Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
-
Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
Eternal security or conditional security?
- Thread starter FreeGrace
- Start date
I'm more than willing to have the logic I presented challenged and refuted, if possible.Logic is irrefutable????
Now that's funny.
lol. Seriously? Paul already described 3 gifts of God previously in his epistle to the Romans, so when he wrote 11:29, why would he feel the need to specify what he meant by "gifts"? Please answer this.
Since he already mentioned 3 of God's gifts, and then noted that God's giftS (plural) are irrevocable, it is more than obvious that it was those 3 gifts that he already mentioned that he had in mind.
However, if it can be shown that Paul had some other "kind" of gift in mind, then go ahead and make your case for that. But remember, Paul never mentioned "gift" between 6:23 and 11:29.
And...no where in Scripture is anything that Israel was given is described as a gift.
As I thought; you aren't familiar with what logic is. Rom 11:29 isn't "logic" as claimed. It's a FACT. Whether aware or not, facts are not logic. They are different. Facts are used IN logic, but are not logic.
This is an excellent example of seriously flawed "logic". It is most illogical.
Try googling "logic" to learn what it is before trying to use it.
It's been done countless times with God's word.
Your "logic" is to ignore the scriptures presented to you, or redefine the plain meaning of what is said.
Example: thrown into the fire and burned, has been redefined by you to mean: removed from Christian service.
That's logic alright:
Paul defines what's going here, and calls it a stronghold.
A fortified position, a "mindset" that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, in favor of predetermined filtered knowledge that has been carefully woven into the fabric of the persons soul, that prevents the truth from entering the persons mind.
For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, 5 casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ, 6 and being ready to punish all disobedience when your obedience is fulfilled. 2 Corinthians 10:4-6
That's why Heresy is such a serious sin, because it spreads throughout the body and affects many.
19 Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery,fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, 20 idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, 21 envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.
JLB
One must first prove that "fire" in John 15:6 means hell fire or the lake of fire. Especially since Paul used "fire" this way in 1 Cor 3:14 and 15 -
14 If any man’s work which he has built on it remains, he will receive a reward.
15 If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.
So, please explain how one "will be saved through FIRE". Does your theology include pergatory?
No, actually, there aren't "many". The few are in context regarding the Tribulation. They do NOT apply to the entire human race. Far from it.
They ALL are about what 1 Cor 3:14 and 15 teach; loss of reward. None of these verses contradict Paul's teaching that eternal life is a gift of God that is irrevocable, or Jesus' teaching that those He gives eternal life to WILL NEVER PERISH.
To be clear, and honest, there are NO Scriptures that teach that one can lose salvation FOR ANY REASON.
To be clear, and honest, there are NO Scriptures that teach that one can lose salvation FOR ANY REASON.
The true, biblical treaching is that one who believes in Jesus Christ is saved and WILL NEVER PERISH.
15 so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life.
16 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. JOHN 3
28 and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand.
JOHN 10
Then please show within THAT context where Paul mentioned any "gift" to Israel. Because the subject of 11:29 is God's gifts and calling.
I have and will explain again.
First I would like to see you reconcile your "definition" of thrown into the fire and burned means removed from Christian service, as I have asked you to do, but you refuse.
That would mean that all "fire" correlates to the same fire in 1 Corinthians 3:14-15 and means:
"we are saved by being removed from Christian service".
Please show us the scriptures that teach us we are saved by being removed from Christian service.
Here are some other examples that refer specifically to the fire.
Here Jesus specifically links THE FIRE with hell -
If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched—
And even now the ax is laid to the root of the trees. Therefore every tree which does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown intothe fire. Matthew 3:10
His winnowing fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clean out His threshing floor, and gather His wheat into the barn; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.” Matthew 3:12
But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’ shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of hell fire. Matthew 5:22
Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Matthew 7:18
“If your hand or foot causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you. It is better for you to enter into life lame or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet, to be cast into the everlasting fire. Matthew 18:8
The Fire that Jesus warned us about, in His teaching from John 15, is described by Him or John the Baptist as being both hell and everlasting.
The fire, as mentioned by Jesus in John 15, and many other places, refers to the everlasting fire of hell.
Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Matthew 7:18
Thrown into the fire and burned, is what Jesus says in John 15.
1 Corinthians 3:14-15 does not mention those who are saved, as being burned, but escaping the fire and being saved, as the three Hebrew Children were saved, because the Son of God was with them.
14 If anyone’s work which he has built on it endures, he will receive a reward. 15 If anyone’s work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire. 1 Corinthians 3;14-15
The work is burned.
The worker is saved, not being burned.
What about the worker, who has no work to show, and is fruitless?
JLB
chessman
Member
Huh?
Romans 11:29 (LEB) For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.
Without a doubt, the gifts and calling of God are the subject of Romans 11:29. Something's irrevocable. What? Um, the gifts and calling of God. On this point, I clearly disagree with your statement above. The only real question is what gifts and calling did Paul mean by his statement. But, I do agree that there is no need to repeat and specify in the one verse (v29) the listing of gifts (plural) that he’s been talking about in this letter so far. He’s already told us what he includes as the gifts of God being spread out over several chapters (1, 3, 5, 6 and 12). You really have to following along with Paul. Maybe even take notes and/or outline the various sections of the letter. Or, all one has to do is read through the letter without bias and without chopping it up into little pieces and it’s very clear what Paul means by the gifts and calling of God. And sure, add the promise(s) God made to Israel to that list. I think that's exactly what Paul is doing. But there’s no good reason to exclude the other gifts he just got through mentioning as well. For sure, no good reason has been presented here anyway.
On your previous point (re-posted above), I agree. But to then to say "gift is not the subject" of Rom 11:29 is obviously wrong. Plus, as I said, it's gifts plural that is the subject of Romans 11:29, not a singular promise to Israel. There is absolutely no exegetical reason whatsoever to think of the previously mentioned gifts (all of them within his letter) are out of the context in Romans 11. For the same reasons that 11:26-28 is in context (even though gifts/calling isn't specifically mentioned there), Romans 6:23 is in context because Paul specifically does call Eternal Life a gift of God (among other gifts). And yes, he says "Eternal Life in Christ Jesus". I'm in no way ignoring the fact that Eternal Life is given to the Roman (Gentiles) in and through Christ Jesus (versus the blood of goats/bulls) as has been erroneously attributed to me by JLB
I'm sure it does include that promise, yes. But the 'gifts and calling' that is the subject of Paul's statement in Rom 11:29 includes what is being promised to Gentiles through this letter to the Romans as well. Paul's simply using an example here. To think Paul’s point about Israel is all he means by "gifts and calling' is short-sighted and not very considerate to the rest of the letter, IMO. I never thought what is irrevocable didn't include promises made to Israel. All God’s promises are true. Which is why neither you nor anyone else is going to convince me through your words/opinions alone that Paul didn't have the very same gifts he just got through describing to his readers in Romans 1, 3, 5, and 6 in mind too. You'd have to somehow show (if you want to make a good counter-OSAS point) that Paul didn't mean all the gifts (plural) he wrote about in this letter. And that hasn't been done so far.
Anti-OSAS has been repeatedly making the claim here in this thread that OSAS is not reading/understanding Romans 11:29 and/or Rom 6:23 in its full context. When in fact, that's exactly what anti-OSAS is doing (not me) by rejecting the fact that Paul's letter is a context in and of itself. I have never claimed that Rom 11:26-28 is a different context than Romans 11:29. Nor would I ever. Nor have I claimed the first part of Romans 6:23 is out of context with the second part of the very same verse, though that's been repeatedly claimed by anti-OSAS too. The reason we Gentiles (and Israel) need Eternal Life is precisely because the wages of sin is death. I get that. I also get the fact that the reason Eternal Life is a gift of God's (one of several) is because we can't obtain Eternal Life except being in Christ Jesus. If I could obtain Eternal Life through being sinless (or clicking my heels three times or whatever), then there’s no need for Christ.
But, not reading Romans 11:29 in consideration of the context of the whole letter, to include Romans 6:23, is a huge mistake. Something Paul exhorts his readers to avoid in Romans 16:17.
Yes, it (Paul’s mention of gifts, plural, in Romans 11:29) includes Eternal Life. That’s my point and the OP's point, too.
Huh? You say it includes Eternal Life then say it not about eternal life. Is there a typo or something going on here? It seems to me you just disagreed with yourself. But maybe I’m misunderstanding or something.
Romans 6:22 (LEB) But now, having been set free from sin and having been enslaved to God, you have your fruit leading to sanctification, and its end is eternal life.
I thought we were supposed to read Romans 6:23 in consideration of Romans 6:22 (just like we are supposed to read Romans 11:29 in consideration of Rom 11:26-28???
Paul just got through telling us what Eternal Life is. Why would he need to repeat it. It’s just what it sounds like. The end result of being set free from sin (the opposite end from that of the wages of sin-Death, of course).
Actually, no I was simply asking you a question. What do you consider the limits of “context”? One verse, two or more verses. One chapter, two or more chapters. Or one letter.
So your answer is, I suppose:
Okay cool then. Romans 6:23 does immediately precede Romans 11:29. It’s part of the same letter, written by the same author and at the same time and received by the Romans at the same time. And Paul even closes out this letter warning us that there will be people that try to divide and twist the doctrine he presented in this letter.
Last edited:
Jethro Bodine
Member
Nothing OSAS has said has been shown to be more direct and to the point and clear than these passages that we can somehow toss these plain passages away. Until it does, I'll be sticking with what the Bible plainly says about this issue of OSAS:
"1Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, 2by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain." (1 Corinthians 15:1-2 NASB)
"let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father." (1 John 2:24 NASB)
"God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. 12He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life." (1 John 5:11-12 NASB)
"9Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son." (2 John 1:9 NASB)
You have to stay in the gospel that you first heard and which you were saved by to remain saved. There is no such thing as abandoning the faith and still being saved.
And, since the Bible warns us of falling away from that which we first heard and were saved by, it must be possible to do so. Besides, I know someone who did.
"1Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, 2by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain." (1 Corinthians 15:1-2 NASB)
"let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father." (1 John 2:24 NASB)
"God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. 12He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life." (1 John 5:11-12 NASB)
"9Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son." (2 John 1:9 NASB)
You have to stay in the gospel that you first heard and which you were saved by to remain saved. There is no such thing as abandoning the faith and still being saved.
And, since the Bible warns us of falling away from that which we first heard and were saved by, it must be possible to do so. Besides, I know someone who did.
Last edited:
[/QUOTE]
Yes, most definitely.
Here Paul establishes the foundation of who will and will not receive eternal life.
7 eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality;
8 but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath,
Romans 2:7-8
This principle is reiterated again and again throughout Romans, and is found in all of Paul's letter's to other Churches as well.
Those Christians who live their life wickedly, and obeying the sinful desires of the flesh, after having received the grace of God and the forgiveness of their sins, and given the Holy Spirit as a gift, will not inherit the kingdom of God, but be under the wrath of God.
These have been given the gift of the Spirit of Christ within them, and in turn produced unrighteousness with it.
The writer of the book of Hebrews explains it this way:
7 For the earth which drinks in the rain that often comes upon it, and bears herbs useful for those by whom it is cultivated, receives blessing from God; 8 but if it bears thorns and briers, it is rejected and near to being cursed, whose end is to be burned.
Hebrews 6:7-8
Let me know if you want more context?
JLB
Yes it does, and says the same thing Romans 2:7-8 says.
Only you OSAS folks never quote the verse, you just use the scripture reference.
Here lets look.
23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:23
You forgot to quote that part of the verse, which says the same thing as verse 16.
Let's look.
16 Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness? Romans 6:16
Same thing Paul says in Romans 2;7-8
Here let's look.
7 eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality;
8 but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath,
Romans 2:7-8
Christians who live their life in sin, practicing the works of the flesh... eternal death in hell. God's wrath.
Christians who live their life producing the fruit of righteousness... eternal life.
chessman
Member
Clearly, you make yet another false claim here.
... plus at least three more times since the OP has the entire verse been posted.
Plus, what possible difference does it make that we sometimes simply reference the verse versus posting it over and over? Does that make anti-OSAS true if we 'never quote the verse'? No!
Because you have never quoted or referred to the whole verse, but only eternal life is a gift from God.
This statement is not true.
Do you know why?
I really don't understand why this total untruth. I have explained it. The phrase is an agricultural metaphor used to show what farmers do with unproductive branches. They sure don't cast them into hell. It seems you've read way too much into the metaphor.
Unlike your tactics, I don't take a single word and try to force the same meaning on all the verses it occurs in.
The specific meaning of a word is determined by its context.
I would ask the opposite; that one goes to hell for being unproductive. All you've shown so far is an agricultural metaphor of a farmer burning a branch.
And I've proven that the word "fire" can mean MORE than one thing in Scripture. A simple word search proves that.
Hardly the issue. The issue is to prove that "the fire" means hell in your cherry picked verses.
Where is this found? Rules of the forum. In this verse, the context specifically mentions hell.
How does this support the claim that "the fire" means hell?? There is NO context for hell here. It's just another agricultural metaphor.
OK, so we got a very hot fire. So, where is hell mentioned?
Finally, another verse that includes the word "hell" to describe what kind of fire.
So far, your batting ave is .500.
Just another agricultural metaphor. Where is "hell" mentioned in the context?
OK, another description of an eternal fire.
Still batting only 1/2.
This statement is just an opinion, with out any supporting evidence of such.
In fact, we know that it cannot be about any saved person being cast into hell, because of what Jesus said:
John 5:24 those who believe HAVE eternal life
John 10:28 those given eternal life WILL NEVER PERISH
There are no verses that outright says anything about losing either salvation or eternal life.
And Paul taught that eternal life is a gift of God.
He also taught that God's gifts are irrevocable.
Therefore, eternal life is irrevocable.
Because he NEVER excluded the gift of eternal life from the gifts that are irrevocable.
Unless there is a verse that hasn't been provided yet to prove that. But I know there is no such verse.
This indicates a misread of the verses.
14 If anyone’s work which he has built on it endures, he will receive a reward. 15 If anyone’s work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire. 1 Corinthians 3;14-15
The work is burned.
The worker is saved, not being burned.[/QUOTE]
It says his works are burned, but he will be saved THROUGH FIRE.
Apparently you're not all that familiar with what "through fire" actually means. Which is why it's being so misunderstood.
So I'll help out. As the believer PASSES through fire, his works are burned up, but he remains saved.
v.15 directly refutes the claim that a believer goes to hell for being unproductive. And it proves that the word "fire" refers to God's judgment (not hell).
He's a loser. But saved. A saved loser. That's what 1 Cor 3:15 is about.
Why would OSAS doctrine "throw away" any verse of Scripture? OSAS could make that exact charge against LOS doctrine.
The issue is how to understand ALL the verses. And IF LOS doctrine was correct, then OSAS has totally misunderstood their own verses.
Or vice versa.
Yes, most definitely.
Here Paul establishes the foundation of who will and will not receive eternal life.
7 eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality;
8 but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath,
Romans 2:7-8[/QUOTE]
This has already been refuted from what ELSE Paul wrote about "continuance in doing good" in 3:9 - What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin
And 3:23 - for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God
Paul was stating what would be true IF one could "continue in doing good", but then goes on to teach that NO ONE can do that. For all are sinners, and all sin.
btw, if Rom 2:6,7 were achievable, then Christ died for NOTHING. Is that part of your theology?
Further, if 2:6,7 were achievable, it wouldn't support LOS doctrine in any way. It would only show that one can earn eternal life by works. Which the Bible strongly condemns. And is anti-grace.
This principle is reiterated again and again throughout Romans, and is found in all of Paul's letter's to other Churches as well.
Here Paul establishes the foundation of who will and will not receive eternal life.
7 eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality;
8 but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath,
Romans 2:7-8[/QUOTE]
This has already been refuted from what ELSE Paul wrote about "continuance in doing good" in 3:9 - What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin
And 3:23 - for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God
Paul was stating what would be true IF one could "continue in doing good", but then goes on to teach that NO ONE can do that. For all are sinners, and all sin.
btw, if Rom 2:6,7 were achievable, then Christ died for NOTHING. Is that part of your theology?
Further, if 2:6,7 were achievable, it wouldn't support LOS doctrine in any way. It would only show that one can earn eternal life by works. Which the Bible strongly condemns. And is anti-grace.
This principle is reiterated again and again throughout Romans, and is found in all of Paul's letter's to other Churches as well.
Yes, I agree. And such believers will NOT lose eternal life because of Jesus' clear promise that those He gives eternal life WILL NEVER PERISH in Jn 10:28.
So you refuted Paul's words? That's funny.
Please share what it is you refuted in Paul's statement here?
7 eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality;
8 but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath,
Romans 2:7-8
- eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality;
- but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath,
What is it that you refuted?
JLB
... but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.
The worker will be saved, but not burned.
The work [people] of the worker, will be burned, not being built with Christ [Word of God] but with hay, stubble [false doctrine of man].
If anyone’s work which he has built on it endures, he will receive a reward. 15 If anyone’s work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.16 Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? 17 If anyone defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which temple you are.
1 Corinthians 3:14-17
Those who are burned in the fire are not saved.
Burned in the fire = Not saved.
If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned [not saved]. John 15:6
Case Closed.
JLB