Two useless/inappropriate/wrong accusations

[Chester]

This is from Jimmy Swaggart Ministries "The Expositor's Study Bible"

Does that make it different (and more authoritative) from someone else's (my?!) interpretation?
Or is it equal to Scripture because it is in the "Expositor's Study Bible"?

 

[PeterJens]

What Game peter?

I and a few others told you what we believed, And you said we were lyers and being dishonest.

You do it to yourself.. You need to start looking inside, And stop attacking everyone who does not agree with you.

Now this is another joke. You spent months saying I did not know what you believed,
and you never actually spelt it out. Now you are saying you told me.

This is why I cannot believe anything you say, because it is not consistent.
And it is you who attacked me and said because I said God sees something of value
in a sinner, I believed in salvation by works.

It demonstrates again how you provoke and distort simple points into something
else. I know this game, and only those who do not know Christ find value in these
tactics. But it does not matter, because I know I cannot help you or anything I share
which I always do from a sincere honest heart. God bless you.

 

[PeterJens]

I cannot talk to you when you act this way, peter

Stunned - I understand your point. I have lost any confidence in the people you are trying to
understand, and they literally refuse to look at things from another point of view.

So I know where they are and what they are doing.

I have met this before, holding a mirage faith, disjointed positions which in isolation appear
sensible, but when brought together fail. It is why over time more and more people are
pulling their position apart and seeing the glory of Christ as it really is, in victory and purity.

The thing about the cross, is when you see Jesus and the cross it changes you, everyday.
And it is here I rejoice, and I encourage everyone to dwell here and learn from our Lord,
listen to His words and walk in His ways. Only then will the Kingdom of God truly dwell
in your heart.

And that is all I have. I would say I follow the tradition of Bunyon and pilgrimes progress,
and the struggles of sanctification and motivation in the things of God.

But His sheep know of what I speak, and that will always be enough, Halleluyah, for the
Lamb is worthy of eternal glory and honour forever, Amen

 

[Chester]

please tell. How did I add? I just took the word literally.

Ah! EG - I about lost it over this post - I laughed and laughed and roared!

I assumed at first your post was total joking!?

But then I looked again and thought maybe you were being serious when you said "I just took the word literally"!

Now, I don't know - I really, really, really, really am utterly confused?!!

Let me try to explain - hope I make sense - This goes back to post #122

Here is what MessageoftheCross wrote:

"Originally Posted by MessageOfTheCross Scripture meaning:
If we believe not (believe what He did at the Cross), yet He abides Faithful (despite the unbelief of many, He will be Faithful to Redeem all who come to Him in Faith): He cannot deny Himself. (Heaven will never change the Plan of Redemption and Victory, which is the Cross.) 2 Timothy 2:13"

Here was your response:

"1. You added to the word. Naughty Naughty

2. Just take him literally. Why try to add anything.

If we are faithless (we lack faith) he is faithful He can not deny himself (he promised eternal life to all who hear the word of truth, and call out to him to be saved, He will keep his word. even when we lose faith. because to take his gift back would be to deny his own word. "



You made a fuss about MessageoftheCross adding to the text (and he does clearly show his additions in red), and then you turn around and add in your own (or someone else's) interpretations to the text. I guess you think yours is the literal interpretation and his is his own ideas. !!!!!!!! To me, it is as clear as day! His is the literal interpretation and yours is just your idea! (Just kidding - though not really - that is how I see it - really!, really!, really!) (Actually I would not call his a "literal" interpretation either - it his idea of what the text means!)

I don't want to argue the verse, here -- I am just trying to convince you that not everyone sees it the way you do!

The text reads - "If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful, he cannot deny himself" -- Your "literal" version has all kinds of ideas and presuppositions brought in from your larger understanding of Scripture. We all do it - I know - and we have to do to interpret Scripture. MessageoftheCross did the same with his "interpretation" --

You wind up with different interpretations of the verse because of different presuppositions.

Am I making sense? I am not trying to convince you your interpretation is wrong -- I am just trying to convince you that when I looked at your "literal" interpretation I laughed so hard I about lost it!

 

[PinkDiamond]

If you fail to surrender any part of your life to Jesus after conversion, would you be denying him in any way?

The fact you have to resort to the use of foolish language to prove a point kind of is telling as well....

It is unfortunate there is so much confusion in this thread. I followed all your posts from the beginning of this thread and I thought you explained your position very well. I'm not sure if others don't understand your definition of submission to Christ or just don't agree with the concept. I agree with you that submission is not optional. I know from the posts of yours that I have read in other threads that you aren't saying we don't sin or struggle after conversion. Submission does not equal sinless perfection or good works. I don't want to add to the confusion, but I thought I'd add my view on what submission is. I think that a person during conversion places total faith in Christ and commits their entire life, aspirations, hopes, dreams etc into God's hands. If a person is conscious of holding back any area of their life and trying to retain some form of control they are in unbelief. To have faith in Christ and confess him as Lord requires that we trust in his goodness and mercy. I'm constantly amazed by all the reasons people give for holding onto control of some area of their life. Almost every time, the resistance stems from unbelief. They have a fear that if they hand over control of their life to God that he will somehow ruin their life or command them to live a ridiculous and embarrassing lifestyle. In reality, submission to God should be the most natural thing for those that believe he is their saviour. If God wanted to ruin our lives, he doesn't need our permission, haha

Surrendering your life completely to Christ doesn't mean that you never struggle with sins or even a specific sin. It does however mean that you have given up control of your life completely and are looking to him to mold you and guide you. I do agree with you that those who are not conscious of having surrendered their life to God in every area haven't been converted. Since we are justified by faith, that implies we need to trust God and turn over the reigns of our life to him.

 

[PeterJens]

as I have said a few times now.. This conversation is not new, you are just new to it. So you may see it differently.

Peter has been shown grace and given grace by so many people. Yet he does the same thing.

I say I believe this,

Peters response is, No, you (meaning I) do not know what your talking about.

it is the same every time, We tell peter. No peter that is not what we are saying, Peters response is we are lying about our own belief.

And yes THAT IS NOT ONLY EVIL, BUT WRONG.

and peter will continue to get called out on it.

but hey, if you want to try to help him, AMEN! maybe you can do what no one else has been able to do yet.. And I will pray you can. because it is peter that matters, not me.

Let me say one point about the above, it is not saying the content of the actual
issue, it is just slander and lying.

I used to accept this type of approach and believe there was miss-understanding, but
it is only done to create anger in the target, so they loose it. But that is the joke.
In christ we are not moved, we still love, we still walk, we still stay faithful.

And the reality is they stir up so much over nothing. It has never stopped from the
first interaction, because they do this so often, to so many, you get used to it, lol.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Now this is another joke. You spent months saying I did not know what you believed,
and you never actually spelt it out. Now you are saying you told me.

This is why I cannot believe anything you say, because it is not consistent.
And it is you who attacked me and said because I said God sees something of value
in a sinner, I believed in salvation by works.

It demonstrates again how you provoke and distort simple points into something
else. I know this game, and only those who do not know Christ find value in these
tactics. But it does not matter, because I know I cannot help you or anything I share
which I always do from a sincere honest heart. God bless you.

see. Same old nonsense, He still does not know what I believe, Yet he just earlier said he did know what I believed. And when he was confronted about it he again attacked.

News flash.

If peter says I believe 2 * 2 - 6, and I try to correct him, and say no Peter. I believe 2 * 2 - 4. Peter has no right to come and say no EG, You believe 2 * 2 = 6. you are a liar. (which is basically going on and has been for months, not just to me, BUT MANY A CC MEMBER..

that is slander, and that is playing God. that is saying YOU KNOW WHAT OTHERS THINK, no matter what.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Ah! EG - I about lost it over this post - I laughed and laughed and roared!

I assumed at first your post was total joking!?

But then I looked again and thought maybe you were being serious when you said "I just took the word literally"!

Now, I don't know - I really, really, really, really am utterly confused?!!

Let me try to explain - hope I make sense - This goes back to post #122

Here is what MessageoftheCross wrote:

"Originally Posted by MessageOfTheCross Scripture meaning:
If we believe not (believe what He did at the Cross), yet He abides Faithful (despite the unbelief of many, He will be Faithful to Redeem all who come to Him in Faith): He cannot deny Himself. (Heaven will never change the Plan of Redemption and Victory, which is the Cross.) 2 Timothy 2:13"

Let me help you. Look at the words I highlighted.. To believe this is to add to the word.

to explain,

1. He said, "unbelief of many,

That is not in the text. The text states, if we (all) are faithless. He is faithfull. There is nothing that can be seen from these two phrases to even come to the conclusion or thought that "many" may lose faith.. The passage is talking about if ALL lose faith. so saying many changes the meaning of the text. And is adding to the word.

2. He said all who come to Him in Faith

where do you get this from the phrase (he is faithful? There is nothing in the text which would even hint that this is what is being spoken of.

Take him literally. "He is faithful" period. anything else is adding to the word.

3. He said, "Heaven will never change the Plan of Redemption and Victory, which is the Cross", first off. He said heaven.. The text says he (Christ) heaven has nothing to do with it So he changed the word " He, an made it mean "It" (heaven) this to change the wording, or is adding to the word.

ie. "

Here was your response:

"1. You added to the word. Naughty Naughty

2. Just take him literally. Why try to add anything.

If we are faithless (we lack faith) he is faithful He can not deny himself (he promised eternal life to all who hear the word of truth, and call out to him to be saved, He will keep his word. even when we lose faith. because to take his gift back would be to deny his own word. "



You made a fuss about MessageoftheCross adding to the text (and he does clearly show his additions in red), and then you turn around and add in your own (or someone else's) interpretations to the text. I guess you think yours is the literal interpretation and his is his own ideas. !!!!!!!! To me, it is as clear as day! His is the literal interpretation and yours is just your idea! (Just kidding - though not really - that is how I see it - really!, really!, really!) (Actually I would not call his a "literal" interpretation either - it his idea of what the text means!)

I don't want to argue the verse, here -- I am just trying to convince you that not everyone sees it the way you do!

The text reads - "If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful, he cannot deny himself" -- Your "literal" version has all kinds of ideas and presuppositions brought in from your larger understanding of Scripture. We all do it - I know - and we have to do to interpret Scripture. MessageoftheCross did the same with his "interpretation" --

You wind up with different interpretations of the verse because of different presuppositions.

Am I making sense? I am not trying to convince you your interpretation is wrong -- I am just trying to convince you that when I looked at your "literal" interpretation I laughed so hard I about lost it!

1. When you make a promise, to go back on that promise is to deny yourself. That is not adding anything.
2. He changed the meaning of words, and actually changed words.. Yes, that is not something we should look to.
3. I did not add to the word. I said what it said, take it literally. If we (ANYONE) lose faith. He is faithful. He can not deny himself (ie go back on his word.. which is a literal interpretation)

 

[PennEd]

It is unfortunate there is so much confusion in this thread. I followed all your posts from the beginning of this thread and I thought you explained your position very well. I'm not sure if others don't understand your definition of submission to Christ or just don't agree with the concept. I agree with you that submission is not optional. I know from the posts of yours that I have read in other threads that you aren't saying we don't sin or struggle after conversion. Submission does not equal sinless perfection or good works. I don't want to add to the confusion, but I thought I'd add my view on what submission is. I think that a person during conversion places total faith in Christ and commits their entire life, aspirations, hopes, dreams etc into God's hands. If a person is conscious of holding back any area of their life and trying to retain some form of control they are in unbelief. To have faith in Christ and confess him as Lord requires that we trust in his goodness and mercy. I'm constantly amazed by all the reasons people give for holding onto control of some area of their life. Almost every time, the resistance stems from unbelief. They have a fear that if they hand over control of their life to God that he will somehow ruin their life or command them to live a ridiculous and embarrassing lifestyle. In reality, submission to God should be the most natural thing for those that believe he is their saviour. If God wanted to ruin our lives, he doesn't need our permission, haha

Surrendering your life completely to Christ doesn't mean that you never struggle with sins or even a specific sin. It does however mean that you have given up control of your life completely and are looking to him to mold you and guide you. I do agree with you that those who are not conscious of having surrendered their life to God in every area haven't been converted. Since we are justified by faith, that implies we need to trust God and turn over the reigns of our life to him.

Gosh, I enter this discussion with apprehension. I DESPISE seeing the body of Christ hurt one another, and I hope I don't become a culprit here.

I'm having trouble seeing the difference between sinning and failing to give your WHOLE self to Jesus.

We all acknowledge that we continue to sin. So by definition we haven't given Everything to Him or else we wouldn't sin.

I'm strictly speaking of SALVATION here. I believe Jesus saves, the Holy Spirit then works in us to conform us to be more and more Christ like.

The hall of faith in Hebrews 11 is full of people that didn't fully trust God at times. Just look at Abraham. He lied to Pharoah because he didn't trust God. Sarah laughed when told she would have a baby. Yet Hebrews 11 records her as being faithful about it!
Then there's Peter and His denials and later hypocrisy with Paul.

So I would say that none of us have given ALL trust to the Lord.

But please take my peace, and Love. We just differ on this.

 

[Chester]

it is the same every time, We tell peter. No peter that is not what we are saying, Peters response is we are lying about our own belief.

And yes THAT IS NOT ONLY EVIL, BUT WRONG.

In response to this "Peter issue" - I hear what you all are saying - and Peter - I do concur that you need to be a bit more gentlemanly in the fight! -


But let me say one thing - to EG - and to others -

I have sometimes experienced the same sort of response from you as you say Peter is giving to you - I could change the above line you wrote to Peter to - "I (Chester) tell EG - 'No EG that is not what I am saying, EG's response is that I am lying about my own belief"

How? Let's try it!

I say - "I am saved by grace through faith and I believe I stay saved by grace through faith. I am not saved by works and I do not stay saved by works. I do not earn initial salvation and I do not keep salvation by earning it. Salvation is completely a gift from God. As long as I have faith in God I am saved. If I no longer have faith in God, I am not saved. I believe that salvation can be lost."

Now what you would like to tell me EG, is that I can't believe the above - it is not possible - hence I am lying about what I believe, I really believe in a works religion. (In reality, a works religion is horrific to me - it makes me gag, croak, throw up, and get quite angry! -- some in my circles would like to throw me out I am so radical!)

Now listen, to your credit - for the last day here you have been trying to listen and understand - You have not said I am lying and you have not said I believe something I say I don't. But, in the past I have been told this sort of thing more than once (100 times??!! - probably not!

So, in conclusion, Peter, I think if you tone your rhetoric down a bit, some of these guys (and gals) around here will converse with you (though I guarantee they will continue to disagree!). I vouch for them (when I don't even know who they are!!!!!

 

[eph610]

It is unfortunate there is so much confusion in this thread. I followed all your posts from the beginning of this thread and I thought you explained your position very well. I'm not sure if others don't understand your definition of submission to Christ or just don't agree with the concept. I agree with you that submission is not optional. I know from the posts of yours that I have read in other threads that you aren't saying we don't sin or struggle after conversion. Submission does not equal sinless perfection or good works. I don't want to add to the confusion, but I thought I'd add my view on what submission is. I think that a person during conversion places total faith in Christ and commits their entire life, aspirations, hopes, dreams etc into God's hands. If a person is conscious of holding back any area of their life and trying to retain some form of control they are in unbelief. To have faith in Christ and confess him as Lord requires that we trust in his goodness and mercy. I'm constantly amazed by all the reasons people give for holding onto control of some area of their life. Almost every time, the resistance stems from unbelief. They have a fear that if they hand over control of their life to God that he will somehow ruin their life or command them to live a ridiculous and embarrassing lifestyle. In reality, submission to God should be the most natural thing for those that believe he is their saviour. If God wanted to ruin our lives, he doesn't need our permission, haha

Surrendering your life completely to Christ doesn't mean that you never struggle with sins or even a specific sin. It does however mean that you have given up control of your life completely and are looking to him to mold you and guide you. I do agree with you that those who are not conscious of having surrendered their life to God in every area haven't been converted. Since we are justified by faith, that implies we need to trust God and turn over the reigns of our life to him.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to PinkDiamond again.

Wish I could rep you for this...this is all I am saying! The confusion comes because people want Jesus on their terms and not on his terms....and people think that is just fine....the detractors can paint me any way they like, but they don't like having to say that Jesus is Lord over EVERYTHING....

I was raised in a "Christian Home" led to Jesus by my Mom at 7, water Baptized by immersion a few weeks later, called to preach by the Holy Ghost at age 9 and at 12 was so terribly hurt, offended and mad at and with God due to religion that I spent just over 2 decades in a self imposed wilderness of bitterness against anything related to God, Jesus, the Holy Ghost, the Bible and church and my life proved I was mad at and with God....I am a former drug addict, alcoholic and hetero sex/porn addict....I would go to church to pacify my parents and blasphemed God in his own house...not the Holy Ghost, but God...
My life was spared many times from sudden death, I mean like walking away from car accidents that should ahve killed me 100x over and stuff like that...

When I came to understand Jesus, through the conviction of the Holy Ghost I gave him everything.....When I consecrated my life to him by re-answering his call, I said whatever you want from you take....I lost a $85,000 a year Job, both of our vehicles died and could not be replaced, We walked through the valley for sure....we still do at times....

So when was I truly born again!?!? I know for sure when it happened and nobody can tell me any different..

Thanks again....I appreciate your kind words...

 

[eternally-gratefull]

In response to this "Peter issue" - I hear what you all are saying - and Peter - I do concur that you need to be a bit more gentlemanly in the fight! -


But let me say one thing - to EG - and to others -

I have sometimes experienced the same sort of response from you as you say Peter is giving to you - I could change the above line you wrote to Peter to - "I (Chester) tell EG - 'No EG that is not what I am saying, EG's response is that I am lying about my own belief"

How? Let's try it!

I say - "I am saved by grace through faith and I believe I stay saved by grace through faith. I am not saved by works and I do not stay saved by works. I do not earn initial salvation and I do not keep salvation by earning it. Salvation is completely a gift from God. As long as I have faith in God I am saved. If I no longer have faith in God, I am not saved. I believe that salvation can be lost."

Now what you would like to tell me EG, is that I can't believe the above - it is not possible - hence I am lying about what I believe, I really believe in a works religion. (In reality, a works religion is horrific to me - it makes me gag, croak, throw up, and get quite angry! -- some in my circles would like to throw me out I am so radical!)

Now listen, to your credit - for the last day here you have been trying to listen and understand - You have not said I am lying and you have not said I believe something I say I don't. But, in the past I have been told this sort of thing more than once (100 times??!! - probably not!

So, in conclusion, Peter, I think if you tone your rhetoric down a bit, some of these guys (and gals) around here will converse with you (though I guarantee they will continue to disagree!). I vouch for them (when I don't even know who they are!!!!!

Here is the difference between Peter and I.

Peter would tell you. that you believe in works, you are being deceitful. And you need to stop thinking like that. (ie, leave no explanation. he will just tell you you are wrong) like he did earlier and has done many many times over.

Me? I will tell you. (now that I know you only believe a person can lose faith)

1. that I think you are teaching a gospel of works. But not just because I said so. (as peter would say) I am not God. But I will explain why I say this, (because you have to work to maintain faith, or do whatever work it is one says one must do to keep from losing salvation) Then we can discuss it.

or

2. We can discuss if or if not a Christian, who has been predestined, Chosen, Sealed unto the day of redemption, Given and has in his possession eternal life, the right to be called the child of God, and assured by Jesus himself, he will never die, never hunger or thirst, Live forever, And be risen by him on the last day. can ever lose faith.

in the one case, I did not just call you out. and say your a liar. I explained where I came up with my conclusion

in the other, I did not call you anything, I just tried to discuss what you believe.

either situation. Someone tried to discuss the issue with you, (this is a bible DISCUSSION FORUM)

peter refuses to do either. (even though many of us have tried it with him numerous times) and if you try to push, .He will always come back and say you are wrong, you are lying, He will get angry, mock you, and start calling you the slanderer, and start saying you have a vendetta against him and are not truthful

I hope you see the difference.

 

[oldethennew]

Stunned - In my travels through religious, philosophical, theological concepts you will find
people jump from one idea to another without knowing how or why they do it.

Every group has an emotional formula of identification, which marks their belief system and
how they define who they identify with.

You know how closed minded ones own thoughts are when you turn the meaning into
different words, does it still work. If it does not, it is a marker for a feeling and not its
real meaning, and so is probably a deception.

"Jesus is the way, the truth and the life"

Exclusive statement, you cannot be saved by anything else, so is a criticism of others,
or is it just a statement of reality?

You eat to stay alive. Does this mean you will try to stop eating? Or it is ridiculous
to believe this because it means non-eaters are doomed.

So Jesus is the life. But some deny His words and His intent.
Some deny His way, it was just to show impossibility.
Some deny His truth, Gods words are false and not worthy of deep analysis or thought.

Yet they claim to point at Jesus and look only to Him. I think they are lying.

======================================================

I would point caution here, there is a big difference in purposefully being lying lied to and lying,
and out-right deception...many truly believe a lie and carry it with them wherever they go...

 

[Chester]

So here is your interpretation:

"If we are faithless (we lack faith) he is faithful He can not deny himself (he promised eternal life to all who hear the word of truth, and call out to him to be saved, He will keep his word. even when we lose faith. because to take his gift back would be to deny his own word. "


You said "3. I did not add to the word. I said what it said, take it literally. If we (ANYONE) lose faith. He is faithful. He can not deny himself (ie go back on his word.. which is a literal interpretation)"

Response:
(1) "we" is first person plural -- "anyone" is third person singular - You can't say this is "literal" -- it is your interpretation - yes - and that is OK!

(2) How do you get that "He will not go back on his word" as the "literal" interpretation of "he cannot deny himself"?? The words are not the same! You changed the words! "himself" does not mean "his word" - look "himself" up in any dictionary and it will not give "his word" for the meaning! You got your interpretation from your understanding of the context and from your understanding of the whole of Scripture - but it is not a strictly "literal' interpretation.

My opinion at least - and I am a pretty fallible human

 

[eternally-gratefull]

So here is your interpretation:

"If we are faithless (we lack faith) he is faithful He can not deny himself (he promised eternal life to all who hear the word of truth, and call out to him to be saved, He will keep his word. even when we lose faith. because to take his gift back would be to deny his own word. "


You said "3. I did not add to the word. I said what it said, take it literally. If we (ANYONE) lose faith. He is faithful. He can not deny himself (ie go back on his word.. which is a literal interpretation)"

Response:
(1) "we" is first person plural -- "anyone" is third person singular - You can't say this is "literal" -- it is your interpretation - yes - and that is OK!

I will be honest. I am not sure what language you are using, But when anyone says if we do this. The people who need to listen to what is said is ANYONE who is spoken of (ie, Paul spoke of we (third person plural) meaning anyone who has come to Christ in faith. (since he is talking about losing faith) So the literal interpretation would be anyone who lost faith.

Can you think of another?

(2) How do you get that "He will not go back on his word" as the "literal" interpretation of "he cannot deny himself"?? The words are not the same! You changed the words! "himself" does not mean "his word" - look "himself" up in any dictionary and it will not give "his word" for the meaning! You got your interpretation from your understanding of the context and from your understanding of the whole of Scripture - but it is not a strictly "literal' interpretation

.

Tell me, What other way could I interpret that. Remembering, that is his word, is himself. and to go against his word, is to deny himself. and the topic is faith, and the only faith scripture talks about, is faith in him..

what other way can I interpret that, I am open.

 

[PinkDiamond]

Gosh, I enter this discussion with apprehension. I DESPISE seeing the body of Christ hurt one another, and I hope I don't become a culprit here.

I'm having trouble seeing the difference between sinning and failing to give your WHOLE self to Jesus.

We all acknowledge that we continue to sin. So by definition we haven't given Everything to Him or else we wouldn't sin.

I'm strictly speaking of SALVATION here. I believe Jesus saves, the Holy Spirit then works in us to conform us to be more and more Christ like.

The hall of faith in Hebrews 11 is full of people that didn't fully trust God at times. Just look at Abraham. He lied to Pharoah because he didn't trust God. Sarah laughed when told she would have a baby. Yet Hebrews 11 records her as being faithful about it!
Then there's Peter and His denials and later hypocrisy with Paul.

So I would say that none of us have given ALL trust to the Lord.

But please take my peace, and Love. We just differ on this.

No worries I don't think you are a culprit or being hurtful. I think it's to be expected that we ( all of us in this forum) are going to have some differences of opinion on certain topics. As long as we don't all call each other names we are good I think passionate or even spirited discussions or disagreements can be a positive thing actually. Differences of opinion don't bother me. At least that shows we all care enough to discuss these issues in great detail and we all might learn something from each other at some point. It's my opinion that we can learn something from everyone ( even people we don't agree with ).

I don't disagree with any of the points you made in this post. I definitely agree with your definition of Salvation: that Jesus saves, the Holy Spirit works in us to conform us to be more and more Christ like. I also agree that saved men ( the examples you used) have had instances or times of unbelief. I think you brought up some very valid points. I know I have had my own moments in my life. At times, I've messed up and tried to make things happen in my own life instead of trusting him to direct. I think that all sin could technically be traced back to unbelief. So I do agree with your point.

I think that the difference is that I view lack of submission as abiding in perpetual unbelief. I guess the way I view it is that we can often through weakness succumb to temptation and sin. We may even struggle for a season or sadly our whole life in some cases and repeatedly succumb to this sin. Some Christians never overcome in this life as they should but are still saved. I wouldn't consider that the same as a person who feels convicted over a certain practice, but refuses to acknowledge that this practice is wrong or thinks it is unfair that Christ would require them to be willing to part with certain vices. I have also known others that when it came right down to it could not stand the idea of relinquishing control of their life.

I guess I view the lack of submission as stubbornness arising from unbelief. The best example I can think of is the contrast between David and Saul. Saul was always intent on doing things his way and serving God his way. He disobeyed the instructions from Samuel, and didn't wait for him to start the burnt offerings. When corrected, his response was basically that it should be good enough. He didn't seem really intent on submitting himself to God. David probably committed one of the worst sins in the OT, but shows an entirely different attitude towards God.

 

[eph610]

I will be honest. I am not sure what language you are using, But when anyone says if we do this. The people who need to listen to what is said is ANYONE who is spoken of (ie, Paul spoke of we (third person plural) meaning anyone who has come to Christ in faith. (since he is talking about losing faith) So the literal interpretation would be anyone who lost faith.

Can you think of another?

.

Tell me, What other way could I interpret that. Remembering, that is his word, is himself. and to go against his word, is to deny himself. and the topic is faith, and the only faith scripture talks about, is faith in him..

what other way can I interpret that, I am open.

I think 2 Tim 2.13 has to be properly interpreted with the verses that preceded it. It was not to be used as a stand alone verse and never should be used that way....

So where do we start Vs 1 or Vs 8?

2 Tim 2.1-13
You therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. [SUP]2 [/SUP]The things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, entrust these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also. [SUP]3 [/SUP]Suffer hardship with me, as a good soldier of Christ Jesus. [SUP]4 [/SUP]No soldier in active service entangles himself in the affairs of everyday life, so that he may please the one who enlisted him as a soldier. [SUP]5 [/SUP]Also if anyone competes as an athlete, he does not win the prize unless he competes according to the rules. [SUP]6 [/SUP]The hard-working farmer ought to be the first to receive his share of the crops. [SUP]7 [/SUP]Consider what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything. [SUP]8 [/SUP]Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, descendant of David, according to my gospel, [SUP]9 [/SUP]for which I suffer hardship even to imprisonment as a criminal; but the word of God is not imprisoned. [SUP]10 [/SUP]For this reason I endure all things for the sake of those who are chosen, so that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus and with it eternal glory. [SUP]11 [/SUP]It is a trustworthy statement:
For if we died with Him, we will also live with Him;
[SUP]12 [/SUP]If we endure, we will also reign with Him;
If we deny Him, He also will deny us;
[SUP]13 [/SUP]If we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself.

 

[PeterJens]

In response to this "Peter issue"

Chester - You will notice there has never been a Peter issue, it is merely when they do not
get their way they create a big apparent issue but with no content.

The fruit is to attempt to be discouraging, and talking about nothing is used to try and distract
from their failure. Just read the lines and lines of discussion about attitude and not issues.
But it is all pointless, because Christ is all in all, and we are victorious through Him, Amen

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I think 2 Tim 2.13 has to be properly interpreted with the verses that preceded it. It was not to be used as a stand alone verse and never should be used that way....

So where do we start Vs 1 or Vs 8?

2 Tim 2.1-13
You therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. [SUP]2 [/SUP]The things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, entrust these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also. [SUP]3 [/SUP]Suffer hardship with me, as a good soldier of Christ Jesus. [SUP]4 [/SUP]No soldier in active service entangles himself in the affairs of everyday life, so that he may please the one who enlisted him as a soldier. [SUP]5 [/SUP]Also if anyone competes as an athlete, he does not win the prize unless he competes according to the rules. [SUP]6 [/SUP]The hard-working farmer ought to be the first to receive his share of the crops. [SUP]7 [/SUP]Consider what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything. [SUP]8 [/SUP]Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, descendant of David, according to my gospel, [SUP]9 [/SUP]for which I suffer hardship even to imprisonment as a criminal; but the word of God is not imprisoned. [SUP]10 [/SUP]For this reason I endure all things for the sake of those who are chosen, so that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus and with it eternal glory. [SUP]11 [/SUP]It is a trustworthy statement:
For if we died with Him, we will also live with Him;
[SUP]12 [/SUP]If we endure, we will also reign with Him;
If we deny Him, He also will deny us;
[SUP]13 [/SUP]If we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself.

it still means the same

if we (who are we?) lose faith

He (Christ) is faithful

He can not deny himself (which is why he remains faithful and true to his word)


the only reason to go back is to determine who "we" are (since it is not said in the actual verse)

 

[Chester]

Here is the difference between Peter and I.

Peter would tell you. that you believe in works, you are being deceitful. And you need to stop thinking like that. (ie, leave no explanation. he will just tell you you are wrong) like he did earlier and has done many many times over.

Me? I will tell you. (now that I know you only believe a person can lose faith)

1. that I think you are teaching a gospel of works. But not just because I said so. (as peter would say) I am not God. But I will explain why I say this, (because you have to work to maintain faith, or do whatever work it is one says one must do to keep from losing salvation) Then we can discuss it.

or

2. We can discuss if or if not a Christian, who has been predestined, Chosen, Sealed unto the day of redemption, Given and has in his possession eternal life, the right to be called the child of God, and assured by Jesus himself, he will never die, never hunger or thirst, Live forever, And be risen by him on the last day. can ever lose faith.

in the one case, I did not just call you out. and say your a liar. I explained where I came up with my conclusion

in the other, I did not call you anything, I just tried to discuss what you believe.

either situation. Someone tried to discuss the issue with you, (this is a bible DISCUSSION FORUM)

peter refuses to do either. (even though many of us have tried it with him numerous times) and if you try to push, .He will always come back and say you are wrong, you are lying, He will get angry, mock you, and start calling you the slanderer, and start saying you have a vendetta against him and are not truthful

I hope you see the difference.

Yes, I do see the difference!

I understand what you are saying - and the way you approach the discussion about works/faith makes me want to launch into it! Great Job! But - not now - as I said before - it will have to wait - I already am getting way too behind on the rest of my life . . .

I can't evaluate if "Peter refuses to do either" - I don't know - You have been corresponding here much longer than I have been . . .