I'm sorry, my system crashed in the middle of a post. What accounts for the apparent ambiguity in the timing of salvation? Are we saved (past-tense) or are we being saved? You can't have it both ways. And why the future tense?
But having repented, were they saved at that moment? I don't think so.
I didn't say they would obey God. They probably won't. But we are all obligated to obey God, whether we are believers or not. Why? Because it is always right to obey God, and it is always wrong to disobey him.
It refers to something that might happen, but not necessarily. Depending on the circumstances, it might not happen.
When Jesus speaks in conditional form, He is not always introducing uncertainty or contingency. Many of His “if… then…” statements function the way biblical wisdom literature functions: they describe the recognizable marks of reality, not the precarious conditions of a contract. When He says, “If you abide in My word, you are truly My disciples,” He is not suggesting that discipleship hangs by a thread or that a true disciple might fail to abide and thereby cease to be what he is.
Cont'd
Rather, He is describing the visible pattern of a life that has already been joined to Him. The conditional form highlights the correspondence between identity and fruit, not the fragility of that identity. It is the same logic John uses when he says, “Everyone who has been born of God practices righteousness.” He is not warning that a child of God might stop being a child; he is describing what new birth produces.
Right.
The obedience highlights the conncection between identity and fruit.
So what if the connection ceases to be present?
Jesus states plainly that if we do not CONTINUE, or ABIDE...we will be like the branches that are thrown into the fire.
John 15:5
6“If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned.
Remember John 15:2 states that those IN JESUS must bear fruit....it is a saved person.
Jesus is making a point of the fact that even a believer can be removed from the vine.
Jesus Himself gives us the interpretive key when He uses natural analogies. “When you see the blossoms on the tree, you know that summer is near.” The statement is conditional, but it contains no contingency. He is not saying, “If you see blossoms, then maybe summer is near—unless something interrupts the process.” Blossoms reveal the nearness of summer; they do not cause it, and they do not introduce the possibility that summer might fail to arrive.
There's another fig tree in a different analogy.
Jesus said that if it did not make fruit withing the year....it would be cut down.
He most probably meant Israel...but it works anyway.
If we do not "come around" and make fruit...we will not be of value to the Kingdom of God.
We will be removed from the vine.
I suppose we all know that even dead flowers take up some water and energy from a plant.
This is why dead flowers are cut off...ditto for parts of a vine.
If we do not produce fruit...we are like those dead flowers.
Also, your verse is NOT conditional.
Jesus is making a simple statement.
He is indeed explaining something that will happen.
No conditions...no if's.
Had Jesus said
IF you see a flower, spring is coming.....
this opens up the contingency....the possibility that spring will not be coming since there is no flower.
In the same way, abiding does not cause someone to be a disciple, nor does it leave open the possibility that a true disciple might fall away. Abiding is the blossom; discipleship is the summer. The conditional form simply names the relationship between the two. Not all conditionals imply uncertainty—some simply describe the reliable signs of God’s work.
Cannot agree at all.
See above.
Agreed. But let's go with caution.
Go with caution?
When Jesus commands something?
I think it would behoove us to just do what He says.
But it is.
Yes—Matthew 7:25–27 is another place where Jesus uses conditional language descriptively, not to introduce contingency or the possibility of an alternative outcome. The “if” in this passage functions the same way as the “if” of the blossoming fig tree or the “if” of abiding in John 8 and 15. Jesus is not speculating about what might happen to two hypothetical builders; He is describing the inevitable correspondence between a person’s foundation and their outcome. The storms do not test whether the house will stand in the sense of introducing uncertainty—they reveal what was already true. The conditional form simply names the relationship: if the foundation is rock, then the house stands; if the foundation is sand, then the house falls. There is no scenario in which a house built on rock collapses, nor one in which a house built on sand survives. The conditional is descriptive of reality, not probabilistic about possibilities.
The blossoming tree is NOT conditional.
Matthew 7:24-27 is conditional.
The storm is testing the house.
Yes. IF the foundation is rock it will stand.
IF the foundation is sand it will fall.
WHAT makes the house be built on rock?
WHAT makes the house be built on sand?
One builder ACTS on the words of Jesus....roch.
One builder DOES NOT ACT on the words of Jesus....sand.
It is WHAT WE DO that creates the foundation.
You're getting a little into OSAS, which is fine with me, but it's totally a different topic.
Jesus is simply saying that if we ACT on His words, we will be on the rock..
If we DO NOT ACT on his words...we will be on sand.
His words are what He taught during His ministry.
Not only those who cry LORD LORD but those who do the will of My Father.
What is the will of God?
To believe in Jesus.
To believe means to follow/to trust/to do what He teaches.
There are descriptive passages in the NT,,,but maybe even the prescriptive ones are being added
to the bunch?
I believe Matthew 7 is prescriptive.
It's explaining HOW to build on the rock or not.
This is why Jesus presents the two builders as types, not as individuals whose futures are open-ended. The wise man is the one who hears and does Jesus’ words; the foolish man is the one who hears and does not do them. These are not two disciples who might switch categories depending on performance. They are two kinds of people, two kinds of foundations, two kinds of outcomes. The storm does not create their destiny; it discloses it. In this way, Jesus’ conditional statements function like the wisdom sayings of Proverbs: “If you walk with the wise, you will become wise.” That is not a contingency but a description of how reality works under God’s ordering. Matthew 7 fits that same pattern. Jesus is not warning true disciples that they might fall; He is describing the unbreakable connection between what a person is and what their life inevitably reveals.
I do understand.
I just cannot agree.
Responded to above.
How so? What do you mean?
If we do not teach obedience to God,,,
we cheapen His sacrifice.
We cheapen it by teaching that we just need to believe and no action is rquired.
This idea leads to:
The undermining of Christian values.
Some say that our deeds are like filthy rags.
Behavior is of of little importance.
It detracts from the authority of God.
Some believe there is no need to even ask forgiveness.
Some say but do not DO.
There's probably more.
Again, Jesus' conditionals are descriptive.
John 15:1–2 fits the same descriptive pattern as the builder metaphor because Jesus is again naming the inevitable correspondence between a person’s true identity and the visible outcome of their life. The vine-and-branches image is not a warning that a genuine branch might suddenly become non‑genuine; it is a revelation of what is already true about the relationship between the vine and each branch. A branch that bears fruit does so because it is organically connected to the life of the vine. A branch that bears no fruit does so because it never shared that life. The conditional or observational language (“every branch in Me that does not bear fruit…”) is not introducing the possibility that a living branch might lose its life, but describing the reality that fruitlessness reveals a lack of life from the start.
No. Roger.
John 15 cannot be understood in any way other than prescriptive.
Those IN JESUS will be cut off if they do not produce.
No way around that.
The entire NT revolves around the teaching that we are to obey.
The verses that state that we can fall away are many.
As I stated...I believe you take too many verses to be descriptive when they are not.
