Eternal Security - Most dangerous words ever preached: Once saved, always saved.

[EleventhHour]

To begin with, your answer to question number two is unbelievable. If God so loved the "fallen, sinful world" then He need not have devised a plan of redemption. In your answer you make God out to love sin.

The rest of your answers are so flippant, they do not deserve an answer. We are done here.

I think you have it backwards ......... He loved the world and sinners in it that He devised a plan of redemption.

This in no way means He loves sin.

Surely this it the correct biblical view rather than God is the author of sin.

Are you one that believes that God only loves the regenerated?

 

[awelight]

Tell me did Jesus love the rich young ruler?

Oh I could easily deal with John 3:16 but I am not about to with people who are flippant with their answers. We are dealing with the subject of God. A subject that should be approached with sincerity and trembling. I will not take the time to answer because those who cling to it do not take the time to answer the rest of Scripture. Like John 6:44 or John 10:26-28, or Col. 1:3, Eph. 1:3-6, just to mention a few

 

[EleventhHour]

Oh I could easily deal with John 3:16 but I am not about to with people who are flippant with their answers. We are dealing with the subject of God. A subject that should be approached with sincerity and trembling. I will not take the time to answer because those who cling to it do not take the time to answer the rest of Scripture. Like John 6:44 or John 10:26-28, or Col. 1:3, Eph. 1:3-6, just to mention a few

So everything has to be on your own terms?
Oh I am most sincere and definitely do not make light of changing the nature of God


You cannot answer a simple question?

 

[EleventhHour]

He is dying for them and not for the whole world. This is only one area of Scripture that states this great and hated truth by those of the world that can't hear His voice.

You did not even respond to my post on the context of John 3:16.

Is this made great by the fact that it is so hated?
No it is hated because it is not Jesus of the scripture.

Jesus did not say while hanging on the cross ................"Father Forgive only those I love

 

[awelight]

You did not even respond to my post on the context of John 3:16.

Is this made great by the fact that it is so hated?
No it is hated because it is not Jesus of the scripture.

Jesus did not say while hanging on the cross ................"Father Forgive only those I love

I gave you a chance to answer to the verses that I posted, but you did not. I said I would give an exposition of John 3:16 as soon as you harmonized it with the verses I posted. You did not answer, instead you attacked. You are saying a lot of humanism in your comments which are repetitious but no where are you using Scripture.

Also if you look around on these threads you will see I dealt with John 3:16 in another area.

 

[J-T]

I'm starting to suspect you're not actually reading what I am saying and instead railing against systems that have no bearing on the conversation.

I don't disagree with Paul, but I recognize as Peter does that many twist what he says to their own destruction. Paul speaks of faith, a real faith, not what faith has come to mean in many circles.

You cite many verses that paint a certain picture, and I cite verses to show that that picture is not the complete picture. If you preach a gospel that is so opposed to works that it cannot accomodate James, Jude, Peter, and John then your gospel is half a gospel. If those books in their simplicity become difficult needing to be massaged over to sound more like Paul, you preach a half gospel.

Works cannot earn anyone salvation but if there are no works then there is no true faith. Just a lifeless belief.

Respectfully and without insult, I suspect that you figured out that you had dug a hole for yourself per "works salvation" and knew that once you had mustered up an imagination's worth of self righteous 'good' works, you would have been called out and buried in that hole.

Now, as I mentioned before, I cited full contextual passages where Apostle Paul made it perfectly clear that "works" is not part of the Gospel. I am glad that you finally acknowledge that fact. But, would you like for me to repost those passages for your convenience? While I agree with you 100% on the first half of what you stated; "Works cannot earn anyone salvation..." I completely disagree with the second portion of your statement; "...but if there are no works then there is no true faith" (based upon the passages that I had already cited).

Per the epistle of James, I love that Book, and it would be a pleasure to discuss it with you. But before we would proceed to discussing James' epistle, there is something else that we also need to address. Do you understand that there is a positional difference between the Apostleship of Paul to that of Peter? Are you aware that Paul was selected and chosen by The Lord Jesus Christ to specifically be the Apostle to the Gentiles?

I will also interject that the epistles of James, Peter, Jude, and John (Let's throw in Hebrews too) do not teach a "works salvation". But as I mentioned before, we'll have to pause before proceeding with discussion of James until we have first properly completed discussion of the aforementioned passages and questions.

 

[EleventhHour]

I gave you a chance to answer to the verses that I posted, but you did not. I said I would give an exposition of John 3:16 as soon as you harmonized it with the verses I posted. You did not answer, instead you attacked. You are saying a lot of humanism in your comments which are repetitious but no where are you using Scripture.

Also if you look around on these threads you will see I dealt with John 3:16 in another area.

It does not harmonize with the other verses that is the point, ... they are different contexts.

In context of the entire passage of John 3 ... the world is plainly understood to mean world >> kosmos

1. he world, the universe
2. the circle of the earth, the earth
3. the inhabitants of the earth, men, the human family

Link

 

[EleventhHour]

I gave you a chance to answer to the verses that I posted, but you did not. I said I would give an exposition of John 3:16 as soon as you harmonized it with the verses I posted. You did not answer, instead you attacked. You are saying a lot of humanism in your comments which are repetitious but no where are you using Scripture.

Also if you look around on these threads you will see I dealt with John 3:16 in another area.

I rebutted your position did not attack you.

Or maybe you are really stating you will not discuss because I have not agreed to your premise.

Are we looking for converts then only?

 

[Bbrdrd]

Respectfully and without insult, I suspect that you figured out that you had dug a hole for yourself per "works salvation" and knew that once you had mustered up an imagination's worth of self righteous 'good' works, you would have been called out and buried in that hole.

Now, as I mentioned before, I cited full contextual passages where Apostle Paul made it perfectly clear that "works" is not part of the Gospel. I am glad that you finally acknowledge that fact. But, would you like for me to repost those passages for your convenience? While I agree with you 100% on the first half of what you stated; "Works cannot earn anyone salvation..." I completely disagree with the second portion of your statement; "...but if there are no works then there is no true faith" (based upon the passages that I had already cited).

Per the epistle of James, I love that Book, and it would be a pleasure to discuss it with you. But before we would proceed to discussing James' epistle, there is something else that we also need to address. Do you understand that there is a positional difference between the Apostleship of Paul to that of Peter? Are you aware that Paul was selected and chosen by The Lord Jesus Christ to specifically be the Apostle to the Gentiles?

I will also interject that the epistles of James, Peter, Jude, and John (Let's throw in Hebrews too) do not teach a "works salvation". But as I mentioned before, we'll have to pause before proceeding with discussion of James until we have first properly completed discussion of the aforementioned passages and questions.

I dug no such hole, my position remains unchanged with regards to works. If you understand me to be saying something different it is in your comprehension not my position.

We could get into the details about how those passages are not presenting quite the picture they're often put forward and tend to have a much more limited view of works than is generally used today, but this is neither the setting nor do I have the drive to present such arguments. Peter's statement alone stands sufficient since he tells us exactly how people twist Paul in 3:17 which is towards lawlessness, meaning they remove the constraints that Paul clearly places on his audience in favor of a view of the gospel that has no responsibility.

And it is the disagreement on the second statement that makes me say you're preaching half a gospel. You preach liberty without responsibility. Your gospel sets no standards, and without standards as I recently heard "without standards there is no love, just brokenness looking for a home."

The undue weight given to Paul over the rest of Scripture is exactly the type of misreading I am speaking to. In order to understand Paul the OT references he makes must be understood, just like to properly understand James the Greek Alexandrian character of the letter has to be understood. Too often the relationship is seen backwards with Paul running roughshod over the OT interpretations and being read into the contexts rather than understanding Paul as an extension of OT themes and stories.

I agree that James and the other general epistles do not teach a works based salvation, but they get those who wish to exclude works entirely spinning with "harmonizations" to smooth them out and find Paul hiding in them rather than reading them in their own voices.

 

[SoulWeaver]

To begin with, your answer to question number two is unbelievable. If God so loved the "fallen, sinful world" then He need not have devised a plan of redemption. In your answer you make God out to love sin.

The rest of your answers are so flippant, they do not deserve an answer. We are done here.

Many are called, but few are chosen.
But according to you only the chosen were ever invited to participate at the feast.

 

[Duskey]

It would seem to me that you should be able to defend your view of John 3:16.

16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.


While "world" should be read in context, there is nothing in the verse that would require one to read it as "World of the Elect" unless one has pre-suppositions that need to be fitted into the verse.

In context it means exactly that the "world"

The comparison is made to the Israelite being told to look at the bronze snake. (John 3: 15-16)

The invitation went to all and those that looked lived.

The "world" >>>> all sinners are given the invitation... by analogy.

As well we have "whosoever" meaning .......... "everyone who"

No limited atonement here.

My fiancé is Greek so I went right to the source. Kosmos means entire world.

It’s astonishing that some people lose perspective of the fact that God is love. They believe His love is grossly limited when in fact the Bible is filled with the contrary.

Putting God in a box reveals the sad lack of spiritual and relational insight of some folks. It’s like proclaiming infinity equals zero.

 

[SoulWeaver]

To begin with, your answer to question number two is unbelievable. If God so loved the "fallen, sinful world" then He need not have devised a plan of redemption. In your answer you make God out to love sin.

The rest of your answers are so flippant, they do not deserve an answer. We are done here.

Romans 5:8 But God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

So does that mean that you used to be a righteous sinner whom God loved, but other sinners were sinful sinners whom God hated?
There are good sinners that Jesus died for, and bad sinners that He didn't die for because they were bad.
Am I understanding this teaching correctly...?

 

[Nehemiah6]

If God so loved the "fallen, sinful world" then He need not have devised a plan of redemption.

Which would means that all human beings would end up in Hell -- the Lake of Fire -- prepared for the devil and his angels.

However, because God is not willing that ANY should perish, but that ALL should come to repentance, He devised His plan of redemption. And that is a demonstration of the love of God for the human race -- the world -- or all the inhabitants of the world.

How it that you have a problem with this? Are you an unbeliever?

 

[Blik]

We are NOT talking about those who refuse to obey the Gospel. We are not talking about unbelievers. We do not need to muddy the waters.

You are talking about people who have been saved, sayin g that once saved they can rely on that salvation to last forever, regardless of their remaining a Christian or not, for one saved, you say , always saved. There are Christians who decide to deny Christ and become people who are not Christians. You are changing the subject. Before you talked about people who have been saved always keeping their salvation, regardless of their current faith. Now you don't want to talk about it!!!!!

 

[Nehemiah6]

...regardless of their remaining a Christian or not...

This is PURE DRIVEL. No one has said any such thing, so you have invented it for your own reasons.

Do you really understand what salvation is all about, and how it comes about? If not, it would be a good idea to go back to square one.

 

[MessageOfTheCross]

“The Salvation of mankind is all wrapped up in the Cross of Christ and, as well, the Sanctification of the Saint is also firmly in the Cross of Christ. The meaning of the New Covenant is the Cross of Christ, as the Cross of Christ is the meaning of the New Covenant. At Calvary Jesus atoned for all sin; past, present, and future, at least for those who will believe (Jn. 3:16). With all sin taken away, Satan’s legal right to hold man captive was, as well, taken away. So, captivity presently, and ever since Calvary, is the result of the individual not taking advantage of what Christ has done for us. Through the Cross, Salvation awaits the sinner, and Sanctification awaits the Saint.”

JSM

 

[J-T]

I dug no such hole, my position remains unchanged with regards to works. If you understand me to be saying something different it is in your comprehension not my position.

We could get into the details about how those passages are not presenting quite the picture they're often put forward and tend to have a much more limited view of works than is generally used today, but this is neither the setting nor do I have the drive to present such arguments. Peter's statement alone stands sufficient since he tells us exactly how people twist Paul in 3:17 which is towards lawlessness, meaning they remove the constraints that Paul clearly places on his audience in favor of a view of the gospel that has no responsibility.

And it is the disagreement on the second statement that makes me say you're preaching half a gospel. You preach liberty without responsibility. Your gospel sets no standards, and without standards as I recently heard "without standards there is no love, just brokenness looking for a home."

The undue weight given to Paul over the rest of Scripture is exactly the type of misreading I am speaking to. In order to understand Paul the OT references he makes must be understood, just like to properly understand James the Greek Alexandrian character of the letter has to be understood. Too often the relationship is seen backwards with Paul running roughshod over the OT interpretations and being read into the contexts rather than understanding Paul as an extension of OT themes and stories.

I agree that James and the other general epistles do not teach a works based salvation, but they get those who wish to exclude works entirely spinning with "harmonizations" to smooth them out and find Paul hiding in them rather than reading them in their own voices.

I can only apologize if I misunderstood your position, but I am not convinced that I did, since you have repeatedly stated that I preach "half a gospel". What is key here, of which is what so many people fail to fully grasp, including you, is that Gospel + Works = False Gospel = Works Salvation. The Gospel is 100% separate from works. These are some of things that are perhaps hard to understand, most especially since so many people have been conned out of knowing that the King James Bible 1611 is the infallible and inerrant written Word of God. That is a subject that I have briefly touched on in this Forum already, and is important that I follow up with a presentation of evidence of that factual reality. You say that you do not believe in a works based salvation, and even agree that James does not teach that, but you are still confused with mixing the Gospel with works. Until you fully realize and acknowledge that Gospel + Works = False Gospel = Works Salvation, you will remain stuck. I will add that the R.C.C., JWs, S.D.A., and other groups not only have wrested the words of Apostle Paul, but they have also wrested verses from the epistle of James for the sole purpose of propagating the false works salvation gospel.

That said, I believe that with proper examination of the scriptural passages of 2Peter 2-3 & Jude, with examples of reality, we can come to a full understanding of precisely how grace is being turned into lasciviousness, including who, how, when, and where. In discussing these passages, we must also include other passages that also parallel and are panoramic to these passages, such as 1Timothy 4:1-5, 2Timothy 3 - 4:1-5, 1John, 2John, 3John, Philippians 3, and Revelation 2-3. It is vital to also grasp that these passages in no way teach that Born Again Christians, sealed by the Spirit of God cannot and will lose their salvation. On the other hand, there are many in the Churches that are not regenerated with the new birth that are at serious risk of losing out on salvation with having their names blotted out of the Book of Life. We can also tie these passages in with Matthew 24 and 2Thessalonians 2 as they all pertain and relate to the great falling away from the faith that is happening right before our eyes.

 

[Bbrdrd]

I can only apologize if I misunderstood your position, but I am not convinced that I did, since you have repeatedly stated that I preach "half a gospel". What is key here, of which is what so many people fail to fully grasp, including you, is that Gospel + Works = False Gospel = Works Salvation. The Gospel is 100% separate from works. These are some of things that are perhaps hard to understand, most especially since so many people have been conned out of knowing that the King James Bible 1611 is the infallible and inerrant written Word of God. That is a subject that I have briefly touched on in this Forum already, and is important that I follow up with a presentation of evidence of that factual reality. You say that you do not believe in a works based salvation, and even agree that James does not teach that, but you are still confused with mixing the Gospel with works. Until you fully realize and acknowledge that Gospel + Works = False Gospel = Works Salvation, you will remain stuck. I will add that the R.C.C., JWs, S.D.A., and other groups not only have wrested the words of Apostle Paul, but they have also wrested verses from the epistle of James for the sole purpose of propagating the false works salvation gospel.

That said, I believe that with proper examination of the scriptural passages of 2Peter 2-3 & Jude, with examples of reality, we can come to a full understanding of precisely how grace is being turned into lasciviousness, including who, how, when, and where. In discussing these passages, we must also include other passages that also parallel and are panoramic to these passages, such as 1Timothy 4:1-5, 2Timothy 3 - 4:1-5, 1John, 2John, 3John, Philippians 3, and Revelation 2-3. It is vital to also grasp that these passages in no way teach that Born Again Christians, sealed by the Spirit of God cannot and will lose their salvation. On the other hand, there are many in the Churches that are not regenerated with the new birth that are at serious risk of losing out on salvation with having their names blotted out of the Book of Life. We can also tie these passages in with Matthew 24 and 2Thessalonians 2 as they all pertain and relate to the great falling away from the faith that is happening right before our eyes.

You accuse but you clearly have not grasped what I am stating so you accuse falsely.

The reality is no one prior to Luther separated sanctification and justification or set such a sharp divide between faith and works, and even after Luther the necessity of a changed life is apparent in just about every theologians assessment to such a degree that the only reason to set that sharp divide is polemics.

I won't get into the issues of Biblical authority other than to say I highly doubt you're using the 1611 KJV but more likely an offshoot of one of the revisions from Oxford or Cambridge.

I really don't follow what you're trying to say in the second chunk as it appears to be rather stream of consciousness rather than a coherent thought.

 

[Guojing]

I agree that James and the other general epistles do not teach a works based salvation, but they get those who wish to exclude works entirely spinning with "harmonizations" to smooth them out and find Paul hiding in them rather than reading them in their own voices.

In the OT, before Christ came, how do you think a Jew will show to God that he has faith in him?

 

[Duskey]

I am not hesitant on that and one single verse of Scripture does NOT represent a "foundational Truth". It takes the Whole council of God.

I will be glad to discuss John 3:16 to it's fullest, if you answer a few questions.

1.) In what way did God so love the world?
2.) Did God love the fallen, sinful world?
3.) Did He love the world as it was originally created?
4.) Did God love the world because He knew what it would become in His eternal plan?
5.) What does "kosmon" (world), used here in the greek really mean?
6.) Does "world" mean everyone without exception?
7.) Is "world" sometimes limited in it's scope in Scriptures?

As to the last question, a few verses to consider:

(Isa 13:11) And I will punish the world for their evil........ (is God punishing ALL the people of the world?)
(John 1:10) He was in the world, and the world was made through him, and the world knew him not. (So did no one in the world know him? What about John the baptist and others?)
(John 1:29) On the morrow he seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold, the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world! (Did Jesus take away the sin of every person. Is the whole world now without sin?)
(John 12:19) The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, Behold how ye prevail nothing: lo, the world is gone after him. (Did the whole world go after him or was it the people in the localized area?)
(John 17:9) I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for those whom thou hast given me; for they are thine: (Finally, our Lord prayed for His own. "World" here cannot be ALL inclusive, as there were some standing with Him that He was praying for.)

Just want to see where you are, as well as any others who might be watching this post.

I just realized something; you said if I answered your questions you would discuss John 3:16 in great detail. I obviously answered your questions but your immediate response was to say we’re done here.

You’ve proven yourself not only to be a heretic but a liar as well. Too bad; I was looking forward to teaching you the Gospel.