Perfect Tense for "saved" proves eternal security

[MarkT]

Breakfast time. Time for breakfast. You must be a hungry man. I'll give you some food. "I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and whoever lives and believes in me shall never die." John 11:25,26 This is your daily bread.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

No need to rephrase as I answered the question.

Here's more:

1 Corinthians 15:

12 Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?

13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:

14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.

15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.

16 For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:

17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.

18 Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.

19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.

20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.

No, you're not getting the question. That's okay.
We'll try it again.

Here's the passage:

"1Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, 2by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain." (1 Corinthians 15:1-2 NASB)

See the "by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you" part?
It says the Corinthians are in fact presently saved because they are in fact presently holding fast the word of the gospel that Paul preached to them. That's what the verbs 'are' and 'hold fast' mean according to tense and mood (ref:https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/1co/15/1/t_conc_1077002 -- click on 'Parse' button for tense and mood of the verbs).

But then Paul says all that is negated by vain, or useless, believing when he says, "unless you believed in vain".
You see, we don't have to know exactly what constitutes vain believing because vain believing doesn't negate the fact that "you are saved, if you hold fast the word" for those who haven't believed in vain. Understand? Do you see it? The condition for being saved (holding fast the word that was preached) is not negated by vain believing if you haven't done that vain believing.

So, how does "unless you believed in vain" make it so I don't have to hold fast the word to be saved if I haven't done that vain believing? That is the question. Don't explain to me what you think vain believing means. How does believing in vain--however you want to define that--make it so that the person who does not believe in vain does not have to hold fast the word that they heard in order to be saved?

 

[Pegasus]

No, you're not getting the question. That's okay.
We'll try it again.

Here's the passage:

"1Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, 2by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain." (1 Corinthians 15:1-2 NASB)

See the "by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you" part?
It says the Corinthians are in fact presently saved because they are in fact presently holding fast the word of the gospel that Paul preached to them. That's what the verbs 'are' and 'hold fast' mean according to tense and mood (ref:https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/1co/15/1/t_conc_1077002 -- click on 'Parse' button for tense and mood of the verbs).

But then Paul says all that is negated by vain, or useless, believing when he says, "unless you believed in vain".
You see, we don't have to know exactly what constitutes vain believing. Vain believing doesn't negate the fact that "you are saved, if you hold fast the word" for those who haven't believed in vain. Understand? Do you see it? The condition for being saved (holding fast the word that was preached) is not negated by vain believing if you haven't done that vain believing.

So, how does "unless you believed in vain" make it so I don't have to hold fast the word to be saved if I haven't done that vain believing? That is the question. Don't explain to me what you think vain believing means. Tell me how believing in vain--however you want to define that--makes it so a person does not have to hold fast the word that they heard and by which they were saved in order to be saved?

What did Paul write after this? What would be in vain?

The Gospel. The Gospel as he laid it out specifically.

Then after laying out the Gospel he then explains there are some in the Corinthian church who deny the Resurrection. That's the context. To prove this context look here:

13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:

14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

What did Paul write after this? What would be in vain?

The Gospel. The Gospel as he laid it out specifically.

Then after laying out the Gospel he then explains there are some in the Corinthian church who deny the Resurrection. That's the context. To prove this context look here:

13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:

14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.

One more time...

OSAS is claiming that the "you are saved if you hold fast the word" doesn't mean 'you have to hold fast the word to be saved' in the passage because of the "unless you believed in vain part", and so I ask, "How does "you are saved if you hold fast the word I preached to you" (1 Corinthians 15:2 NASB) become 'you don't have to hold fast the word to be saved' just because some people do vain believing?"

 

[JLB]

Read the scripture a little before what you have posted.

John 6:63-64 The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life. Yet there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him.

So JLB, the above was spoken from Jesus's mouth. Jesus knows the heart of a person and knew Judas did not believe, even though he chose him.

Yes, there were some of His disciples who stopped believing, which is prefaced by the fact that they no longer walked with Him anymore.

From that time many of His disciples went back and walked with Him no more. Then Jesus said to the twelve, “Do you also want to go away?”

Those who stopped believing, stopped following, as they stopped being "His disciples", prefaced by the fact that they "stopped following"

This was not so, of the twelve, because they continued following Jesus, and were still "His disciples" at this point.

A disciple is someone who follows their teacher and learns from Him. A disciplined follower.

Peter representing the twelve said these words, when asked: “Do you also want to go away?”

But Simon Peter answered Him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. 69 Also we have come to believe and know that You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”

Those who believed; followed.
Those who no longer believe; no longer followed, as they were no longer disciples.

Did Judas turn away from following Jesus, with the rest of those who didn't believe anymore?

There were those who didn't believe, as they stopped following, and there was Judas who betrayed Him.

• Judas was not among those who didn't believe.
• Those who didn't believe were not counted as the one who betrayed Him

60 Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this, said, “This is a hard saying; who can understand it?”
61 When Jesus knew in Himself that His disciples complained about this, He said to them, “Does this offend you? 62 What then if you should see the Son of Man ascend where He was before? 63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life. 64 But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who would betray Him. 65 And He said, “Therefore I have said to you that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted to him by My Father.”
66 From that time many of His disciples went back and walked with Him no more. 67 Then Jesus said to the twelve, “Do you also want to go away?” 68 But Simon Peter answered Him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. 69 Also we have come to believe and know that You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
70 Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you, the twelve, and one of you is a devil?” 71 He spoke of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, for it was he who would betray Him, being one of the twelve. John 6:60-71



JLB

 

[JLB]

Please.
The name of your thread is "Perfect Tense for "saved" proves eternal security"
And you said that you didn't base a doctrine on the tense of a verb but have shown that the tense proves the doctrine.
So you just contradicted yourself displayi9ng the abysmal confusion of your "proof."

 

[chessman]

See the "by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you" part?
It says the Corinthians are in fact presently saved because they are in fact presently holding fast the word of the gospel that Paul preached to them. That's what the verbs 'are' and 'hold fast' mean ...

Pretending for a moment that you are not operating under the 'weakened defense' rule of A&T rules bullet #8 and are also able to answer questions defending your case;
What does the conjunction "also" mean in Paul's sentence that is 1 Cor 15:1-2?

 

[JohnDB]

Like so many of these discussions, this one seems to me in the vein of debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin (73, if you must know). If I knew today that OSAS were true or that it were not true, it wouldn't affect in the slightest the way I live my life.

Actually that debate about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin is a discussion about what constitutes an angel/messenger. It's not an unimportant lesson or discussion. (Although the euphemism would tend to make a person think otherwise)

It's as relevant today in this age where people who claim they have a message from God to give us to those who say God is silent are all given the same relevance.

2Peter talks about gaining knowledge of God. That's actually going to take more than staying in a Holiday inn express and watching a couple of YouTube videos to accomplish. (Which is why you had issues before with your ministry...not that you intended to be niave)

It's a walking race. It is all uphill. You are not everyone else and everyone else is not you. So let them learn and grow in the grace and knowledge of God...just as you can.

 

[FreeGrace]

It appears to me that nothing resembling actual "discussion" takes place in a "dialogue" with you, so I at least am not going to continue. Discussion with you reminds me of the old joke about the guy who sat around beating his head with a hammer. When asked why, he responded: "Because it feels so good when I stop."

"Assuming that which is to be proved," also known as "begging the question," is not how debates work.

I'm sorry that you do not understand how debate work.

You are committing this fallacy by assuming that the perfect tense of "have been saved" necessarily means "have been saved forever, with no possibility of ever falling away."

OK, Mr. appellate court debater, please point out where I ever made that statement.

If you would care to explore commentaries on the Greek other than those to which you are now referring, you will see that any number of them explain that the present tense means "you are presently saved" or "you now continue in your salvation." I am not saying that the additional language you are mentally adding is impossible; I am saying it does not flow inevitably from the use of the present tense, as you assume it does.

I will explain how these debates work, not those in appellate courts. One side makes a claim and provides evidence that supports the claim. Or at least thinks it does. Then, if there are those who disagree with the claim, or the evidence, they engage the debate by showing that the claim is wrong and/or the evidence doesn't support the claim.

This is why you are guilty of assuming that which is to be proved.

That's what EVERYONE does when they make a claim. They believe their claim to be true. I may only be an assumption, but they do believe it to be true. Even you do that.

I could just as easily mentally add "have been saved and will continue to be so long as you remain in the faith."

And the easiest thing to do is challenge what you've added by challenging your claim by showing evidence from Scripture. Which can't be done.

This would be equally valid, meaning that the verse is simply not the proof text you want to make it.

Since the claim cannot be shown from Scripture, the claim is not equally valid.

 

[FreeGrace]

Let's pretend that's what "unless you believed in vain" (1 Corinthians 15:2 NASB) means.

How about not pretending but actually understanding and accepting what the phrase actually says? Which is: "unless you believed without reason". Check your lexicon. That's really what the Greek word translated "in vain" means. It doesn't mean to cease to believe.

 

[JohnDB]

That sounds like an opinion. I've given links that explain the perfect tense for "having been saved". And what it means.

From Dan Wallace's "Greek Grammar: Beyond the Basics", on p.573, he says this:
"As Moulton points out, the perfect tense is 'the most important, exegetically, of all the Greek Tenses.' The perfect is used less frequently that the present, aorist, future, or impoerfect; when it is used, there is usually a deliberate hoice on the part of the writer."


None of these things affect the perfect tense meaning. Let's address that, please.

The most important of the unimportant portion of Greek grammar is not a great place to hinge an entire theology viewpoint.

But even in this instance the context would be hinged more upon the time of writing this letter. (60AD)

Some of those who had believed in Jesus and followed had already died. Many before Jesus even showed up. Then there are the future believers...those who will believe.

John's Gospel has the same thing in 1:12. Even though it is in English as past tense it is the perfect Aortist tense which is the same thing as here.

This scripture is not a proof text of OSAS.
Just a common expression of those having faith. That it isn't limited to a period of years like 1976-2016.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

What does the conjunction "also" mean in Paul's sentence that is 1 Cor 15:1-2?

You tell me. What does the conjunction 'also' mean in Paul's sentence in 1 Corinthians 15:1-2?
"1Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, 2by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain."

I'm confident that when you get done "you are saved, if you hold fast the word" will 'not really' mean you are saved conditioned upon if you hold fast the word that was preached to you.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

How about not pretending but actually understanding and accepting what the phrase actually says? Which is: "unless you believed without reason". Check your lexicon. That's really what the Greek word translated "in vain" means. It doesn't mean to cease to believe.

And so I ask, again,

"How does "you are saved if you hold fast the word I preached to you" (1 Corinthians 15:2 NASB) become 'you don't have to hold fast the word to be saved' for those who don't believe in vain just because some 'believe without reason'?"

 

[chessman]

You tell me. What does the conjunction 'also' mean in Paul's sentence in 1 Corinthians 15:1-2?
"1Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, 2by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain."

It means exactly what it is translated to mean. Yet you cut it out of His logical statement in order to form your own 'logic'. That's a no, no and a corruption of His logic.

Paul didn't say:

you are saved if you hold fast the word I preached to you" (1 Corinthians 15:2 NASB)

He said:
1Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, 2by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain."

If you hold fast the word which I preached to you AND/ALSO received, you are saved AND/ALSO you stand UNLESS you believed in vain.

If you meet all of Paul's criteria you are saved AND/ALSO "stand". Which means;
confirmed, establish, fixed, hold, placed, set, firm, upright.

To stand firm/fixed/upright in your salvation, you must "hold fast" the word AND/ALSO you must have "received" the Word that he actually preached. Not something he didn't preach, like Christ not raised. "Received" literally means to "take along". You have to "take along" Christ being raised from the dead in order to be saved and/also stand.

If you believed a 'version' of the word that you think saves a person but does not ALSO resurrect the person, then you believed in vain (to no purpose). Thus, you are not saved.

Simple logic and entirely OSAS compatible.

It would be like believing that speaking in tongues saves you but never believing in Christ's resurrection.

 

[Pegasus]

One more time...

OSAS is claiming that the "you are saved if you hold fast the word" doesn't mean 'you have to hold fast the word to be saved' in the passage because of the "unless you believed in vain part", and so I ask, "How does "you are saved if you hold fast the word I preached to you" (1 Corinthians 15:2 NASB) become 'you don't have to hold fast the word to be saved' just because some people do vain believing?"

Again, in 1 Corinthians 15 not holding fast to the teachings means denying the Bodily Resurrection of Jesus Christ. Believing the Resurrection is what makes us Christian. It is the central teaching of Christianity and what differentiates us from other forms of religion to include Judaism.

 

[FreeGrace]

Please.
The name of your thread is "Perfect Tense for "saved" proves eternal security"
And you said that you didn't base a doctrine on the tense of a verb but have shown that the tense proves the doctrine.
So you just contradicted yourself displayi9ng the abysmal confusion of your "proof."

Hardly. I've already, in other threads, provided 6 other texts that prove eternal security.

I'm not a one verse theologian. This thread is about another evidence for it.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

It means exactly what it is translated to mean. Yet you cut it out of His logical statement in order to form your own 'logic'. That's a no, no and a corruption of His logic.

Paul didn't say:


He said:
1Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, 2by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain."

If you hold fast the word which I preached to you AND/ALSO received, you are saved AND/ALSO you stand UNLESS you believed in vain.

If you meet all of Paul's criteria you are saved AND/ALSO "stand". Which means;
confirmed, establish, fixed, hold, placed, set, firm, upright.

To stand firm/fixed/upright in your salvation, you must "hold fast" the word AND/ALSO you must have "received" the Word that he actually preached. Not something he didn't preach, like Christ not raised. "Received" literally means to "take along". You have to "take along" Christ being raised from the dead in order to be saved and/also stand.

If you believed a 'version' of the word that you think saves a person but does not ALSO resurrect the person, then you believed in vain (to no purpose). Thus, you are not saved.

Simple logic and entirely OSAS compatible.

It would be like believing that speaking in tongues saves you but never believing in Christ's resurrection.

How does all this make it so that presently holding fast the word that you had preached to me is not the condition in order for me to be presently saved? That is the question that no one seems able to answer.

"1Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, 2by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain." (1 Corinthians 15:1-2 NASB)

 

[FreeGrace]

The most important of the unimportant portion of Greek grammar is not a great place to hinge an entire theology viewpoint.

Of course I haven't done that. I've already, in other threads, provided 6 texts that support eternal security.

But even in this instance the context would be hinged more upon the time of writing this letter. (60AD)

Some of those who had believed in Jesus and followed had already died. Many before Jesus even showed up. Then there are the future believers...those who will believe.

John's Gospel has the same thing in 1:12. Even though it is in English as past tense it is the perfect Aortist tense which is the same thing as here.

This scripture is not a proof text of OSAS.

The point is that being saved in the past in the perfect tense means still being saved now.

So, for those who are anti-OSAS, how come there are no contingencies about "still being saved now"? If, as being claimed, that one ceases to be saved if one ceases to believe, how come this verse leaves out such a warning?

Not everyone who has believed in the past are STILL saved, IF they have ceased to continue to believe, according to the anti-OSAS folk. So how come this verse doesn't include any conditions? It should, if they were correct.

The anti-OSAS folk can't even defend their own claim about ceasing to be saved IF one ceases to believe.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Again, in 1 Corinthians 15 not holding fast to the teachings means denying the Bodily Resurrection of Jesus Christ. Believing the Resurrection is what makes us Christian. It is the central teaching of Christianity and what differentiates us from other forms of religion to include Judaism.

We all know this.
Why does this make it so that I don't have to hold fast to the word of the gospel in order to stay saved?
That's the question nobody will answer.

 

[FreeGrace]

And so I ask, again,

"How does "you are saved if you hold fast the word I preached to you" (1 Corinthians 15:2 NASB) become 'you don't have to hold fast the word to be saved' for those who don't believe in vain just because some 'believe without reason'?"

The question is irrelevant to the verse.

1 Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, 2by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain."


One is saved UNLESS ONE BELIEVES IN VAIN (WITHOUT REASON).

I've already explained the Greek word translated "hold fast".