What is the 'work' that may or may not get burned up in 1 Corinthians 3:8-16?

[Jethro Bodine]

So quit teaching believers to be worried about ending up in hell when Jesus Christ PROMISED that those who believe:
HAVE eternal life
WILL NOT come into judgment
HAVE PASSED from spiritual death to eternal life, John 5:24

But I am saying that...
THOSE WHO BELIEVE are indeed saved and have passed from death to life. But you are destroying the building of God when you say the promise is for those who DON'T BELIEVE and they then stop believing having been led astray into thinking Jesus said those who don't believe have eternal life and have passed from death to life.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

If one "believes in vain", meaning without reason, they are not saved. That's what Paul taught.

Now, don't avoid the question again. Please explain how when a person believes in vain that makes "you are saved if you hold fast the word"* not true for those who have not believed in vain.

(*1 Corinthians 15:2 NASB)

 

[FreeGrace]

Reasonable people who who know and believe the truth, don't take scriptures out of context

That is totally true. And no one has shown that I've done any such thing.

and splice them together with another scripture, leaving out the parts they choose to ignore to create a man made doctrine that supersedes the rest of scripture.

This is totally confused. Nothing has been spliced.

What you've not admitted is that both verses speak of the gifts of God. 6:23 describes one of God's gifts, which is eternal life. 11:29 teaches that God's gifts are irrevocable.

The ONLY WAY to dissociate 6:23 from 11:29 is IF Paul made specifically clear that eternal life was NOT one of the gifts of God that are irrevocable. No one can prove that. Because Paul never taught that.

If Paul didn't mean that ALL of God's gifts are irrevocable, 11:29 would have had to indicate that. But it doesn't do any such thing.

For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. for the gifts and the calling of God are [is] irrevocable.

There you go: the gift of eternal life is irrevocable.

Then you claim, based on this "interpretation", that it is not necessary to continue to believe any longer in Christ, because now the person has eternal life in which can never be revoked.

The problem continues with your unbiblical "interpretation" by claiming that one must continue to believe. Paul never taught that. One isn't saved by continuing to believe. They are saved WHEN they believe and then they ARE SEALED with the Holy Spirit for the day of redemption. Eternal security.

All someone has to do is examine the life of Judas Iscariot, to see just how unbiblical your man made "theory" really is.

This ought to be interesting.

Judas "heard the voice of Jesus", and "followed Him for three and one half years", was an Apostle being sent with the others and preached the Gospel and worked signs and wonders, and cast out devils.

How 'bout that! And so did the crowd in Matt 7:21-23, where Jesus told the lot of them; "I never knew you. Depart from me, you workers of iniquity."

He then betrayed Jesus Christ.

He sure did.

Was Judas still saved?

He was NEVER saved. What would give anyone such an idea?? As I pointed out, he did the same things the crowd in Matt 7:21-23 did, and Jesus NEVER KNEW them.

Just to jog a few memories,
21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.
22 “Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’
23 “And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.’

See? They prophesied in His name, they cast out demons in His name, and they performed many miracles in His name. No different than what Judas did. And Jesus told them He NEVER KNEW THEM.

Pretty clear, imho.

The missing ingredient in both Judas and the crowd in Matt 7:23 is they never believed in Him for eternal life. They thought they could earn their entrance into heaven. They thought they could impress our Savior.

But...no such deal. They went to hell. They never believed.

I've pointed this out many times, but it's clear it needs to be taught again.

Paul's answer to the jailer who asked him what he MUST DO to be saved refutes any man made notion or assumption that one must continue to believe in order to continue to be saved.

Paul's answer, in Acts 16:31 - They said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.”

The tense for "believe" is aorist. If continuance of believing is necessary in order to stay saved, then Paul's answer was quite misleading. Because his use of the aorist leaves out ANY notion of continuing time.

So, let's just admit that your assumptions and opinion are unbiblical.

 

[FreeGrace]

Romans 6:23 and Romans 11:29 says this: Death is irrevocable.

No it doesn't. And you know better than pushing this silliness.

For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.for the gifts and the calling of God are [is] irrevocable.


You see, by your method of interpreting the scriptures a person can cut and paste and mix and match whatever they want to come up with whatever they decide.

We are to read what the scriptures say as a whole, not just take the parts we decide to believe and discard the rest like a spoiled child who only decides to eat the ice cream [milk] and discard the whole meal.

A healthy person can't just drink milk their whole life, but must also eat their meat.

How can you have any pudding, if you don't eat your meat?

12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles of the oracles of God; and you have come to need milk and not solid food. 13 For everyone who partakes only of milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a babe.14 But solid food belongs to those who are of full age, that is, those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil. Hebrews 5:12-14JLB

See post 862 for all that is needed to refute such man made ideas.

 

[FreeGrace]

Denial is not an argument.

It's written clear as day in our Bibles, but I understand how the power of indoctrinations work: When the church teaches it's people to rationalize away plain scripture over and over and over the church will indeed not be able to see the truth anymore. But an honest, seeking heart will eventually see the truth and be set free from these indoctrinations.

While it is important that God's people be set free from these spirits at work in the church today to lead her astray it is equally important that insincere people in the church be drawn away by them. That's God plan. Let's just be careful to be on the right side of that plan.


It's a present tense holding onto the gospel that you are presently saved by. But you have decided for the sake of your doctrine that it is a past tense verb that says it is a holding fast one did in the past that accomplished salvation at that time in the past and does of necessity have to continue in the present for one to be saved. But any honest Christian can check this out for themselves and see that what I say is correct, and that what you tech is not:

2by which also you are (presently) saved, if you (presently) hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain." (1 Corinthians 15:2 NASB parenthesis mine)

https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/1co/15/1/t_conc_1077002

http://ezraproject.com/id27.html

People who take the time to investigate this because they are honest, and courageous enough to face the truth, and they then continue in their faith because of what they have learned, they will be my reward for my labor in the building of God. They are my work in the building of God. Those who don't listen can't be my reward for sharing this truth because if they don't continue to hold fast the word in order to be presently saved they will not be saved but will be burned up in the final Judgment. They will be as hay, wood, and stubble and won't be on the other side of the fire to be a reward for me. The teachers who labor in the building of God to build these kinds of people (hay, wood, and stubble) into the building of God will see their work burned up. And depending on if they started out in and continued in the gospel word, they may or may not pass through themselves. Harsh words, but this is exactly what the Bible tells us.

But by all means, Freegrace, if you can provide some credible source that says the holding fast of the word and the salvation it produces is past tense and does not have to continue in order to be saved please share it. You just saying it is past tense isn't going to cut it in the face of the credible sources I've cited above.

See post 862 for all that is needed to refute such ideas.

 

[FreeGrace]

But I am saying that...
THOSE WHO BELIEVE are indeed saved and have passed from death to life. But you are destroying the building of God when you say the promise is for those who DON'T BELIEVE and they then stop believing having been led astray into thinking Jesus said those who don't believe have eternal life and have passed from death to life.

Post 862 refutes your ideas. I don't need to keep repeating myself.

 

[FreeGrace]

Now, don't avoid the question again. Please explain how when a person believes in vain that makes "you are saved if you hold fast the word"* not true for those who have not believed in vain.

(*1 Corinthians 15:2 NASB)

Your question doesn't make any sense to me. How does "when a person believes in vain" make anything not true? That is basically your question. As if one who believes in vain makes something else not true. It doesn't. Your question has no answer because it is nonsensical.

I will gladly answer any sensible questions. But I cannot answer nonsensical questions. Because there is no answer.

However, I'll provide a big hint. Quit perseverating on the present tense. The Bible uses both present tense and aorist tense in regard to believing for salvation. So you have no point.

And I've pointed out before that Jesus used the all-hallowed present tense for 'believe' in Luke 8:13.
“Those on the rocky soil are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no firm root; they believe (present tense) for a while, and in time of temptation fall away." Luke 8:13

Now, what immediately follows the word 'believe'? "for a while". Thus, completely disproving the claim that one must continue to believe in order to continue to be saved.

And, on top of that, in the previous verse, Jesus used the aorist tense:
“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 (aorist) and be saved." Luke 8:12

There it is: Jesus noted that those who believe, WITHOUT ANY CONCEPT OF DURATION OF TIME, will be saved.

So, those who are fixated on the present tense are barking up the wrong tree. People are saved by believing in a point in time. Those who believe HAVE eternal life, WILL NOT come into condemnation, and HAVE PASSED from spiritual death to eternal life. John 5:24 Period.

Case closed.

 

[JLB]

No it doesn't. And you know better than pushing this silliness.

For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. for the gifts and the calling of God are [is] irrevocable.

This is what must be done to come up with your theory.

Based on your method of interpretation, I have the liberty to ignore the context, and ignore parts of the verse's that I'm joining together to form my own doctrine.

For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. for the gifts and the calling of God are [is] irrevocable.

Death is irrevocable.

If you can have ability to splice two verse's together to form your own doctrine, then what's keeping everyone else from doing the same?

How 'bout that! And so did the crowd in Matt 7:21-23, where Jesus told the lot of them; "I never knew you. Depart from me, you workers of iniquity."

Please show me where in the scriptures that Jesus told Judas Iscariot: I never knew you. Depart from me, you worker of iniquity.


JLB

 

[JLB]

Your question doesn't make any sense to me. How does "when a person believes in vain" make anything not true?

If a person believed the Gospel, then later no longer believed, not holding fast to the word the first heard, by which they were saved, then they believed in vain.

Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you—unless you believed in vain. 1 Corinthians 15:1-2

The condition "if", predicates the salvation you presently have, otherwise you believed in vain.

Your believing [past tense] that you did when you were first saved, is in vain, if you don't hold fast that word [present tense] by which you were saved...

Making OSAS not true!

The holding fast is the continuing to believe and trust in Jesus Christ, without which you have believed in vain.

JLB

 

[chessman]

What is your point is relation to the topic at hand?

My point is the same as Paul's point. God has a full number of people He has in His mind to give Eternal Life. Loosing even just one person (or more) who received Eternal Life would mean (if true) God's full number is lacking one (or more).

Doesn't Romans 11 deal with unbelief and being cut off from the New Covenant in Christ?

Yes it most certainly does. So does Romans 3:

Romans 3:3 (LEB) What is the result if some refused to believe? Their unbelief will not nullify the faithfulness of God, will it? ​

As I've pointed out before. The Biblical definition of unbelief is refusing to believe. Never, not once in the entire Bible, does it ever mean ''believing for a while'. You have to make that idea up.

This context is to be taken into account when reading Romans 11:29.

Okay. Accounted for.

Disregarding this context, will lead to a misunderstanding of the New Covenant, and the doctrine of Salvation.

Disregarding the fact that Eternal Life is a gift of God's in Christ Jesus (Rom 6:23) will lead some to misunderstand and think Eternal Life is an earned reward based on their superiority to Christ Jesus.

Additionally, misunderstanding that God's gifts are irrevocable (Rom 11:29) will lead some into thinking that God's gifts are revocable.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Quit perseverating on the present tense. The Bible uses both present tense and aorist tense in regard to believing for salvation. So you have no point.

"2By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain." (1 Corinthians 15: NASB)

He's using the present tense for both 'are saved' and 'hold firmly'. You can't just change it to the past tense to get rid of the truth that you have to still be believing in the gospel to be presently saved.

And I've pointed out before that Jesus used the all-hallowed present tense for 'believe' in Luke 8:13.
“Those on the rocky soil are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no firm root; they believe (present tense) for a while, and in time of temptation fall away." Luke 8:13

Now, what immediately follows the word 'believe'? "for a while". Thus, completely disproving the claim that one must continue to believe in order to continue to be saved.

This is funny.
So now it is a passage about salvation?

And, on top of that, in the previous verse, Jesus used the aorist tense:
“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 (aorist) and be saved." Luke 8:12

Everybody who presently believes had to believe somewhere in the past. And salvation does indeed start at that moment, but that hardly negates the fact that the Bible also says you have to keep believing in order to keep being saved. Besides, Jesus is relating the story after the fact. Of course you use the aorist tense to do that. But like I say, you have no argument anyway since the Bible says in plain words that you have to keep believing to be saved. These are the plain and simple words of the Bible that have been suppressed by the work of a spirit at work in the Protestant church. But God's sheep who are able to hear his voice will eventually realize that. The question is, will they listen? Or will they be lost with the others who decide to not keep believing to the very end in order to be saved in the very end, and lead others astray into the same error?

So, those who are fixated on the present tense are barking up the wrong tree. People are saved by believing in a point in time. Those who believe HAVE eternal life, WILL NOT come into condemnation, and HAVE PASSED from spiritual death to eternal life. John 5:24 Period.

This is not in contention (not by me anyway). You are indeed truly saved the moment you believe. You receive all that salvation is in this life when you first believe with the promise of what is to come. But the Bible also says you have to continue to believe to continue to be saved. That is the point of contention. 1 Corinthians 15:1-2 plainly says that you are saved if you keep hold of the gospel word by which you were saved. Plain as day.

See, you, and lots of other people have to stop instantly defining 'saved' as meaning 'irretrievably saved'. I can see that you are doing that. You are using the common OSAS circular reasoning. It goes like this: 'The Bible says you are saved when you believe, and 'saved' means forever, so salvation can't be taken away'.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Your question doesn't make any sense to me. How does "when a person believes in vain" make anything not true? That is basically your question. As if one who believes in vain makes something else not true. It doesn't. Your question has no answer because it is nonsensical.

I will gladly answer any sensible questions. But I cannot answer nonsensical questions. Because there is no answer.

Let's try it again.

You insist it's not true that "you are (presently) saved if you (presently) hold fast the word" (1 Corinthians 15:2 NASB parenthesis mine), and you cite the words immediately following that to prove your point--"unless you believed in vain." So once again I ask, explain how a person believing in vain makes it so holding fast the word of the gospel is not the condition for anyone for being saved.

 

[JLB]

My point is the same as Paul's point. God has a full number of people He has in His mind to give Eternal Life. Loosing even just one person (or more) who received Eternal Life would mean (if true) God's full number is lacking one (or more).

Again, God see's before hand through His foreknowledge, who will be saved and who will not, but it is still each person's choice.

Because He see's the end from the beginning, doesn't mean He chooses who will and who will not will be saved.

The full number of those He saw who would be saved, from the foundation of the world will indeed be saved.

Additionally, misunderstanding that God's gifts are irrevocable (Rom 11:29) will lead some into thinking that God's gifts are revocable.

Romans 11:29 doesn't say God's gifts are irrevocable, those are your words which is why you don't post the actual scripture, you post your own opinion, then tag it with a scripture reference.

This seems to be the pattern with the OSAS camp.

It's either posting half a scripture, and another half a scripture, then leave out the context and viola: Instant heresy.

Here is what Romans 11:29 says -

For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. Romans 11:29

The gifts and calling together are irrevocable.

Also - Irrevocable in the original Greek, doesn't even mean what you are claiming it means.

For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. KJV

without repentance - Strong's G278 - ametamelētos

not repentant of, unregretted

God does not regret calling Israel into covenant, even though they have been disobedient.

29 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. 30 For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, 31 even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy. Romans 11:29-31


When the entire context is read, it's clear that some were cut off from covenant, through unbelief, just as the Gentiles are warned that they as well may be cut off if they don't continue... also a warning not to fall into unbelief as well.


JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

How can you have any pudding, if you don't eat your meat?

We don't need no education!

 

[FreeGrace]

For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. for the gifts and the calling of God are [is] irrevocable.

This is what must be done to come up with your theory.

I believe your attempts to dissociate Rom 6:23 from Rom 11:29 are becoming quite comical.

The subject of both verses are the gifts of God.

Based on your method of interpretation, I have the liberty to ignore the context, and ignore parts of the verse's that I'm joining together to form my own doctrine.

There has been a total failure to show that I've ignored any context. And there is NO context that changes the absolute FACT that the gift of eternal life is irrevocable.

For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. for the gifts and the calling of God are [is] irrevocable.

Death is irrevocable.

Do you seriously think anyone would fall for this absurd "interpretation"?

Since 'death' isn't mentioned in Rom 11:29, there is NO context for 'death' in 11:29. Again, both verses deal with God's gifts. Since eternal life is a gift of God, and Paul wrote that God's gifts are irrevocable, AND...he didn't exclude the gift of eternal life from being irrevocable, of course it is irrevocable.

If you can have ability to splice two verse's together to form your own doctrine, then what's keeping everyone else from doing the same?

What I've done is prove that the gift of eternal life is an irrevocable gift of God.

Please show me where in the scriptures that Jesus told Judas Iscariot: I never knew you. Depart from me, you worker of iniquity.
JLB

I only took your own post and showed that Judas did ALL the things that the crowd in Matt 7:21-23 did. And Jesus' response to them.

Now, since you think that Judas was a believer, please quote the exact verse that says that.

At some point, I'd think you'd get tired of making claims that cannot be shown from Scripture. Or embarrassed. I sure would be.

 

[FreeGrace]

...
...
...
The holding fast is the continuing to believe and trust in Jesus Christ, without which you have believed in vain.JLB

The only vain thing going on here is trying to disprove eternal security when the Bible has very clearly SAID that God's gift of eternal life is irrevocable.

 

[FreeGrace]

...
...
...
That is the point of contention. 1 Corinthians 15:1-2 plainly says that you are saved if you keep hold of the gospel word by which you were saved. Plain as day.

I KNOW what is plain as day. Eternal life, which is a gift of God, is irrevocable. That much I do know.

See, you, and lots of other people have to stop instantly defining 'saved' as meaning 'irretrievably saved'.

Uh, the biblical word is "irrevocably saved", from Rom 11:29 about the gifts of God. Salvation being one of those gifts, from Eph 2:8.

I always prefer the biblical wordings. Not the made up stuff that some come up with.

I can see that you are doing that.

Well, I'm glad that you do.

You are using the common OSAS circular reasoning. It goes like this: 'The Bible says you are saved when you believe, and 'saved' means forever, so salvation can't be taken away'.

Not even close. Unless someone can show from Scripture that being irrevocable can mean that it may be taken away or lost, you don't have a point.

 

[FreeGrace]

Let's try it again.

Actually, I'm tiring of these games and twisted explanations.

The Bible says that eternal life is a gift of God. Do you believe this or not?
The Bible also says that the gifts of God are irrevocable. Do you believe this or not?

This should clear the air, so to speak. I do hope you'll answer these questions. They are simple enough. Just a 'yes' or a 'no'. Not difficult at all.

Then we'll know how much of the Bible that you believe.

 

[chessman]

God see's before hand through His foreknowledge, who will be saved and who will not, but it is still each person's choice.

Yes.

Because He see's the end from the beginning, doesn't mean He chooses who will and who will not will be saved.

Correct. But it does mean He knows who will be saved and more directly applicable to my point means He knows who is counted (numerically) as being saved.

Knowing who will be saved (and who will not be) certainly DOES mean He's counted that very person as being saved within His total number. In Romans 11:29, Paul is very clearly making the point that God's full number of Gentile believers must "come in" because (For) God's gifts and calling are irrevocable (without repentance, take you pick). And not only that, but Paul specifically says this to Gentile believers (see v13 and v15) which shots down your erroneous theory that the context of Romans 11:29 is merely about Israel.

The full number of those He saw who would be saved, from the foundation of the world will indeed be saved.

Exactly. Yet your theory (if it were true) has setup a theoretical situation where God counts the very person He foreknew as one of the saved (adding them into the accumulation of the number of saved people) then has to subtract them out later on (subtracting them from the accumulation) when/if they become ex-believers (i.e. He repents/revokes His gift/calling). Thus revoking their saved status and subtracting them from His total number. Yet Romans 11:29 says God's gifts and callings are irrevocable (without repentance, take your pick of which English word to use) specifically because (For the very reason) the full number of Gentiles must come in.

The gifts and calling together are irrevocable.

Yep. Paul told this to Gentiles too. God never (not once) repents, regrets, revokes any of His calling or of His gifts. God doesn't make mistakes in math either.

 

[JLB]

The only vain thing going on here is trying to disprove eternal security when the Bible has very clearly SAID that God's gift of eternal life is irrevocable.

Those who believe, and are "in Christ" are secure.

Those who believe for a while, and do not abide in Him, are not secure.

If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned. John 15:6

Those who do not: abide in Him, remain connected to Him, continue to be joined to Him, continue to be in Him, continue to have Him...

Have no eternal security, because eternal life is conditional on remaining connected to Him.

Apart from Him, there is no promise of eternal life.

Jesus Christ Himself is our eternal life: Knowing Him is eternal life.

Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. 2 John 1:9

He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. 1 John 5:12


Those who endure to the end will be saved. Matthew 24:13


JLB