Why don't you, since you are convinced that "proper exegesis" will refute OSAS. I didn't see anything in the Mounce translation that is any different than how I understand Jn 5:24.
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
If I ask someone for a gift, did I earn it, or work for it when I got it handed to me?
- Thread starter llama
- Start date
That's because Mounce only gives you the words. He does not parse them. Mounce's translation is an Interlinear, not a Greek grammar.
How about parsing these two verbs for us so that we gain a correct meaning of John 5:24 (ESV), based on the Greek?
Oz
Last edited:
Well, I did parse them. And you haven't provided any comment about my parsing. Are you going to?
Please refer me to the post number where you parsed these 2 Greek words and gave the meaning. I seem to have missed your post.
FreeGrace,
I've found your post. Sorry that I missed it previously. I asked you to parse and give the meaning of 2 Greek verbs in John 5:24 (ESV), pisteuwn (believes) and echei (has). Thanks for doing this.
However, you did not give the meaning of these 2 verbs as they are associated with eternal life. Because both of these 2 verbs are in the present tense, they mean continuous action. So the meaning of John 5:24 (ESV) is: 'whoever ... continues to believe him who sent me continues to have eternal life'. Perseverance of the saints is the doctrine that the saints are those who continue to believe (persevere) so they continue to experience eternal life.
That's why OSAS is a misleading statement as it infers that if one believes once that there is guaranteed eternal life. That is not the case as John 5:24 (ESV) demonstrates.
You try to dispute this by saying, 'present participle in Luke 8:13 and immediately after the word added "for a while"'. That's perfectly OK in Greek. A present participle means continuous action but it can be limited by some accompanying construct as is here, 'for a while'. So there was continuous action of believing but it was only for a limited time. That does not deny the meaning of continuous action of the Greek present tense. We use it in English as well. I drove the car on the highway until I crashed it. This means I continued to drive my car until it came to a screeching halt.
Echei can also be transliterated as exei as the 'ch' or 'x' are transliterating the Greek letter of the alphabet chi or xi.
You stated that 'And Jesus used the aorist tense in the previous verse in the phrase "lest they believe and be saved"' (Lk 8:12 ESV). However, this is use of the Greek ingressive aorist (see A T Robertson's Word Pictures 1930:113) in which the action is viewed from perspective of the initiation of the action. It may be diagrammed as:
·>-------------------------------------- (Dana & Mantey 1955:195)
There is no problem with the aorist being used for believing, in its ingressive form, as seeing salvation from the viewpoint of its beginning (initiation).
The biblical teaching is that the person who continues to believe continues to have eternal life (that's the meaning of John 5:24 (ESV). To deny this is to deny basic Greek grammar.
You state:
I agree. But it is based on the conditions established in John 5:24 (ESV). They continue to believe so that they will continue to have eternal life. Eternal life is not for those who once believed, then fell away from the faith, or shipwrecked their faith. Eternal life is based on perseverance of the saints. Saints persevere by continuing to believe and continuing to have eternal life.
Oz
Works consulted
Dana, H E & Mantey, J R 1955. A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament. Toronto, Ontario: The Macmillan Company.
Robertson, A T 1930. Word Pictures in the New Testament: The Gospel According to Luke, vol 2. Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman Press.
Last edited:
I will copy and paste part of that post as a reminder of what I have already said in regard to the present tense:
"Oh, I see. You think the present part means they have to keep on believing in order to keep on having eternal life.
We KNOW that isn't a fact, since Jesus Himself used the present participle in Luke 8:13 and immediately after the word added "for a while". So it does NOT demand ongoing action til the end of time.
And Jesus used the aorist tense in the previous verse in the phrase "lest they believe and be saved".
And Paul used the aorist tense in Acts 16:31 in his answer to the jailer. As well, in Rom 10:10, he used the aorist tense.
So you're making much more of the present tense than is warranted, given all the verses that have the aorist tense for believe and be saved.
If one HAD to continue to believe in order to continue to be saved, then neither Jesus nor Paul would have EVER used the aorist tense in the verses they did."
I believe I have provided an adequate defense for my views. Since both Paul and Jesus used the aorist tense for believing in relation to getting saved, I don't think you have a point.
And Luke 8:13 uses the present tense for 'believe' even though Jesus then adds "for a while". So even Jesus didn't consider the present tense to mean "continuous action" throughout one's life.
And in the previous verse, He used the aorist tense for "lest they believe and be saved."
Your point is not taken.
FreeGrace,
I've already refuted your position at #1166. I'm not going to repeat what I wrote.
pisteuson, the ingressive aorist in Acts 16:31 is looking at believing from the point of initiation. I've explained the ingressive aorist in #1166.
I'm making of the present tense of the verb exactly what it states in John 5:24 (ESV). The present tenses in this verse sink OSAS. Of course you wouldn't want to accept the importance of the present tenses because they refute your view.
You use a question begging fallacy. You start with OSAS as your premise, so no matter what the Greek text states, you have to conclude with OSAS. It's fallacious reasoning.
Oz
No, sir, you did not. Your whole premise is based on a faulty understanding of the present tense. It does NOT mean continuous action for the rest of eternity, as I proved from other words that both Jesus and Paul used in expressing believing in Christ for salvation. How do you explain their use of the aorist tense, which is a point in time action, without any regard for duration of time?
[Deleted inappropriate comment. WIP] So I am guilty as charged.
Jesus tells us that those to whom He gives eternal life (which is WHEN they believe) they WILL NEVER PERISH.
And you haven't provided any verse that teaches that salvation or eternal life exists only as long as one continues to believe. Your faulty premise is that one must continue to believe in order to continue to be saved. What verse says that? It's not Jn 5:24, which is what you think it means.
If that were true, then neither Jesus nor Paul would EVER have used the aorist tense for "believe" when speaking about getting saved.
Jesus said this: “Those beside the road are those who have heard; then the devil comes and takes away the word from their heart, so that they will not believe and be saved. Luke 8:12 The word 'believe' is aorist. Point in time.
13 “Those on the rocky soil are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no firm root; they believe for a while, and in time of temptation fall away. How do you explain WHY Jesus used the present tense along with "for a while"? How does that make sense to your understanding of the present tense?
They said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.” Acts 16:31
Paul used the aorist tense here.
Further, consider this word from Jesus:
but who ever drinks of the water that I will give him shall never thirst; but the water that I will give him will become in him a well of water springing up to eternal life.” Jn 4:14 The word "drinks" is aorist tense.
I see a parallel between what Jesus said in Jn 4:14 and 10:28. Those who "drink of the water that I will give him" WILL NEVER THIRST is the same as saying "to them I give eternal life and they WILL NEVER PERISH.
Since Jesus used the aorist tense for "drinks", one cannot claim that salvation is based on continuous action.
Salvation is based on a point in time action of placing one's faith in Jesus Christ for eternal life. At that moment, they HAVE eternal life, and they WILL NEVER PERISH. A promise from Jesus.
Last edited by a moderator:
Jethro Bodine
Member
....through our faith. We are kept by God's power for the day of salvation through our faith. But you say we still have God's power keeping us for the day of salvation even if we don't have faith.
"4to obtain an inheritance which is imperishable and undefiled and will not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, 5who are protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time." (1 Peter 1:4-5 NASB bold mine, italics in original)
False doctrine is almost always false because it improperly divides out portions of scripture from the context of the whole Bible (it's that not rightly dividing the word of God thing). That is what your doctrine is doing when it says we are kept by the power of God for the day of salvation but ignores that the Bible says it does that through a continuing faith, not through a failed faith.
I believe you once did not see how anyone can get around this, but now it's clear to you that you've been neglecting the whole counsel of scripture. The whole counsel of scripture shows us that the promise is for those who have faith and continue in that faith, not for those who lose their faith before the day of salvation.
See, your interpretation of John 5:24 NASB cannot be true because it makes the clear words of 1 Corinthians 15:1-2 NASB false. But my interpretation of 1 Corinthians 15:1-2 NASB does not make John 5:24 NASB false. Paul provides us additional truth that shows us that Jesus was not saying in John 5:24 NASB that you don't have to still have your faith on the day of salvation to be saved on that day.
smaller
Member
There is not a one of you on the other side of this conversation that factors in the faith of Christ into these equations. Not a one. And in that you all make HIM a failure in the process, and take the confidence in Him and place it on yourselves instead.
Phil. 1:
6 Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:
You have replaced that with "you will" perform.
I said this:
"Absolutely! It is God who keeps us for the day of salvation. Or as Paul said it in Eph 1:13,14, 4:30, 2 Cor 1:22 and 5:5, we are sealed for the day of redemption."
So being kept "by faith" doesn't mean to continue to believe in order to continue to be saved. It means we are kept by God's Word. Our action of believing is non-meritorious, as taught by Paul twice: Rom 4;4,5 and Eph 2:8,9.
He taught that those who believe are sealed with the Holy Spirit for the day of redemption (Eph 1:13,14, 4:30), and without any exceptions or conditions. iow, once someone believes, they ARE sealed, and FOR the day of redemption.
In fact, the word "believing" in Eph 1:13 is in the aorist tense, which refutes your claim about having to continue to believe in order to continue to be saved.
Eph 1:13 - In Him, 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,
So, to be clear, your view is refuted by the FACT that "having believed" is in the aorist tense.
iow, in the past, when you believed, you were sealed for the day of redemption. No other conditions and no exceptions.
I don't see how anyone can refute these facts.
"Absolutely! It is God who keeps us for the day of salvation. Or as Paul said it in Eph 1:13,14, 4:30, 2 Cor 1:22 and 5:5, we are sealed for the day of redemption."
Well, the word "faith" is a noun. Not a verb. The verb is "believe". iow, we actively believe in something. And that something is our "faith". Where does the noun 'faith' come from? God. It's His Word. Believing what He says is "have faith" in what He says.
So being kept "by faith" doesn't mean to continue to believe in order to continue to be saved. It means we are kept by God's Word. Our action of believing is non-meritorious, as taught by Paul twice: Rom 4;4,5 and Eph 2:8,9.
Because of all the promises in the Bible about our eternal security. Which I've already laid out.
I believe that is true of all those who think that salvation can be lost.
That has not been shown from Scripture, because it cannot be shown from Scripture. The opposite is true and has been shown from Scripture.
I have no idea what this means. Please clarify.
Show me, please.
I think Paul was very clear about eternal security. He taught that eternal life, a gift of God (Rom 6:23) is irrevocable (Rom 11:29). That has not been refuted by anyone.
He taught that those who believe are sealed with the Holy Spirit for the day of redemption (Eph 1:13,14, 4:30), and without any exceptions or conditions. iow, once someone believes, they ARE sealed, and FOR the day of redemption.
In fact, the word "believing" in Eph 1:13 is in the aorist tense, which refutes your claim about having to continue to believe in order to continue to be saved.
Eph 1:13 - In Him, 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,
So, to be clear, your view is refuted by the FACT that "having believed" is in the aorist tense.
iow, in the past, when you believed, you were sealed for the day of redemption. No other conditions and no exceptions.
I don't see how anyone can refute these facts.
Great point, smaller!!
From all that has been posted, it seems to me that the other side believes that getting to heaven is ultimately based on how good one is. Not on how good God's grace and Christ's sacrifice is.
iow, if a believer ceases to believe, or "returns to the vomit" of life, they are then "not good enough" for heaven.
That's how I see their view. If that is wrong, I hope one of them will clarify how I am wrong.
In fact, no person will EVER be good enough for heaven. That is the whole point of the Law and what the Bible teaches. Which is why Jesus Christ came to earth, lived a perfect life, and paid the price for ALL sins. So that IN SPITE of ourselves, God will save those who believe in Christ.
smaller
Member
The Spirit of God in Christ IS in play in these matters.
Why we would take our faith, and place it rather in our own hands, by our own power, is merely a sign of internal opposition, working against our Savior. I consider that opposing force to be a persistent actuality in the flesh, because it IS contrary to the Spirit, AND the Spirit IS against the flesh. This alternate working is what I view in these matters, to see why believers RESIST our Savior, in every case of sights.
Some have described it as similar to the sun, in hardening clay and melting water.
There are opposite works to observe transpiring from the same Word, when we see the Spirit IS against the flesh.
Do I hold this against any believer? Never. I just understand the working principle behind it, of the flesh always and perpetually seeking to exalt itself OVER God in Christ, in opposition to our Savior. This condition operates in everyone to certain extents. Few care to have the light of the Gospel shed in this direction, upon themselves. But there are TWO sides to the measures. Gal. 5:17. And these, in opposition. It is "real" opposition.
But even this "resistance" is under the power of God in Christ, as an opponent. So I can see it no other way than Divinely intentional.
Matthew 28:18
And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
There will be only ONE Victor at the end. I expect Him to prevail over my own flesh in the final analysis. Phil. 3:21. And I expect this WILL also be the case for every believer, regardless of their post salvation resistance in the flesh.
This is termed Prevailing Grace.
Last edited:
No, sir, you did not. Your whole premise is based on a faulty understanding of the present tense. It does NOT mean continuous action for the rest of eternity, as I proved from other words that both Jesus and Paul used in expressing believing in Christ for salvation. How do you explain their use of the aorist tense, which is a point in time action, without any regard for duration of time?
[Deleted inappropriate comment. WIP] So I am guilty as charged.
Jesus tells us that those to whom He gives eternal life (which is WHEN they believe) they WILL NEVER PERISH.
And you haven't provided any verse that teaches that salvation or eternal life exists only as long as one continues to believe. Your faulty premise is that one must continue to believe in order to continue to be saved. What verse says that? It's not Jn 5:24, which is what you think it means.
If that were true, then neither Jesus nor Paul would EVER have used the aorist tense for "believe" when speaking about getting saved.
Jesus said this: “Those beside the road are those who have heard; then the devil comes and takes away the word from their heart, so that they will not believe and be saved. Luke 8:12 The word 'believe' is aorist. Point in time.
13 “Those on the rocky soil are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no firm root; they believe for a while, and in time of temptation fall away. How do you explain WHY Jesus used the present tense along with "for a while"? How does that make sense to your understanding of the present tense?
They said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.” Acts 16:31
Paul used the aorist tense here.
Further, consider this word from Jesus:
but who ever drinks of the water that I will give him shall never thirst; but the water that I will give him will become in him a well of water springing up to eternal life.” Jn 4:14 The word "drinks" is aorist tense.
I see a parallel between what Jesus said in Jn 4:14 and 10:28. Those who "drink of the water that I will give him" WILL NEVER THIRST is the same as saying "to them I give eternal life and they WILL NEVER PERISH.
Since Jesus used the aorist tense for "drinks", one cannot claim that salvation is based on continuous action.
Salvation is based on a point in time action of placing one's faith in Jesus Christ for eternal life. At that moment, they HAVE eternal life, and they WILL NEVER PERISH. A promise from Jesus.
FreeGrace,
I've provided the continuous nature of the present tense in John 5:24 (ESV) to demonstrate that continuous believing leads to continuous having eternal life. To reject this is to reject the accuracy of the Greek grammar.
I have explained the nature of the ingressive aorist when used for 'believe', but you reject that, even though it is consistent with NT Greek grammar. Of course Luke recorded what Paul said in Acts 16:31 and he used 'believe' as the aorist tense. That's perfectly acceptable as it is an ingressive aorist tense that deals with the initiation (beginning) of believing. It is not the same perspective as that in John 5:24 (ESV).
Contemporary Greek grammarian, Daniel Wallace's explanation of the ingressive aorist tense is:
However, your premise of OSAS becomes your conclusion, thus indicating you are using a question begging logical fallacy.
Oz
Works consulted
Wallace, D B 1996. Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan.
Jethro,
This is an excellent point. It is well said as 1 Cor 15:2 (NASB) states, 'by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain'.
Only those are saved who 'hold fast the word'. This is further enforced by the word for 'hold fast', which is katechete, which is present tense, meaning continuous action, i.e. continuously holding fast. 'Are saved' is swzesthe, which is present tense, indicating continuous action.
So, 1 Cor 15:2 (NASB) means 'you are continuously saved if you continuously hold fast the word which I preached to you'. This is in agreement with the present tenses and continuous action of 'believe' and 'have' in John 5:24 (NASB).
OSAS contradicts this exegesis, if a person considers that a person who once believed thus guarantees him or her eternal life. The biblical teaching, based on these verses, is that continuous believing is needed to continuously have eternal life. This means that saved people will continuously hold fast the word. It is not a one time believe and that guarantees eternal life.
Oz
Last edited:
I understand your view, but John 5:24 doesn't say that. I believe you are misusing the present tense, and explained why. Please address all the verses I provided that have "believe" in the aorist tense.
It's not fair to ignore verses that use the aorist tense for "believe" and only acknowledge verses that use the present tense.
OK, please refresh my memory. I don't recall an explanation of the ingressive aorist. And how you have determined that the verses I quoted are ingressive.
I don't see how the ingressive refutes my views. As Wallace says:
"Unlike the ingressive imperfect, there is no implication that the action continues. This is simply left unstated."
iow, it sounds like he is saying that "there is no implication that the action continues."
Yes, that is what the aorist tense generally means. It does not address duration. And Wallace decries the aorist like a photo rather than a video of an action.
I see this as conflicting. If you are saved by Christ alone for salvation, then having to continue to do anything not only isn't necessary, but contrary to your statement.
[edited, WIP]
1. I don't believe you understand my view of the continuous action of the present tense verbs in John 5:24 (ESV) because you reject fundamental Greek grammar and its meaning when applied to this verse. [Your claim regarding another member's knowledge is invalid]
2. It is incorrect that I use verses that use the aorist tense for 'believe'. I have discussed them above and explained the Greek ingressive aorist tense as it relates to the verses you raised. But you don't [we do not know what another "wants"] seem to accept this explanation from the Greek grammarians because of your OSAS pre-set against this exegesis.
Go back to #1166 (especially, #1168 and #1175 for explanations of the ingressive aorist. For you to say that 'I don't recall an explanation of the ingressive aorist'. That demonstrates you are not reading my posts and I'm wasting my time explaining Greek grammar to you. What level of Greek grammar have you taken at college, seminary or university? Or are you depending on others to give you Greek grammatical information?
3. You claim that the ingressive aorist does not refute your view. [because we believe something doesn't necessarily make it a fact] I believe it DOES. This is what I wrote by way of explanation of the ingressive aorist in #1166:
You stated that 'And Jesus used the aorist tense in the previous verse in the phrase "lest they believe and be saved"' (Lk 8:12 ESV). However, this is use of the Greek ingressive aorist (see A T Robertson's Word Pictures 1930:113) in which the action is viewed from perspective of the initiation of the action. It may be diagrammed as:
·>-------------------------------------- (Dana & Mantey 1955:195)
There is no problem with the aorist being used for believing, in its ingressive form, as seeing salvation from the viewpoint of its beginning (initiation).
·>-------------------------------------- (Dana & Mantey 1955:195)
There is no problem with the aorist being used for believing, in its ingressive form, as seeing salvation from the viewpoint of its beginning (initiation).
4. You are not going to conclude any differently to OSAS because of your use of a begging the question logical fallacy. When you use this fallacy, as you have done throughout this thread, you start with the premise of OSAS and where do you conclude? You conclude with OSAS, which was where you began.
[deleted inflammatory statements]
Oz
Last edited by a moderator:
All of this is simply untrue. The quote from Wallace didn't even support your claim.
Speaking of which, let's review what Wallace said on the previous page, under "definition": "The aorist normally views the action as a whole, taking no interest in the internal workings of the action. It describes the action in summary fashion, without focusing on the beginning or end of the action specifically. This is by far the most common use of the aorist, especially with the indicative mood."
He went on to say: "It places the stress on the fact of the occuyrrence, not its nature."
That said, we know that one's faith may fail because Jesus actually said so regarding the second soil in tht parable.
And there are several places where church leaders specifically encouraged the congregation to "remain true to the faith" (Acts 14:22, or "remain true to the Lord" (Acts 11:23).
Yet, there is no place in Scripture that tells us that one must continue in the faith in order to continue to be saved or have eternal life.
I never said you did. I said you've ignored the verses that use the aorist for 'believe'.
Actually, the explanation from Wallace didn't help you one bit. I really don't know why you even brought it up.
So, I will refresh your memor of what Wallace said about the "ingressive" aorist: "Unlike the ingressive imperfect, there is no implication that the action continues."
How does that help your view?
I'm not seeing anything here that refutes my view of the aorist. It is a tense that simply ignores duration. There is NO IMPLICATION that the action continues.