Kan Posted December 19, 2015 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 5 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,661 Content Per Day: 0.48 Reputation: 1,292 Days Won: 2 Joined: 12/21/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted December 19, 2015 1 hour ago, shiloh357 said: I believe in the doctrine called "Eternal Security." The OSAS label was created by the enemies of Eternal Security to communicate the idea that we believe that once you are saved, you can sin as much as you want. Eternal Security is predicated on the idea that you are a genuine follower of Jesus who isn't looking to live in sin and has no desire to forsake the Lord. It is further predicated on the faithfulness of God. We are eternally secure because God isn't going to change his mind tomorrow and revoke salvation for all mankind. God is always going to be faithful to His promises and those who are truly converts have no fear that that they will ever lose their salvation because God changed his mind. Lucifer was not "one with God." Lucifer is an angel who is outside the possibility of redemption. The idea of dying daily isn't the idea that we convert daily. That is nonsense. Paul talks about a daily reckoning of the reality that we are dead to sin. The Bible doesn't teach that we have to "re-die" to sin every day. Paul is talking about daily reminding ourselves that we are in fact dead to sin. So in that sense, we "die daily." If we have to convert or get re-saved every day, as you suggest in your weird notion of what die-daily means, then you have no assurance from one day to the next that you are saved. If salvation depends on me 'dying daily,' then I am the savior, ultimately. I would be saving myself instead of Jesus saving me, once for all, as the Bible teaches. A good answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kan Posted December 19, 2015 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 5 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,661 Content Per Day: 0.48 Reputation: 1,292 Days Won: 2 Joined: 12/21/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted December 19, 2015 1 hour ago, Your closest friendnt said: It seems to me you are making a comparison Lucifer with: Who is the other party you are comparing Lucifer with? No party except the fallen angels who were, by the way, one with God, and then fell into sin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghtan Posted December 19, 2015 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 0 Topics Per Day: 0 Content Count: 422 Content Per Day: 0.12 Reputation: 216 Days Won: 0 Joined: 10/21/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted December 19, 2015 2 hours ago, shiloh357 said: I thought I already referenced Spiros Zodihates' Greek dictionary above. I apologize if that wasn't made clear. I was referencing him elsewhere on the board and thought I had cited him correctly in both places. His dictionary is the one that offers "lapse, "to be in error," "to stray." He never indicates that it means aposostasy in Heb. 6:6. Charles Ryrie who was a professor of theology at Dallas Theological Seminary also holds this view, in his book, "Basic Theology." He says the following about Heb. 6: 1-8: " I personally understand the passage to be describing born again people. The phrases in verses 4 and 5 clearly refer to a conversion experience (cf. “enlightened” in 10:32, “taste” in 2:9, and “partakers” in 12:8). But they are willfully immature believers (cf. 5:11-14). Now, the writer warns, since it is impossible to go back in the Christian life to start it over (but if one could it would be necessary to fall away first in order to go back to the beginning), there are only two remaining options: stay where you are in this state of immaturity, or move forward to maturity (6:1). Since their present state was undesirable, this passage was a strong warning to go on in the Christian life. This warning is similar to that which a teacher might give a class: “It is impossible for you students, once enrolled in this course, turning the clock back (which cannot be done, but which would have to be done if one could go back to the beginning) to start this course over. Therefore, go on to further knowledge.” The warnings against immaturity and fruitlessness are severe and the consequences significant. But those consequences do not include hell because of losing eternal life. Paul exulted in the confidence that nothing, including any other created thing (which has to include yourself), can separate us from the love of God which is in Christ (Rom. 8:38-39). And again he declared: “If we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself” (2 Tim. 2:13). The consistency of God’s character guarantees a secure salvation." Not only that but The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (TNDT) points out that peripitos is actually two Greek words, "para" which means "beside" and pipto which means, "fall." That's why it means "fall to the side" not "apostasy" in Heb. 6:6. TDNT says it this way: "A. The Group outside the NT. 1. The verb has such senses as "to fall beside (or aside)," "to stumble on something," "to be led aside or past," "to be mistaken." The noun means "slip" or "error." 2. In the LXX the verb means "to be in vain" in Es. 6:10, "to err" in Wis 6:9, and "to win" in Wis 12:2; Eze. 14:13; 15:8; 18:24. The noun generally means a "fault" in the LXX, mostly individual sins before God. The group plays little role in Philo, and Josephus uses only the verb in the general sense "to befall" (Antiquities 13 .362). B. The Group in the NT. 1. The verb occurs only in Heb 6:6, where it means "to commit a fault" rather than "to fall away" but with no specific reference. 2. The noun occurs in Mt 6:14-15; Mk 11:25. Faults against others are at issue in Mt 6:14, and against God in v. 15. The repetition brings out the severity of faults against others. The general use in Mk 11:25 does not specify against whom we offend; offenses against others are also offenses against God. Paul often uses the noun. He has it for Adam's sin in Ro 5:15, 17 and for the totality of sin in Ro 5:20 (in distinction from parabasis as the transgression of commandments). A similar use occurs in Ga 6:1, and in Ro 11:11-12 the paraptoma of Israel consists of its rejection of the gospel." Those are three scholarly sources that simply don't agree with how you are representing periptos. Why do you quote the bits that suit your view but ignore the parts that don’t? Zodhiates actually continues by saying that in the NT parapipto is “used only in Heb 6:6, denoting a falling away, an ABANDONMENT.” And why use the TDNT which is older and more liberal? Use the NIDNTT which is newer and more evangelical. It says parapipto in Heb 6:6 “is certainly not meant in the sense of a single lapse but rather expresses the ABANDONMENT of the Christian truth.” And the respected lexicon BDAG gives the concise meaning: “fall away; commit APOSTASY.” So Strong’s is right after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 2 hours ago, ghtan said: Why do you quote the bits that suit your view but ignore the parts that don’t? Zodhiates actually continues by saying that in the NT parapipto is “used only in Heb 6:6, denoting a falling away, an ABANDONMENT.” And why use the TDNT which is older and more liberal? Use the NIDNTT which is newer and more evangelical. It says parapipto in Heb 6:6 “is certainly not meant in the sense of a single lapse but rather expresses the ABANDONMENT of the Christian truth.” And the respected lexicon BDAG gives the concise meaning: “fall away; commit APOSTASY.” So Strong’s is right after all. Yes, all that is true. I quoted the relevant parts relative to Heb. 6:6, as that is what we are talking about. We are NOT talking about how the word is used everywhere it is used in either biblical or secular usage. I never said that the word cannot mean apostasy, ever. I was limiting my points to the specific verse under consideration. But as I already pointed out, apostasy is a rejection of the Christian religion. A true Christian cannot commit apostasy because a true Christian isn't a member of the "Christian religion," but has been transformed by the Holy Spirit, has a new heart that is committed to serving the Lord. We are talking about relationship with Jesus, not a religion. A true Christian can never forsake or abandon that relationship; he can never forsake the Lord. Furthermore, one important rule is that word usage trumps word meaning. The context in which Heb. 6:6 occurs, is a discussion about spiritual immaturity. That's why Strong's simply doesn't cut it here. The writer of Hebrews is not talking about apostasy. The entire context is begins in 5:11 and is dealing with spiritual immaturity. I quoted Charles Ryrie who also confirms that fact. The writer accuses them of needing milk instead of meat, and clinging to elementary principles and urges them to go deeper in the faith. He NEVER says they are abandoning the faith, but that they are stagnate. So, peripiptos in a discussion about spiritual immaturity CANNOT be used to mean apostasy because that doesn't fit the context. So "fall aside" is a better understanding than apostasy in this verse. The problem is that you, like so many, focus on word meaning and ignore word usage which far more important to grasp when handling languages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdemoss Posted December 19, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 59 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,402 Content Per Day: 0.98 Reputation: 2,154 Days Won: 28 Joined: 02/10/2012 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/26/1971 Share Posted December 19, 2015 This word parapipto is a combining form para + pipto. Pipto is found all over the New Testament so that we can very well understand the array of meaning the word can have. Para is equally used many times so that we can also understand the full array of the words usage in scripture. The problem lies in there being an array of meaning. I understand Shiloh point concerning context and have been considering such. The comparisons made through out the whole book of Hebrews are between those the book is written unto and the Israelites of old. Shiloh, my question to you is what do you believe concerning those that fell in the wilderness spoken of earlier in the book. They were said to have fallen due to having an evil heart of unbelief and destroyed by God. Do these still have a place in the kingdom of heaven or is there damnation eternal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Your closest friendnt Posted December 19, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 18 Topic Count: 7 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 7,974 Content Per Day: 2.42 Reputation: 2,790 Days Won: 3 Joined: 06/05/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted December 19, 2015 5 hours ago, gdemoss said: This word parapipto is a combining form para + pipto. Pipto is found all over the New Testament so that we can very well understand the array of meaning the word can have. Para is equally used many times so that we can also understand the full array of the words usage in scripture. The problem lies in there being an array of meaning. I understand Shiloh point concerning context and have been considering such. The comparisons made through out the whole book of Hebrews are between those the book is written unto and the Israelites of old. Shiloh, my question to you is what do you believe concerning those that fell in the wilderness spoken of earlier in the book. They were said to have fallen due to having an evil heart of unbelief and destroyed by God. Do these still have a place in the kingdom of heaven or is there damnation eternal? I am not sure what you are trying to say by mixing the OLD with theNEW. Even if you use the word that is derived from the verb "pipto", "to fall", within a meaning of a race, or a continues action of movement of pressing forwards without let go of the discipline that is associated with this race, and placing the word "para-" before, having "parapipto", in a singular form, and the word "parapesantes" in a plural form. denoting something that has happen along the way, during the running of the race, that's it the participants remaining on the race are less, than when the race started. That does not mean that they are not running any other race, only they are not running this very high standard discipline race. They are still in some other races with the faith of Jesus Christ, but of a different persuasion. Still heirs of the heavenly inheritance. What was the qualifier for participating in this race: For this very specific race, the participants are of the clear understanding that have cut off them selfs from the past, that is their affiliation with their old jewis ways, and have stop judging them selfs and rather having accepted judgement and reproach and isolation from families and the community and their culture who still in the Mosaic tradition. "Parapesantes", In this context is spoken by a man, who had been following the Jewis way, which is based on observation of holidays, and rituals, that includes the Temple ceremonies, and the cleansing regulations, of their culture. (if you want to hear something, and you may attend some Synagogues to find out, "faith" is not a requirement to participating in the Jewis retuals, and be accepted as a member of a certain Synagogue, , only compliance with their rituals, and observances), This man the writer if the scripture has cut off and forsake his Jewis mosaic past, and the Temple worship, and together with others having put their hope and faith of the Rock of The eternal life, Jesus Christ, all you need for everything is in Jesus Christ. "Parapesantes", some participants for varied reasons, they went back to attend and participate in the old cultural celebrations, and continiun in their kosher ways, and participating with their families in the Temple ceremonies. But with Faith in Jesus Christ, not seeking attonment of sins or the life of God, wich can not be departed through the Temple worship, the priest themselfs not having the life God. But by been diplomatic, and not to be expell from their wifes and children and their families and communities, and the commercial, and economic benefit of doing commerce within the Jewis culture, and even avoiding persecusion. Jesus had forseen that, and had said that you must forsake everything and accept to loose everything and follow me, if it comes to that. Jesus did not forebit faith in him, no of course not, Jesus loved the Secrets believers. He said, don't take the light from among themselfs, even if it is under the bed. In societies or situations where is not allowed to be in the open. Don't remove the light from an unbieliving Family, so it may be there to influence in secrecy other members of the family. Parapesantes is not a general term judging to hell, unless someone has forsake and has renounce Jesus Christ as a Savior. No one is Save from Hell with his own righteousness together with Jesus righteousness. But only with Jesus righteousness imputed to them when they believed that Jesus died for our sins, that Jesus saves us from Hell, when we believe in him, but Jesus also extents his love to us by been with us through the Holy Spirit and help us in our life, with everything that we need help with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Your closest friendnt Posted December 20, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 18 Topic Count: 7 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 7,974 Content Per Day: 2.42 Reputation: 2,790 Days Won: 3 Joined: 06/05/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted December 20, 2015 On 19 December, 2015 at 0:14 AM, Kan said: No party except the fallen angels who were, by the way, one with God, and then fell into sin. Brother Kan, Lucifer and some of the Angels, they were created in the heavens. Jonh,in the Gospe of Jonh ch:1, and Paul more than once, are telling us, that the creator of Lucifer and the Angels, and not just the fallen, but all the Angels is not God the Father, but is The one who came out from God the Father, the first one and only one, who came out from the Father, and it was a time that the two of them were the only ones and not anyone else. The one who came out from the Father is also God. The Father did not create anything, withing a specific meaning, that he must have created the environment to bring forth his Son (the word), who is also God, and who created Lucifer, and all the other Angels and later the earth ( including the universe and all the unseen forces, like gravity, electricity, magnetic forces and the like ones. The question you have raised with your statment "Lucifer or any Angel for that matter that they are one with God at the time of coming into been. (their creation). Keep in mind the distiction between God the Father and God the Son, (if we may use this disription to tell who does what), Or (God the creator). Now we come to know that God the creator was the one who was predestine to be the Christ, to enter our world and be like us when he was born in Bethlehem. By now we may say that God, (the Christ to be Created Lucifer and all the Angels first, before he created Man. Because he is the creator of both the Angels and Man, and he is the one who gave both Life, we seek to understand what life he gave them. For the Angels it is easier to understand. First they were created as heavenly beens ( if I may use this word), to be in the heavens and in the presence of their creator the one who gave them life. It is easy to understand that they had the same life as their creator, that the life in them came from the one who created them and he gave them of his life, the same as when he created Man. The must have the same life in them, and be one with him in this matter because they got the life from him, but they are not exactly like him, they are different, they are Angels and he is not. And because their creator is one with God his Father, then all the angels are one with God the Father because of their lineage, the have in them the life of God the Father, which life they got from God, the Christ to be, who when he will be born and enter our world and be like us, but with the life of God the Father within him, he will be call JESUS, EMMANUEL. Every one who was from God the creator, was created also having a righteousness of the one who gave them life, so to be one with God their creator, both the Angels and Man, they must remain in that perfect righteousness to be one with God. God created them in his own Image, with the same righteousness he had. If they disobeyed God they loose both the Life and the righteousness of God. That what happen to Lucifer and some of the Angels, and also the same thing happen to Adam. The one who came from God at the beginning, God himself, the Creator of all things, the Word of God, the Lord God of Abraham and the israelites, also was under the obedience to his Creator the Father, if he disobeyed God the Father of all, whether before or after when he was born as Jesus, he too will loose his righteousness and the life of God and fall, if for exable that happen before he came in the flesh, he will become separated from God and without his life and with a righteousness of disobedience, and if that happen to disobey the Father latter when in the flesh as Jesus, then he too will fall, like the first Adam and be like us when we were in the fallen inheritance. Separated from God. Today as believers in Jesus Christ we have not only the life of God through Jesus Christ, but we also have the righteousness of God through Jesus Christ, by faith in him,(the Christ, the Savior). When we sin Jesus remains righteous, and Holy. When we disobey Jesus remains obedient. As he is, so we are by faith in him. Jesus is our peace with the Fathet. Merry Christmas, and a Happy New Year to you, and to your family. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts