when will the most evil doctrin in the world get banned on this site.

[peldom10]

gentile Christians were never Commanded to keep the Jewish Sabbath.

saying that one must is a lie.

you have not said that here, but have plenty of times in other threads.

and, as to this thread, the only thing i would ban is Sabbath keeping by modern gentile Christians to be right with God.

Show me one pal.

 

[Phoneman-777]

Did you read John 6:29? It tells us that it is a work to believe. Your example doesn't address choosing.

Let's not confuse the "cognitive work of choosing to believe" with the altogether different "good/bad work of obedience or lack thereof".

Even you refuse to acknowledge a difference, the Bible over and over tells us to "choose" good over bad.

 

[Phoneman-777]

Those who become "entangled again" had never become saved in the first place.

Let's get something straight: we're either "with" Jesus or "against" Him.

THERE IS NO SPIRITUAL SWITZERLAND.

The text plainly says they "escaped" the pollution of the world, and the difference between "escaped" and "entangled" is a stark as "pregnant" and "not pregnant". They were escaped, grace-saved, born again Christians who kicked Jesus off their heart throne to make room for themselves and will go to hell.

 

[Phoneman-777]

gentile Christians were never Commanded to keep the Jewish Sabbath.

saying that one must is a lie.

you have not said that here, but have plenty of times in other threads.

and, as to this thread, the only thing i would ban is Sabbath keeping by modern gentile Christians to be right with God.

Hebrews 4:9 would beg to differ. It plainly says "It is therefore the duty of the people of God to keep the Sabbath..."

Are we going to ignore that "rest" is the Greek "kataposis" from Hebrews 3:11 to Hebrews 4:11 except verse 9 where it is "Sabbatismos"? I guess when it comes to inspiration, God took the day off when Paul got to this passage, right?

 

[Phoneman-777]

[Heb 6:9 KJV]
9 But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak.

Yes, Jesus spoke of these "better things" mentioned by Paul here: "..the love of many shall wax cold, but he that shall endure to the end, the same shall be saved." - Matthew 24:12 KJV

Let's not twist "better things" into meaning "saved" so that we can make the escaped "lost", OK? It's referring to the steadfast, unceasing faith versus faith that fails to endure to the end.

 

[gb9]

Hebrews 4:9 would beg to differ. It plainly says "It is therefore the duty of the people of God to keep the Sabbath..."

Are we going to ignore that "rest" is the Greek "kataposis" from Hebrews 3:11 to Hebrews 4:11 except verse 9 where it is "Sabbatismos"? I guess when it comes to inspiration, God took the day off when Paul got to this passage, right?

you mean one obscure translation that you insist is the only correct one says this.

 

[Runningman]

Bro, if they abused Christ, should we expect anything less? "We must gather warmth from the coldness of others, strength from their cowardice, and loyalty from their treason". It's my wish to see in heaven all who mock and disparage
When the motive is unclear, it's wrong to judge it because God alone knows the heart. Clear motives such as drinking because the body requires water, sleeping because one requires rest, obtaining a fishing, hunting, or trawling license because one is required to do those things...needs no judgment call. However, attraction, flattery, jealousy, dependency, etc., can be motivated by many things.

There's only one reason a OSAS License to Sin is required - to escape the same punishment for doing the exact same thing for which the Unlicensed will suffer. The OSAS crowd denies this - not because it's untrue - but because saying it like this strips away the dignity with which they clothe this false doctrine.

I’m not necessarily pro-OSAS but reframing those people as perverse people looking for a license to sin is called demonizing the opposition. It means that rather than defeating someone you disagree with with ideas and facts, you attempt to destroy their character in the eyes of other people. If you can at least make them look evil then maybe you’ve scored a few points. We see this a bit too much around the board.

What I will leave you with is this nugget:
No one needs a license to sin because everyone is sinning just fine without a license.

Isn’t that the truth though?

 

[Runningman]

I’m not necessarily pro-OSAS but reframing those people as perverse people looking for a license to sin is called demonizing the opposition. It means that rather than defeating someone you disagree with with ideas and facts, you attempt to destroy their character in the eyes of other people. If you can at least make them look evil then maybe you’ve scored a few points. We see this a bit too much around the board.

What I will leave you with is this nugget:
No one needs a license to sin because everyone is sinning just fine without a license.

Isn’t that the truth though?

And yes there are a lot of verses that strongly imply that once you are saved you can’t be unsaved.

 

[Runningman]

I'm leaving this site. Goodbye this is my last post to Christian chat. due to none stop abuse and God's words being trashed and Christians being abused by angry people and false accusers and anti Christians i have decided to leave for good this time,

sorry to see you go! I was beginning to wonder why I hadn’t seen you post much. This board is mostly just for sport any way. There are no serious studies or serious fellowship here. Just a bunch of debates and discussions. Take a break and try to reach some lost folk who want to be saved and are reachable. It’s refreshing and I think it’s necessary at times.

 

[rogerg]

Let's not twist "better things" into meaning "saved" so that we can make the escaped "lost", OK? It's referring to the steadfast, unceasing faith versus faith that fails to endure to the end.

[Heb 6:9 KJV] 9 But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak.

Wait... are you trying to say the verse doesn't mean they were saved? It clearly states that those Paul addressed were saved, and that there were things given directly to them of God as a by-product, and accompanying salvation. There is no other way to reasonably interpret or understand that verse.

 

[rogerg]

Let's get something straight: we're either "with" Jesus or "against" Him.

THERE IS NO SPIRITUAL SWITZERLAND.

The text plainly says they "escaped" the pollution of the world, and the difference between "escaped" and "entangled" is a stark as "pregnant" and "not pregnant". They were escaped, grace-saved, born again Christians who kicked Jesus off their heart throne to make room for themselves and will go to hell.

No, they weren't -- they were never of the saved:

[Mar 4:15-19 KJV]
15 And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts.
16 And these are they likewise which are sown on stony ground; who, when they have heard the word, immediately receive it with gladness;
17 And have no root in themselves, and so endure but for a time: afterward, when affliction or persecution ariseth for the word's sake, immediately they are offended.
18 And these are they which are sown among thorns; such as hear the word,
19 And the cares of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in, choke the word, and it becometh unfruitful.

 

[rogerg]

Let's not confuse the "cognitive work of choosing to believe" with the altogether different "good/bad work of obedience or lack thereof".

Even you refuse to acknowledge a difference, the Bible over and over tells us to "choose" good over bad.

For someone to truly believe is God's work, and God's work alone.

[Gal 5:22 KJV]
22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,

 

[rogerg]

You are partially correct. Please consider the following in your analysis;...".faith without works is dead"....?
Caution...the Bible tells us...we cannot work or buy our way into Heaven/Eternal Salvation. We must use common sense.

We are to work for our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ as part of living righteously.

".".faith without works is dead"....?"

Just to explore your logic a little deeper, isn't it your understanding (but not mine) that a person is saved by/through their own faith? If so and if their faith is a "dead" faith by lacking works, it would be unable to bring salvation. So, if works are a prerequisite to alive faith, which alive faith is a prerequisite for salvation, then we must know precisely how to achieve those works in their numbers, to satisfy the standard of faith, by which we will be judged. Therefore, I suggest it is incumbent upon you to provide for our edification those criteria. If you are unable to, it may just be that you're working under an incorrect assumption as to the correct meaning of that biblical phrase ("faith without works is dead").

 

[oyster67]

Once saved always saved is finally getting abolished by a lot of churches, because it gives people a license to sin or makes people become a law unto themselves.

They don't like to call it Calvinism because this emphasizes that it comes from men and not from Christ or His Written Word.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Once saved always saved is finaly getting abolished by alot of churches, because it gives people a liscence to sin or makes people become a law unto them selfs.

If the eternal security of the believer is getting banned, you might as well ban Christ and His finished work of redemption. Who said that this is a license to sin? Who said that this makes people a law unto themselves? Do you have any documented evidence, or is this all something you have concocted? [Note: I have not fixed any of the errors in the quote]

 

[Dino246]

If the eternal security of the believer is getting banned, you might as well ban Christ and His finished work of redemption. Who said that this is a license to sin?

Phoneman did, ad nauseam.

 

[Phoneman-777]

you mean one obscure translation that you insist is the only correct one says this.

Self evident truth doesn't need consensus, but to be pulled from the obscuring hand of Satan and held high for all to either embrace or despise.

 

[Phoneman-777]

I’m not necessarily pro-OSAS but reframing those people as perverse people looking for a license to sin is called demonizing the opposition.

I never said they were "perverse", so kindly don't put words in my mouth. What I say is they want a License to Sin to escape the same punishment the Unlicensed will suffer for doing the same things the Licensed do whatever that reason may be: presumption, a stop-gap measure, security (however false), etc.

I have a question: how come no one complains when the arguments of the Conditional Salvation crowd are reframed so as to "prove" they teach Legalism?

It means that rather than defeating someone you disagree with with ideas and facts, you attempt to destroy their character in the eyes of other people. If you can at least make them look evil then maybe you’ve scored a few points. We see this a bit too much around the board.

Can't we do both? Defeat them with sound arguments as I've done over and over, but also make clear what is obscured to them: that there's only one reason a person desires a License: to escape the same punishment the Unlicensed will suffer for doing the exact same thing the Licensed do. This is called "stripping away the dignity with which false doctrine is clothed".

What I will leave you with is this nugget:
No one needs a license to sin because everyone is sinning just fine without a license. Isn’t that the truth though?

No, it's not the truth. While the Just Man may stumble and fall into sin but is lifted up by the grace of God, the Presumptuous Man climbs down into the pit, sits down comfortably among the filth, swats away the uplifting hand of Jesus, and waves his OSAS "License to Sin" in His face. He thinks his license will grant him immunity from suffering the same punishment which the Unlicensed will suffer for doing the exact same thing the Licensed do.

 

[Phoneman-777]

[Heb 6:9 KJV] 9 But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak.

Wait... are you trying to say the verse doesn't mean they were saved? It clearly states that those Paul addressed were saved, and that there were things given directly to them of God as a by-product, and accompanying salvation. There is no other way to reasonably interpret or understand that verse.

LIsten to me very closely: WORDS MEAN THINGS.

OK?

It says right there that these "better things" ACCOMPANY salvation...or "ALONG WITH salvation" just as an "accompanying instrument" means an instrument played alongside a different instrument.

These "better things" are not "salvation" but are things which "accompany" salvation: specifically, steadfast faith, without which no man will see God.

 

[Phoneman-777]

No, they weren't -- they were never of the saved:

[Mar 4:15-19 KJV]
15 And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts.
16 And these are they likewise which are sown on stony ground; who, when they have heard the word, immediately receive it with gladness;
17 And have no root in themselves, and so endure but for a time: afterward, when affliction or persecution ariseth for the word's sake, immediately they are offended.
18 And these are they which are sown among thorns; such as hear the word,
19 And the cares of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in, choke the word, and it becometh unfruitful.

Let's be clear: all four recipients were saved:

1. "in their hearts".
2. "received with gladness".
3. "became unfruitful" which means they previously brought forth fruit.
4. of course, continued to bring forth fruit.

Can the "unsaved" be said to have "received" God's Word "in their hearts" but later "became unfruitful" when Romans 8:7 KJV says the wicked can't bring forth the fruit of obedience to God's Law even if they wanted to? Never.

BTW, even if the first three were symbolic of the "never saved", that still does not take away from the fact that Peter's dogs and pigs had escaped the pollutions of this world. YOU CAN'T BE SIMULTANEOUSLY "ESCAPED" AND "ENTANGLED AGAIN THEREIN" ANY MORE THAN A WOMAN CAN BE SIMULTANEOUSLY "PREGNANT" AND "NOT PREGNANT".