For Those Who Deny Eternal Security

[Jason0047]

IMO, the bible does not teach stringent perfectionism. That’s why John 1:9 allows the sinner (saved by grace) to seek forgiveness when there’s been backsliding. J- seems to take scripture close to “stringent perfectionism” (which might not quite be what Jesus had in mind when he said on the cross, “Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.”)

There was certainly forgiveness. The first christians and missionaries to the Gentiles were Jewish.

However, on the whole, Israel has had a rough time of it for the last 2000 years, as they seem to have been driven from pillar to post in most Gentile nations, except the US. Now there’s growing animosity in the US, with many calling them Khazars instead of Jewish. Much of the reason might be how they seem to be able to siphon the wealth of the countries they’ve been to.

After Jesus had healed a crippled man at the pool of Bethesda, he said to the man, John 5:14

[SUP]14[/SUP]Afterward Jesus findeth him in the temple, and said unto him, Behold, thou art made whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee.

Better to stay on the safe side of obedience, but not “stringent perfectionism.” Israel might be an example. (Romans 11)

Well, I don't believe a saint always stops sinning over night or even in a year or so. That is why 1 John 1:9 is there. But 1 Peter 4:1 says the believer can cease from sin. Galatians 5:24 says they that are Christ's have crucified the affections and lusts. Jesus told the woman caught in act of adultery to sin no more. If a believer could not stop sinning, then Jesus would have lied to this woman. For why tell someone to do something that they cannot possibly accomplish?

 

[Jason0047]

And you aren't focusing on only that portion of Scripture that you prefer?

For it is the one who rejects Jesus that does not receive his words . . . . He that rejects me . . . rejects (does not receive) my words.

Sorry. Your not making any sense. Both are true. Rejecting Jesus and not receiving his words are both equally true. It is not one or the other.

 

[Angela53510]

Well, I don't believe a saint always stops sinning over night or even in a year or so. That is why 1 John 1:9 is there. But 1 Peter 4:1 says the believer can cease from sin. Galatians 5:24 says they that are Christ's have crucified the affections and lusts. Jesus told the woman caught in act of adultery to sin no more. If a believer could not stop sinning, then Jesus would have lied to this woman. For why tell someone to do something that they cannot possibly accomplish?

Sadly for you, the text about the woman caught in adultery was not in the original text. So please don't use it to proof text how not sinning or being perfect is possible.

It gets really weary reading the same verses pulled out of context, or actually not being in the original writings. Find another verse or passage to prove your point. That one will not do.

 

[notuptome]

IMO, the bible does not teach stringent perfectionism. That’s why John 1:9 allows the sinner (saved by grace) to seek forgiveness when there’s been backsliding. J- seems to take scripture close to “stringent perfectionism” (which might not quite be what Jesus had in mind when he said on the cross, “Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.”)

There was certainly forgiveness. The first christians and missionaries to the Gentiles were Jewish.

However, on the whole, Israel has had a rough time of it for the last 2000 years, as they seem to have been driven from pillar to post in most Gentile nations, except the US. Now there’s growing animosity in the US, with many calling them Khazars instead of Jewish. Much of the reason might be how they seem to be able to siphon the wealth of the countries they’ve been to.

After Jesus had healed a crippled man at the pool of Bethesda, he said to the man, John 5:14

[SUP]14[/SUP]Afterward Jesus findeth him in the temple, and said unto him, Behold, thou art made whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee.

Better to stay on the safe side of obedience, but not “stringent perfectionism.” Israel might be an example. (Romans 11)

There is nothing wrong with striving to be holy but the teaching of loss of salvation when one fails to achieve an undefined mark is just wrong.

Some of the seed sown springs to life only to perish because of no depth of root. Not all grows to produce an hundred fold.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Angela53510]

Sorry. Your not making any sense. Both are true. Rejecting Jesus and not receiving his words are both equally true. It is not one or the other.

I disagree with you totally! Besides being joined by the coordinate conjunction kai or and, and meaning that they are both of equal value, it is evident all through the Bible that receiving Jesus means receiving his Word, because he IS the living Word.

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.2 He was in the beginning with God.3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.4 In him was life,and the life was the light of men.5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it." John 1:1-4

I have seen you make this error before - dividing the Word of God, from the Word. Which makes me wonder if this lack of understanding of the Biblical text is another thing that is driving your bad theology?

 

[peacefulbeliever]

Sorry. Your not making any sense. Both are true. Rejecting Jesus and not receiving his words are both equally true. It is not one or the other.

Well . . . I consider that I did make sense - I did not say it was one or the other - are you having trouble comprehending?

If someone rejects Jesus then they have rejected his words . . . when someone accepts Jesus they accept his words. Now, because I may still have faults and failures in my life that I am having trouble with doesn't mean that I have rejected Jesus and his words. That is where you are wrong.

Jason, someone who rejects Jesus is an unbeliever . . . so of course, they also reject his words.

 

[Jason0047]

Sadly for you, the text about the woman caught in adultery was not in the original text. So please don't use it to proof text how not sinning or being perfect is possible.

It gets really weary reading the same verses pulled out of context, or actually not being in the original writings. Find another verse or passage to prove your point. That one will not do.

What? You do not speak or write Greek like the apostles did. Nobody today can do that. Unless you can talk with Paul personally. We can only have an idea of what it says based on our own language today. You did not repent hearing the Greek; And displayed power in Acts 2 that He has no problem translating so that people can have the understanding.

 

[Jason0047]

What? You do not speak or write Greek like the apostles did. Nobody today can do that. Unless you can talk with Paul personally. We can only have an idea of what it says based on our own language today. You did not repent hearing the Greek; And displayed power in Acts 2 that He has no problem translating so that people can have the understanding.

Edit:

Meant to say "God displayed power in Acts 2."

 

[Jason0047]

Well . . . I consider that I did make sense - I did not say it was one or the other - are you having trouble comprehending?

If someone rejects Jesus then they have rejected his words . . . when someone accepts Jesus they accept his words. Now, because I may still have faults and failures in my life that I am having trouble with doesn't mean that I have rejected Jesus and his words. That is where you are wrong.

Jason, someone who rejects Jesus is an unbeliever . . . so of course, they also reject his words.

No. There are people who believe in a false Christ. For example, do you believe the Catholic's version of Jesus is the same as Christ described in the Bible? But this cannot be the same Jesus because their Jesus allows for one to worship idols; And the OSAS proponent believes Jesus allows them to sin and still be saved (Which is not the same Jesus described in the Bible).

 

[Jason0047]

I disagree with you totally! Besides being joined by the coordinate conjunction kai or and, and meaning that they are both of equal value, it is evident all through the Bible that receiving Jesus means receiving his Word, because he IS the living Word.

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.2 He was in the beginning with God.3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.4 In him was life,and the life was the light of men.5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it." John 1:1-4

I have seen you make this error before - dividing the Word of God, from the Word. Which makes me wonder if this lack of understanding of the Biblical text is another thing that is driving your bad theology?

Jesus was not literal words who was transformed into a person. If that is what you are proposing, then that is utter nonsense because Jesus is the second person of the Godhead who is eternal and uncreated. There is a difference between the Living Word and the Written Word. But both are inseparable from one another. Think of the Written Word as a love letter and the Living Word as the writer.

 

[Gr8grace]

Sadly for you, the text about the woman caught in adultery was not in the original text. So please don't use it to proof text how not sinning or being perfect is possible.

It gets really weary reading the same verses pulled out of context, or actually not being in the original writings. Find another verse or passage to prove your point. That one will not do.

I see a little humor in God letting some of this false stuff into our translations..........If we study, we will find out. If we want our pet doctrines........


But the woman caught in adultery story.............It is in no way in the originals, and has human view point all the way through it. It is pretty easy to reject and rest easy at night. It does not follow grace.

 

[BradC]

Well, I don't believe a saint always stops sinning over night or even in a year or so. That is why 1 John 1:9 is there. But 1 Peter 4:1 says the believer can cease from sin. Galatians 5:24 says they that are Christ's have crucified the affections and lusts. Jesus told the woman caught in act of adultery to sin no more. If a believer could not stop sinning, then Jesus would have lied to this woman. For why tell someone to do something that they cannot possibly accomplish?

You really think that this woman had the capacity to sin no more? Just like that she was going to stop not just her adultery but all sin. It was a weakness she had in this area of adultery as a woman. It dominated her life. She needed to know that she would not be condemned for her sin, that she was free from her accusers and that she could go in the Grace of the Lord Jesus Christ without being condemned by the law. She had never experienced the Grace that she had received from the Lord.

 

[Jason0047]

You really think that this woman had the capacity to sin no more? Just like that she was going to stop not just her adultery but all sin. It was a weakness she had in this area of adultery as a woman. It dominated her life. She needed to know that she would not be condemned for her sin, that she was free from her accusers and that she could go in the Grace of the Lord Jesus Christ without being condemned by the law. She had never experienced the Grace that she had received from the Lord.

It doesn't matter what I think. It matters what the Word says. Jesus would have been lying if he did not mean what He said.

 

[Angela53510]

What? You do not speak or write Greek like the apostles did. Nobody today can do that. Unless you can talk with Paul personally. We can only have an idea of what it says based on our own language today. You did not repent hearing the Greek; And displayed power in Acts 2 that He has no problem translating so that people can have the understanding.

Your ignorance of languages is showing!! If you had any background in grammar and English, you would understand what I was saying.

Kai means "and/even/also/namely." After a while, when you have been reading Greek, you begin to know which English word to substitute for the Greek word. But whichever English word you use, it is always a coordinate conjunction. That means "joins two things of equal value." The other kind of conjunction is a subordinate conjunction, meaning it joins two things and usually the second one is of lesser value, in English, in Greek they have different endings for the words, so sentence order does not matter.

In English, AND is a coordinate conjunction. That means it joins two words, clauses of equal value. In this case, it joins receive and believe. (I have forgotten the original passage, or maybe the reference was never posted)

So in English, Greek, French, German, Spanish which I speak or have studied, AND always joins two things of equal value when in a sentence. It is the same in all western languages.

In English, an example of a subordinate conjunction would be BUT. When you have the word BUT or de in Greek, you know that the word or clause following it is dependent upon the other.

You think you have solved the mysteries of the Bible, yet you do not even understand the basics of English.

And I was saved when God reminded me of John 3:16 which I had learned as a child in Sunday School. So no, you do not need Greek to be saved. But if you want to argue relentlessly on soteriology, I would suggest you brush up a bit on grammar, so you won't have to be embarrassed that you haven't a clue what you are talking about!

 

[BradC]

It doesn't matter what I think. It matters what the Word says. Jesus would have been lying if he did not mean what He said.

Did the Lord tell you to go and sin no more? If this woman went and sinned again would the Lord have condemned her according to your doctrine or would he have given her Grace? The Lord had not gone to the cross yet nor had he shed his blood, yet he did not condemn the woman according to the law.

 

[Stephen63]

Before the latest discoveries of older manuscripts, other scripts held that title, & they were judged as "correct"..... and so on & so on. Every time older ones are found, they are automatically the "right" ones. Am I the only one that thinks that is just stupid?

Imagine if an older set is found every 6 months..... see how ridiculous that would be?

IMO, the sets that agree the most would be the likely "correct" ones..... with exception to the RCC versions.

 

[dcontroversal]

It doesn't matter what I think.

Finally some truth from you........

 

[Jason0047]

I see a little humor in God letting some of this false stuff into our translations..........If we study, we will find out. If we want our pet doctrines........


But the woman caught in adultery story.............It is in no way in the originals, and has human view point all the way through it. It is pretty easy to reject and rest easy at night. It does not follow grace.

So when the Word disagrees with what you say you look to a language that you do not know how to speak or write fluently? I remember trying to study Brazilian Portuguese. I thought I had a handle on the language from studying the books and CD's. But I was wrong. My fiancé kept correcting me.

 

[Stephen63]

People who deny eternal security are actually saying Jesus died only for those who are perfect.

Talk about an oxymoron.

Where did you come up with that? HOW DARE YOU come in here & judge every person who doesn't believe in eternal security to believe only in perfectionism & not grace? Which one of us did you sit down with & had a long discussion about our beliefs?

Those who judge largely will be largely judged.

You can't understand an oxymoron..... it's three letters too much for you.

 

[Jason0047]

Your ignorance of languages is showing!! If you had any background in grammar and English, you would understand what I was saying.

Kai means "and/even/also/namely." After a while, when you have been reading Greek, you begin to know which English word to substitute for the Greek word. But whichever English word you use, it is always a coordinate conjunction. That means "joins two things of equal value." The other kind of conjunction is a subordinate conjunction, meaning it joins two things and usually the second one is of lesser value, in English, in Greek they have different endings for the words, so sentence order does not matter.

In English, AND is a coordinate conjunction. That means it joins two words, clauses of equal value. In this case, it joins receive and believe. (I have forgotten the original passage, or maybe the reference was never posted)

So in English, Greek, French, German, Spanish which I speak or have studied, AND always joins two things of equal value when in a sentence. It is the same in all western languages.

In English, an example of a subordinate conjunction would be BUT. When you have the word BUT or de in Greek, you know that the word or clause following it is dependent upon the other.

You think you have solved the mysteries of the Bible, yet you do not even understand the basics of English.

And I was saved when God reminded me of John 3:16 which I had learned as a child in Sunday School. So no, you do not need Greek to be saved. But if you want to argue relentlessly on soteriology, I would suggest you brush up a bit on grammar, so you won't have to be embarrassed that you haven't a clue what you are talking about!

Again, Biblical Greek is a dead language. And not all scholars agree with one another. So you are talking gibberish. You didn't grow up during Biblical times writing and speaking this language.