Iron Clad example proving OSAS from John 10:28

[OzSpen]

Yes.
By rejecting _____, they suffered "'shipwreck" concerning their faith.

According to the Greek (and context), what did they (Hymenaeus and Alexander) reject that caused them to "shipwreck" their faith?

1. Jesus
2. Their conscience
3. Their faith
4. All of the above

1 Timothy 1:3-5 (ESV) As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus so that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine, nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship from God that is by faith. The aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. ​

According to the Letter, was "their faith":
1. speculative
2. Stewarded by God
3. Sincere

Hymenaeus and Alexander 'have made shipwreck of their faith'. Their faith has been ruined. it is no longer genuine faith.

The use of the language of 'shipwreck' infers that the faith that they now have - in contrast to what they used to have - is not genuine faith.

Seems like your a priori assumptions prevent your seeing that genuine faith was shipwrecked to become useless faith. If it happened for Hymenaeus and Alexander, it can happen to anyone.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Did God "steward" Maheno?

So Paul was telling Timothy to do the impossible?

Your first question is irrelevant to the discussion.

Your second question does not have a relevant target so I have no basis on which to answer it. I can only go by what Paul told Timothy in 1 Tim 1:18-20 (ESV), where 2 people who had shipwrecked their faith were 'handed over to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme' (1 Tim 1:20 ESV).

It doesn't say they were handed over to Satan so that they may learn not to backslide and can now return to the faith they abandoned or shipwrecked.

Oz

 

[chessman]

Your first question is irrelevant to the discussion.

If my first question about the picture of the boat (Did God steward the Maheno) is irrelevant, then your boat picture must be irrelevant.

Your second question does not have a relevant target so I have no basis on which to answer it.

If my second question about the Hebrews passage (So Paul was telling Timothy to do the impossible?) was irrelevant, then your posting Hebrews in relation to Paul's letter to Timothy was irrelevant.

It doesn't say they were handed over to Satan so that they may learn not to backslide and can now return to the faith they abandoned or shipwrecked.

Bingo. Proving Paul's direction to Timothy has zero to do with Hebrews 6:6. Getting back to what Paul said about the Greeks Hymenaeus and Alexander, Are you prepared to answer:

According to the Greek (and context), what did they (Hymenaeus and Alexander) reject that caused them to "shipwreck" their faith?

1. Jesus
2. Their conscience
3. Their faith
4. All of the above

1 Timothy 1:3-5 (ESV) As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus so that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine, nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship from God that is by faith. The aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.
According to the Letter, was "their faith":
1. speculative
2. Stewarded by God
3. Sincere

 

[th1b.taylor]

What leap?

From John 10:28 to are there levels in Hell, total rabbit trail away from the subject.

 

[OzSpen]

If my first question about the picture of the boat (Did God steward the Maheno) is irrelevant, then your boat picture must be irrelevant.

If my second question about the Hebrews passage (So Paul was telling Timothy to do the impossible?) was irrelevant, then your posting Hebrews in relation to Paul's letter to Timothy was irrelevant.

Bingo. Proving Paul's direction to Timothy has zero to do with Hebrews 6:6. Getting back to what Paul said about the Greeks Hymenaeus and Alexander, Are you prepared to answer:

You are engaging in begging the question / circular reasoning.

You and I can't have a rational discussion when you do this.

 

[OzSpen]

From John 10:28 to are there levels in Hell, total rabbit trail away from the subject.

At #69 I was responding to what reba asked in #44.

It was not a 'total rabbit trail away from the subject' but responding to an honest issue raised by reba.

Levels of punishment in hell related to reba's topic.

Nice try!

Oz

 

[chessman]

You are engaging in begging the question / circular reasoning.

By asking you two perfectly relevant simple questions (three times now) about the Greek grammar and the 'context' of the verse in 1st Timothy (concerning Hymenaeus and Alexander's faith) that you brought up from Paul's letter to Timothy against the OSAS argument from John 5:24 and John 10:28??? That's not begging the question, NT Greek teacher Oz, it's asking a relevant question or two per the rules of this debate forum. There's a logical reason, reasonable debate rules requires debaters to answer the opposing view's relevant questions.

You and I can't have a rational discussion when you do this (avoid answering relevant questions).

You are not following the rules of debate and you are making your case look weak by not answering theses questions:

Last chance to show off your Greek grammar skills and somehow explain how Hymenaeus and Alexander's faith is relevant to John 10:28:

↑
By rejecting _____, they suffered "'shipwreck" concerning their faith.

According to the Greek (and context), what did they (Hymenaeus and Alexander) reject that caused them to "shipwreck" their faith?

1. Jesus
2. Their conscience
3. Their faith
4. All of the above

1 Timothy 1:3-5 (ESV) As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus so that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine, nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship from God that is by faith.The aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.

According to the Letter, was "their faith":
1. speculative
2. Stewarded by God
3. Sincere

 

[OzSpen]

By asking you two perfectly relevant simple questions (three times now) about the Greek grammar and the 'context' of the verse in 1st Timothy (concerning Hymenaeus and Alexander's faith) that you brought up from Paul's letter to Timothy against the OSAS argument from John 5:24 and John 10:28??? That's not begging the question, NT Greek teacher Oz, it's asking a relevant question or two per the rules of this debate forum. There's a logical reason, reasonable debate rules requires debaters to answer the opposing view's relevant questions.

You and I can't have a rational discussion when you do this (avoid answering relevant questions).

You are not following the rules of debate and you are making your case look weak by not answering theses questions:

Last chance to show off your Greek grammar skills and somehow explain how Hymenaeus and Alexander's faith is relevant to John 10:28:

↑
By rejecting _____, they suffered "'shipwreck" concerning their faith.

According to the Greek (and context), what did they (Hymenaeus and Alexander) reject that caused them to "shipwreck" their faith?

1. Jesus
2. Their conscience
3. Their faith
4. All of the above

1 Timothy 1:3-5 (ESV) As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus so that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine, nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship from God that is by faith.The aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.

According to the Letter, was "their faith":
1. speculative
2. Stewarded by God
3. Sincere

Your a priori presupposition is OSAS. Your conclusion is OSAS. Therefore, you engage in a begging the question/circular reasoning fallacy. It is fallacious reasoning.

We cannot have a rational conversation when you do this.

Oz

 

[Jethro Bodine]

From John 10:28 to are there levels in Hell...

Yes.

42And the Lord said, “Who then is the faithful and sensible steward, whom his master will put in charge of his servants, to give them their rations at the proper time? 43“Blessed is that slave whom his master finds so doing when he comes. 44“Truly I say to you that he will put him in charge of all his possessions. 45“But if that slave says in his heart, ‘My master will be a long time in coming,’ and begins to beat the slaves, both men and women, and to eat and drink and get drunk; 46the master of that slave will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know, and will cut him in pieces, and assign him a place with the unbelievers.47“And that slave who knew his master’s will and did not get ready or act in accord with his will, will receive many lashes, 48but the one who did not know it, and committed deeds worthy of a flogging, will receive but few. From everyone who has been given much, much will be required; and to whom they entrusted much, of him they will ask all the more." (Luke 12:42-48 NASB bold and underline mine)

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Your a priori presupposition is OSAS. Your conclusion is OSAS. Therefore, you engage in a begging the question/circular reasoning fallacy. It is fallacious reasoning.

I have found that is a common feature of OSAS.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

That would contradict the verse itself.
Jhn 15:2 Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He cuts off....
If the branch is "in Christ" (in me) it has eternal life by being united to Christ. Since being "in Christ" is the essence of "having salvation," those branches are, by definition, saved.
One cannot, at the same time be both in Christ (saved) and not in Christ (lost.)
Being "in Christ" and not saved is like being a little bit pregnant.

Paul addresses this point directly in his teaching about the vine:

"you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear; 21for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. 22Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off. " (Romans 11:20-22 NASB)

The 'branch' had faith, and was standing by that faith, then it did not have faith (and so no longer belonged to the vine) and will be removed from the vine.

 

[chessman]

We cannot have a rational conversation when you do this.

You could have answered my questions about the verse and we could have had a rational A&T conversation of the Greek grammar and the context of the passage that you brought up in support of your anti-OSAS pre-supposition. However, you choose not to answer my perfectly reasonable questions (three times), violating 1 Peter's 3:15's apologetic instructions and the procedures setup for it in this A&T forum.

You are the one that brought up 1 Timothy 1:19-20. I simply asked you two questions about it.

If someone on the street simply walked-up to you (a teacher of NT Greek) and asked you the following question:

Hey professor Oz, you know those two Greeks Paul talked about in His letter to Timothy, Hymenaeus and Alexander; What did they reject that caused them to make shipwreck of their faith? What would (should) you say?

1. Jesus
2. Their conscience
3. Their faith
4. All of the above

The Biblically correct answer (according to the Greek grammar) is 2 (not 1,2 or 4). They rejected their conscience according to Paul.
It's no wonder their faith became shipwrecked. Their conscience was driving their boat. And thus, their faith wound up wrecked.

Yet you said (about the verse):

it is no longer 'genuine faith'

Paul never, not once, said their faith was a 'genuine faith' that they held then later rejected. That is, a God given faith that's stewarded by God.

The very point/instruction that Paul was making in his letter to Timothy was that their faith (Hymenaeus and Alexander) was NOT stewarded by God. It was "their conscious" they rejected, not a Godly stewarded faith or Jesus or a' genuine faith' or anything else that they once had then rejected.

All one has to do is 'read the context' and know that the pronoun Paul used for what they rejected was their conscience. [Or one can use their own anti-OSAS pre-supposition and simply assume that their original faith was a 'genuine faith' that later became 'ruined' because their 'genuine faith' was rejected.] The problem is, Paul never said they rejected their genuine faith.

1Tim 1:3-5 (ESV) As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus so that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine, nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship from God that is by faith. The aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.​

Paul's charge was for Timothy to use his spiritual gift (teaching) to teach the Ephesians how to be stewarded by God rather than by their own conscience (which was Hymenaeus and Alexander's problem). Their shipwrecked faith has zero to do with losing their salvation. It's about who was driving their faith/ship (their own conscience rather than God).

 

[chessman]

I have found that is a common feature of OSAS.

I have round that it is a common tack (pun intended) for pretty much anybody (OSAS or anti-OSAS) to avoid answering hard questions that expose weaknesses in their arguments.

Once again, if there were a verse(s) in the Bible that actually described someone loosing their salvation, I would not hold to a OSAS position. But people claiming they're there and not proving it, doesn't float my boat.

 

[FreeGrace]

False!

I've presented Greek grammar at #67 to refute this view, but you are not listening.

Do you read and parse Greek grammar yourself?
Oz

If I'm so wrong, then please just explain how the present tense is so different from what I explained. And please explain why Jesus used the present tense in Luke 8:13 for believing when the 2nd soil only "believed for a while". Hardly continuous belief.

 

[FreeGrace]

This is what happens when you reject the Greek grammar of John 5:24 (ESV) and John 10:28 (ESV) and don't consider the content verses like these:
This charge I entrust to you, Timothy, my child, in accordance with the prophecies previously made about you, that by them you may wage the good warfare, 19 holding faith and a good conscience. By rejecting this, some have made shipwreck of their faith, 20 among whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme(1 Tim 1:18-20 ESV).

Please specifically explain how I've "rejected" the grammar of either verse. That is a nonsense charge. Unless actual evidence is presented. Just throwing out baseless charges is worthless.

So, it is possible to shipwreck ones faith, be handed over to Satan and blaspheme against God in the process. That's Bible!
Oz

And I've NEVER said otherwise.

The fact is that shipwrecking one's faith doesn't mean losing salvation, as is being CONTINUOUSLY claimed by your side. No one has shown any evidence for that.

In fact, because eternal life is described by Paul as a gift of God in Rom 6:23, and he also noted that God's gifts are IRREVOCABLE in Rom 11;29, the view that salvation can be lost is demonstrably refuted.

Your serve.

 

[FreeGrace]

I said this in regard to John 10:28:
"It has ONLY to do with receiving the gift. That's the ONLY BASIS for NEVER PERISHING."

That is false.

Then take your charge up with Jesus. He's the One who said it. I am only pointing out what He said.

Since there is such disagreement, please exegete the verse to prove that my understanding is wrong.

JN 15:1 "I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener. 2 He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit,....
5 "I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. 6 IF ANYONE DOES NOT REMAIN IN ME, HE IS LIKE A BRANCH THAT IS THROWN AWAY AND WITHERS; SUCH BRANCHES ARE PICKED UP, THROWN INTO THE FIRE AND BURNED.

'Scuse me, but the verse in question is John 10:28. Focus, please.

RO 11:17 If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, 18 do not boast over those branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you. 19 You will say then, "Branches were broken off so that I could be grafted in." 20 Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. 21 For IF GOD DID NOT SPARE THE NATURAL BRANCHES, HE WILL NOT SPARE YOU EITHER.

22 CONSIDER THEREFORE THE KINDNESS AND STERNNESS OF GOD: STERNNESS TO THOSE WHO FELL, BUT KINDNESS TO YOU, PROVIDED THAT YOU CONTINUE IN HIS KINDNESS. OTHERWISE, YOU ALSO WILL BE CUT OFF.

1CO 9:27 No, I beat my body and make it my slave so that after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified for the prize

1CO 10:12 So, if you think you are standing firm, becareful that you don't fall!

COL 1:21 Once you were alienated from God and were enemies in your minds because of your evil behavior. 22 But now HE HAS RECONCILED YOU BY CHRIST'S PHYSICAL BODY THROUGH DEATH TO PRESENT YOU HOLY IN HIS SIGHT, WITHOUT BLEMISH AND FREE FROM ACCUSATION-- 23 IFYOU CONTINUE IN YOUR FAITH, established and firm, not moved from the hope held out in the gospel.

HEB 3:12 See to it, brothers, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God. 13 But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called Today, so that none of you may be hardened by sin's deceitfulness. 14 WE HAVE COME TO SHARE IN CHRIST IFWE HOLD FIRMLY TILL THE END THE CONFIDENCE WE HAD AT FIRST.

HEB 6:4 It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, 6 IFTHEY FALL AWAY, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace.

PHP 3:7 But whatever was to my profit I now consider loss for the sake of Christ. 8 What is more, I consider everything a loss compared to the surpassing greatness of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them rubbish, that I may gain Christ 9 and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ--the righteousness that comes from God and is by faith. 10 I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, 11 and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead. 12 Not that I have already obtained all this, or have already been made perfect, but I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me. 13 Brothers, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, 14 I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus.

2PE 1:5 For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith goodness; and to goodness, knowledge; 6 and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness; 7 and to godliness, brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness, love. 8 For if you possess these qualities in increasing measure, they will keep you from being ineffective and unproductive in your knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 But if anyone does not have them, he is nearsighted and blind, and has forgotten that he has been cleansed from his past sins. 10 Therefore, my brothers, be all the more eager to make your calling and election sure. For IFYOU DO THESE THINGS, YOU WILL NEVER FALL,

2PE 2: 20 IF THEY HAVE ESCAPED THE CORRUPTION OF THE WORLD BY KNOWING OUR LORD AND SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST AND ARE AGAIN ENTANGLED IN IT AND OVERCOME, THEY ARE WORSE OFF AT THE END THAN THEY WERE AT THE BEGINNING. 21 It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them.

EZE 18:24 "But if a righteous man turns from his righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked man does, will he live? None of the righteous things he has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness he is guilty of and because of the sins he has committed, he will die.”

ditto X 11.

All this demonstrates is a broad ranged misunderstanding of Scripture. None of which refutes what Jesus said in John 10:28.

But given your understanding of all these passages, what in the world was Jesus meaning in John 10:28, if not that the single condition for NEVER PERISHING is to receive eternal life??

 

[FreeGrace]

This is the Maheno shipwreck on the beach at Fraser Island off the coast of Hervey Bay, Qld (4 hours north of where I live):

Maheno shipwreck,

(photo courtesy Pinterest)

This is what this working ship used to look like:

(courtesy Wikipedia)

The shipwrecked Maheno is useless as a boat. It used to be a usable steam ship but it is nothing more than a rusted hull now.

Thus, a shipwrecked faith is one that used to be functional but is now a useless faith - it has been ruined, abandoned, given up, torn down.

James made the same point about a useless faith. It is barren, fruitless.

But where in all this is one justified to make the HUGE leap from a useless faith (meaning fruitless) to loss of salvation?

No one seems able to provide any explanation for that.

The Bible teaches it can be done and I know it happens. Two fellows who were vibrant Christians in my first theological college abandoned their faith and have not returned. Heb 6:6 (NLT) states of them, 'It is impossible to bring such people back to repentance; by rejecting the Son of God, they themselves are nailing him to the cross once again and holding him up to public shame'
Oz

You know I'm no Calvinist, as proven by our being shouder to shoulder against their doctrine of limited atonement some years ago.

I fully understand that believers can abandon their faith, cease to believe. Jesus even made that exact point in the 2nd soil.

But where is the justification that such action results in loss of salvation. If it did, then what Jesus said in John 10:28 is untrue.

Since you noted you teach NT Greek, please provide your expanded translation of what Jesus said in that verse.

 

[FreeGrace]

Hymenaeus and Alexander 'have made shipwreck of their faith'. Their faith has been ruined. it is no longer genuine faith.

OK, let's take this to an analogy to show how false the statement is.

I have a car battery. I was involved in a wreck because someone ran into the front of my car and ruined the battery. No different than a shipwrecked faith. But, can one honestly say that the ruined battery isn't a genuine battery? No, they cannot honestly say that.

A "shipwrecked faith" (1 Tim 1:19) or a "dead faith" (James 2:17,20,26), which is the same thing, is not producing deeds, but is nevertheless genuine.

The use of the language of 'shipwreck' infers that the faith that they now have - in contrast to what they used to have - is not genuine faith.

Not at all, as just shown. Even a dead battery is STILL a genuine battery. It just needs charging.

Seems like your a priori assumptions prevent your seeing that genuine faith was shipwrecked to become useless faith.

What you've been missing is that a dead or ruined battery, while useless, is STILL a GENUINE battery.

If it happened for Hymenaeus and Alexander, it can happen to anyone.

Oz

No argument from me on that. But that doesn't mean they lost their salvation.

Remember that WHEN one believes, they HAVE eternal life (John 5:24). And those who have been given eternal life WILL NEVER PERISH (Jn 10:28).

No one has proven otherwise.

 

[FreeGrace]

chessman said: ↑
If my first question about the picture of the boat (Did God steward the Maheno) is irrelevant, then your boat picture must be irrelevant.

If my second question about the Hebrews passage (So Paul was telling Timothy to do the impossible?) was irrelevant, then your posting Hebrews in relation to Paul's letter to Timothy was irrelevant.

Bingo. Proving Paul's direction to Timothy has zero to do with Hebrews 6:6. Getting back to what Paul said about the Greeks Hymenaeus and Alexander, Are you prepared to answer:

You are engaging in begging the question / circular reasoning.

You and I can't have a rational discussion when you do this.

His comments were totally rational and legitimate and revealed that your comments about his questions to be irrelevant.

It seems to me that this is just a dodge of the issues. If one doesn't want to answer questions, just say so.

 

[atpollard]

Paul addresses this point directly in his teaching about the vine:

"you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear; 21for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. 22Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off. " (Romans 11:20-22 NASB)

The 'branch' had faith, and was standing by that faith, then it did not have faith (and so no longer belonged to the vine) and will be removed from the vine.

The original parable/metaphor of the vine by Jesus was about Jesus being the True Vine (Israel) as contrasted with the oft mentioned OT vine of the nation of Israel, so the metaphor is that those who were Jews in the flesh were being cast off for rejecting Jesus (not abiding in the True Vine). In Romans, Paul picks up on and expands the metaphor/parable to include Gentiles being grafted into the True Vine. His point would then seem to be that if God would chop off one who was outwardly a Jew, but not inwardly a Jew for having what James would later describe as a 'dead faith that cannot save', then Gentiles (as a group) have no reason to expect that God will not cut them out of the church and cast them off if they too fail to abide in the vine (by having what James will later describe as a 'dead faith that cannot save'). Like so much of Romans, it emphasizes the inclusion of gentiles into the promise and the equal treatment of all by God under the New Covenant.

I think that it is a reach to apply it to someone having the Spirit ... and leaping from God's hand, negating God's promise and thwarting the will of the Father. Such a view runs afoul of too many non-metaphor verses.