Apostasy 101

[rily51jean]

The ERV Bible - An Apostate translation. Have a look at how they mislead you.

https://www.jesusisprecious.org/bible/erv/satanic_counterfeit.htm

I agree they're apostate, but this is actually the only time they were correct:

ERV Falsely Uses “Passover” in Acts 12:4 Instead of Correct Word, “Easter”
Only the trustworthy King James Bible retains the proper word “Easter” (a pagan holiday) in Acts 12:4. All of the new PERverted Bible versions change the word to “Passover,” which is heresy. The Old Testament plainly teaches that the holy day of Passover happened first in time, and then the seven-day feast of unleavened bread followed. Leviticus 23:5-6, “In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the LORD's passover. And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the LORD: seven days ye must eat unleavened bread.” The Bible says in Acts 12:3 that it was the time of the days of unleavened bread, which means that Passover had already come and gone.

KING JAMES BIBLE (KJB) — Acts 12:4, “And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.” [emphasis added]

EASY-TO-READ VERSION (ERV) — Acts 12:4, “He arrested Peter and put him in jail, where he was guarded by a group of 16 soldiers. Herod planned to bring Peter before the people, but he wanted to wait until after the Passover festival.” [emphasis added]​

In the KJV, Easter, is a mis-translation, the Greek, in the texts is the word "passover".
Acts 12:4 the word given: "Easter" is Strong's G3957 pascha, pas'-khah; of Chald. or. [comp. 6453]; the Passover (the meal, the day, the festival, or the special sacrifices connected with it):--Easter, Passover

But, the word Easter defined in the "Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary" (BASED ON WEBSTER'S THIRD NEW INTERNATIONAL DICTIONARY) G & C Merriam Company, Publishers, Springfield Massachusetts, U.S.A. c.1963, is as follows:

Eas-ter\ 'e-ster\ n [ME estre, fr. OE eastre; akin to OHG ostarun (pl.) Easter; both fr. the prehistoric WGmc name of a pagan spring festival akin to OE east east] : a feast observed on the first Sunday after the full moon on or next after the vernal equinox in commemoration of Christ's resurrection.
So, while the dictionary definition traces it to the prehistoric name of a pagan spring festival akin to OE, it does apply it as given in the KJV Acts 12:4.
But, it should not have been used because as Apostle Paul states in 1 Corinthians 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
And Christ is referred to as "the Lamb slain"; and in Rev. 14:1 ..."lo, a Lamb stood on mount Sion, ...." Rev. 21:22-23 22..."and the Lamb are the Temple of it." 23 "....and the Lamb is the light thereof."

But, Satan takes that Name for himself too: Rev. 13:11 "And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon."

The old, ancient spring festival of Oestre, or Easter was, I believe, the old spring fertility rites of Astarte, or Diana, where they romped through the groves in their sexual orgies, and rolling Oestre eggs. It had nothing whatsoever to do with Passover as given by God in Exodus.

That's probably the only time the authors of the ERV were near the mark.

 

[Judges1318]

I appreciate your efforts, but you and I just do not see eye to eye on the parable of the soils and probably never will. I also appreciate you not falsely accusing me of being disingenuous or calling me a liar whenever we have a disagreement over doctrine. I believe that all genuine believers are fruitful, yet not all are equally fruitful. (Matthew 13:23) Faith that remains unfruitful, is a dead faith. (James 2:14)

I agree with all of this except the last point, and I appreciate the conciliatory attitude.

Faith can have plenty of righteous works attached to it and it still lack the fruit of the Spirit, like joy, peace, patience, kindness, etc. There are plenty of us genuinely saved believers with lots of righteous works attached but in whom the fruit of the Spirit (joy, peace, etc.) gets choked out. If you have never been able to relate to that, good for you. And I mean that. I rejoice with you. You're the one hitting the home run for the team and I'm jumping up and down in the stands for you waving our banner. But you need to open up your doctrinal box just a hair to allow us genuine believers who spend waaaaay too much time in the 3rd type of soil to exist in your doctrine. Please, make room for us.

Picture Abraham. He receives the promises of God, takes them to heart, believes them, then packs his family up and heads for the promised land, having the works that validate his faith as living and not dead, but grumbling every step of the way there. I'm painting the very real possibility of this scenario to help you see that true believers can have faith that is alive, not dead, but have little to no fruit. I got the T-shirt on this one, and so do a lot of other genuine brothers and sisters. 3rd type of soil in believers is for real. We're out here. And the world hates us because we're not really any different than them but we say we are. We're not proud of it, but we're out here. But by God's grace our hearts are becoming 4th type of soil more and more every year.

 

[rily51jean]

I wonder if we have a problem of focus.
1. Sin - hurtful actions for our benefit at the cost to others
2. Relationship - an understanding between two parties

Often we do bad things by accident, by chance, as a result of anger, selfishness etc.
Someone gets hurt and a relationship is damaged.

If we put right the hurt, focus on the relationship things can be restored.
If we put things right, but ignore the relationship we have broken the relationship and do not care.

Our language often focuses on behaviour, as measured to a set of rules and not as measured to our
relationship to God. So the idea has come about if we behaved without sin, God would be ok with this.

So some believe we can be good, separate from God, and that is fine.
Or we can never be good, because we are too messed up, but Christ can be the glue so God is blind.

But in essence until we start caring about what God thinks and who He is all is lost.
We are called to walk the straight path, because God wants this and we love Him.
It is also the best thing for us, and when His Spirit dwells in our hearts we actually agree.

David got so amazed by Gods law, He wondered at it and how it operated, because it really was good.
Our relationship with God is not destroyed by one sin, but by us not loving and dealing with the relationship
consequences and hurt, and not sowing to the good relationship we have with God through the Holy Spirit.

I think, IMHO, (not that what I think truly matters), but I think that:
#1 Within every relationship, either people-to-people, or people-to-God/God-to-people, there are always "terms". I think everybody has a set of terms for their relationships, to define the quality of it, and to establish the "comfort", so to speak, of it, so it can be viable, and operational in their lives, in mutually enjoyable ways.
#2 God's laws, i.e., the Ten Commandments, and the other two that Jesus gave us, set the parameters and the conditions, the "terms" for having a happy and "comfortable" relationship with both other people, but also with God Himself. God's 10 Commandments, are the "terms" for having happy, comfortable, and healthy relationships. It has to do with the viability of Trust, and is foundational to any relationship, whether it's a business relationship, a friendship relationship, or a marital relationship, and likewise a Spiritual relationship with YHVH.
So, basically it comes down to caring about what makes somebody irritated, frustrated, angry, stressed, uncomfortable, distressed, suspicious, distrustful, and the effort to keep from doing things they don't like, and to keep doing things for them that they do like.

Maybe I'm being redundant. It's summed up in "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

"We are called to walk the straight path, because God wants this and we love Him."

I think it should also be:
"We are called to walk the narrow path, because God wants this, because He loves us."
He loved us first.

 

[Judges1318]

Paul uses the same Greek word (hagiazo) in 1 Corinthians 1:2 for believers who are "sanctified" in Christ Jesus as he does for the unbelieving spouse who is "sanctified" by the believing spouse, yet the unbelieving spouse is not saved by this association but does come under the believing spouse's influence and is in a real sense "set apart" from other unbelievers.

You have the popular understanding of 1 Corinthians 7:14, lol.
After some years of serious OT reading I realized what Paul meant by 'sanctified'.
It means 'made clean'. Things and people that are sanctified have been made clean for contact and use by the people of God so as not to be defiled by contact with them.
For the believer, obviously, it also means being 'made clean and set apart' in regard to salvation.

 

[rily51jean]

I agree with all of this except the last point, and I appreciate the conciliatory attitude.

Faith can have plenty of righteous works attached to it and it still lack the fruit of the Spirit, like joy, peace, patience, kindness, etc. There are plenty of us genuinely saved believers with lots of righteous works attached but in whom the fruit of the Spirit (joy, peace, etc.) gets choked out. If you have never been able to relate to that, good for you. And I mean that. I rejoice with you. You're the one hitting the home run for the team and I'm jumping up and down in the stands for you waving our banner. But you need to open up your doctrinal box just a hair to allow us genuine believers who spend waaaaay too much time in the 3rd type of soil to exist in your doctrine. Please, make room for us.

Picture Abraham. He receives the promises of God, takes them to heart, believes them, then packs his family up and heads for the promised land, having the works that validate his faith as living and not dead, but grumbling every step of the way there. I'm painting the very real possibility of this scenario to help you see that true believers can have faith that is alive, not dead, but have little to no fruit. I got the T-shirt on this one, and so do a lot of other genuine brothers and sisters. 3rd type of soil in believers is for real. We're out here. And the world hates us because we're not really any different than them but we say we are. We're not proud of it, but we're out here. But by God's grace our hearts are becoming 4th type of soil more and more every year.

"There are plenty of us genuinely saved believers with lots of righteous works attached but in whom the fruit of the Spirit (joy, peace, etc.) gets choked out."
I agree with you on this entirely.

As Proverbs 4:23 states "Keep thy heart with all diligence; For out of it are the issues of life."
(i.e. Guard your mind,with all diligence, as with a hedge of thorns....)
Apostle Paul states in: 2 Cor. 10:3 "For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:
4 {For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strongholds
5 Casting down imaginations, and every knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;
6 And having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled."

1 Peter 5:8 "Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
9 Whom resist stedfast in the faith, knowing that the same afflictions are accomplished in your brethren that are in the world."

So, we're constantly under attack from Satan himself, and Satan's little helpers, in our minds, to disrupt the peace that Christ has given to us, and we need to constantly watch and test the thoughts that come to us from "out of the blue", because thoughts affects our feelings, and Satan attacks us through our feelings, by launching false "thoughts" at our minds, to choke our our peace. And that can render us "fruitless", even though we strive to obey Him.
Galatians 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith 23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law." (and vs.s 24-26). Satan tries to disrupt, and steal that fruit from us constantly/incessantly.
That's why Paul in Ephesians 6:10-18 tells us in vs. 11 to put on the whole armour of God, that we may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. And in vs. 13 to "take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Vs.s 14-17 #1 Above all the shield of faith, #2 the girt of truth, #3 the breastplate of righteousness, #4 your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace, #5 the helmet of salvation, #6 the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God and #7 Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints,"
"imaginations" are reasonings, which are thoughts;

Just MHO.

 

[Grandpa]

That is the only place where we don't completely see eye to eye. I agree that it would be silly and stupid to throw Jesus in the trash can, but the Bible does say it can happen. As long as we keep loving God and each other, it doesn't matter. We are are still brothers and sisters.

You are right that we would disagree over that.

I don't think the bible says that a Saved individual loses their salvation.

And you are also correct that it doesn't matter as far as our own interaction goes. We are still brothers even if one of us has more faith than the other, or less faith.

 

[Grandpa]

I believe in the Sabath.

You believe in working at the law.

You don't believe in Rest from your work at the law.

 

[Grandpa]

And i doubt you do understand it yourself.

The grace of God is for all mankind, not a portion that thinks about Jesus. That is why Paul says it is a gift, free gift to sinners. Sinners means everyone.

Titus 2:11For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men.

It is the second part of Eph 2:8-11, about works that actually matters.

Someone who doesn't believe that Christ gives us rest has a long way to go before they even begin to understand scripture.

 

[Judges1318]

after considering the CONTEXT it seems most likely that "he was sanctified" should be understood in the sense of someone who had been "set apart" or identified as a professing believer in the Hebrew Christian community of believers, but later renounces his identification with other believers, by rejecting the "knowledge of the truth" that he had received, and trampling under foot the work and the person of Christ himself.

What context? Can you post it here?

 

[mailmandan]

What context? Can you post it here?

In Hebrews 10:26, To "sin willfully" in the Greek carries the idea of deliberate intention that is habitual, which stems from rejecting Christ deliberately. This is continuous action, a matter of practice. Now we don't walk along our daily life and "accidentally" fall into a pit called sin. We exercise our will but, the use of the participle clearly shows continuous, willful, habitual action. The unrighteous practice sin (1 Corinthians 6:9-10; Galatians 5:19-21); not the righteous, who are born of God (1 Corinthians 6:11; 1 John 3:9). *Hermeneutics.

If the word 'sanctified' in Hebrews 10:29 is used to describe saved people who lost their salvation as eternal IN-securists teach, then we have a contradiction because the writer of Hebrews in Hebrews 10:10, we clearly read ..WE have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. In Hebrews 10:14, we read - For by one offering He has perfected for all time THOSE who are sanctified. To go from sanctified (as in saved) back to un-sanctified (as in lost salvation in verse 29 according to your view) would be in contradiction to sanctified once for all/perfected for all time in Hebrews 10:10,14. *Hermeneutics.

*NOWHERE in the context does it specifically say the person who "trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant" was "saved" and/or "lost their salvation." The reference to "the blood of the covenant that sanctified him" in verse 29 "on the surface" appears to be referring to a Christian, but this overlooks the fact that the word translated "sanctified" (which is the verb form of the adjective "holy") which means "set apart," and doesn't necessarily refer to salvation.

In 1 Corinthians 7:14, Paul uses it to specifically refer to non-Christians who are "sanctified" or "set apart" by their believing spouse. (And by this Paul does not mean that they are saved). A non-Christian can be "set apart" from other non-Christians without experiencing salvation as Paul explained.

In verse 39, the writer of Hebrews sets up the CONTRAST that makes it clear to me that he was referring to make believers/nominal Christians, not saved people: But WE are not of those who draw back to perdition, but OF THOSE who believe to the saving of the soul. Those who draw back to perdition do not believe to the saving of the soul and those who believe to the saving of the soul do not draw back to perdition. *Hermeneutics.

So after considering the CONTEXT, it seems most likely that "he was sanctified" should be understood in the sense of someone who had been "set apart" or identified as a professing believer in the Hebrew Christian community of believers, but later renounces his identification with other believers, by rejecting the "knowledge of the truth" that he had received, and trampling under foot the work and the person of Christ himself, which gives evidence that his identification with the Hebrew Christian community of believers was only superficial and that he was not a genuine believer.

 

[Judges1318]

There is no way a person can ACTUALLY be saved and then stop believing in the one who saved them.

The multitude of desperate, impassioned warnings in the Bible tell us otherwise.
And don't forget......the saved Galatians stopped believing.

If you were drowning and just about to go under and someone pulled you out of the water could you later just not believe you were pulled out of the water?

You could jump back in the water.
That's what could happen.

 

[Noose]

Someone who doesn't believe that Christ gives us rest has a long way to go before they even begin to understand scripture.

So far, no scriptural support for your assertions. And, i do affirm that Christ gives us rest but the rest comes after one dies- with so many scriptures in support.

 

[Noose]

You believe in working at the law.

You don't believe in Rest from your work at the law.

Everybody works the law including yourself.

For example: Are you faithful to your wife? If yes, then you are diligently keeping the law of Moses. How cool is that.

 

[Enxu]

In Hebrews 10:26, To "sin willfully" in the Greek carries the idea of deliberate intention that is habitual, which stems from rejecting Christ deliberately. This is continuous action, a matter of practice. Now we don't walk along our daily life and "accidentally" fall into a pit called sin. We exercise our will but, the use of the participle clearly shows continuous, willful, habitual action. The unrighteous practice sin (1 Corinthians 6:9-10; Galatians 5:19-21); not the righteous, who are born of God (1 Corinthians 6:11; 1 John 3:9). *Hermeneutics.

So, somehow once a person professes Jesus Christ and becomes a Christian, they suddenly lose their will and can no longer sin wilfully? That’s fallacy. It is true that the children of the devil practise sin and children of God do not practise sin, but it is false that a true Christian can never go back into the practise of sin.

Children of the devil or children of God are spiritual statuses reflected by the lifestyles of individuals, and statuses CAN change because lifestyles can change. Or else it is foolish for the apostles to write warnings after warnings against false teachings, against walking after the flesh, against loving money and the world, exhorting Christians to examine themselves to see if they are in the faith etc etc. If their statuses as children of God can never change then the apostles wrote the epistles for NOTHING.

Even apostle Peter in 2 Peter 2:20 talked about how people who once escaped corruption by knowing Jesus Christ became entangled in corruption again are like dogs returning to vomit and resemble pigs washed clean going back to the mire. Hebrews 6:6 also talked about how it is impossible to bring back into repentance people who have once tasted the goodness of the Lord and eventually turned away from Him because they end up crucifying Him again. Clearly all these verses talked about changes in people regarding their faith and how it is very possible for true Christians to walk away from their faith , reject Christ whom they once accepted and return to the corruption they’ve escaped.

 

[Enxu]

In verse 39, the writer of Hebrews sets up the CONTRAST that makes it clear to me that he was referring to make believers/nominal Christians, not saved people: But WE are not of those who draw back to perdition, but OF THOSE who believe to the saving of the soul. Those who draw back to perdition do not believe to the saving of the soul and those who believe to the saving of the soul do not draw back to perdition. *Hermeneutics.

According to you, the nominal make believe Christians never had true faith. Verse 39 says they DREW BACK into perdition. So since they never had saving faith, WHAT did they draw back from?

 

[Enxu]

There is no way a person can ACTUALLY be saved and then stop believing in the one who saved them.

We WILL be saved if we persevere in the faith, that is what the Gospel actually said. We are still in the wilderness and being tried by God like the Old Testament Israelis. Did all Israelis who came out of Egypt enter into the Promised Land? No, because an entire generation died in disbelief, even though they first started out with faith and was delivered from their slavemasters. Faith can be dead, changed, rejected, shipwrecked, destroyed. This is not only what is said in the entire Bible, found within the examples of Israel, it is seen in actual reality.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I am dumbfounded by the amount of people who continue to show lack of faith in God

Lack of faith in his promise

Lack of faith in his ability

Lack of faith in his Knowledge

Lack of faith in his strength

they want to take the glory away from God and take it themselves.

Well knees flash, God will not share his glory with you, period

he who BEGAN a GOOD WORK in YOU (at the moment of salvation) WILL complete it until the day of christ

this is Gods promise, given to all who truly believe through living faith in the gospel, and are born again, adopted justified, sealed, forgiven owners of all in Christ, as blessed Sons.

 

[mailmandan]

So, somehow once a person professes Jesus Christ and becomes a Christian, they suddenly lose their will and can no longer sin wilfully? That’s fallacy. It is true that the children of the devil practise sin and children of God do not practise sin, but it is false that a true Christian can never go back into the practise of sin.

I never said anything about a Christian losing their will (free will) yet John clearly stated in 1 John 3:9 - No one who is born of God practices sin.. (NASB) Yet you say those who are born of God practice sin and lose their salvation. That's fallacy. John never said that. To practice sin is an ongoing, willful, habitual lifestyle with no goal or effort to stop (no repentance, just bring on the sin!) which characterizes children of the devil and not children of God.

Children of the devil or children of God are spiritual statuses reflected by the lifestyles of individuals, and statuses CAN change because lifestyles can change.

John did not say that in 1 John 3:9-10.

Or else it is foolish for the apostles to write warnings after warnings against false teachings, against walking after the flesh, against loving money and the world, exhorting Christians to examine themselves to see if they are in the faith etc etc. If their statuses as children of God can never change then the apostles wrote the epistles for NOTHING.

Christians can get tripped up, stumble and temporarily fall. Proverbs 24:16 - For a righteous man may fall seven times AND rise again, but the wicked shall fall by calamity. There are also plenty of "nominal" Christians mixed in with genuine Christians, so these warnings are not for nothing. Many people who thought they were Christians will one day go on to Jesus about their alleged wonderful works, yet Jesus will proclaim to them that He NEVER knew them (Matthew 7:22-23) which also demonstrates what they were trusting in for salvation and it was NOT CHRIST ALONE.

Even apostle Peter in 2 Peter 2:20 talked about how people who once escaped corruption by knowing Jesus Christ became entangled in corruption again are like dogs returning to vomit and resemble pigs washed clean going back to the mire.

Those who are truly born of God have received a new nature, a divine nature, and are new creations in Christ Jesus. (2 Corinthians 5:17) They have been transformed from pigs and dogs into sheep. The change is more than merely cosmetic, as in 2 Peter 2:20. *These cleaned up on the outside dogs and pigs were NEVER sheep.

*Compare 2 Peter 1:4 - "partakers of the divine nature," having escaped the corruption - Strongs #5356 that is in the world through lust with 2 Peter 2:20 - with they escaped the pollutions - Strongs #3356 (different Greek word) of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, yet they are again entangled therein, and overcome. *Notice that 2 Peter 2:20 did not mention them being "partakers of the divine nature."

Corruption (Strongs #5356) (to shrivel or wither, spoil , ruin , deprave, corrupt , defile, to destroy by means of corrupting, to spoil as does milk). Corruption - describes decomposition or rotting of an organism and the accompanying stench. The utter depravity of the fallen flesh and the resultant moral decomposition of the world opposed to God is driven by it sinful lusts or evil desires. Internal corruption.

Pollutions/Defilements (Strongs #3393) ("pollutions", "filthy things", "contaminations", "world's filth") describes the state of being tainted or stained by evil and refers to impurity, impure, tainted, defilement, foulness or pollution. Pollutions/Defilement refers to what is on the outside (2 Peter 2:20). But genuine believers have escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust (2 Peter 1:4).

*Corruption is deeper than pollutions/defilements on the outside: it is decay on the inside.

Having the knowledge of Jesus Christ does not save a person if there is no heart submission to that knowledge. The latter end is worse than the beginning for these men because rejecting this knowledge will make them more accountable at the judgment. Judas Iscariot is a good example. He walked with Jesus for 3 years and to the other disciples looked like the real deal, yet Jesus said, "he is a devil!" (John 6:70)

Hebrews 6:6 also talked about how it is impossible to bring back into repentance people who have once tasted the goodness of the Lord and eventually turned away from Him because they end up crucifying Him again.

In regards to renew them again unto repentance, this does not specify whether the repentance was merely outward or genuine accompanied by saving faith. They have in some sense "repented," there may be sorrow for sins and an attempt to turn from them (moral self-reformation) that non-believers can experience. There is repentance that falls short of salvation, which is clear from Hebrews 12:7 and the reference to Esau, as well as the repentance of Judas Iscariot in Matthew 27:3. Paul refers to a repentance “without regret that leads to salvation,” which shows there is a repentance that does not lead to salvation. As with “belief/faith”, so too with “repentance,” we must always distinguish between what is substantial and results in salvation and what is spurious. Renew them again "unto salvation" would be conclusive evidence for your argument.

In regards to tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, they may have tasted in such a way as to give them a distinct impression of the goodness of what was tasted, yet they still fell away. Inherent in the idea of tasting is the fact that one might or might not decide to accept what is tasted. For example, the same Greek word (geuomai) is used in Matthew 27:34 to say that those crucifying Jesus "offered him wine to drink, mingled with gall; but when he tasted it, he would not drink it." Do we taste into one Spirit or drink into one Spirit? (1 Corinthians 12:13).

In Hebrews 6:7-8, we read - For the earth which drinks in the rain that often comes upon it, and bears herbs useful for those by whom it is cultivated, receives blessing from God; BUT if it bears thorns and briars, it is rejected and near to being cursed, whose end is to be burned. In this metaphor relating to agriculture, those who receive final judgment are compared to land that bears no vegetation or useful fruit, but rather bears thorns and thistles. We see in scripture where good fruit is a sign of spiritual life and a lack of good fruit is a sign of false believers/wolves in sheep's clothing (Matthew 3:8-10; 7:15-20; 12:33-35) so we have an indication that the trustworthy evidence of one's spiritual condition is the fruit they bear (whether good or bad), suggesting that the writer of Hebrews is talking about people who are not genuine believers.

*Verse 9 sums it up for me. The writer is speaking to those truly saved (refers to them as BELOVED). He says that even though he speaks like this concerning THOSE types of people, He is convinced of better things concerning YOU. Things that ACCOMPANY SALVATION. Thorns and briars and falling away permanently do not accompany salvation and are not fruits worthy of authentic repentance.

Clearly all these verses talked about changes in people regarding their faith and how it is very possible for true Christians to walk away from their faith, reject Christ whom they once accepted and return to the corruption they’ve escaped.

After examining these verses in context and properly harmonizing scripture with scripture, there is no evidence here which unequivocally proves that really "saved" people really "lost their salvation," so your argument is INCONCLUSIVE.

 

[mailmandan]

According to you, the nominal make believe Christians never had true faith. Verse 39 says they DREW BACK into perdition. So since they never had saving faith, WHAT did they draw back from?

It's true that "nominal" (in name only) Christians never had true faith, but a spurious faith. You don't need true faith in order to draw back. Those who received the "knowledge" of the truth in Hebrews 10:26 were at a crossroad and those who drew back to perdition DID NOT BELIEVE TO THE SAVING OF THE SOUL and those who believe to the saving of the soul DID NOT DRAW BACK TO PERDITION. Drawing back would be a manifestation of unbelief.

Someone who has received the "knowledge" of the truth and is among genuine believers and is still in the process of considering the truth, but then ultimately decides to draw back to perdition instead of believing to the saving of the soul still drew back. The truth was revealed to such people, yet they still drew back. That is where they drew back from. You can't draw back from the truth if you have not yet acquired the truth and had the chance to consider the truth, but that does not mean you have to fully accept the truth before you draw back.

If I decide to walk across the Brooklyn bridge and I walk right up to the bridge and am on the verge of stepping onto it, but then instead, I turn and walk away from it, does that mean I didn't turn away and depart from the bridge just because I wasn't actually on the bridge? Of course not. It's the same with these Hebrews who draw back to perdition and do not believe to the saving of the soul.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

It's true that "nominal" (in name only) Christians never had true faith, but a spurious faith. You don't need true faith in order to draw back. Those who received the "knowledge" of the truth in Hebrews 10:26 were at a crossroad and those who drew back to perdition DID NOT BELIEVE TO THE SAVING OF THE SOUL and those who believe to the saving of the soul DID NOT DRAW BACK TO PERDITION. Drawing back would be a manifestation of unbelief.

Someone who has received the "knowledge" of the truth and is among genuine believers and is still in the process of considering the truth, but then ultimately decides to draw back to perdition instead of believing to the saving of the soul still drew back. The truth was revealed to such people, yet they still drew back. That is where they drew back from. You can't draw back from the truth if you have not yet acquired the truth and had the chance to consider the truth, but that does not mean you have to fully accept the truth before you draw back.

If I decide to walk across the Brooklyn bridge and I walk right up to the bridge and am on the verge of stepping onto it, but then instead, I turn and walk away from it, does that mean I didn't turn away and depart from the bridge just because I wasn't actually on the bridge? Of course not. It's the same with these Hebrews who draw back to perdition and do not believe to the saving of the soul.

amen, It helps when we read the whole passage, and not just nitpick verses out of context