1 Peter 1:23 is about eternal security

[Jethro Bodine]

eternal life is irrevocable. Not the offer of eternal life being irrevocable. But the VERY GIFT itself.

Where does it say that the eternal life itself (that God has not changed his mind about giving to people) is what is irrevocable?

I've proven using the context of Romans 11 itself that Paul is saying God did not change his mind about giving people the gifts and calling of God (Paul himself being proof of that) even though Christ has been rejected. So now to prove your point you must show us the context that proves that Paul is saying once the person has the gifts and calling of God He will not change his mind and take it away from that person. It isn't there, but if it really is there, surely you'll be able to provide it. You're up. Can you do it?

 

[chessman]

So how does that point automatically transfer over to meaning that the person who does receive the gifts and calling of God (because God never stopped calling people from among his group) can never ever lose his salvation?

Because not only has God not stopped calling people (Jews and Gentiles, individually), He has not stopped gifting those same individual people with eternal life. And eternal life is, well ... eternal. I.e. It is irrevocable. Just as His calling is irrevocable, so is His gift of eternal life. Both individually and corporately. Just ask the 7,000 and Paul. Any fair evaluation of letter Paul wrote to the Romans and specifically spoke to Gentile Romans at the chapter 11 point can see the clarity of what Paul was saying.

The 'argument' that Romans 11 is about corporate/national calling and gifting and not also about individual calling/gifting is absurd given Paul's use of his individual self and the 7,000 individuals he used for examples. Clearly it's an attempt to avoid the obvious implication of eternal life being an irrevocable gift of God.

Just as absurd as if Romans 11 were only about calling/gifting to Jews, when Paul specifically says he's speaking to Gentiles. Not to mention that groups of people are made up of individual people, by definition.

Anyway, that was my point. Your statement: "The argument is that the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable in regard to the nation of Israel, not in regard to any one individual person not being able to have them revoked once they accept the gifts and calling of God" doesn't stand up to credibility, IMO, given the quotes from Paul's context I posted. Repeated here for clarity:

Romans 11:1-2, 4-5 (LEB) Therefore I say, God has not rejected his people, has he? May it never be! For I also am an Israelite, from the descendants of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not rejected his people, whom he foreknew! Or do you not know, in the passage about Elijah, what the scripture says—how he appeals to God against Israel? ... But what does the divine response say to him? “I have left for myself seven thousand people who have not bent the knee to Baal.” So in this way also at the present time, there is a remnant selected by grace. ​

His point is clearly that in this present time, just as in Elijah's time, God calls and gifts individuals. 7,000 plus one plus more are His people. Irrevocably so.

 

[chessman]

They and them, refers to unsaved Jews who have rejected the Gospel.

True. Nobody has disagreed. Freegrace answered your question multiple times.

Romans 11:25-32 (NKJV) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written:

“The Deliverer will come out of Zion, And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; For this is My covenant with them, When I take away their sins.” ​

Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy. For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all. ​

Who is it that Paul is refering to as you and your in this passage?

1. Saved Gentiles only
2. Saved Jews only
3. Saved people (Jews and/or Gentiles)

 

[dirtfarmer]

Yes, and why wouldn't we speak to each other so? My bible study group is chocked full of men who believe they, no........... who believe others can lose their salvation.And it ain't pretty conversation most of the time.
Eternal security is the key in advancing in the Christian way of life. If we don't figure it out ................we don't advance. We do not repent to be cleansed again. We name and site our sins to regain fellowship in our EVERLASTING/ETERNAL relationship with Our Lord.

Peter did not need a bath, he needed his feet washed. 1 John 1:9.

hello gr8grace3, dirtfarmer here

Excellent and truthful post. we all need our "feet washed" from walking in the world.

 

[JLB]

"Unbelieving Jews. So what, again? The point REMAINS; the gifts of God (one of which IS eternal life) ARE irrevocable.

That's just it, the context of Romans 11:29 is referring to unsaved Jews, who have rejected Jesus as Messiah.

The irrevocable call to Jews who have rejected the Gospel remains available to them, which means they can not possible have eternal life.

Eternal life is not the irrevocable gift mentioned in Romans 11:29.
Eternal life is mentioned in Romans 11:29

Sure. If they do believe, they will HAVE the gift of eternal life, which is irrevocable.

There is no scripture in the bible that says eternal life is irrevocable.

For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. Romans 11:29

Romans 11:29 says the gifts and calling are irrevocable.


JLB

 

[JLB]

True. Nobody has disagreed. Freegrace answered your question multiple times.

Romans 11:25-32 (NKJV) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written:

“The Deliverer will come out of Zion, And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; For this is My covenant with them, When I take away their sins.” ​

Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy. For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all. ​

Who is it that Paul is refering to as you and your in this passage?

1. Saved Gentiles only
2. Saved Jews only
3. Saved people (Jews and/or Gentiles)

ANSWER: People who have not rejected the Gospel.

28 Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. 29 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. 30 For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, 31 even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy. 32 For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all. Romans 11:28-32

Those who were formerly "connected" as a branch, were removed, and those who believe were "grafted in".


19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in.” 20 Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either. 22 Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off. Romans 11:19-22


Question:

Do you believe that those who were "connected", but were removed because of unbelief/disobedience are still somehow "saved", even though have been "cut off"?



JLB

 

[JLB]

Yes, and why wouldn't we speak to each other so? My bible study group is chocked full of men who believe they, no........... who believe others can lose their salvation.And it ain't pretty conversation most of the time.
Eternal security is the key in advancing in the Christian way of life. If we don't figure it out ................we don't advance. We do not repent to be cleansed again. We name and site our sins to regain fellowship in our EVERLASTING/ETERNAL relationship with Our Lord.

Peter did not need a bath, he needed his feet washed. 1 John 1:9.

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. Galatians 5:19-21

...those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

What kingdom will those Christians who practice the works of the flesh inherit, if not the kingdom of God?



JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

The 'argument' that Romans 11 is about corporate/national calling and gifting and not also about individual calling/gifting is absurd given Paul's use of his individual self and the 7,000 individuals he used for examples.

I am truly amazed that you still do not understand the argument.

Individual callings and gifts (Romans 11:29 NASB) shows that God has not revoked those gifts and callings from the nation as a whole. Paul and others callings and gifts are proof that God did not revoke those giftings and callings from Israel. Now, what you and freegrace have to prove using the context of the passage is that Paul and others having the gifts and calling of God, despite Israel's rejection of Christ, automatically translates into those individuals not being able to ever lose the gifts and calling of God. Of course after more than 500 posts that has not been done because it can not be done. It's simply not in the passage.

His point is clearly that in this present time, just as in Elijah's time, God calls and gifts individuals. 7,000 plus one plus more are His people. Irrevocably so.

Now explain how this automatically means those who receive the gifts and calling of God (because God has not changed his mind about giving those out) can never lose those gifts and calling. Just show us the context that explains that's what Paul meant.

 

[dirtfarmer]

I am truly amazed that you still do not understand the argument.

Individual callings and gifts (Romans 11:29 NASB) shows that God has not revoked those gifts and callings from the nation as a whole. Paul and others callings and gifts are proof that God did not revoke those giftings and callings from Israel. Now, what you and freegrace have to prove using the context of the passage is that Paul and others having the gifts and calling of God, despite Israel's rejection of Christ, automatically translates into those individuals not being able to ever lose the gifts and calling of God. Of course after more than 500 posts that has not been done because it can not be done. It's simply not in the passage.


Now explain how this automatically means those who receive the gifts and calling of God (because God has not changed his mind about giving those out) can never lose those gifts and calling. Just show us the context that explains that's what Paul meant.

hello Jethro Bodine, dirtfarmer here

Was the kingdom promised to a nation or to individuals? My understanding is that it was promised to the nation of Israel, not to individuals. We find that the nation of Israel has always had an remnant which is not the Church but God's earthly people. Has there ever in history been a nation that had no homeland for almost 3000 years and still remained a pure people? Those that will become the kingdom of priest are the 144,000, 12,000 from each tribe that is sealed during the tribulation, are the remnant.

 

[chessman]

Who is it that Paul is refering to as you and your in this passage?

1. Saved Gentiles only
2. Saved Jews only
3. Saved people (Jews and/or Gentiles)

ANSWER: People who have not rejected the Gospel.

That is correct, 3. And individual people at that. Thus your 'argument' that Romans 11's context is about Jews or their 'nation' only is incorrect.

Question:

Do you believe that those who were "connected", but were removed because of unbelief/disobedience are still somehow "saved", even though have been "cut off"?

Those natural branches who were "removed" because of unbelief are not who Paul is talking to, even though he uses them as an example of just how important it is to God that He not reject any of His people (Jew or Gentile). And furthermore, your assumptive question, assumes that they were saved via their natural Jewish flesh. That's incorrect. As anyone can see:

Romans 11:13-14 (NKJV) For I speak to you Gentiles; inasmuch as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, if by any means I may provoke to jealousy those who are my flesh and save some of them.​

Being a natural branch is NOT what saves either a Jew or a Gentile.

As Elijah assumed he was the only natural branch Jew in his day who believed/obeyed God, it's a bad assumption to assume their salvation state. He was wrong at least 7,000 times. God corrected him by stating there were in fact 7,000 of His people alive and well protected by God's mercy upon ALL His people. That's true even today, in present time.

 

[chessman]

I am truly amazed that you still do not understand the argument.

I understand your argument. Even quoted it twice.

The argument is not that the gifts and calling are only for Israel and not for the gentiles. The argument is that the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable in regard to the nation of Israel as a group, not in regard to any one individual person not being able to have them revoked once they accept the gifts and calling of God.

For a change, your argument is somewhat clear and understandable. Not so many double negatives and vague references to 'them/they'. The issue is not understanding your argument, it's that your argument is clearly in contradiction to the 7,000+ individuals Paul mentions. Himself and 7,000 individual Jews in Elijah's day and to the individual Roman Gentiles to whom he wrote his points.

 

[FreeGrace]

So how does that point automatically transfer over to meaning that the person who does receive the gifts and calling of God (because God never stopped calling people from among his group) can never ever lose his salvation?

Simply, and clearly, because the gifts of God are irrevocable.

The context of Romans 11:29 NASB is about God not changing his mind about calling and gifting people from among the nation of Jews.

11:29 is about all of God's gifts to everyone, not only to Jews.

There is nothing whatsoever in the context about those people who do receive God's gift and calling then to not ever be able to lose it. Nothing whatsoever.

If one simply denies the meaning of "irrevocable", that would be the comment.

 

[FreeGrace]

Where does it say that the eternal life itself (that God has not changed his mind about giving to people) is what is irrevocable?

6:23 says it clearly. And because 6:23 and 11:29 are directly linked by the fact that both verses deal with the gifts of God.

I've proven using the context of Romans 11 itself that Paul is saying God did not change his mind about giving people the gifts and calling of God (Paul himself being proof of that) even though Christ has been rejected.

You only thought you've proved something.

So now to prove your point you must show us the context that proves that Paul is saying once the person has the gifts and calling of God He will not change his mind and take it away from that person.

Already done. The word "irrevocable" means exactly that.

Now, to prove your claims, where is Scriptural proof that God ever has, or ever will, revoke the specific gift of eternal life?

It isn't there, but if it really is there, surely you'll be able to provide it. You're up. Can you do it?

Did already. In the meaning of the word 'irrevocable'.

Words to mean things. And we must pay attention to what words mean.

 

[FreeGrace]

That's just it, the context of Romans 11:29 is referring to unsaved Jews, who have rejected Jesus as Messiah.

And this doesn't support your claim at all. When those unsaved Jews do believe on Christ, they are given the irrevocable gift of God, being eternal life.

The irrevocable call to Jews who have rejected the Gospel remains available to them, which means they can not possible have eternal life.

That's not even close to the point. The point is that WHEN GIVEN, eternal life is an irrevocable gift. Eternal security.

Eternal life is not the irrevocable gift mentioned in Romans 11:29.

Since Paul specifically described 3 of God's gifts in the body (context) of his letter to the Romans, it would be absurd to claim that 11:29 did not refer to at least those 3 gifts, especially since he described NO OTHER gifts before 11:29.

Eternal life is mentioned in Romans 11:29

No it's not. But because Paul had ALREADY described eternal life as a gift of God in 6:23, 11:29 does refer to that specific gift. As well as the other 2 gifts that Paul described previous to 11:29.

There is no scripture in the bible that says eternal life is irrevocable.

For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. Romans 11:29

Interesting. You've cited the verse that refutes your claim. When Paul mentioned "the gifts of God" in 11:29, he had already described 3 of them previously in Romans. So ALL of those are in play when Paul penned 11:29. It is simply absurd to claim otherwise.

Romans 11:29 says the gifts and calling are irrevocable.
JLB

OK, sure. The gifts AND the calling are BOTH irrevocable.

Paul noted 2 things that are irrevocable in 11:29 - God's gifts AND God's calling.

 

[JLB]

That is correct, 3. And individual people at that. Thus your 'argument' that Romans 11's context is about Jews or their 'nation' only is incorrect.

This statement of yours, contradicts your previous statement, in which you agreed that "they" and "them" and "these" and "their" refer to unsaved Jews, who had rejected the Gospel. Post #547


The context of Romans 11:29 is referring to Jews who have rejected Jesus as Messiah, thus rejecting the call to salvation through the Gospel, in contrast to those who have obediently "believed" the Gospel.


They who have rejected Jesus as Messiah, have been "disconnected", and remain in need of Salvation, in which they certainly do not have eternal life, because they have been "cut off", in which Paul warns these who have been "grafted in", that they too can be cut off, in the do not continue, where as those who were "cut off", can be grafted back in", in they do not continue in unbelief.

28 Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. 29 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. 30 For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, 31 even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy.
Romans 11:28-31


Do you believe those who were "cut off", have eternal life?



JLB

 

[JLB]

And this doesn't support your claim at all. When those unsaved Jews do believe on Christ, they are given the irrevocable gift of God, being eternal life.

How can eternal life be irrevocable if these who rejected Jesus as Messiah were "cut off" and are now in need of obeying the call of the Gospel?

Paul warns the Church, they too can become "cut off" if they don't continue to believe.

20 Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either. 22 Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off. 23 And they also, if they do not continue in unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. Romans 11:20-23


These folks who were "cut off", because of unbelief, can indeed be grafted back in, IF they do not continue in unbelief.

The very thing Paul warns the Church.

These Jews who were cut off because of unbelief, must repent and believe the Gospel, showing that they are unsaved, just like those in the Church in Rome are warned, that THEY TOO CAN FALL INTO THIS SAME FATE IF THEY FALL INTO UNBELIEF.

• Jews who were cut off = unsaved
• Christians who are cut off = unsaved

JLB

 

[chessman]

This statement of yours, contradicts your previous statement, in which you agreed that "they" and "them" and "these" and "their" refer to unsaved Jews, who had rejected the Gospel. Post #547

No it doesn't. Your claim that the context is exclusively about the red/Jews has been shown to be false. There are red "they", "them", "these" AND "their" in the context. I admit that. There is also blue "you", "your", "Gentile", "brothers" in context. You ignore that fact. And we all know why.

Romans 11:25-32 (NKJV) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written:
“The Deliverer will come out of Zion, And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; For this is My covenant with them, When I take away their sins.” Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy. For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all.

 

[chessman]

Do you believe those who were "cut off", have eternal life?

I addressed your assumptive question already. I don't make the same assumption that you do. Being a natural branch didn't mean salvation and/or eternal life. You are assuming it does.

your assumptive question, assumes that they were saved via their natural Jewish flesh. That's incorrect. As anyone can see:

Romans 11:13-14 (NKJV) For I speak to you Gentiles; inasmuch as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, if by any means I may provoke to jealousy those who are my flesh and save some of them.​

Being a natural branch is NOT what saves either a Jew or a Gentile.

Do you believe that the 7,000 God reserved for Himself from Elijah's day had received eternal life? And if so, did God revoke it from them?

Romans 11:4 (NKJV) But what does the divine response say to him? “I have reserved for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.”​

 

[Jethro Bodine]

The issue is not understanding your argument, it's that your argument is clearly in contradiction to the 7,000+ individuals Paul mentions. Himself and 7,000 individual Jews in Elijah's day and to the individual Roman Gentiles to whom he wrote his points.

Let's try it one more time:

How does Paul and the 7,000+ individuals that have the gifts and calling of God automatically translate into them never being able to lose that gift and calling?

It's easy to see how the 7,000+ individuals that have the gifts and calling of God shows us that God did not revoke the gifts and calling of God so that no one can ever have them after Christ was rejected, but NOTHING whatsoever in the context of Romans 11 says that "the gifts and calling of God is irrevocable" (Romans 11:29 NASB) means the 7,000+ individuals that received the gifts and calling of God can now never ever lose it.

Want to try again? It should be really easy for you now (if your argument is correct) to answer the plainly stated question emboldened above. But I know you can't, because there is nothing in the passage to defend your out of context interpretation of Romans 11:29 NASB.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Simply, and clearly, because the gifts of God are irrevocable.

Classic OSAS circular reasoning. You'll have to do better than this.

11:29 is about all of God's gifts to everyone, not only to Jews.

All references to arguments I am not making will be ignored from this point forward.

If one simply denies the meaning of "irrevocable", that would be the comment.

You have to provide context to prove that eternal life itself is what is irrevocable and not that God still giving out the gifts and calling to people is what Paul is saying is irrevocable. Paul even uses himself as proof to support what I'm saying Romans 11:29 means. No proof, no evidence, nothing exists in the passage to support and defend your argument that Paul means that once a person receives the gifts and calling of God that they can not be taken back from that person.

Did already. In the meaning of the word 'irrevocable'.

Words to mean things. And we must pay attention to what words mean.

Stop dodging the argument. There is no disagreement on the definition of irrevocable.
Prove to us that what Paul is saying is that the gift of eternal life itself is irrevocable and can't be taken away from the person who has it, and that Paul is not saying that what is irrevocable is God continuing to hand out the gifts and calling of God to new people even though Christ has been rejected. Prove it using the passage, not by using what you insist it means.