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

[JLB]

Yes, He did.


This is just a very disingenuous statement, as everyone knows.


Doesn't need to. Paul had already described what he meant by "gifts" in Rom 3:24 (justification) and Rom 6:23 (eternal life).

Those who actually understand what "context" means have no problem understanding that Rom 11:29 refers to the gifts of justification and eternal life. Those who don't understand what context means horribly misunderstand lots of Scripture.

Since there is disagreement about what Paul was referring to in Rom 11:29, please show the forum where Paul defined what he meant by "gifts" in 11:29.

To do that would require finding a verse somewhere between 1:1 and 11:29 where Paul described something as God's gifts.

Oh, and while you're at it, please find a verse where Paul was clear that he didn't mean justifiation and eternal life in 11:29.

If those things can be done, you'll convince me of my error. But if not, then, well, we'll all know that your view is the one in error.

I've shown where Paul defined God's gifts very plainly. You've not done that, nor has anyone else.

Why should your view be accepted when you've failed to do that?

All the circular reasoning in the world will never produce the word eternal or life or salvation in the verse Romans 11:29.


For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. Romans 11:29 KJV

Here's what we know, sons of God were cast down to hell, and will exist eternally with the devil and his angels, in the fires of hell.

Then He will also say to those on the left hand, 'Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels: Matthew 25:41

The devil, Satan, and his angels along with the angels, sons of God, that were disobedient in the days of Noah, are all destined for everlasting fire.

All those servants of Jesus, on the left hand, that did not produce fruit with be cast there with them.

Being a son of God, does not somehow exempt a person from eternal condemnation.

There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. Romans 8:1


Thanks be to God, for His mercy that He is longsuffering, desiring all of us to come to repentance, and be with Him for all of eternity.





JLB

 

[MarkT]

Let me be clear: Paul SAID that God's gifts (that's eternal life itself, not just a promise) is irrevocable.

There is no way any promise of anything can rightly be called a gift. That's just absurd.

When God promises something, He always carries through. Otherwise, He'd be a liar.

But, promises are NOT gifts.

Promises are words. Gifts are the result of promises.

I agree and I never said a promise is a gift. I said the promise is irrevocable. You said the gift is irrevocable. Right? But revoked has to refer to a covenant, not a gift, and Paul brought up the covenant with Israel. 'He will banish ungodliness from Jacob.' Ro. 11:26-27

So what Paul is saying is Jesus was the Deliverer who was promised Israel. Therefore God did not forget his people. So when he says the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable, he is talking about God keeping his covenant with Israel. So what was promised Israel is in Christ.

 

[MarkT]

I said this:
"What does your crowd do with King Saul, who was killed by God for consulting a medium (1 Chron 10:13,14) yet was told by Samuel that he would join Samuel the next day (1 Sam 28:19)?

King Saul was a failure as king. And God killed him because of his repeated disobedience. Yet, at his death, he joined Samuel. And there is no explanation from your side."

My request was quite clear. Saul is with Samuel today, even though he was an awful king who regularly disobeyed God's commands.

Yeah. In the earth. They are both asleep in the earth.

I figured that kind of a silly response. Why would a SAVED prophet of God, who WAS in Paradise, and sent back to earth to tell Saul what was coming, to only mean that he would die and be in the earth??

Unless there is solid evidence that Saul's body was buried right next to Samuel's body, your answer fails at every level.

Samuel was telling Saul that he would be with him in Paradise the next day.

Why silly? The woman medium conjured or divined up the spirit of Samuel. She saw him coming out of the earth. Samuel said, "Why have you disturbed me by bringing me up?" 1 Sam. 28:11-20 Samuel was in the earth asleep when the medium brought him up.

Where does it say Samuel was in paradise? Where does it say he was sent back to earth?

The spirt of Samuel prophesied the LORD would give Israel and him into the hands of the Philistines, and Saul would be dead and in the earth with Samuel the next day.

 

[FreeGrace]

All the circular reasoning in the world will never produce the word eternal or life or salvation in the verse Romans 11:29.

Edited do not imply another member disingenuous reba Since Paul had already defined what he meant by God's gifts, there was no reason "in the world" for him to repeat himself. Those who are familiar with and understand how context works, KNOWS that the gifts he noted in 11:29 are the SAME GIFTS he had already defined earlier. Specifically, both justification and eternal life.

And, no one has been able to refute that. Disagree, sure. But the score is zero for refutation.

When Paul said "the gifts of God", he was referring to justification and eternal life.

 

[FreeGrace]

I agree and I never said a promise is a gift. I said the promise is irrevocable.

On what basis do you claim this? Please be specific regarding which verse tells us that 'the promise' is irrevocable?

Because 11:29 does NOT say anything about a promise of any kind. It clearly states that God's GIFTS (not promises) are irrevocable.

You said the gift is irrevocable. Right?

No, Paul said it. I only repeat what God's Word SAYS.

But revoked has to refer to a covenant, not a gift

Based on whose authority? Why does it "has to", as you assert?

and Paul brought up the covenant with Israel. 'He will banish ungodliness from Jacob.' Ro. 11:26-27

So what? Did he refer to the covenant as a gift? No, he did not. And NO WHERE in Scripture is any covenant described as a gift to anyone. Your point is not taken because it is unsubstantiated.

So what Paul is saying is Jesus was the Deliverer who was promised Israel.

OK, he said that, sure. But that has nothing to do with the gifts of 11:29.

Therefore God did not forget his people. So when he says the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable, he is talking about God keeping his covenant with Israel. So what was promised Israel is in Christ.

Wrong. There is NOTHING in Scripture to substantiate your claim about any covenant being called a gift.

Paul is the one who get to define what he meant by "God's gifts" in 11:29. And he did so clearly in 3:24 and 6:23. He said NOTHING about any covenant being a gift. So 11:29 is NOT about any covenant.

 

[FreeGrace]

Yeah. In the earth. They are both asleep in the earth.

I wish you were joking. Why in the world would any believer put focus on the grave, where DEAD bodies lie, when ALL believers go to heaven? That makes no sense.

If you want to be consistent with such a view, then consider this verse:
Luke 23:43 - And He said to him, “Truly I sayto you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise.”

While Jesus added "in Paradise", why would Samuel be focused on where their DEAD bodies would lie? Samuel said the same thing, without the "in Paradise". But that isn't significant. He was telling Saul that he would join him the next day. And by the way, Samuel wasn't speaking from the ground. He appeared to Saul in his physical form, not as a DEAD corpse. So he certainly wasn't speaking of the grave.

No believer of the caliber of Samuel would EVER put any emphasis on the grave, but on being in Paradise, or heaven.

Your answer makes no sense whatsoever.

Why silly? The woman medium conjured or divined up the spirit of Samuel. She saw him coming out of the earth. Samuel said, "Why have you disturbed me by bringing me up?" 1 Sam. 28:11-20 Samuel was in the earth asleep when the medium brought him up.

So, is your view that Samuel was only in the grave? That his spirit never made it to Paradise?? That's why it is silly.

Where does it say Samuel was in paradise?

Where do you think his spirit was after he died?

Where does it say he was sent back to earth?

Where do you think sheol is? Until Jesus died and was resurrected, all saved souls went to Paradise, a compartment in sheol (hell). As well, the place of "torments" was also in sheol (hell), but in a different place.

When Jesus died, He visited sheol and took the saved souls up to heaven with Him.

The spirt of Samuel prophesied the LORD would give Israel and him into the hands of the Philistines, and Saul would be dead and in the earth with Samuel the next day.

Except the one speaking was NOT DEAD. His spirit was very much alive, as dead men don't speak.

So he couldn't have been speaking of the grave.

It's real clear that you're not familiar with where saved souls go after physical death.

 

[MarkT]

On what basis do you claim this? Please be specific regarding which verse tells us that 'the promise' is irrevocable?

Because 11:29 does NOT say anything about a promise of any kind. It clearly states that God's GIFTS (not promises) are irrevocable.


No, Paul said it. I only repeat what God's Word SAYS.


Based on whose authority? Why does it "has to", as you assert?


So what? Did he refer to the covenant as a gift? No, he did not. And NO WHERE in Scripture is any covenant described as a gift to anyone. Your point is not taken because it is unsubstantiated.


OK, he said that, sure. But that has nothing to do with the gifts of 11:29.


Wrong. There is NOTHING in Scripture to substantiate your claim about any covenant being called a gift.

Paul is the one who get to define what he meant by "God's gifts" in 11:29. And he did so clearly in 3:24 and 6:23. He said NOTHING about any covenant being a gift. So 11:29 is NOT about any covenant.

By definition
revoke
1 [ with obj. ] put an end to the validity or operation of (a decree, decision, or promise): the men appealed and the sentence was revoked.

Paul said, 'the gifts and the call of God'. You put 'gifts' and 'call of God' together and you have 'covenant'.

 

[FreeGrace]

By definition
revoke
1 [ with obj. ] put an end to the validity or operation of (a decree, decision, or promise): the men appealed and the sentence was revoked.

Paul said, 'the gifts and the call of God'. You put 'gifts' and 'call of God' together and you have 'covenant'.

They aren't the same, so I don't "put them together". The 'call' is an invitation as any lexicon will tell you. And the 'gifts' have been described specifically by Paul within the context of the epistle.

No matter how one tries to slice it, no where in the Bible is ANY covenant described or called a gift. It just ain't so.

When God invites, that is irrevocable. He never rescinds His invitations.

When God gives the gift of justification and eternal life, He never rescinds or revokes them.

 

[JLB]

[QUOTE="

When God gives the gift of justification and eternal life, He never rescinds or revokes them.[/QUOTE]

These Christians in the Church at Galatia, were warned by Paul that practicing the works of the flesh, would eventually lead them to not inherit the kingdom of God.


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

John also warns us that idolaters, heretics, sorcerers, sexually immoral... will not be welcome in God's Kingdom.


But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.” Revelation 21:8

Not inheriting God's Kingdom = cast into the everlasting fires of hell.


Somewhere these believer's who were justified by faith in Christ, turned back from practicing righteousness, and were enticed to practice fulfilling the desires of there flesh, having become entangled again, they were overcome and found no repentance before they died.


As Peter says -

20 For if, after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the latter end is worse for them than the beginning. 21 For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them. 22 But it has happened to them according to the true proverb: “A dog returns to his own vomit,” and, “a sow, having washed, to her wallowing in the mire.”
2 Peter 2:20


it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them.


Peter says it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it....


The only Way of Righteousness, is by faith in Jesus Christ.


JLB

 

[FreeGrace]

[QUOTE="

When God gives the gift of justification and eternal life, He never rescinds or revokes them.

These Christians in the Church at Galatia, were warned by Paul that practicing the works of the flesh, would eventually lead them to not inherit the kingdom of God.


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[/QUOTE]
Here we go again. There are 2 other parallel passages; 1 Cor 6:9,10 - 9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. and Eph 5:5 - For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person—such a man is an idolater—has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.

So, whether it's phrased "will not inherit" or "has no inheritance" means the SAME THING. The phrase has nothing to do with not entering the kingdom, as some think.

John also warns us that idolaters, heretics, sorcerers, sexually immoral... will not be welcome in God's Kingdom.

They sure won't have an "abundant entrance" as Peter noted in 2 Pet 1:10.11 - 10Therefore, my brothers, be all the more eager to make your calling and election sure. For if you do these things, you will never fall, 11and you will receive a rich welcome into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

If failure to "do these things" were to result in loss of entrance, he would have said so. But instead, he notes what will be lost: a "rich welcome" INTO the kingdom. Not loss of entrance as some erroneously claim.

We also know from 1 Thess 5:10 that all who have believed will be with the Lord forever, regardless of their lifestyle:

"who died for us, so that whether we are awake or asleep, we will live together with Him."

The context is very clear about what Paul meant by being awake or being asleep. They have to do with lifestyle. Those who are awake are alert and obedient, while those who are asleep are not not alert and not obedient.

Now, watch how the insecurity crowd will not even attempt to refute any of my points, or try to explain these verses to show that my understanding is wrong.

 

[WIP]

Now I have another question. If I don't inherit something, what does that mean?

Here are some examples from Merriam Webster.

• to come into possession of or receive especially as a right
• to receive as a devise or legacy
• to take or hold a possession

So if I will not inherit the kingdom of God, by Webster's definition I will not come into possession or I will not receive or I will not take hold of the Kingdom. Where would that leave me?

 

[FreeGrace]

Now I have another question. If I don't inherit something, what does that mean?

Here are some examples from Merriam Webster.

• to come into possession of or receive especially as a right
• to receive as a devise or legacy
• to take or hold a possession

So if I will not inherit the kingdom of God, by Webster's definition I will not come into possession or I will not receive or I will not take hold of the Kingdom. Where would that leave me?

The short answer would be this: a renter rather than an owner. iow, there will be believers in the kingdom who do not have an inheritance IN the kingdom, just as Eph 5:5 says.

So, to have "no inheritance in the kingdom" means to have no possessions or rights (certain privileges) in the kingdom.

It does not mean to not enter the kingdom.

Recall that Peter spoke of a "rich welcome" in the kingdom if one does "these things" (2 Pet 1:11), which is adding to their faith the character qualities that he listed. Those qualities speak to obedience and lifestyle. That's how one receives a rich welcome into the kingdom.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

You guys have been arguing about this everyday for 2 months now.
Is anyone winning?

 

[WIP]

You guys have been arguing about this everyday for 2 months now.
Is anyone winning?

Won't really know the answer to that question until our resurrection I suppose. God knows the answer! I will trust Him.

 

[MarkT]

They aren't the same, so I don't "put them together". The 'call' is an invitation as any lexicon will tell you. And the 'gifts' have been described specifically by Paul within the context of the epistle.

No matter how one tries to slice it, no where in the Bible is ANY covenant described or called a gift. It just ain't so.

When God invites, that is irrevocable. He never rescinds His invitations.

When God gives the gift of justification and eternal life, He never rescinds or revokes them.

Because they are not the same, you don't put them together? Where is the logic in that? Paul said, 'the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable', and you can't put them together even though they are put together by the word 'and'?

How many ways can I say it? The gifts and the call of God belong to the covenant? They are the things that are promised by the covenant. The LORD is ever mindful of his covenant. Ps. 111:5 He has commanded his covenant for ever. Ps. 111:9

And why do you keep repeating this straw man? "No matter how one tries to slice it, no where in the Bible is ANY covenant described or called a gift. It just ain't so."

Nobody called the covenant a gift.

 

[FreeGrace]

You guys have been arguing about this everyday for 2 months now.
Is anyone winning?

Truth always wins. ;)

 

[FreeGrace]

Because they are not the same, you don't put them together? Where is the logic in that? Paul said, 'the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable', and you can't put them together even though they are put together by the word 'and'?

I explained what I meant by both gifts and calling. What was not understood?

How many ways can I say it? The gifts and the call of God belong to the covenant?

Please prove that. All I've seen so far are your opinions about a covenant.

They are the things that are promised by the covenant.

The covenant promises a call? And gifts? Where, please?

The LORD is ever mindful of his covenant. Ps. 111:5 He has commanded his covenant for ever. Ps. 111:9

And why do you keep repeating this straw man?[/QUOTE]
The straw man is the false issue of covenants being what Paul meant in Rom 11:29.

"No matter how one tries to slice it, no where in the Bible is ANY covenant described or called a gift. It just ain't so."

Nobody called the covenant a gift.

So, where is the proof? Without evidence from Scripture, all you have is opinion.

I have given proof of what Paul was referring to.

 

[MarkT]

I wish you were joking. Why in the world would any believer put focus on the grave, where DEAD bodies lie, when ALL believers go to heaven? That makes no sense.

If you want to be consistent with such a view, then consider this verse:
Luke 23:43 - And He said to him, “Truly I sayto you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise.”

While Jesus added "in Paradise", why would Samuel be focused on where their DEAD bodies would lie? Samuel said the same thing, without the "in Paradise". But that isn't significant. He was telling Saul that he would join him the next day. And by the way, Samuel wasn't speaking from the ground. He appeared to Saul in his physical form, not as a DEAD corpse. So he certainly wasn't speaking of the grave.

No believer of the caliber of Samuel would EVER put any emphasis on the grave, but on being in Paradise, or heaven.

Your answer makes no sense whatsoever.


So, is your view that Samuel was only in the grave? That his spirit never made it to Paradise?? That's why it is silly.


Where do you think his spirit was after he died?


Where do you think sheol is? Until Jesus died and was resurrected, all saved souls went to Paradise, a compartment in sheol (hell). As well, the place of "torments" was also in sheol (hell), but in a different place.

When Jesus died, He visited sheol and took the saved souls up to heaven with Him.


Except the one speaking was NOT DEAD. His spirit was very much alive, as dead men don't speak.

So he couldn't have been speaking of the grave.

It's real clear that you're not familiar with where saved souls go after physical death.

It doesn't matter what you think of the caliber of Samuel or where Samuel is or where he should be based on your theology, the Scripture says otherwise. The medium saw him coming out of the earth.
1 Samuel 28:13
The king said to her, “Have no fear; what do you see?” And the woman said to Saul, “I see a god coming up out of the earth.”

 

[MarkT]

The covenant promises a call? And gifts? Where, please?

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

Jesus is the mediator of the new covenant. Heb. 8:6

Acts 2:39
For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him.”

 

[JLB]

Now I have another question. If I don't inherit something, what does that mean?

Here are some examples from Merriam Webster.

• to come into possession of or receive especially as a right
• to receive as a devise or legacy
• to take or hold a possession

So if I will not inherit the kingdom of God, by Webster's definition I will not come into possession or I will not receive or I will not take hold of the Kingdom. Where would that leave me?

In the dark.


JLB