Not By Works

[eternally-gratefull]

The context does not support you here....the fact is, John knew they were not saved to begin with....it is common among certain evangelistic teaching to attmept to rightly divide this passage with the parable of the wheat and tares,so that means its all about salvation... but that is not at all supported by the context....

Using 1 John 219 as a proof test for who is saved and who is not is playing Holy Spirit.....and *COULD* fall into violation of Matt 12.36-37

Nice try

john said they were antichrist, and they left us

and he als stated if they were truly of us they never would have left, but they left to expose the fact they were never of us,

sorry man, but your arguments fall based on johns words alone.

 

[dcontroversal]

not nearly quite as bad as drinking the saddusee smoothie.....it buries you with no hope of resurrection....

Hilarious... hah

 

[Meggido]

Nice try

john said they were antichrist, and they left us

and he als stated if they were truly of us they never would have left, but they left to expose the fact they were never of us,

sorry man, but your arguments fall based on johns words alone.

I have never said they were believers that fell away.....I have always said to you and DCON now, they were never believers....so what is your point of disagreement?

 

[dcontroversal]

Nice try

john said they were antichrist, and they left us

and he als stated if they were truly of us they never would have left, but they left to expose the fact they were never of us,

sorry man, but your arguments fall based on johns words alone.

I guess I missed something.....what did I miss.....? The concept of never being of us = never saved right? same as Jesus I never knew you is indicative of never being saved....I am trying to figure what I missed migo....

 

[preacher4truth]

Nice try

john said they were antichrist, and they left us

and he als stated if they were truly of us they never would have left, but they left to expose the fact they were never of us,

sorry man, but your arguments fall based on johns words alone.

Correct, it is referring to false converts, and the proof they were false is that they departed the faith. Same sense in 2 John.

The fact remains, those who do not believe in the biblical doctrine of perseverance/preservation of the saints will go to no end to yank that clear verse out of context.

 

[Meggido]

I guess I missed something.....what did I miss.....? The concept of never being of us = never saved right? same as Jesus I never knew you is indicative of never being saved....I am trying to figure what I missed migo....

Bill and I are wondering the same thing....I never claimed the people talked about in 1 John 2.19 were saved and then fell away...I always maintained they were gnostic and never believed in the first place and left the fellowship of the Apostles, because they were discerned to be Gnostic and were never really part of the saved believers...

What I am gathering from EG is he thinks they were unnoticed false teachers with the spirit of antichrist church who pretended to be saved, and pulled people away from Christ and when they were discovered they were forced from he church and were never saved to begin with...and at one point he pointed to the fact they were the tares...

The context does not support this conclusion...

 

[Meggido]

Correct, it is referring to false converts, and the proof they were false is that they departed the faith. Same sense in 2 John.

The fact remains, those who do not believe in the biblical doctrine of perseverance/preservation of the saints will go to no end to yank that clear verse out of context.

Funny, since the biblical doctrine of perseverance/preservation of the saints was not around at that time....Calvin had not even been born yet....

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Exactly, they never, ever were believers.....I said this numerous times.....salvation, losing salvation or or salvation in general is not even in the context...and neither is there a command or passive permission to use 1 John 2.19 to test salvation....

Never had salvation is the issue, No matter what your say,

No one is using it to test salvation. Never has it been said or tried to use it.

It is used to show those who CLAIM to Have faith, but now deny christ have never been saved. Period.

That is what john said if you deny it, thats on you.

 

[dcontroversal]

Bill and I are wondering the same thing....I never claimed the people talked about in 1 John 2.19 were saved and then fell away...I always maintained they were gnostic and never believed in the first place and left the fellowship of the Apostles, because they were discerned to be Gnostic and were never really part of the saved believers...

What I am gathering from EG is he thinks they were unnoticed false teachers with the spirit of antichrist church who pretended to be saved, and pulled people away from Christ and when they were discovered they were forced from he church and were never saved to begin with...and at one point he pointed to the fact they were the tares...

The context does not support this conclusion...

Yeah I don't know about all that as I have been in and out.....all I know is whatever the case they were never saved to begin with and it seems we all agree on that......Gnostics, Satanists or Charlie Chaplin's relatives notwithstanding.....

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I have never said they were believers that fell away.....I have always said to you and DCON now, they were never believers....so what is your point of disagreement?

Smh, I never said you said any of the above. That has never been my argument,

WHy do you bother man?

If you can not listen to someone to try to figure out what they are saying, then Howe can you expect to ever discuss anything with anyone?

 

[Meggido]

Originally Posted by preacher4truth

Oh, I'm waiting to check "my history here" while waiting for you to document it, historically. Then I can really "check" history.

Documentation. Go get it. And then apply this to those who were accused by name with further documentation.

All we have thus far are accusations. Unsubstantiated accusations attached to names.

If you cannot provide this in documented detail, as well as those of others, said accusations will then be considered slander and false. Since you claim these to be true, you should have ready proof.

You've gone on to support this, now provide literal proof of these accusations.

I am waiting and have provided proof and bumped this 3x now....Calling preacher4truth.....

Notice you left off the most important part of my post....this proves you have a closed mind...just because you think something is untrue does not make it untrue...now to be the spiritual adult here, let me show my entire post to you versus the proof-text you did on my post, so people can judge for themselves....notice the bold parts please





Here are some links that have other links to prove the point....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neopla...d_Christianity

Perhaps the best record is this one:

http://www.john-uebersax.com/plato/cp.htm<<<<his list links to the historical records.


I also suppose you would outright deny that when Paul preached at Mars Hill, he was not quoting two Greek Poets in Acts 17.28 which is taken from 2 poems/hymns written by 2 Greek men to Zeus...1 an astronomer and poet and the other a Greek Stoic...and were most likely...Aratus and Cleanthes

Christian Platonism is what birthed Gnostic doctrine and was rapidly invading the Early Church in the 1-4 centuries

Gnostics originated in Alexandria and mingled with the early Christian church in the 1st century....this is why John sent his 3 letters out to the churches because the Church as becoming heavily influenced by syncretism.....This is why he wrote 1 John 2.19 and why that verse has zero to do with salvation or eternal security and should no be used as a bully wielding billy club to judge salvation...by saying with arrogance....oh that person, they were never saved to begin with....John knew those who had invaded the church were not believers....he was warning other churches about Platonic and Gnostic influences that are the spirit of antichrist...


For the record, I am also available if you would like me to come to your next cookout and cut your steak, separate your veggies and taters and get your favorite sippee cup filled with Juice for you as well....


Now put up or shut up about this....because your closed mind to all things Calvin is limiting your otherwise great wisdom on discerning false teachings...

Here is another link showing Augustine was very integral at merging Platonism WITH Christianity...

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/augustine/

 

[preacher4truth]

Funny since the biblical doctrine of perseverance/preservation of the saints was not around at that time....Calvin had not even been born yet....

Not around at what time?

Actually Calvin didn't invent the doctrine, it's biblically based. It was also believed and adhered to well prior to Calvin. In fact, the book of Hebrews when accepted by canon, received blessings of canonicity partly due to, hold onto your hat, its adherence to the eternal security of believers.

Furthermore, 1 John 2:19 refers to false brothers who left, proving them false.

I'd like to see you back up your take on 1 John 2:19 with any authorities whatsoever.

 

[Meggido]

Never had salvation is the issue, No matter what your say,

No one is using it to test salvation. Never has it been said or tried to use it.

It is used to show those who CLAIM to Have faith, but now deny christ have never been saved. Period.

That is what john said if you deny it, thats on you.

I agree, they never had salvation......Next?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I guess I missed something.....what did I miss.....? The concept of never being of us = never saved right? same as Jesus I never knew you is indicative of never being saved....I am trying to figure what I missed migo....

just read might, He is claiming we are saying stuff we never said again. He likes to deflect.

1. I never said he used 1 John to prove people lost salvation
2. I never said anyone ever used 1 John as prove text for salvation.

Same as always, he is just trying to deflect.

 

[dcontroversal]

Never had salvation is the issue, No matter what your say,

No one is using it to test salvation. Never has it been said or tried to use it.

It is used to show those who CLAIM to Have faith, but now deny christ have never been saved. Period.

That is what john said if you deny it, thats on you.

I agree with this as well.....just like in churches today....The enemy does sow tares that are never saved to begin with....obviously everyone knows that I believe one cannot fall away from the faith and lose salvation.....that is the work of the Lord and he starts and FINISHES the good work of faith he begins in ALL......to say one can lose it after it has been started is to say JESUS fails in his work....I will never embrace that....ever.

 

[Meggido]

Not around at what time?

Actually Calvin didn't invent the doctrine, it's biblically based. It was also believed and adhered to well prior to Calvin. In fact, the book of Hebrews when accepted by canon, received blessings of canonicity partly due to, hold onto your hat, its adherence to the eternal security of believers.

Furthermore, 1 John 2:19 refers to false brothers who left, proving them false.

I'd like to see you back up your take on 1 John 2:19 with any authorities whatsoever.

I answered your challenge on the other topic....lets see what you have to say about that before we move along...

 

[dcontroversal]

Why do I feel like I hear dueling banjos playing in the background HAHAHHAHAH dada ding ding ding ding ding ding ding HAHAHAHAH ching ching ching swish parry thrust ching ching ching HAHAHHAHAHAH I love this place.............

 

[Meggido]

Yeah I don't know about all that as I have been in and out.....all I know is whatever the case they were never saved to begin with and it seems we all agree on that......Gnostics, Satanists or Charlie Chaplin's relatives notwithstanding.....

totally agree and that is all I have said...the burr in he saddle is I took away an apologetic weapon and his little feelers got hurt........again...

 

[preacher4truth]

I answered your challenge on the other topic....lets see what you have to say about that before we move along...

On Platonism? Where did this blessed event happen?

And if this is what you're referring to, the context was that Plato had some negative effect on Christianity, as if he influenced it with false doctrine. That was my issue, plus the lies propagated on Spurgeon, Calvin &c. (not like the person doesn't do this often anyhow, and when called for proof disappears and avoids)

There is no need to go on about the other until you offer proof of authorities who hold to your teaching on 1 John 2:19. The Scripture is quite clear, they were false converts, the proof came via their departure. You've gone out on a limb to attempt, feebly so, to make the text mean something different altogether. But this happens when a person needs the Scripture to back them up when it doesn't.

 

[Meggido]

On Platonism? Where did this blessed event happen?

And if this is what you're referring to, the context was that Plato had some negative effect on Christianity, as if he influenced it with false doctrine. That was my issue, plus the lies propagated on Spurgeon, Calvin &c. (not like the person doesn't do this often anyhow, and when called for proof disappears and avoids)

There is no need to go on about the other until you offer proof of authorities who hold to your teaching on 1 John 2:19. The Scripture is quite clear, they were false converts, the proof came via their departure. You've gone out on a limb to attempt, feebly so, to make the text mean something different altogether. But this happens when a person needs the Scripture to back them up when it doesn't.

And there it is..........dear reader, this is translated to mean....I have no way to counter or defend the truths posted I challenged somebody to produce....so now I will play the Wizard of Oz routine and beg you...do not look behind the curtain...nothing to see...

The context of 1 John 2.19 stands...I am not going to cut up your steak for ya any more little feller...grown up boys cut their own steak...




You are just another bloviating Charlatan Calvinist emperor without clothes....