Bible Study Accepted in the Beloved: Why My Redemption and Adoption is Eternally Secure.

[Tenchi]

Anyway, I've said all I'm inclined to say on this head. I realize you've got your view and you're well set into it. Which is perfectly fine. I'm likewise well-established in what I believe and remain unpersuaded by your perspective. Thanks, though. If nothing else, it's been interesting to see what you think and why.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

A distinction that is not crisp and clear. Sin is always a reflection of a corresponding belief.

That is not true.
I have NEVER sinned because I didn't care about or believe in Christ anymore. Not once.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Anyway, I've said all I'm inclined to say on this head. I realize you've got your view and you're well set into it. Which is perfectly fine. I'm likewise well-established in what I believe and remain unpersuaded by your perspective. Thanks, though. If nothing else, it's been interesting to see what you think and why.

What I had hoped to do was show you that the scriptures that you use to be so determined and unmovable about OSAS can be understood in another way that OSAS, apparently, never thought of. And that's why OSAS is sure it's doctrine is the one and only absolutely correct way.

One day I was reading this passage and it occurred to me that the eternal security of salvation is because of the effectiveness and permanence of Christ's ministry, not because you can never lose it. I'll spare the bolded letters because I can see you know the scriptures and will contemplate carefully what I'm pointing out in these passages:

14because by a single offering He has made perfect for all time those who are being sanctified.
Hebrews 10:14

23Now there have been many other priests, since death prevented them from continuing in office. 24But because Jesus lives forever, He has a permanent priesthood. 25Therefore He is able to save completelyd those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to intercede for them. Hebrews 7:23-25

Because Christ's Ministry and Sacrifice is perfect and never-ending, the author exhorts us to hold fast to it, because it is the faithfulness of Christ's Ministry that is eternally secure, not our possession of it, unless we keep believing in it:

23Let us hold resolutely to the hope we profess, for He who promised is faithful.
Hebrews 10:23

14Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to what we profess.
Hebrews 4:14

So we see that the scriptures say that we are to hold fast to that which is eternally effective and everlasting, not that we will always have that which is eternally effective and everlasting all the time. OSAS seems to think it has the only way that these passages can be understood. That's simply not true.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

What you're trying to prove and what I'm trying to prove are not, I think, identical things. It seems to me that Paul has made it clear that God does allow His children to migrate into moralism and law-keeping. It seems, then, that the question is actually: If they persist in moralism, can they reach a point where God withdraws what Christ has accomplished for them in his redemption, justification and sanctification of them? I don't think so. All that moralism (aka - self-justification through law-keeping) does, ultimately, is cut off the born-again believer from fellowship with God. Their relationship to Him through and in Christ, however, is unalterable and eternal because it exists and is established and maintained in Christ, not in the believer, which is what I was pointing out in the OP to this thread.

I don't think you understand exactly what it means to be justified. This is a very serious matter. Which we will visit when I get back from church....

 

[Tenchi]

I understand justification perfectly well. In any case, please start a thread somewhere else, if you're determined to continue to post on this matter. Thanks.

 

[hawkman]

No one can pluck a born-again child of God out of Christ's hand and that includes the faithless born-again person him/herself (John 10:28-29).

Let us look at John10:27-29 .

27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.

Are the as you call them "faithless born-again" following Jesus ? "they follow me " Are they walking with Christ ?

Born-again and following Jesus , both are necessary .

I agree no one can pluck a born-again child of God out of Christs hand but that child of God can decide they want to go back and worship the golden calf with the world and live in Sodom again .

 

[Tenchi]

Are the as you call them "faithless born-again" following Jesus ? "they follow me " Are they walking with Christ ?

Ah. So all of Christ's statement about no one plucking his sheep out of his hand rests, not on God, not on Christ being the Good Shepherd, but on the willingness of the sheep to follow him. Do you recall the parable of the lost sheep? The sheep was lost because it wasn't following the shepherd. But, you know, the shepherd left all of his other sheep in search of the one that had wandered off. Why? Well, among other things, because it was his sheep that had got lost. He didn't go out looking for someone else's sheep, did he? No. It was because the lost sheep was his own sheep that he went out to find it.

It seems, though, that you believe that the lost sheep, having failed to follow the Shepherd, wandering off as sheep are naturally prone to do, has thereby plucked itself out of membership in the Good Shepherd's fold and is no longer one of his sheep. If so, if this is how Jesus looks at the wandering child of God, why would he go after him/her? Shepherds don't go off in search of strange sheep; they've got their own flock to care for, after all.

A sheep that has wandered off into the wilderness, away from its shepherd, is more or less helpless, vulnerable, not just to predators, but to entanglement in vegetation, or drowning in water, or stumbling into a crevice, or just growing its wool coat so big that it can't function, dying of immobility and the killing starvation and thirst that result. And finding its way back to its shepherd is, essentially, impossible for a sheep that has wandered out of sight of him. They are bizarrely - and dangerously - ill-equipped for survival in the wild. But, even so, you would place the responsibility for remaining within the Good Shepherd's flock on the sheep.

"No one" necessarily includes everyone. The Good Shepherd's sheep have been given to him by God, and identify themselves by following him, but they remain Christ's "sheep" because no one has the power - not even the sheep themselves - to remove any of them from his hand. And this is a crucially important thing given how much like actual sheep we are in our relationship to our Good Shepherd.

 

[jasonc]

Ah. So all of Christ's statement about no one plucking his sheep out of his hand rests, not on God, not on Christ being the Good Shepherd, but on the willingness of the sheep to follow him. Do you recall the parable of the lost sheep? The sheep was lost because it wasn't following the shepherd. But, you know, the shepherd left all of his other sheep in search of the one that had wandered off. Why? Well, among other things, because it was his sheep that had got lost. He didn't go out looking for someone else's sheep, did he? No. It was because the lost sheep was his own sheep that he went out to find it.

It seems, though, that you believe that the lost sheep, having failed to follow the Shepherd, wandering off as sheep are naturally prone to do, has thereby plucked itself out of membership in the Good Shepherd's fold and is no longer one of his sheep. If so, if this is how Jesus looks at the wandering child of God, why would he go after it? Shepherds don't go off in search of strange sheep; they've got their own flock to care for, after all.

A sheep that has wandered off into the wilderness, away from its shepherd, is more or less helpless, vulnerable, not just to predators, but to entanglement in vegetation, or drowning in water, or stumbling into a crevice, or just growing its wool coat so big that it can't function, dying of immobility and the killing starvation and thirst that result. And finding its way back to its shepherd is, essentially, impossible for a sheep that has wandered out of sight of him. They are the bizarrely - and dangerously - ill-equipped for survival in the wild. But, even so, you would place the responsibility for remaining within the Good Shepherd's flock on the sheep.

"No one" necessarily includes everyone. The Good Shepherd's sheep have been given to him by God, and identify themselves by following him, but they remain Christ's "sheep" because no one has the power - not even the sheep themselves - to remove any of them from his hand. And this is a crucially important thing given how much like actual sheep we are in our relationship to our Good Shepherd.

I need to a thread on how goats and sheep act .

Lol.i have dealt with both .goats are more aggressive and less willing to let you harm them.

 

[hawkman]

Ah. So all of Christ's statement about no one plucking his sheep out of his hand rests, not on God, not on Christ being the Good Shepherd, but on the willingness of the sheep to follow him. Do you recall the parable of the lost sheep? The sheep was lost because it wasn't following the shepherd. But, you know, the shepherd left all of his other sheep in search of the one that had wandered off. Why? Well, among other things, because it was his sheep that had got lost. He didn't go out looking for someone else's sheep, did he? No. It was because the lost sheep was his own sheep that he went out to find it.

It seems, though, that you believe that the lost sheep, having failed to follow the Shepherd, wandering off as sheep are naturally prone to do, has thereby plucked itself out of membership in the Good Shepherd's fold and is no longer one of his sheep. If so, if this is how Jesus looks at the wandering child of God, why would he go after him/her? Shepherds don't go off in search of strange sheep; they've got their own flock to care for, after all.

A sheep that has wandered off into the wilderness, away from its shepherd, is more or less helpless, vulnerable, not just to predators, but to entanglement in vegetation, or drowning in water, or stumbling into a crevice, or just growing its wool coat so big that it can't function, dying of immobility and the killing starvation and thirst that result. And finding its way back to its shepherd is, essentially, impossible for a sheep that has wandered out of sight of him. They are bizarrely - and dangerously - ill-equipped for survival in the wild. But, even so, you would place the responsibility for remaining within the Good Shepherd's flock on the sheep.

"No one" necessarily includes everyone. The Good Shepherd's sheep have been given to him by God, and identify themselves by following him, but they remain Christ's "sheep" because no one has the power - not even the sheep themselves - to remove any of them from his hand. And this is a crucially important thing given how much like actual sheep we are in our relationship to our Good Shepherd.

The sheep that was not snatched out of Christs hand but simply wandered off into the direction of their choosing and now is dead before being brought back to the fold .

 

[jasonc]

The sheep that was not snatched out of Christs hand but simply wandered off into the direction of their choosing and now is dead before being brought back to the fold .

In order to be a sheep in your case .Jesus wouldn't accept him ?

Why ?

For if they have tasted the salvation...they have made the crucifixion afresh and their is no forgiveness of sins anew ..

 

[Jethro Bodine]

It seems to me that Paul has made it clear that God does allow His children to migrate into moralism and law-keeping. It seems, then, that the question is actually: If they persist in moralism, can they reach a point where God withdraws what Christ has accomplished for them in his redemption, justification and sanctification of them?

Yes. God will withdraw it, if you reject any correction regarding the matter. If you're even given the chance to be corrected on the matter. That we clearly learn from the Galatians.

You have to continue in the faith you started out in in order to enter into the kingdom at the end of the age:

4and into an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, reserved in heaven for you, 5who through faith are shielded by God’s power for the salvation that is ready to be revealed in the last time.1 Peter 1:4-5

Remove the 'through faith' part and you no longer have that through which you are shielded by God's power for the salvation that is ready to be revealed. The Galatians abandoned their faith in the perfection (the justification) that comes from having your sins forgiven and were reverting back to the vain attempt to be perfected (justified) before God through the works of the law.

Anyone who arrives at the judgment in the confidence that they stand perfect before God because of keeping the works of the law will be rejected and will not enter into the kingdom of God. They will have failed to secure the perfection (the justification) that comes from having faith in God's forgiveness apart from works of the law. They are unbelievers.

 

[Tenchi]

The sheep that was not snatched out of Christs hand but simply wandered off into the direction of their choosing and now is dead before being brought back to the fold .

??? I'm not following what you mean here...

 

[Jethro Bodine]

The sheep that was not snatched out of Christs hand but simply wandered off into the direction of their choosing and now is dead before being brought back to the fold .

Yes. This reminds me of the argument that a child that is born can not be unborn. Yes, but they can die.