If I ask someone for a gift, did I earn it, or work for it when I got it handed to me?

[younglite]

FreeGrace. I can see now that you're one of those who use hermeneutical gymnastics to make Scripture say what you want to believe. You're so steeped in your belief, you can't allow Scripture to say what it means. I have many more Scriptures, but in your desire to believe what you want, you would just twist them. To not abide in Christ, and to have no fellowship with Him doesn't mean anything to you. As long as you're positionally chosen, you're good. Oops! That's what Israel believed, too. I guess the prodigal son should have just kept on partying, eh? After all, he would always be his father's son. Silly Jesus for sharing such a story.

God is not interested in dead children with no fellowship. This doesn't mean He doesn't love them, but it does mean they chose to fall away on their own. Your logic basically says he no longer gives them free will, but rather He forces them to remain a member of their family. Hebrews 10:38-39 says otherwise...

...but my righteous one shall live by faith, and if he shrinks back, my soul has no pleasure in him. But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who have faith and preserve their souls.

It's hard to assume this means physical death, since the context is about preserving the soul. I just choose to believe what it says - a righteous one can shrink back and be destroyed - soul and all.

Have you set yourself up as more scholarly than those who have studied the Greek intensely over their lifetimes and KNOW the Greek language?

You speak out of both sides of your mouth. On the one hand, you told me to ignore the early church fathers because of all their heresy. But then you now say we should honor those who understand Greek. My guess is that these guys who spoke it first might merit some honor. Maybe they weren't all steeped in heresy. The fact that some of them did tell the truth and it somehow got passed on to this day might have some logic.

 

[WIP]

I've been offline for a couple days and noticed quite a few personal digs throughout the posts on the last few pages but rather than closing the discussion and removing a lot of posts, I'll just post a reminder here to watch those comments. Keep in mind that we are not here to prove ourselves more learned or intelligent than the next guy. We are here to get into Scripture to grow in our faith and understanding and above all to do it with gentleness and respect.

Thank you.

 

[FreeGrace]

I have never seen a scripture that teaches us that it's impossible to become unsealed.

Because it is impossible to be "unsealed". That's WHY Paul used such words as "promise", "pledge" and "guarantee" when he taught about the sealing with the Holy Spirit. And for WHY all believers have been sealed: FOR the day of redemption.

I'm waiting for someone to show otherwise.

Paul clearly taught eternal security in these verses:

Eph 1:13,14 - 13InHim, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession, to the praise of His glory.

Eph 4:30 - Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.

2 Cor 1:22 - who also sealed us and gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge.

2 Cor 5:5 - Now He who prepared us for this very purpose is God, who gave to us the Spirit as a pledge.

So, what has Paul taught here?

First, having believed, we are SEALED IN HIM (union with Christ) with the Holy Spirit of PROMISE, given as a PLEDGE FOR the day of redemption of God's own possession. This seal is a PLEDGE from God.

And consider this verse:

Heb 6:18 - so that by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have taken refuge would have strong encouragement to take hold of the hope set before us.

So, for one to accept your view of loss of salvation, 2 things are required:

1. Either prove by exegesis that Eph 1:13,14 4:30, 2 Cor 1:22 and 5:5 do NOT teach eternal security, or

2. Accept that God DOES break His promises and pledges, which makes Him a liar. Even though Scripture SAYS that it is impossible for God to lie. Titus 1:2 and Heb 6:18

Yes, as long as we have the Holy Spirit, we have the guarantee that insures our salvation.

Glad you agree with me here. Jesus said the Holy Spirit would be with us FOREVER.
Jn 14:16 - “I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever

Gee, maybe Jesus was just kidding? Or really didn't mean it? Or what?

Unfortunately, there will be some who disregard the precious blood of Jesus and insult the Spirit of Grace, and draw back to perdition, ending up reaping God;s vengeance.

Why would one think that "vengeance" must refer to loss of salvation? God's hand of discipline, per Heb 12 surely is vengeance.

So it is possible for a person to have partaken of the Holy Spirit and tasted of His power, to later on fall away.
JLB

Please prove from Scripture that falling away means loss of either salvation or the Holy Spirit.

All these assumptions, suppositions and guessing don't really defend your opinion.

 

[FreeGrace]

If you are longer one with The Lord in Covenant relationship, as a man and woman are one through the marriage relationship, then you have become disconnected from Him and His life, like a branch that becomes disconnected from the Vine and receives life from the Vine.

But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him. 1 Corinthians 6:17
JLB

Nope. There is nothing in Scripture about being "divorced" from God. In fact, Jesus made the point that God's view of marriage is PERMANENT.

Not to mention the sealing with the Holy Spirit FOR the day of redemption. Promised, pledged, and guaranteed.

 

[FreeGrace]

Your the one using man's commentary, not me.

Using scholars who know much more about the Greek than you and I combined.

Again I have to ask; what are your credentials that puts your opinion above that of the scholars?

 

[FreeGrace]

FreeGrace. I can see now that you're one of those who use hermeneutical gymnastics to make Scripture say what you want to believe.

With all respect, that is nonsense.

You're so steeped in your belief, you can't allow Scripture to say what it means.

More of same. lol

I have many more Scriptures, but in your desire to believe what you want, you would just twist them.

How about just the one best, most clear verse about the possibility of losing your salvation? Got one of those?

To not abide in Christ, and to have no fellowship with Him doesn't mean anything to you.

Wrong again. It is EXTREMELY important, but not for salvation. For fruit production, as Jesus very clearly taught His 11 remaining disciples in Jn 15.

As long as you're positionally chosen, you're good. Oops! That's what Israel believed, too. I guess the prodigal son should have just kept on partying, eh? After all, he would always be his father's son. Silly Jesus for sharing such a story.

What makes anyone think the prodigal son was about loss of salvation and regaining it again?? It was about loss of fellowship with his father, and the restoration of fellowship with his father.

God is not interested in dead children with no fellowship. This doesn't mean He doesn't love them, but it does mean they chose to fall away on their own.

Yes, children can and do rebel against their parents. But it seems the conclusion of your view is that when a child rebels, they are NO LONGER children of their parents. Doesn't that seem quite silly?

Your logic basically says he no longer gives them free will, but rather He forces them to remain a member of their family.

Gots news for you. A child CANNOT undo his own birth. Impossible. What you're talking about here is fellowship, NOT relationship.

Once your mother gave you birth, that cannot be undone. You will be her son FOREVER.

Hebrews 10:38-39 says otherwise...

...but my righteous one shall live by faith, and if he shrinks back, my soul has no pleasure in him. But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who have faith and preserve their souls.

Why should anyone think "destroy" means ultimate eternal destruction? And the Greeks used the word for "souls" to refer to one's human life. The context is physical life or death, just as in Deut 11 and 30.

It's hard to assume this means physical death, since the context is about preserving the soul. I just choose to believe what it says - a righteous one can shrink back and be destroyed - soul and all.

See above.

You speak out of both sides of your mouth. On the one hand, you told me to ignore the early church fathers because of all their heresy. But then you now say we should honor those who understand Greek.

Uh, the early church fathers didn't write lexicons. They wrote sermons. Big difference. And most of the early fathers dealt in Latin, not Greek.

 

[MarkT]

What gifts to the Jews? Where does Paul define any gifts to the Jews?

The same gifts we receive - the gifts of the Spirit. 1 Cor. 12:4-11

28 As regards the gospel they are enemies of God, for your sake; but as regards election they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. 29 For the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable. Romans 11:28-29

So who is he talking about when he says, 'they are enemies'? He is talking about his brethren according to descent, his kinsmen by race. Romans 9:3-5 Specifically the Jews who were hardened so that they did not believe.

All this is meaningless. When the Bible says that God's gifts are irrevocable, it means He won't take them back.

The word irrevocable refers to the covenant which makes the gifts possible. Paul doesn't quote Isaiah for no reason.

“The Deliverer will come from Zion,
he will banish ungodliness from Jacob”;
“and this will be my covenant with them
when I take away their sins.” Romans 11:26-27

John 3:16
For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

That's a covenant.

Anyways, Paul is not saying anything close to always saved. The covenant is whoever believes in him shall have eternal life.

 

[MarkT]

(Post removed, ToS 2.4, rude and antagonistic after administrator's warning in post 462 to not do this. Obadiah.)

 

[FreeGrace]

I said this:
"What gifts to the Jews? Where does Paul define any gifts to the Jews?"

The same gifts we receive - the gifts of the Spirit. 1 Cor. 12:4-11

Interesting. Paul defined both justification and eternal life as gifts of God IN Romans before writing IN Romans that God's gifts are irrevocable. Since you brought up a verse OUTSIDE of Romans, Paul also noted the "gifts of the Spirit" IN Romans in 1:11 - For I long to see you so that I may impart some spiritual gift to you, that you may be established

So, let me get this straight: you go OUTSIDE of the context of Romans to make your point, even though Paul made the same point IN Romans. Yet, you ignore the 2 other definitions of God's gifts IN Romans when explaining 11:29.

Why is that?

28 As regards the gospel they are enemies of God, for your sake; but as regards election they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. 29 For the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable. Romans 11:28-29

So who is he talking about when he says, 'they are enemies'? He is talking about his brethren according to descent, his kinsmen by race. Romans 9:3-5 Specifically the Jews who were hardened so that they did not believe.

And, who does "for YOUR sake" refer to? Gentiles.

The gifts of justification and eternal life are irrevocable to Jew and Gentile alike.

The word irrevocable refers to the covenant which makes the gifts possible.

Actually, Paul was very clear in 11:29 - for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.

He wasn't referring to the covenant that "makes the gifts possible". He specifically SAID "the gifts are irrevocable".

Paul doesn't quote Isaiah for no reason.

“The Deliverer will come from Zion,
he will banish ungodliness from Jacob”;
“and this will be my covenant with them
when I take away their sins.” Romans 11:26-27

Where ANYWHERE in the Bible is God's covenant to Israel defined as a gift?

Anyways, Paul is not saying anything close to always saved. The covenant is whoever believes in him shall have eternal life.

He exactly did say that. Please read 11:29 carefully. It is God's gifts, which he defined previously IN Romans, that are irrevocable: justification and eternal life.

The truth is as clear as crystal.

 

[FreeGrace]

(Post removed, response to a deleted post. Obadiah.)

 

[younglite]

And most of the early fathers dealt in Latin, not Greek.

Latin didn't become the common language of Christian worship until the 3rd and 4th centuries. The apostles worshipped in homes and spoke the common language of Greek and Aramaic. Paul, Peter and John had disciples named Polycarp, Ignatius, and Clement, who in turn had disciples named Ireaneus, Justin Martyr, and Hippolytus. The NT and their writings are in Greek and Aramaic. There's a difference between the church fathers of the Nicaean era, and the "early" church fathers.

 

[Kidron]

The new creature requires food and water Kidron. Mt. 4:4 That's where your argument fails. Nobody is born a mature adult; babes need milk and the more mature need meat.Now, I see a lot of Paul said and no Jesus said, so that tells me you have rejected Jesus;
As for being sealed by the Spirit I would agree if your house is built on Jesus. But as far as I can see it is built on Paul..

--
When i say "Son of God" as the status of a believer..... im referring to the heavenly position as a family member in God's family.
As "Son of God" is the Kingdom title of every single born again person, while YOU are referring to an earthly babe in Christ who has to learn how to walk out their Christianity from the position of a newbie.

And you are telling (Edited, ToS 2.4, rudenes and insulting. Obadiah.) me ive rejected Jesus, only because i try to help people who are stuck in "James" who instead need to be STUDYING the "Apostle to the Gentiles'" letters (Paul) that are written to the body of Christ that teach the doctrine of Salvation that you are never going to find in "James".

(Edited, ToS 2.4, unwelcome spiritual advice. Obadiah)

 

[FreeGrace]

Latin didn't become the common language of Christian worship until the 3rd and 4th centuries. The apostles worshipped in homes and spoke the common language of Greek and Aramaic.

Finally, an admission that the common language was Greek.

Paul, Peter and John had disciples named Polycarp, Ignatius, and Clement, who in turn had disciples named Ireaneus, Justin Martyr, and Hippolytus. The NT and their writings are in Greek and Aramaic.

Which of the original NT books were written in Aramaic? And please provide proof.

 

[MarkT]

I said this:
"What gifts to the Jews? Where does Paul define any gifts to the Jews?"

Interesting. Paul defined both justification and eternal life as gifts of God IN Romans before writing IN Romans that God's gifts are irrevocable. Since you brought up a verse OUTSIDE of Romans, Paul also noted the "gifts of the Spirit" IN Romans in 1:11 - For I long to see you so that I may impart some spiritual gift to you, that you may be established

So, let me get this straight: you go OUTSIDE of the context of Romans to make your point, even though Paul made the same point IN Romans. Yet, you ignore the 2 other definitions of God's gifts IN Romans when explaining 11:29.

Why is that?

It's interesting the way you make Paul into two people.

Is Paul two people that he doesn't know his own mind when he says gifts? Faith is a gift. Righteousness comes by faith. So Paul said the gift of righteousness. Romans 5:17 Is Paul saying anything new? It's the same Paul who said, 'Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is from God, that we might understand the gifts bestowed on us by God.' 1 Cor. 2:12

Do you know of any gift of God that is not a gift of the Holy Spirit? No? Then you can be sure Paul is talking about the gifts of the Spirit when ever he says gifts.

 

[younglite]

Finally, an admission that the common language was Greek.

I never said it wasn't. But you ignored admitting your mistake that the early church fathers didn't commonly use Latin. Do your own research on Aramaic being a common language in conjunction with Greek. I never said entire books were written - just phrases and chapters in the NT. It is an established fact in all Bible schools. A quick google search will reveal it for you. Since you're not really interested in mutual debating, and this topic really isn't worth so much energy. There are other worthwhile critical doctrines to focus on. Be well.

 

[MarkT]

--
When i say "Son of God" as the status of a believer..... im referring to the heavenly position as a family member in God's family.
As "Son of God" is the Kingdom title of every single born again person, while YOU are referring to an earthly babe in Christ who has to learn how to walk out their Christianity from the position of a newbie.

And you are performing ignorance to tell me ive rejected Jesus, only because i try to help people who are stuck in "James" who instead need to be STUDYING the "Apostle to the Gentiles'" letters (Paul) that are written to the body of Christ that teach the doctrine of Salvation that you are never going to find in "James".

And one more thing.....Paul told you to
1 Corinthians 11
11 """ Be you followers of ME (Paul), even as i also am of Christ"

Understand? ???????????
So MarkT, if you are not following the doctrines of Paul and the example of Paul's discipleship, as he "followed Christ", and has told you to follow him, ..... then you are not doing the right thing in your Christianity.
I think you should begin today.

The RSV says 'be imitators of me'. It doesn't say be followers of me.

1 Corinthians 4:16
I urge you, then, be imitators of me.

1 Corinthians 11:1
Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ.

Makes sense, because Paul was sent to lay the foundation of Jesus Christ. So Paul is not preaching his own gospel; he is preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ. We should, all of us, follow the Lord Jesus and no one else.

So when he says be imitators of me, he is talking about the manner in which they ought to live; how they should conduct themselves regarding immorality (shun it) the worship of idols (shun it) eating or not eating food (eat whatever you want to eat).

So my point is follow Jesus. Treasure his words. You can not understand Paul except in the light of Christ. His writing doesn't stand alone; it is built on the gospel and the teachings of our Lord. Paul is a servant, like us, and that's where people get all discombobulated.

 

[FreeGrace]

It's interesting the way you make Paul into two people.

This false claim has no relevance to anything I said. I pointed out what Paul defined as God's gifts. How does that relate to schizosophrenia?

Is Paul two people that he doesn't know his own mind when he says gifts? Faith is a gift. Righteousness comes by faith. So Paul said the gift of righteousness. Romans 5:17 Is Paul saying anything new? It's the same Paul who said, 'Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is from God, that we might understand the gifts bestowed on us by God.' 1 Cor. 2:12

So what? How does any of this refute what Paul clearly and plainly defined as God's gifts in Rom 5:15,16,17 and 6:23?

And it is those gifts that are what he was referring to in 11:29. In fact, he NEVER defined any covenant as a gift of God. Nor does the Bible anywhere.

Do you know of any gift of God that is not a gift of the Holy Spirit? No? Then you can be sure Paul is talking about the gifts of the Spirit when ever he says gifts.

So, to your way of thinking, Paul was lying when he defined justification and eternal life as gifts of God????

It is clear that such thinking is totally wrong.

 

[FreeGrace]

I never said it wasn't. But you ignored admitting your mistake that the early church fathers didn't commonly use Latin. Do your own research on Aramaic being a common language in conjunction with Greek. I never said entire books were written - just phrases and chapters in the NT. It is an established fact in all Bible schools. A quick google search will reveal it for you. Since you're not really interested in mutual debating, and this topic really isn't worth so much energy. There are other worthwhile critical doctrines to focus on. Be well.

Don't worry. I am well. And I agree that your points on Aramaic weren't worth debating. The NT was written in Greek. That is not debatable anyway, regardless of your opinion about it.

 

[MarkT]

This false claim has no relevance to anything I said. I pointed out what Paul defined as God's gifts. How does that relate to schizosophrenia?


So what? How does any of this refute what Paul clearly and plainly defined as God's gifts in Rom 5:15,16,17 and 6:23?

And it is those gifts that are what he was referring to in 11:29. In fact, he NEVER defined any covenant as a gift of God. Nor does the Bible anywhere.


So, to your way of thinking, Paul was lying when he defined justification and eternal life as gifts of God????

It is clear that such thinking is totally wrong.

Eternal life is not a definition of gift. The definition of gift is

noun

1 a thing given willingly to someone without payment; a present: a Christmas gift | [ as modifier ] : a gift shop.

• an act of giving something as a present: his mother's gift of a pen.

• informal a very easy task or unmissable opportunity: that touchdown was an absolute gift.

2 a natural ability or talent: he has a gift for comedy.

verb [ with obj. ]

give (something) as a gift, esp. formally or as a donation or bequest: the company gifted 2,999 shares to a charity.

• present (someone) with a gift or gifts: the director gifted her with a heart-shaped brooch.

• (gift someone with) endow someone with (something): she was gifted with a powerful clairvoyance.

 

[FreeGrace]

Eternal life is not a definition of gift.

I never said anything like that. I said that Paul defined eternal life as a gift of God. Do you debate that??

We all know what "gift" means. And Paul defined eternal life as a gift of God.