Eternal Salvation – From the Perspective of Life

[Yes, and]

6 hours ago, NConly said:

Covenant as in New Covenant

a written agreement or promise usually under seal between two or more parties especially for the performance of some action

The New Covenant is different from the Old in that it is more like a Will which only goes into effect upon the death of the one who enacted it. The heir of the new covenant is just that. An heir. An heir has no say in the creation of the will or in who is designated as beneficiary. Heb. 8-10 (really, all of Hebrews) lays this out, showing that the work is truly all the work of God through the death of his son on our behalf. Paul (my studies lead me to believe Paul is not the writer to the Hebrews, but of course I could be wrong) uses this same idea in Ephesians.

If someone tries to cherrypick the "problem verses"such as Heb. 10:26-31 to prove a doctrine of insecure salvation, they are pulling those out of context. In that example, vv. 32-39 follow, which temper the severe language, bringing the believing reader back to their faith (or to resting in their faith) which is the writer's main intent.

We are to rest in faith in the work of Christ, not to argue with one another over man-made doctrines, or place a burden on one another to do certain things to ensure our salvations. Eyes front, soldiers.

[NConly]

21 minutes ago, Yes, and said:

The New Covenant is different from the Old in that it is more like a Will which only goes into effect upon the death of the one who enacted it. The heir of the new covenant is just that. An heir. An heir has no say in the creation of the will or in who is designated as beneficiary. Heb. 8-10 (really, all of Hebrews) lays this out, showing that the work is truly all the work of God through the death of his son on our behalf. Paul (my studies lead me to believe Paul is not the writer to the Hebrews, but of course I could be wrong) uses this same idea in Ephesians.

If someone tries to cherrypick the "problem verses"such as Heb. 10:26-31 to prove a doctrine of insecure salvation, they are pulling those out of context. In that example, vv. 32-39 follow, which temper the severe language, bringing the believing reader back to their faith (or to resting in their faith) which is the writer's main intent.

We are to rest in faith in the work of Christ, not to argue with one another over man-made doctrines, or place a burden on one another to do certain things to ensure our salvations. Eyes front, soldiers.

the reason God said in Jere I will make a New Covenant is because it is a Covenant not a will. and I did not cherrypick any verses.

 

[Mike Mclees]

12 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

If true, there has to be a verse that says this.  Please provide.

If true, there has to be a verse that says this.  Please provide.

If there are no verses that say these things, they are just opinions and contrary to the Bible.

The idea of continuing faith in order to be saved is refuted clearly by these 2 verses:

John 3:18 -  Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.

2 Thess 2:12 - and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.

Do you know what "have not believed" means?  It means "have NEVER believed".

That is who will be condemned.  Those who never believed.

Consider the second soil, who "believed for a while, and in time of temptation, fell away".  Did he ever believe?  Yes.  So he won't be condemned.

I know who your two verses are speaking to and what do they have to do with OSAS? They are people who have heard the Gospel and never received it. This is an example of how you twist scripture. You need to address those who were believers but fell away as in 2nd Thess 2: 3-4. the great falling away. Can you say they are still saved? !!

Edited August 27, 2023 by Mike Mclees

[Yes, and]

1 hour ago, NConly said:

the reason God said in Jere I will make a New Covenant is because it is a Covenant not a will. and I did not cherrypick any verses.

 

Relax. I wasn't referring to you. If I was I would have said you were. Of course the language of the OT says "New Covenant," but from the perspective of the writer to the Hebrews (who quotes heavily from the OT to press his (or her!*) points), the New Covenant is for all intents and purposes a will ("Last Will and (New) Testament"). This is why the term "inheritance," the idea of inheritance, is used in the NT. A child does not make himself or herself a child. He or she just is, and the parents bequeath their riches to the child. The child has absolutely no say in this. Nor did, for that matter, the Hebrews. God could have chosen anyone or any race to be his people. He chose them. They did not choose him.

*I threw that in there just to get a rise out of some folks. Yes, some commentators suggest the possibility a woman wrote this letter.

[Vine Abider]

1 hour ago, Mike Mclees said:

I know who your two verses are speaking to and what do they have to do with OSAS? They are people who have heard the Gospel and never received it. This is an example of how you twist scripture. You need to address those who were believers but fell away as in 2nd Thess 2: 3-4. the great falling away. Can you say they are still saved? !!

If they are born-again with His life in them, those in 2 Thess 2:3-4 will be disciplined, but not lost (which is the 3rd option).

(BTW NOTE TO ALL - let's stop accusing others of "cherry-picking" verses. This does little to promote effective fellowship in love for our fellow believers!)

[Mr. M]

15 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

Yes He did.  But please tell me what you heard Him say in each verse.

17 hours ago, Mr. M said:

He said that they must hear His Voice to know Him.

John 5:

24 “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life.

Not in v.24 He didn't.  No mention of knowing Him.  But, believing, yes.  "whoever believes HAS eternal life".  Did you hear that?

17 hours ago, Mr. M said:

25 Most assuredly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear will live.

This verse is about the resurrection, not about believing and possessing eternal life.

Here is where you are most in error...you refuse to acknowledge context because you cannot. The giveaway is in bold below.

25 Most assuredly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear will live. 

Do you hear that? "and now is! This is being born again, passing from death to life NOW, after conversion passing from death to life. When? Just as it is written "the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God".

Now here is where He connects to the resurrection and judgment...

28 Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice 

29 and come forth—those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation.

In the first statement, the spiritually dead are born again. What do you think He meant when He said "let the dead bury the dead"? I started recognizing and hearing the Lord's Voice clearly about 35 years ago, and now I converse with Him throughout every day. In fact, I have come to understand the true purpose of the Scriptures, they are topics of discussion with the Lord, to grow in the knowledge of Him. When one is hearing His Voice, they do not spend much time debating these doctrines of men. This is the judgment...

John 5:37 And the Father Himself, who sent Me, has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form.

"Nor seen His form" eidos [G1491] This refers to "the light of His contenance".

Luke 9:29 As He prayed, the appearance of His face was altered, and His robe became white and glistening. 

Now I will indulge the question you keep asking, "what scriptures say you can lose your salvation". I never answered because the question is totally illogical! Why would the apostolic doctrine teach you how to get lost? How to lose salvation? Full disclosure, here's how to lose it, if you desire.  For anyone not interested in working out their salvation in fear in trembling, the way is easy, and clear...remain in disobedience.

Colossians 3:5 Therefore put to death your members which are on the earth: fornication, uncleanness, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. 6 Because of these things the wrath of God is coming upon the sons of disobedience.

The testimony of the scriptures is clear, to access this eternal life, you must die!

Romans 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service. 2 And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.

If someone wants to forfeit their salvation? Hook up! Take a lover! Live in fornication and find out what the future holds. Indulge in this world's idolatry.  One thing is certain, there will be no access to the tree of life.

Revelation 22:

14 Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city. 

15 But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie.

Edited August 27, 2023 by Mr. M

[Mr. M]

48 minutes ago, Vine Abider said:

If they are born-again with His life in them, those in 2 Thess 2:3-4 will be disciplined, but not lost (which is the 3rd option).

(BTW NOTE TO ALL - let's stop accusing others of "cherry-picking" verses. This does little to promote effective fellowship in love for our fellow believers!)

Doctrines of men do not come simply from cherry picking verses, but isolating topics for discussion, separating them from the full testimony of the apostolic doctrine. I was unfamiliar terms like "soteriology, hamartology, eschatology" before I came to on line forums four years ago. I have never been a theologian, but one who has pursued a relationship by diligently seeking His presence in my life. Can you really separate salvation from reconciliation, justification, sanctification, glorification? This has done profound damage. Many even quote "line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little, there a little" as if this is the Way. This is error!

Isaiah 28:13 But the word of the Lord was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.

As to the notion that all are disciplined, but not lost, you may as well embrace UR if you think there is not eternal consequences for rejecting that chastisement. 

Hebrews 12:

7 If you endure chastening, God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom a father does not chasten? 

8 But if you are without chastening, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate and not sons. 

Is this really negotiable? Count me out!

Hebrews 5:

8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience

by the things which he suffered;

9 And being made perfect, he became the author of

eternal salvation unto all them that obey Him;

The modern church has perfected the "easy way".

Have I suffered in vain all these years? NO WAY!

Acts 14:22 Confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.

Many are far from it, because...

Matthew 7:

13 “Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. 

14 Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.

[Yes, and]

34 minutes ago, Mr. M said:

Here is where you are most in error...you refuse to acknowledge context because you cannot. The giveaway is in bold below.

 

41 minutes ago, Vine Abider said:

(BTW NOTE TO ALL - let's stop accusing others of "cherry-picking" verses. This does little to promote effective fellowship in love for our fellow believers!)

Almost this entire thread is rife (or maybe ripe?) with cherry-picking. Any time someone accuses another of ignoring context they are accusing that person of cherry-picking, it comes from both sides of this particular argument, and continues to be a manifestation of what I spoke about in my Going Meta post. I (admittedly) dived into the sandbox here (but note my response to @NConly clarifying that I was not saying he was cherry-picking).

Now some responded to my "Meta" post suggesting it was worthwhile to get into these online arguments, debates—or whatever you want to call them. This was my impetus to add something here.

At this point I don't buy it. Unless someone—anyone—who sits by and reads this stuff (who has not posted anything here) and is willing to testify that some word in here encouraged them in their faith (anyone?) I can find absolutely no worth to this. And by "encouraged" I am not talking about the echo chamber/confirmation bias effect wherein someone says what I already believe. No, I mean being built up to a deeper level of faith, or perhaps brought to a repentance or a "transforming by the renewing of one's mind." Quoting myself from "Going Meta":

"So, I absolutely agree that one must engage, and one never knows what word dropped might have an eternal effect. But 'wrangling about words' also has an effect. Paul calls this useless and leads to the ruin of the hearers. That is a pretty severe effect. And, right now, as I write this, I have to be careful to not go down that path! In my mind, just writing stuff, with no personal face-to-face encounters and opportunities to love and serve by actions rather than words, can be dangerous ground."

I wonder whether some (not all!) of you folks who have participated in this thread, from either side (or a third, as @Vine Abider suggests), who clearly have written things in an acrimonious and sanctimonious tone (they absolutely drip with it) could actually sit down around a dinner table with your opponent without wanting to punch them in the nose? 

Truly, this stuff grieves me.

[Your closest friendnt]

14 minutes ago, Mr. M said:

Doctrines of men do not come simply from cherry picking verses, but isolating topics for discussion, separating them from the full testimony of the apostolic doctrine. I was unfamiliar terms like "soteriology, hamartology, eschatology" before I came to on line forums four years ago. I have never been a theologian, but one who has pursued a relationship by diligently seeking His presence in my life. Can you really separate salvation from reconciliation, justification, sanctification, glorification? This has done profound damage. Many even quote "line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little, there a little" as if this is the Way. This is error!

Isaiah 28:13 But the word of the Lord was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.

As to the notion that all are disciplined, but not lost, you may as well embrace UR if you think there is not eternal consequences for rejecting that chastisement. 

Hebrews 12:

7 If you endure chastening, God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom a father does not chasten? 

8 But if you are without chastening, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate and not sons. 

Is this really negotiable? Count me out!

Hebrews 5:

8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience

by the things which he suffered;

9 And being made perfect, he became the author of

eternal salvation unto all them that obey Him;

The modern church has perfected the "easy way".

Have I suffered in vain all these years? NO WAY!

Acts 14:22 Confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.

Many are far from it, because...

Matthew 7:

13 “Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. 

14 Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.

What is Salvation? Why someone would want to be Saved? 

Why anyone would say to someone else believe in Jesus Christ to be Saved.

To make it more clear what  the Macedonian man wanted to be saved from when he asked Paul "What can I do to be Saved ". 

Why Paul understood him and he told him "believe in Jesus Christ". 

How Paul knew what the Macedonian man wanted to be saved from? 

 

 

[Mr. M]

22 minutes ago, Yes, and said:

Truly, this stuff grieves me.

And yet, the discussion continues. Will you also cherry pick

quotes from my response?

1 hour ago, Mr. M said:

Doctrines of men do not come simply from cherry picking verses, but isolating topics for discussion, separating them from the full testimony of the apostolic doctrine. I was unfamiliar terms like "soteriology, hamartology, eschatology" before I came to on line forums four years ago. I have never been a theologian, but one who has pursued a relationship by diligently seeking His presence in my life. Can you really separate salvation from reconciliation, justification, sanctification, glorification? This has done profound damage. Many even quote "line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little, there a little" as if this is the Way. This is error!

Isaiah 28:13 But the word of the Lord was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.

Of course, there was so much more in the posting...with plenty

of edification, if you can receive it.

Edited August 27, 2023 by Mr. M