you saying that anyone with faith MUST always return to God if they decide to leave?

BTW, just to make it clear, I do NOT believe in eternal security.

 

[Nathan]

I'm sorry Nathan.

I haven't been following along and really do not know your position.

He got his inheritance when he left. He asked for it and the Father gave it.

THAT was the end of his inheritance. There might have been more available upon the death of the father, but the Pr Son would not share in it.


Once the inheritance was given, that was it. LIke I mentioned to FreeGrace, we also get many blessings from God when we are in His presence, but if we leave it...that's the end of our blessings.


The PS did come back, and he then also did receive any other inheritance available at the time of the father's death.

I agree with your last paragraph. Are you saying that anyone with faith MUST always return to God if they decide to leave?

BTW, just to make it clear, I do NOT believe in eternal security.

I was just asking those questions as I thought of them, based on your comments. They were not directed toward you so much.

I would say that the if a person with faith(still) will desire to return based on the Fathers forgiveness, not based on their supposed position.

And, I would say that I DO believe in eternal security, but only eternal security in Christ.

 

[Nathan]

-
Is there a difference, in God's point of view, between a person who denies Christ and a person who denies the finished work of Christ?

Let me ask it like this.....If you blaspheme Jesus The Christ by denying his finished work, then is this the unpardonable sin of blaspheming Him?

So, if the finished work of Jesus, is to eternally redeem all who Trust by Faith, (In HIM), then is the sin of denying Jesus's redemption as "finished", the same as denying OSAS (in public or on a Forum)?
Isn't it blaspheming the Holy Spirit to deny the work of Jesus on a cross as an "eternal redemption", by saying in public or on a public Forum, that this work is not eternal, but is instead conditional?
Is not the "Free Gift of Salvation", being blasphemed in public when someone says on a Public Forum that its not free, its not eternal, and that its a conditional redemptive work that is based on our "works" and our "enduring"?

Some of you here might want to consider that for a little while before you pounce on it with a few favorite twisted verses.



<B><

To deny Christ is to deny all He is and has done. You can't have just 'part' of Him. He is not an open buffet for people to choose from.

Blasphemy of Christ will be forgiven. It's the blasphemy of the Spirit that won't be. Reason being, it is the work of the Spirit in the life of a person - He is the life in a person. To blasphem the Spirit simply means to deny His life.

If you deny the life of the Spirit, how can God forgive you? That's why it's unforgivable.

Romans 8:10 (ESV)
But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

Romans 8:11 (ESV) 11 If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.

I am not sure I have heard anyone state that Christs work is not eternal or finished? I would contradict anyone who thinks there is something 'more' that has to be added to Christs sacrifice.

It's not based on our works, and it's not based on our endurance. It's based on faith - yes?

Does the free gift come through another means than faith?

So is it wise to deny that a person must have faith, to say that the Spirit must not be in a person?

Endurance only has to do with Gods discipline. A person who goes against, turns away, from the discipline of God - who denies the power of the Spirit to bring about change in their life - believing in something they said or did one time - are they not guilty of continuing in the sin of blasphemy of the Spirit?

Jerimiah 2
12 Be appalled, O heavens, at this; be shocked, be utterly desolate, declares the LORD,
13 for my people have committed two evils: they have forsaken me, the fountain of living waters, and hewed out cisterns for themselves, broken cisterns that can hold no water.

Israel also thought they could walk away from God and yet be 'saved' because they were Children of Abraham. They thought their birth guaranteed them the inheritance.

 

[Jim Parker]

To deny Christ is to deny all He is and has done. You can't have just 'part' of Him. He is not an open buffet for people to choose from.

Blasphemy of Christ will be forgiven. It's the blasphemy of the Spirit that won't be. Reason being, it is the work of the Spirit in the life of a person - He is the life in a person. To blasphem the Spirit simply means to deny His life.

If you deny the life of the Spirit, how can God forgive you? That's why it's unforgivable.

Right on once again.

 

[FreeGrace]

1. Jesus gives them the Spirit, which is eternal life in us.
2. Those who have the Spirit have life, those who do not have not life.
3. No one can take you from the Fathers hand, but sin can lead you away.
4. God is greater than everyone, and only He has life and immortality.
5. No one can take you from the Fathers hand, but sin can lead you away.
6. The words "no one" means "no one".

yes
yes
but sin cannot lead one away from salvation
yes
but sin cannot lead one away from salvation
and "no one" includes even the one in Jesus' and God's hand cannot remove themselves from Jesus' or God's hand.

Seems straight forward to me. Those in Christ have life, those who are not in Christ do not have life.

That is straightforward. But what's not taught in Scripture is any teaching about the sealing with the Holy Spirit being undone or unsealed.

There is sin that leads to death and sin that does not lead to death. We know that this 'death' cannot be temporal/physical death, because we know that 'sin' is what brings physical death to begin with. All sin results in physical death.

Then was Paul in error to tell the Corinthian church the result of their abuse of the Lord's Table (sinning) when he mentioned physical death? And what about Ananias and Sapphira who died physically for lying to the Holy Spirit? We cannot ignore these clear examples from Scripture.

Therefore, the death John speaks of cannot be physical death, but death of the soul.

It can and it does. If John meant eternal death, then that teaching is in conflict with Paul's teaching that eternal life, a gift of God, is irrevocable. Or Jesus' teaching that those given eternal life will never perish. Or Peter's teaching that we have been born again of imperishable seed. This speaks of spiritual life, which cannot perish.

 

[FreeGrace]

It says, 'we will come to him and make our home with him.' It means both the Father and the Son will take up residence and live with him in his house. Didn't Jesus say the Spirit of truth would dwell in us?

I've already explained the difference between dwelling and "making a home". To dwell is about where one lives. To make a home is about communion and fellowship.

One can live with another where there is no communion or fellowship.
Prov 21:9 Better to live on a corner of the roof than share a house with a quarrelsome wife.
KJV has "brawling woman".

 

[FreeGrace]

Sorry FG
I was being a bit sarcastic on the last one.

Hard to grasp on forums.

The Prodigal Son got his share BEFORE he left. But he would get nothing after the father died.

But that's not the point of the parable. The son did return and what did the father give him? His signet ring. Know what that means? Kinda like handing over the checkbook. iow, grace is unlimited. So there is no amount of sin that trumps God's grace.

Jesus had to die for us to get our inheritance. I'm sure you now this is why it's called a Testament.
We get plenty of blessings before Jesus dies while we are at His die.

Yes.

But will we get the final inheritance once WE die?
I think not.

Well, what did Jesus say about it? He said He gives them (believers) eternal life and they will never perish. John 10:28

Is that a promise or not? And He previously told us when one HAS eternal life; when they believe, in John 5:24.

And, yes, you did guess at why I was asking about free will.
No use to rehash.
If we DO have free will, why does it get taken away once we're saved??
Just explain this to me.

I'd be happy to. Free will isn't taken away once we're saved. We still are able to rebel against God. So your premise is incorrect.

The problem is to equate the freedom to believe with the supposed "freedom to be unsaved". That idea is in error because it isn't by our act of believing that we're saved in the first place. iow, it isn't our action (of believing) that saves us. It is God who saves those who believe. This isn't a play on words. It's a significant point. God's plan from the beginning was to save those who believe. And none of them earned it or deserved it.

If it was our action of believing that did save us, then yes, by that same free will power, we could unsave ourselves by unbelieving.

But since we're not saved by our action of believing, we can't unsave ourselves by any action of rebellion or unbelieving at a later time.

The action of believing is non-meritorious. That means it doesn't earn us anything, nor do we deserve anything. But God saves us by His own GRACE.

 

[Nathan]

yes
yes
but sin cannot lead one away from salvation
yes
but sin cannot lead one away from salvation
and "no one" includes even the one in Jesus' and God's hand cannot remove themselves from Jesus' or God's hand.


That is straightforward. But what's not taught in Scripture is any teaching about the sealing with the Holy Spirit being undone or unsealed.


Then was Paul in error to tell the Corinthian church the result of their abuse of the Lord's Table (sinning) when he mentioned physical death? And what about Ananias and Sapphira who died physically for lying to the Holy Spirit? We cannot ignore these clear examples from Scripture.


It can and it does. If John meant eternal death, then that teaching is in conflict with Paul's teaching that eternal life, a gift of God, is irrevocable. Or Jesus' teaching that those given eternal life will never perish. Or Peter's teaching that we have been born again of imperishable seed. This speaks of spiritual life, which cannot perish.

I think you might be confused with what Paul taught and what you think he taught. Where do you find that sin will not lead you away from Christ?

1 John 5:16 (ESV)
If anyone sees his brother committing a sin not leading to death, he shall ask, and God will give him life--to those who commit sins that do not lead to death. There is sin that leads to death; I do not say that one should pray for that.

I think you might want to step back and consider the way your trying to make pieces of the Bible fit. We can't pull one verse from here, and another from some place else, and then say that others don't mean what they say - because we want to believe that it can't be so.

Jeremiah 2:22 (ESV) 22 Though you wash yourself with lye and use much soap, the stain of your guilt is still before me, declares the Lord GOD.

Jeremiah 2:23 (ESV) 23 How can you say, 'I am not unclean, I have not gone after the Baals'? Look at your way in the valley; know what you have done--a restless young camel running here and there,

Jeremiah 2:24 (ESV) 24 a wild donkey used to the wilderness, in her heat sniffing the wind! Who can restrain her lust? None who seek her need weary themselves; in her month they will find her.

The eternal life you speak of is only in Christ. It is not something that you posses, unless you think you are like God? Eternal life lives in you, and only through the Spirit does it give you life.

If sin did not result in physical death, then your argument against Johns teaching would have grounds to stand on. But John is contrasting sin that does not lead to death, and sin that does. ALL sin leads to physical death, but only one sin leads to eternal death of the soul.

Jeremiah 2
31 And you, O generation, behold the word of the LORD. Have I been a wilderness to Israel, or a land of thick darkness? Why then do my people say, 'We are free, we will come no more to you'?
32 Can a virgin forget her ornaments, or a bride her attire? Yet my people have forgotten me days without number.
33 "How well you direct your course to seek love! So that even to wicked women you have taught your ways.
34 Also on your skirts is found the lifeblood of the guiltless poor; you did not find them breaking in. Yet in spite of all these things
35 you say, 'I am innocent; surely his anger has turned from me.' Behold, I will bring you to judgment for saying, 'I have not sinned.'
36 How much you go about, changing your way! You shall be put to shame by Egypt as you were put to shame by Assyria.
37 From it too you will come away with your hands on your head, for the LORD has rejected those in whom you trust, and you will not prosper by them.

 

[Nathan]

That is straightforward. But what's not taught in Scripture is any teaching about the sealing with the Holy Spirit being undone or unsealed.

What is not taught in Scripture is the idea that Gods seal is valid apart from His Spirit.

Ephesians 1:13 (ESV)
In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit,

We should not be so foolish to insert "by" in the place of "with". If the Spirit is not in a person, the seal is not there either.

 

[gr8grace3]

Hard to grasp on forums.


But that's not the point of the parable. The son did return and what did the father give him? His signet ring. Know what that means? Kinda like handing over the checkbook. iow, grace is unlimited. So there is no amount of sin that trumps God's grace.


Yes.


Well, what did Jesus say about it? He said He gives them (believers) eternal life and they will never perish. John 10:28

Is that a promise or not? And He previously told us when one HAS eternal life; when they believe, in John 5:24.


I'd be happy to. Free will isn't taken away once we're saved. We still are able to rebel against God. So your premise is incorrect.

The problem is to equate the freedom to believe with the supposed "freedom to be unsaved". That idea is in error because it isn't by our act of believing that we're saved in the first place. iow, it isn't our action (of believing) that saves us. It is God who saves those who believe. This isn't a play on words. It's a significant point. God's plan from the beginning was to save those who believe. And none of them earned it or deserved it.

If it was our action of believing that did save us, then yes, by that same free will power, we could unsave ourselves by unbelieving.

But since we're not saved by our action of believing, we can't unsave ourselves by any action of rebellion or unbelieving at a later time.

The action of believing is non-meritorious. That means it doesn't earn us anything, nor do we deserve anything. But God saves us by His own GRACE.

Great stuff brother. What a great encouragement to read through your posts. Direct,no nonsense......Truth.

Reversionism~~ It sure is a concept and truth taught in His word. But few seem to see it.

 

[chessman]

We should not be so foolish to insert "by" in the place of "with".

Who were you quoting when you used quotes around the word by here?

 

[Nathan]

Who were you quoting when you used quotes around the word by here?

I was not quoting anyone specific, but a general quote to those who think that it is 'by' the Spirit we are sealed - who think it's just a 'stamp' of approval.

The Spirit Himself is the seal on us. It is the Spirit Himself that is the eternal life in us.

 

[MarkT]

I've already explained the difference between dwelling and "making a home". To dwell is about where one lives. To make a home is about communion and fellowship.

One can live with another where there is no communion or fellowship.
Prov 21:9 Better to live on a corner of the roof than share a house with a quarrelsome wife.
KJV has "brawling woman".

Jesus said they "will come to him and make their home with him", meaning they will come to him and reside with him in his house. Even Pr. 29:9 speaks of sharing a house. Yes there is conversing and fellowship. Just like inviting your friends over to your house, they will come, and there will be eating and drinking and conversing and fellowship. Jesus said this about the man who loves him. He will keep his word. John 14:23 He also said, "He who does not love me does not keep my words" John 14:24

John 8:51
Truly, truly, I say to you, if any one keeps my word, he will never see death.”

 

[Jim Parker]

"no one" includes even the one in Jesus' and God's hand cannot remove themselves from Jesus' or God's hand.

That is an incorrect interpretation.
The verse on which you base that notion does not say that.
Jhn 10:29 “My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father's hand."
In the statement "no one is able to snatch them out of My Father's hand.", "no one" (οὐδεὶς) is the subject; "is able to snatch" (δύναται ἁρπάζειν) is the verb and "them" is the direct object implied by the grammar.
The action refers only to the subject.
It is illogical to assume that the Greek suggests in any manner that someone would "snatch himself" out of anything. Such an act would be similar to taking hold of one's belt loops and attempting to lift oneself off the ground.
So there is no scriptural, grammatical, or historic basis for your conclusion.

And, no, I don't hope to convince you. You have demonstrated that to be a lost cause.
However, I do hope to assist any one else who might be following this thread.

iakov the fool

 

[FreeGrace]

I think you might be confused with what Paul taught and what you think he taught. Where do you find that sin will not lead you away from Christ?

I never said it wouldn't. In fact, when one sins, they ARE away from Christ. Totally out of fellowship. Recall this verse:
2 Cor 6:14 - Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? 15 What harmony is there between Christ and Belial?

There is no sin in the light, only in darkness. John said it this way:
1 John 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin.

iow, one cannot sin and be in fellowship with Christ or God. In fact, we need purification from sin. Which is why John then wrote 1:9.

The eternal life you speak of is only in Christ. It is not something that you posses, unless you think you are like God?

Then why did Jesus say that those who believe HAVE eternal life in John 5:24 and Paul described eternal life as a gift of God in Rom 6:23?

So, of course eternal life is something the believer possesses. The Bible couldn't be more clear.

Eternal life lives in you, and only through the Spirit does it give you life.

And...it's a possession, something we HAVE.

If sin did not result in physical death, then your argument against Johns teaching would have grounds to stand on.

lol. I have no argument against John's teaching. It's your misunderstanding of John's teaching that you mistakenly think I'm arguing against. iow, it's your views on John's teaching that I am arguing against.

But John is contrasting sin that does not lead to death, and sin that does.

Correct. But not in the way you're taking it.

ALL sin leads to physical death, but only one sin leads to eternal death of the soul.

Where did John ever suggest "only one sin"? Please provide evidence from Scripture that supports your claims. Per forum rules.

Jeremiah 2
31 And you, O generation, behold the word of the LORD. Have I been a wilderness to Israel, or a land of thick darkness? Why then do my people say, 'We are free, we will come no more to you'?
32 Can a virgin forget her ornaments, or a bride her attire? Yet my people have forgotten me days without number.
33 "How well you direct your course to seek love! So that even to wicked women you have taught your ways.
34 Also on your skirts is found the lifeblood of the guiltless poor; you did not find them breaking in. Yet in spite of all these things
35 you say, 'I am innocent; surely his anger has turned from me.' Behold, I will bring you to judgment for saying, 'I have not sinned.'
36 How much you go about, changing your way! You shall be put to shame by Egypt as you were put to shame by Assyria.
37 From it too you will come away with your hands on your head, for the LORD has rejected those in whom you trust, and you will not prosper by them.

Please point out how this passage supports your claim about "only one sin". I see no evidence.

 

[chessman]

I do hope to assist any one else who might be following this thread.

So John 10:29 could be translated 'My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all [but the subject of this sentence], and no one [else] can seize them from the Father’s hand'???

John 10:29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one can seize them from the Father’s hand.​

 

[FreeGrace]

What is not taught in Scripture is the idea that Gods seal is valid apart from His Spirit.

I never suggested that it was. Only believers are sealed. And this sealing occurs WHEN one believes, because Paul said, "having believed" in the aorist tense. That means from a single occurrence of believing, one is sealed IN HIM.

Ephesians 1:13 (ESV)
In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit,

The ESV fails to properly translate the aorist tense, when the proper translation is "having believed". However, even the ESV recognizes the past tense meaning of the aorist tense. So, from an act of belief in the past, one is sealed IN HIM.

We should not be so foolish to insert "by" in the place of "with".

I don't believe I've ever made that mistake. If so, it was a tired typo. I'm VERY FAMILIAR with the correct wording of the verse. We are sealed IN HIM with the Holy Spirit of promise.

If the Spirit is not in a person, the seal is not there either.

Are you not aware that the Spirit IS the seal?? The word "seal" is a noun here, not a verb.

 

[FreeGrace]

I said this:
""no one" includes even the one in Jesus' and God's hand cannot remove themselves from Jesus' or God's hand."

That is an incorrect interpretation.

Everyone is free to their own opinion. And anyone is free to prove my claim incorrect.

The verse on which you base that notion does not say that.

Then explain who all is excluded in the phrase "no one". iow, does it exclude yourself? If so, please prove it. So far, all you've got is a claim.

Jhn 10:29 “My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father's hand."
In the statement "no one is able to snatch them out of My Father's hand.", "no one" (οὐδεὶς) is the subject; "is able to snatch" (δύναται ἁρπάζειν) is the verb and "them" is the direct object implied by the grammar.
The action refers only to the subject.

So, what is included, or excluded, in the subject. iow, who is it that cannot remove the person in God's hand?

It is illogical to assume that the Greek suggests in any manner that someone would "snatch himself" out of anything.

Really? Then how come there are quite a few on this forum who argue that the believer can remove themselves from Christ, which results in loss of salvation? I don't care if one says "snatch" or "remove" or "sever". The issue from 10:29 is this: does "no one" even mean the person in His hand cannot remove himself from His hand? I believe "no one" means "no person".

Now, if someone can prove that "no one" doesn't really mean "no person", please proceed.

 

[Jim Parker]

So John 10:29 could be translated 'My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all [but the subject of this sentence], and no one [else] can seize them from the Father’s hand'???

John 10:29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one can seize them from the Father’s hand.​

It's really simple.
It says that no one can snatch a believer out of the father's hand.
- Some one other than the believer might try to snatch the believer out of the Father's hand but, he won't be able to do it.

It does not say that a believer can't change his mind and leave.
- People do not "snatch" themselves but they can walk away.