1 Peter 1:23 is about eternal security

[JLB]

I have given you the rest of Paul's sentence (the context) which tells us what Paul means by departing from "the faith".

No answer here, as to what "the faith" is in?

Please answer the question.

The faith, is a reference to faith in Christ Jesus: ie - "faith in God".

4 Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons,2 speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, 3 forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. 4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; 5 for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.
1 Timothy 4:1-5

...Believe and know the truth is another reference to the truth of the Gospel; faith in Christ Jesus.


I know of at least one group that teaches this. Messianic Judaism teaches that we are to refrain from eating pork, and shrimp, or Lobster because we are to observe the law of Moses, rather than what Jesus and Paul taught about food in the New Testament.

3 forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. 4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; 5 for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

• Here is what Jesus taught about this subject.

18 So He said to them, “Are you thus without understanding also? Do you not perceive that whatever enters a man from outside cannot defile him, 19 because it does not enter his heart but his stomach, and is eliminated, thus purifying all foods?” Mark 7:18-19

• Here is what Paul taught; as he learned from Christ about foods.

14 I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. 15 Yet if your brother is grieved because of your food, you are no longer walking in love. Do not destroy with your food the one for whom Christ died. 16 Therefore do not let your good be spoken of as evil; 17 for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. 18 For he who serves Christ in these things is acceptable to God and approved by men. 19 Therefore let us pursue the things which make for peace and the things by which one may edify another. 20 Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All things indeed are pure, but it is evil for the man who eats with offense. 21 It is good neither to eat meat nor drink wine nor do anything by which your brother stumbles or is offended or is made weak.22 Do you have faith? Have it to yourself before God. Happy is he who does not condemn himself in what he approves. 23 But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because he does not eat from faith; for whatever is not from faith is sin. Romans 14:14-23


Departing from the faith in Christ Jesus; forbidding to eat certain foods [Kosher] and forbidding the intermarriage between Jew and Gentile, are references to the law of Moses, of which Paul warned the gentile Churches, not to be carried away with this doctrine.


1 Timothy 4:1 is a reference to departing from faith in Christ Jesus, as I have shown from the context from 1 Timothy.

• Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from [Strongs 868] the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, 1 Timothy 4:1

• 13 But the ones on the rock are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, who believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away. [Strongs 868] Luke 8:13

• 12 Beware, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief in departing from [Strongs 868] the living God; 13 but exhort one another daily, while it is called “Today,” lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. 14 For we have become partakers of Christ if we hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast to the end, Hebrews 3:12-14

JLB

 

[JLB]

Is it our works in this world that prove to God that we are worthy of salvation? That seems to be what you are saying.

What He has stated over and over, is our works show proof of Christ dwelling within us, in which He Himself produces the righteous fruit of His Life from within us.

This righteous fruit [works] is the proving evidence of the living Christ dwelling with us, as we manifest His Life through deeds and words.

34 Then the King will say to those on His right hand, ‘Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 35 for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; 36 I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me.’ Matthew 25:34-36

Paul called this... presenting your members as instruments of righteousness.

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?... 19 I speak in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you presented your members as slaves of uncleanness, and of lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves of righteousness for holiness. Romans 6:16-19


JLB

 

[FreeGrace]

Okay, good.

"1I say then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin." (Romans 11:1 NASB)

Paul is using himself to show that God has not altogether rejected the nation of Israel. He being an Israelite proves that.

Now......using the passage, what is it about Paul that demonstrates his acceptance by God?

And, none of this results in the claim that eternal life is not irrevocable.

If Paul had added "a few", or "some", or "many" or "most" in Rom 11:29, then we might assume that maybe eternal life wasn't irrevocable.

But he didn't make that distinction. He wrote "the gifts of God". Nothing to indicate that Paul intended less than all of them.

And, since he already described 3 of God's gifts IN Romans before penning 11:29, it is inconceivable to try to exclude any of them from 11:29.

Because of what Paul wrote in 11:29, he would have HAD TO specifically note what gifts are not irrevocable from the 3 that he had already described in Romans prior to 11:29.

I cannot imagine how one cannot see that.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

you've confused the noun 'faith' with a verb.

No. 'Faith' in Hebrews 11:1 is a noun.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?page=4&strongs=G4102&t=KJV#lexResults

It's a 'thing'. It's the 'thing' that makes it so you can know something is true that you can not see, through which we can then do the believing required to solicit the forgiveness of sin through Christ.

 

[gr8grace3]

There is no contradiction. Totally different context, which I fully explained.

As to #2, every person in humanity who has received the gift of eternal life, will have it forever. Period.

If eternal life is not irrevocable, how come there are no verses that plainly say that?

And 1 Pet 1:23 says we have been born again of IMPERISHABLE SEED. So that means exactly what Jesus said in John 3:16 that those who believe WILL NEVER PERISH, and He said the same thing in John 10:28.

Which is why "born-again" in 1 Pet 1:23 is in the perfect tense. We are born-again of imperishable seed, as apposed to perishable seed.

Being "born-again" is an action that dogmatically will continue to exist. Christ did it,passive voice. And the subject can NEVER lose their place. Once born-again, always born again.

Born-again~~avagevvaw 0313 perf(perfect tense)/pass (passive voice)/ nom (nominative case) p mas-Ptc I am begetting again 1

Source~~
*26th ed. Nestles, Allen Text, American Bible Society; New York
**Gramcord Institute, 2218 NE Brookview Dr,; Vancouver WA 98686

 

[Jethro Bodine]

And, none of this results in the claim that eternal life is not irrevocable.

If Paul had added "a few", or "some", or "many" or "most" in Rom 11:29, then we might assume that maybe eternal life wasn't irrevocable.

But he didn't make that distinction. He wrote "the gifts of God". Nothing to indicate that Paul intended less than all of them.

And, since he already described 3 of God's gifts IN Romans before penning 11:29, it is inconceivable to try to exclude any of them from 11:29.

Because of what Paul wrote in 11:29, he would have HAD TO specifically note what gifts are not irrevocable from the 3 that he had already described in Romans prior to 11:29.

I cannot imagine how one cannot see that.

Now, follow through and answer my question:
Using the passage, what is it about Paul that demonstrates his acceptance by God? What does Paul, an Israelite, have that shows God has not revoked the gifts and calling of God from Israel?

"26and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written,
“THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION,
HE WILL REMOVE UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB.”

27“THIS IS MY COVENANT WITH THEM,
WHEN I TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS.”

28From the standpoint of the gospel they (the Israelites) are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God’s choice they (the Isrealites) are beloved for the sake of the fathers; 29for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable." (Romans 11:26-29 NASB)

Paul is proof that God has not revoked the gifts and calling promised to Israel. That's what the context shows he means by "the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable" (vs.29). But you have lifted that verse completely out of context and are claiming that it means once you believe you can then not believe and you still have the gift of eternal life.

The gifts and calling of God are irrevocable in regard to the Israelites always having the gifts and calling of God. SAVED ISRAELITES, LIKE PAUL, PROVE THAT. The believing remnant that God always has for himself in every generation of Israelites is proof that he did not revoke the gifts and calling of God he promised the Patriarchs that the Israelites would have. The passage has NOTHING to do whatsoever with a OSAS doctrine that says once a person believes they can then become an unbeliever and they still have the gift of eternal life. But the context clearly shows what I'm saying "the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable" means. You have yet to provide a shred of evidence from the passage to support your interpretation of verse 29.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

If Paul had added "a few", or "some", or "many" or "most" in Rom 11:29, then we might assume that maybe eternal life wasn't irrevocable.

But he didn't make that distinction. He wrote "the gifts of God". Nothing to indicate that Paul intended less than all of them.

And, since he already described 3 of God's gifts IN Romans before penning 11:29, it is inconceivable to try to exclude any of them from 11:29.

Which gift and calling of God did Israelite Paul have?

 

[smaller]

John 6:27
Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed.

What believer, in their right mind, seeks the eternal destruction of another believer in fire? Who does that? Don't these people who try this see that what they measure to others, they GET put upon themselves?

Matthew 7:
1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

ot every believer will have a part in the holy city. Only those believers who have endured and will be rewarded.

You have added to Revelation by saying there is this place between the kingdom of God and hell for believers who stopped believing, but who will remain saved in this place somewhere between the kingdom of God and the fiery hell. The irony being, you cause God to take away your place in the kingdom by adding that.

"18I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; 19and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book." (Revelation 22:19 NASB)

"15Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood." (Revelation 22:15 NASB)

"To the thirsty I will give water without cost from the spring of the water of life. 7Those who are victorious will inherit all this, and I will be their God and they will be my children. 8But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.”" (Revelation 21:6-8 NASB)

To be outside of the city is to be in the lake of fire. There is no place in between the city and the fiery hell. You're either in the city, or outside of it consigned to the fires of hell.

 

[LovethroughDove]

Do these promises in any way dismiss the requirement to keep believing as a condition for continued salvation?

The kind of faith I've been given, is the only thing I know. God gave me revelation of himself and I can't ignore that or unbelieve what he has revealed. What I'm saying is, I've been sealed with the truth of him.

 

[FreeGrace]

Now, follow through and answer my question:

My questions not being answered, nonetheless.

Using the passage, what is it about Paul that demonstrates his acceptance by God? What does Paul, an Israelite, have that shows God has not revoked the gifts and calling of God from Israel?

Well, since you've said that what these gifts are is NOT THE POINT, what does it matter? Since these so-called gifts and calling of God to Israel cannot even be listed from the context, your question is immaterial.

Until one can actually prove that 11:29 is ONLY about Israel, and actual prove with evidene from the context what these 'gifts' are, there is no use in further discussion.

I have shown from Paul's letter where he specifically mentioned 3 gifts of God, yet your position wants to exclude them from 11:29.

"26and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written,
“THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION,
HE WILL REMOVE UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB.”

27“THIS IS MY COVENANT WITH THEM,
WHEN I TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS.”

28From the standpoint of the gospel they (the Israelites) are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God’s choice they (the Isrealites) are beloved for the sake of the fathers; 29for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable." (Romans 11:26-29 NASB)

Paul is proof that God has not revoked the gifts and calling promised to Israel.

Since you've been clear that these so-called gifts cannot be listed from the passage, you have no point.

That's what the context shows he means by "the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable" (vs.29).

How does the "context show" that??

But you have lifted that verse completely out of context and are claiming that it means once you believe you can then not believe and you still have the gift of eternal life.

There is no context for your claims about gifts to Israel.

 

[FreeGrace]

Which gift and calling of God did Israelite Paul have?

He had spiritual gifts (1:11), he was justified (3:24, 5:15,16,17) and he received eternal life (6:23). Any more questions?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

And, none of this results in the claim that eternal life is not irrevocable.

What it does is show you have been improperly using Romans 11:29 NASB to defend a hyper-grace OSAS doctrine.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

He had spiritual gifts (1:11), he was justified (3:24, 5:15,16,17) and he received eternal life (6:23). Any more questions?

Okay, good.
Paul is evidence that God has not revoked the gifts and calling of God. If he had, Paul would not have the gifts and calling of God.
But you have been improperly using Romans 11:29 to show that once a person believes they can never lose the gift of eternal life even if they stop believing. But as we can plainly see, that is not what Paul is talking about in Romans.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

The kind of faith I've been given, is the only thing I know. God gave me revelation of himself and I can't ignore that or unbelieve what he has revealed. What I'm saying is, I've been sealed with the truth of him.

Then you are in the traditional OSAS camp. You believe that a believer can never stop believing, and, therefore, they can never ever lose justification/ salvation because of unbelief. Freegrace is in this new camp of OSAS doctrine. He says a believer CAN stop believing, but they retain Christ's eternal life despite even their outright rejection and denial of Christ.

 

[FreeGrace]

You have added to Revelation by saying there is this place between the kingdom of God and hell for believers who stopped believing, but who will remain saved in this place somewhere between the kingdom of God and the fiery hell.

What motivates one to much such stuff up? I've NEVER said anything about anything between heaven and hell. That's an old RCC myth.

The irony being, you cause God to take away your place in the kingdom by adding that.

I've explained what "takes away his part" means. One is free to realize that truth or not. I'm not responsible for what anyone else believes. I am only responsible for knowing the truth.

There is no evidence from Scripture that "takes away his part" means loss of salvation. That is merely an assumption.

To be outside of the city is to be in the lake of fire. There is no place in between the city and the fiery hell. You're either in the city, or outside of it consigned to the fires of hell.

Since v.15 begins with "outside..." and v.14 ends with "into the city", it should be apparent that v.15 is about those living ON THE NEW EARTH but outside the gates into the city.

There is NO OTHER PLACE between heaven and hell. And after the Millennial rule of Christ, with all believers living on the NEW EARTH, that's where heaven IS. And there is the NEW JERUSALEM on the new earth.

So there will be people in the city and people on the new earth. This is very simple.

There is no reason to think that being outside the city means being in the lake of fire. That puts the lake of fire ON the new earth.

How does that make sense?

 

[FreeGrace]

What it does is show you have been improperly using Romans 11:29 NASB to defend a hyper-grace OSAS doctrine.

No one has shown any such thing. I have shown that Paul described 3 gifts of God before he penned 11:29 and no one has shown that he specified that he wasn't referring to any of them when he penned 11:29.

And, once again, the use of the perjorative term "hyper-grace" indicates your extreme bias against the grace of God. The term basically suggests that eternal security would be "too much" grace.

The point from Scripture is that God's grace is far greater than any failure on your or my part.
James 4:6
But He gives a greater grace. Therefore it says, "GOD IS OPPOSED TO THE PROUD, BUT GIVES GRACE TO THE HUMBLE."
NASU

It appears that your position has no place for God's greater grace.

His grace is greater than the worst sin ever. So there is no place for your position in Scripture.

btw, eternal security DOES require GREATER GRACE. Which God has amply supplied.

 

[FreeGrace]

I answered with this:
"He had spiritual gifts (1:11), he was justified (3:24, 5:15,16,17) and he received eternal life (6:23). Any more questions?"

Okay, good.

Why say "good" when your position does not believe that eternal life is irrevocable?

Paul is evidence that God has not revoked the gifts and calling of God.

Which I listed in my answer above, and to which you responded, "good". As if there was agreement.

If he had, Paul would not have the gifts and calling of God.

If he had...what?

But you have been improperly using Romans 11:29 to show that once a person believes they can never lose the gift of eternal life even if they stop believing.

Because eternal life is irrevocable, that's what it means. And eternal security requires GREATER GRACE. Which God has amply supplied.

And you've voiced your rejection of such grace by the use of the term "hyper-grace". As if there was too much of it.

But as we can plainly see, that is not what Paul is talking about in Romans.

Well, I'd have to agree with you about "seeing things". But they are not there, actually.

What IS there is eternal security by the fact that God's gifts are irrevocable.

 

[chessman]

Please answer the question.

Sure. Departing the faith in 1 Tim 4:1 means:

forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth.

Believe and know the truth is another reference to the truth of the Gospel; faith in Christ Jesus.

The truth Paul spoke of in 1 Tim 4:1-5 is that:

every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; 5 for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

Faith in Christ Jesus means faith in the Messiah (Jesus) being God. It's the faith that saves both Jew and Gentile.

On the otherhand, there are both Jews and Gentiles that have faith in Christ Jesus but do not have faith that every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer. Unfortunately.

 

[FreeGrace]

Then you are in the traditional OSAS camp. You believe that a believer can never stop believing, and, therefore, they can never ever lose justification/ salvation because of unbelief. Freegrace is in this new camp of OSAS doctrine. He says a believer CAN stop believing, but they retain Christ's eternal life despite even their outright rejection and denial of Christ.

If the Bible is true, and it is, then eternal life, a gift of God, is irrevocable.

And, by "traditional", is meant Calvinistic. But Scripture precedes both Calvinism and Arminianism. I have demonstrated that eternal life is a gift of God, and God's gifts are irrevocable. So the only rational conclusion is that eternal life is irrevocable.

The logic is solid and no one has shown otherwise. What has been shown is illogic and unreasonableness in trying to disprove the truth.