Is it Possible for a True Christian to lose their Salvation.

[GodsGrace]

1 John 4:2 This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God

I look at the world and so many people Spiritualize Jesus, meaning (ask Jesus into your heart). No, he came in the flesh and rose from the dead. This happened and people don't really believe that. I believe in him (the real person) Not an abstract thing.

Asking Jesus into your heart is a good thing. It's the heart that rules us as much as the brain.
Proverbs 23:26
John 14:27

I very much agree with your last sentence.


Wondering

 

[FreeGrace]

FreeGrace,
I DID quote your words in post no. 608 so you could reference the scripture, however, I'll repeat it for you here.
First I'd like to say that I don't consider my question (or answer as you call it) to be vague.
If you're telling me that a word is in the aorist tense, and I'm asking you to please state then same word (or verse) using the present tense, it means I'd like to compare the two tenses, as you understand them.

Here's what you originally said which I quoted in 608:

Not quite so simple. Paul's answer in Acts 16;30-31 to the jailer's question of "what MUST I DO to be saved?" was to believe (in the aorist tense) and you will be saved. Paul also used the aorist tense in Rom 10:9.

And it even gets a bit more complicated because in Luke 8:13 Jesus used the present tense for "believe" but added "for a while". How would one explain that?

Not only that, but when Jesus said "lest they believe and be saved" in v.12, He used the aorist tense!!

This should immediately eliminate any notion that one must continue to believe in order to continue to be saved.

If JLB's claim: "believe for a while = saved for a while" were true, then Jesus would have used the present tense in Luke 8:12 and the aorist tense in 8:13. The fact that He didn't refutes his claims.

So the verses I'd like you to translate into the PRESENT tense are:
Acts: 16:30-31
Romans 10:9
Luke 8:12
Luke 8:13

Believing for a while This is not a difficult thing to do.
Have you ever believed you had the best gal in the world
Until you didn't believe it anymore??
Or you kept your first one ever??

Please compare for me the present and aorist tense for the above listed verses.
I'd like to hear the actual difference in English.

Thanks.

Wondering

English has 3 tenses: past, present, and future. Greeks had 6 tenses, which can be easily looked up in a number of websites.

But, basically, the aorist tense generally means "in a point in time" without any reference to duration of time. Kinda like a snapshot. The present tense generally indicates action presently occurring.

The error is to think the present tense means the action must continue on indefinitely, yet Jesus used the present tense in Luke 8:13 even though the action of believing did not continue on indefinitely.

Because the aorist tense is used in a number of verses about believing for salvation, it is (or should be) clear that one is saved in a point in time that they have believed.

If salvation was linked to on-going believing, then Jesus would not have used the aorist in Luke 8:12, nor the present tense in v.13. He would have switched them.

 

[FreeGrace]

Actually, it's impossible to get resaved after you have been turned over by God to your unbelief and become lost.

So, how could Jesus say that those He gives eternal life will never perish?? In your view, one who has believed and was saved, loses salvation for apparently a whole lot of reasons, but cannot re-gain salvation.

Your view is different than what Jesus said in John 10:28.

The question for former believers is not if they can be resaved--that's impossible (Hebrews 4:6 NASB). The question is, have they worn God's patience out and been turned over to loss of eternal life yet.

Where would I read about God losing patience and revoking (since that's what your view is) eternal life?

 

[FreeGrace]

The fiery hell in Matthew 18:8,9 NASB is not hyperbole, nor metaphorical.
You can't make it so 'hell' is 'not really' hell. These 'not really' OSAS arguments are so extensive it's impossible for an honest person like myself to receive them as explanations for making so many clear non-OSAS teachings go away.

Jesus' whole saying was hyperbole. It's ok to disagree with another view, but is there any substance to your claims about why it cannot be hyperbole? Or what I posted cannot be true?

 

[GodsGrace]

English has 3 tenses: past, present, and future. Greeks had 6 tenses, which can be easily looked up in a number of websites.

But, basically, the aorist tense generally means "in a point in time" without any reference to duration of time. Kinda like a snapshot. The present tense generally indicates action presently occurring.

The error is to think the present tense means the action must continue on indefinitely, yet Jesus used the present tense in Luke 8:13 even though the action of believing did not continue on indefinitely.

Because the aorist tense is used in a number of verses about believing for salvation, it is (or should be) clear that one is saved in a point in time that they have believed.

If salvation was linked to on-going believing, then Jesus would not have used the aorist in Luke 8:12, nor the present tense in v.13. He would have switched them.

Thank you FreeGrace.
I knew this.
What I was asking is How would you say the aorist tense in English?
What would be necessary to say to understand it?
To understand that it's an ongoing action?

If you still don't know what I mean, forget it.
What I'm saying is that, yes, you believe at a point in time.
The belief continues.
Until it stops.
If the belief stops, you return to your original state - the state you were in BEFORE you believed.

Like John 3:16
It says That Whoever BELIEVES
NOT
That Whoever BELIEVED

Believes is present tense and implies continuattion.
If it stops, salvation stops.
If Jesus is Life, then we need HIM in our heart to give us that life.

Wondering

 

[FreeGrace]

Thank you FreeGrace.
I knew this.
What I was asking is How would you say the aorist tense in English?

My answer was included in the post being responded to.

This is what I said:
"Because the aorist tense is used in a number of verses about believing for salvation, it is (or should be) clear that one is saved in a point in time that they have believed."

By adding the words "in a point in time" communicates the action duration.

What would be necessary to say to understand it?
To understand that it's an ongoing action?

The aorist is NOT an ongoing action. It's a point in time act.

If you still don't know what I mean, forget it.
What I'm saying is that, yes, you believe at a point in time.
The belief continues.

Not according to the aorist tense. Aorist tense does not consider duration.

If the belief stops, you return to your original state - the state you were in BEFORE you believed.

Regardless of how this will be understood, your statement is an opinion but without any Scriptural evidence. I need evidence to believe what is claimed.

Like John 3:16
It says That Whoever BELIEVES
NOT
That Whoever BELIEVED

btw, the aorist tense generally functions as a past tense verb. So, allow me to add to the definition of the aorist: "a point in time in the past". Hopefully, that will clarify.

Believes is present tense and implies continuattion.

Actually, not. It means current action in the perspective of the writer/speaker.

If it stops, salvation stops.

That has not been shown from Scripture. Again, just an opinion, from a misunderstanding of Greek tenses.

If Jesus is Life, then we need HIM in our heart to give us that life.
Wondering

I'm glad you phrased it that way. Consider Jesus' own words:
"I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand." John 10:28

Now, who does Jesus give eternal life to? Believers.

And those who HAVE eternal life WILL NEVER PERISH. That's a promise from Jesus.

I'll ask what Jesus asked Martha in John 11: Do you believe this?

 

[smaller]

But of course now the criticism is going to be that I keep myself saved while everyone else is up for grabs. It's the proverbial no win.

Pretty astounding, isn't it?

I might term it the "irony" of the lose your salvation crowd. We ARE advised to 'keep ourselves' in the LOVE of God:

Jude 1:21
Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.

And the lose your salvation crowd reads that and says to themselves, IF I don't keep myself in the LOVE OF GOD, then God will destroy me forever in hell.

And I might say, they missed the point altogether.

 

[JLB]

The error is to think the present tense means the action must continue on indefinitely, yet Jesus used the present tense in Luke 8:13 even though the action of believing did not continue on indefinitely.

that's why it's called "present tense".

Believing must be in the present tense, as it's always now.



JLB

 

[JLB]

It's clear in v.13 that they did believe, and therefore, were saved.

Great, now explain that to Chessman.

And please don't forget the promise of Jesus in John 10:28; those I give eternal life will never perish.

Believe is listed here as well.

Same principle is here, except "Believe" seems to take on an expanded meaning:

My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish.


Judas Iscariot heard His Voice and followed Him for 3 1/2 years... until he didn't.


The others followed Him the rest of their life.


25 Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in My Father’s name, they bear witness of Me. 26 But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you. 27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. 28 And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand. 30 I and My Father are one.”
John 10:25-30


Thanks for making my point.



JLB

 

[dirtfarmer]

It was not the Word of God from the O.T. that was abandoned. Not at all whatsoever. But the "natural men" of Israel's understandings of the law that were abandoned.

Jesus Himself, taught AFTER His Own Resurrection, from the O.T.

Luke 24:27
And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

It is this that the natural of Israel, were blinded to. They did not recognize 'God With them.' The Word, made flesh. The Word, Resurrected. The Spirit of The Word, sent into our own hearts by faith in Him.

Do you see pork, shellfish and animal killing in the law, or do you see JESUS?

I see Jesus by Every Word of God.

John 5:39
Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.



We find Christ Himself being testified by the scriptures. All those Words of God, are in fact Him, Christ, Speaking.



Paul was turned from the power of Satan, of darkness, after Christs resurrection, by Direct Revelation. Acts 26:18.

The reality however is that "all of Israel" are Gods children to start with. Deut. 14:1, Psalm 82:6, Matt. 23:9. The real question is "why" can't they see Jesus or themselves? And these reasons, scriptures tell us, that THEY were blinded for US to receive Gods Mercy in Christ. Be thankful. Do not condemn them. Do not think God deals any differently with them, than with us.

Romans 11:
25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

Gods Final Intentions are only to One, His Christ, His Body.

Eph. 2:
12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:
13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;

What two were made one? Israel and Gentile, in Christ.

hello smaller, dirtfarmer here

What Jesus expounded to them was about his death, burial, and resurrection. The "natural Israel" was blinded to the fact that he was the Lamb of God to take away the sin of the world. What they were expecting was some one to overthrow the Roman rule over Israel and bring again the earthly kingdom unto Israel.

Why would you think that I saw pork, shellfish, and animal killings?

Paul was turned from a Pharisee into an apostle by direct revelation of Jesus on the road to Damascus.

John 5:39 was the answer that Paul gave to the Jews that were depending on "scripture" to being eternal life, but Jesus told them that eternal life was in him and scriptures. Read v40; " And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life."
Romans 3:21-22 "But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, witnessed by the law and the prophets. Even the righteousness which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto to all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference."

Why was Israel blinded? Romans 9:32 " Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone."

God's final intentions are not only to the body, but to the nation of Israel also. It was no secret that God had plans for the Gentiles also, because of Exodus 19:6; the kingdom of priest. We find the purpose of the kingdom of priest in 1 Peter 2:9 " But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his light."
Isaiah 49:6 " And he said, it is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee to for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth."
Romans 11:26 "And so all Israel will be shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come a Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob." This has reference to what John wrote in Revelation about the 144,000 being sealed during the tribulation.

 

[FreeGrace]

that's why it's called "present tense".

Believing must be in the present tense, as it's always now.

What should one do with all the verses where the word "believe" is linked to salvation in the aorist tense, basically a past tense concept of "a point in time"?

Even Jesus didn't think according to your view because He used the present tense in the phrase "believe for a while". How should one explain that?

 

[FreeGrace]

Great, now explain that to Chessman.

No need. Like yourself, he can take my posts or leave them.

Same principle is here, except "Believe" seems to take on an expanded meaning:

My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish.

Again, the point is totally missed. Who are His sheep? He answered that in v.9 where He equated Himself with being the "door of the sheep" and those who "enter through" Him will be saved. That's how one becomes His sheep.

Judas Iscariot heard His Voice and followed Him for 3 1/2 years... until he didn't.

That doesn't mean he was saved. Again, your emphasis on works, lifestyle and the like do not save anyone. He followed Him because he was a thief and was continually looking for ways to exploit the money bag.

John 12:6 - He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it.

The others followed Him the rest of their life.

They were saved WHEN they believed in Him as Messiah.

25 Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in My Father’s name, they bear witness of Me. 26 But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you. 27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. 28 And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand. 30 I and My Father are one.”
John 10:25-30

Thanks for making my point.

Didn't happen. Never will.

 

[smaller]

hello smaller, dirtfarmer here. What Jesus expounded to them was about his death, burial, and resurrection.

We aren't given the exact particulars of that expounding. Only 'where it came from' with this brief in front of it:

26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

The "natural Israel" was blinded to the fact that he was the Lamb of God to take away the sin of the world.

All "natural men" are likewise blinded. Not just "Israel." See Eph. 2:2 for an example. Or 2 Cor. 4:4 for the same example. Or 2 Cor. 3:14, or Mark 4:15, all the same examples.

What they were expecting was some one to overthrow the Roman rule over Israel and bring again the earthly kingdom unto Israel.

Just like today, we have all kinds of "imaginations" about what Jesus is going to do. How many of those imaginations can hold to scripture is always the question, ain't it?

Why would you think that I saw pork, shellfish, and animal killings?

Because when I referenced law, you immediately inferred I must believe in animal sacrifices. To which I pointed out that such understanding is natural sight, not spiritual insights. And gave some example of what Spiritual insight is "like" from 1 Cor. 9.

Why was Israel blinded? Romans 9:32 " Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone."

That is the how, but it does not describe the "why" whatsoever. All natural men are led to stumble, which is the larger engagement.

God's final intentions are not only to the body, but to the nation of Israel also. It was no secret that God had plans for the Gentiles also, because of Exodus 19:6; the kingdom of priest. We find the purpose of the kingdom of priest in 1 Peter 2:9 " But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his light."
Isaiah 49:6 " And he said, it is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee to for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth."

Romans 11:26 "And so all Israel will be shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come a Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob." This has reference to what John wrote in Revelation about the 144,000 being sealed during the tribulation.

Like I said prior, you and I are perhaps worlds apart on understanding Revelation. I am not a "Jewish concentric only" when it comes to end time, at all. There are not going to be 144,000 Jewish God Zombies with a MARK on their foreheads, roaming the earth. Which is what a lot of people think they see.

 

[dirtfarmer]

We aren't given the exact particulars of that expounding. Only 'where it came from' with this brief in front of it:

26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.



All "natural men" are likewise blinded. Not just "Israel." See Eph. 2:2 for an example. Or 2 Cor. 4:4 for the same example. Or 2 Cor. 3:14, or Mark 4:15, all the same examples.


Just like today, we have all kinds of "imaginations" about what Jesus is going to do. How many of those imaginations can hold to scripture is always the question, ain't it?


Because when I referenced law, you immediately inferred I must believe in animal sacrifices. To which I pointed out that such understanding is natural sight, not spiritual insights. And gave some example of what Spiritual insight is "like" from 1 Cor. 9.




That is the how, but it does not describe the "why" whatsoever. All natural men are led to stumble, which is the larger engagement.


Like I said prior, you and I are perhaps worlds apart on understanding Revelation. I am not a "Jewish concentric only" when it comes to end time, at all. There are not going to be 144,000 Jewish God Zombies with a MARK on their foreheads, roaming the earth. Which is what a lot of people think they see.

hello smaller, dirtfarmer here

We are probably worlds apart in most of our beliefs.

I never stated any thing about " Jewish God Zombies with a mark in their foreheads, roaming the earth.

It was only the Jews that stumbled, Jesus was never given to the Gentiles as a messiah to establish an earthly kingdom.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Okay. I've heard from a lot of you and get what is being discussed here. It doesn't look like the title of this thread, cause true believers will not start to unbelieve.

2 Corinthians 10:5 We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.

Paul is stating that whatever he wrote to us, he wrote it for our own good (as true believers). God's word to our Spirit and flesh will make us obedient to Christ.

Example: Hebrews 6:4-6 It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, if they 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.

A believer understands the consequences if they fall away. We won't do it! At the same time, we look to Christ's finished work on the cross and not ourselves. It is a paradox and I understand why people can't get on the same page.

I understand the parable of the sower and seed, cause I was all of the different kinds of people until I was the person with good soil.....able to receive and then grow.

Thank you.
Though the head strong won't listen, it is not you they are denying here.
You make perfect sense to me.

 

[chessman]

Great, now explain that to Chessman.

I prefer Jesus' explanation over anyone else's. You know, the one where Jesus said it was the good soil that was the one that understood.

Matthew 13:18-19, 23 (LEB) “You, therefore, listen to the parable of the sower: When anyone hears the word about the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what was sown in his heart. This is what was sown on the side of the path. But what was sown on the good soil—this is the one who hears the word and understands it,
​

Yet JLB said; "The ones in example #2 & #3, did understand"

 

[GodsGrace]

My answer was included in the post being responded to.

This is what I said:
"Because the aorist tense is used in a number of verses about believing for salvation, it is (or should be) clear that one is saved in a point in time that they have believed."

By adding the words "in a point in time" communicates the action duration.

The aorist is NOT an ongoing action. It's a point in time act.

Not according to the aorist tense. Aorist tense does not consider duration.

Regardless of how this will be understood, your statement is an opinion but without any Scriptural evidence. I need evidence to believe what is claimed.

btw, the aorist tense generally functions as a past tense verb. So, allow me to add to the definition of the aorist: "a point in time in the past". Hopefully, that will clarify.

Actually, not. It means current action in the perspective of the writer/speaker.

That has not been shown from Scripture. Again, just an opinion, from a misunderstanding of Greek tenses.

I'm glad you phrased it that way. Consider Jesus' own words:
"I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand." John 10:28

Now, who does Jesus give eternal life to? Believers.

And those who HAVE eternal life WILL NEVER PERISH. That's a promise from Jesus.

I'll ask what Jesus asked Martha in John 11: Do you believe this?

I agree with a lot of what you say.
Like for instance:
Those who HAVE eternal life will never perish.
HAVE: Have at the time of death. You must have eternal life IN you at the time of your death in order to be eternally saved and never perish.
We've been through the snatching of hand and I'm not going to repeat. No one can "snatch" us, but we could walk out of our own FREE WILL.

Regarding A Point In Time:
At a point in time I was 16 years old.
I'm not anymore.
Whenever we believed, whever that point in time is, it MUST be continued. We MUST do s Jesus instructed.
He instructed us not only to talk about Him but to do what He instructed.

My answer was included in the post being responded to.

This is what I said:
"Because the aorist tense is used in a number of verses about believing for salvation, it is (or should be) clear that one is saved in a point in time that they have believed."

By adding the words "in a point in time" communicates the action duration.


The aorist is NOT an ongoing action. It's a point in time act.


Not according to the aorist tense. Aorist tense does not consider duration.


Regardless of how this will be understood, your statement is an opinion but without any Scriptural evidence. I need evidence to believe what is claimed.


btw, the aorist tense generally functions as a past tense verb. So, allow me to add to the definition of the aorist: "a point in time in the past". Hopefully, that will clarify.


Actually, not. It means current action in the perspective of the writer/speaker.


That has not been shown from Scripture. Again, just an opinion, from a misunderstanding of Greek tenses.


I'm glad you phrased it that way. Consider Jesus' own words:
"I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand." John 10:28

Now, who does Jesus give eternal life to? Believers.

And those who HAVE eternal life WILL NEVER PERISH. That's a promise from Jesus.

I'll ask what Jesus asked Martha in John 11: Do you believe this?

My answer was included in the post being responded to.

This is what I said:
"Because the aorist tense is used in a number of verses about believing for salvation, it is (or should be) clear that one is saved in a point in time that they have believed."

By adding the words "in a point in time" communicates the action duration.


The aorist is NOT an ongoing action. It's a point in time act.


Not according to the aorist tense. Aorist tense does not consider duration.


Regardless of how this will be understood, your statement is an opinion but without any Scriptural evidence. I need evidence to believe what is claimed.


btw, the aorist tense generally functions as a past tense verb. So, allow me to add to the definition of the aorist: "a point in time in the past". Hopefully, that will clarify.


Actually, not. It means current action in the perspective of the writer/speaker.


That has not been shown from Scripture. Again, just an opinion, from a misunderstanding of Greek tenses.


I'm glad you phrased it that way. Consider Jesus' own words:
"I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand." John 10:28

Now, who does Jesus give eternal life to? Believers.

And those who HAVE eternal life WILL NEVER PERISH. That's a promise from Jesus.

I'll ask what Jesus asked Martha in John 11: Do you believe this?

My answer was included in the post being responded to.

This is what I said:
"Because the aorist tense is used in a number of verses about believing for salvation, it is (or should be) clear that one is saved in a point in time that they have believed."

By adding the words "in a point in time" communicates the action duration.


The aorist is NOT an ongoing action. It's a point in time act.


Not according to the aorist tense. Aorist tense does not consider duration.


Regardless of how this will be understood, your statement is an opinion but without any Scriptural evidence. I need evidence to believe what is claimed.


btw, the aorist tense generally functions as a past tense verb. So, allow me to add to the definition of the aorist: "a point in time in the past". Hopefully, that will clarify.


Actually, not. It means current action in the perspective of the writer/speaker.


That has not been shown from Scripture. Again, just an opinion, from a misunderstanding of Greek tenses.


I'm glad you phrased it that way. Consider Jesus' own words:
"I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand." John 10:28

Now, who does Jesus give eternal life to? Believers.

And those who HAVE eternal life WILL NEVER PERISH. That's a promise from Jesus.

I'll ask what Jesus asked Martha in John 11: Do you believe this?

Hi FreeGrace
I was wondering today if Jesus knew about this aorist tense of which you're in such awe.

I live in an area where there are only Catholics. This evening I spoke to a priest friend of mine who is in his 60's, and has a theology degree. He speaks different languages, English, Italian, French, Arab and Greek.

I asked him about what we've been speaking about. He explained the tense slightly and then proceeded to tell me that not too much importance should be given to it. He said it's a continuation. He said you must believe NOW. You must believe WHEN YOU DIE.

I made a point of this.

In case you don't believe me, and why should you, I found this on the internet. There was a lot and none of it agrees with your understanding of the word. Which, BTW, has never been important to me since the bible makes it clear that we must be in a believing state when we die.

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

CONT'D

 

[GodsGrace]

Part 2

In the Ancient Greek, the indicative aorist is one of the two main forms used in telling a story; it is used for undivided events, such as the individual steps in a continuous process (narrative aorist); it is also used for events that took place before the story itself (past-within-past). The aorist indicative is also used to express things that happen in general, without asserting a time (the "gnomic aorist"). It can also be used of present and future events; the aorist also has several specialized senses meaning present action.

Non-indicative forms of the aorist (subjunctives, optatives, imperatives, infinitives) are usually purely aspectual, with certain exceptions including indirect speech constructions and the use of optative as part of the sequence of tenses in dependent clauses. There are aorist infinitives and imperatives that do not imply temporality at all. For example, the Lord's Prayer in Matthew 6:11 uses the aorist imperative in "Give (δός dós) us this day our daily bread", in contrast to the analogous passage in Luke 11:3, which uses the imperfective aspect, implying repetition, with "Give (δίδου dídou, present imperative) us day by day our daily bread."

An example of how the aorist tense contrasts with the imperfect in describing the past occurs in Xenophon's Anabasis, when the Persian aristocrat Orontas is executed: "and those who had been previously in the habit of bowing (προσεκύνουν prosekúnoun, imperfect) to him, bowed (προσεκύνησαν prosekúnēsan, aorist) to him even then." Here the imperfect refers to a past habitual or repeated act, and the aorist to a single one.

There is disagreement as to which functions of the Greek aorist are inherent within it. Many authors hold that the aorist tends to be about the past because it is perfective, and perfectives tend to describe completed actions; others that it is essentially a mixture of past tense and perfective aspect.

Hermeneutic implications

Because the aorist was not maintained in either Latin or the Germanic languages, there have long been difficulties in translating the Greek New Testament into Western languages. The aorist has often been interpreted as making a strong statement about the aspect or even the time of an event, when, in fact, due to its being the unmarked (default) form of the Greek verb, such implications are often left to context. Thus, within New Testament hermeneutics, it is considered an exegetical fallacy to attach undue significance to uses of the aorist. Although one may draw specific implications from an author's use of the imperfective or perfect, no such conclusions can, in general, be drawn from the use of the aorist, which may refer to an action "without specifying whether the action is unique, repeated, ingressive, instantaneous, past, or accomplished." In particular, the aorist does not imply a "once for all" action, as it has commonly been misinterpreted.

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

Please note the very last line.

As far as what Jesus asked Martha in John 11:26, since it's a personal question that does not require an answer, I leave it to your imagination. (do you suppose I'd enjoy being lost??)


Wondering

 

[dirtfarmer]

I agree with a lot of what you say.
Like for instance:
Those who HAVE eternal life will never perish.
HAVE: Have at the time of death. You must have eternal life IN you at the time of your death in order to be eternally saved and never perish.
We've been through the snatching of hand and I'm not going to repeat. No one can "snatch" us, but we could walk out of our own FREE WILL.

Regarding A Point In Time:
At a point in time I was 16 years old.
I'm not anymore.
Whenever we believed, whever that point in time is, it MUST be continued. We MUST do s Jesus instructed.
He instructed us not only to talk about Him but to do what He instructed.




Hi FreeGrace
I was wondering today if Jesus knew about this aorist tense of which you're in such awe.

I live in an area where there are only Catholics. This evening I spoke to a priest friend of mine who is in his 60's, and has a theology degree. He speaks different languages, English, Italian, French, Arab and Greek.

I asked him about what we've been speaking about. He explained the tense slightly and then proceeded to tell me that not too much importance should be given to it. He said it's a continuation. He said you must believe NOW. You must believe WHEN YOU DIE.

I made a point of this.

In case you don't believe me, and why should you, I found this on the internet. There was a lot and none of it agrees with your understanding of the word. Which, BTW, has never been important to me since the bible makes it clear that we must be in a believing state when we die.

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

CONT'D

hello Wondering, dirtfarmer here

A couple of points that you made troubles me a little. My mother was a believer, but when she passed away at the age of 98 her mind was not such that she could have retained a belief in any thing. I believe that once a person is "justified"(saved by belief) by God they can never loose that justification(salvation) It is my understanding that when a person believes, has faith, or born again( receives salvation), that a relationship is established with God and that believer. It is my belief that that relationship can never be broken because it is kept by the power of God. I do believe during that relationship, that fellowship can be broken by the believer being overtaken by a fault and must be confessed (say the same as God), then fellowship is restored. The reason that I believe this is because we are told that Christ paid for the sin debt( death-separation from God) for the whole world and because of that the only sin that brings separation from God is unbelief in Christ at the point of physical death.

I believe that sin is the nature that we all were born with because of Adam's transgression. I believe that sins are the fruit of that nature, just as there is love, joy, peace, and etc , which are fruit of the Spirit. In scripture those that are condemned to the lake of fire are those that die in the sin of unbelief. It is possible for an unbeliever to have similar attributes as do believers, not possess the Spirit and still remain in unbelief. It is not because of love, joy, or peace, that we are saved but because we have the Spirit dwelling in us.

We are asked what, and who can separate us from the love of God. It was the Love that God has for man, that God gave his only begotten to pay our sin. I often ask those that have children; Do your children always obey you. Of course the answer is no, and since they disobey(sin, so to speak) do they become unborn and not your children. The answer is no, but we do chastise them, and that is to make them respectable adults. So it is with God.

The other question is, did you posted your belief based on scripture or is your belief based on what the priest told scripture states? I don't ask any one to base their beliefs on what I say or teach only but encourage them to search the scriptures and compare scripture with scripture to see if what I say is in line with the teachings of Spirit about scripture.

not saying that you are lost

In Christ
dirtfarmer.

 

[JLB]

I prefer Jesus' explanation over anyone else's. You know, the one where Jesus said it was the good soil that was the one that understood.

Matthew 13:18-19, 23 (LEB) “You, therefore, listen to the parable of the sower: When anyone hears the word about the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what was sown in his heart. This is what was sown on the side of the path. But what was sown on the good soil—this is the one who hears the word and understands it,
​

Yet JLB said; "The ones in example #2 & #3, did understand"

Yes the ones in group 2 & 3 did hear the word and receive it with joy.

They believed for a while.
They were saved for a while.



JLB