Loss of salvation???

[studier]

Paul addressed the question 'shall we then sin (all we want) so that grace would abound?' because he was fully aware of opportunity to assert that argument. Indeed, it's a predominant argument currently being employed in another thread.

Yet the sin under discussion is ultimately choosing apostasy.

 

[Mem]

Understood, but an aorist verb and an argument from silence used by either side to assert opinions apart from a comprehensive explanation of what sealing is and is not, doesn't convince me either way.

I get that.

Yet the sin under discussion is ultimately choosing apostasy.

Even if it is established that apostasy after believing can be chosen, there's still the debate of what apostasy actually is.
One side would say disobeying the (specifically the 10) commandments while the other asserts that it is returning the law.

 

[studier]

Using the FORM of the IF used would be helpful in the translation process.

Many elaborations and other things would be helpful.

Here's N.T Wright's take. Note how he states the intensified IF clause and how he ties it tightly to verse 15 to say this is daily [right through the end] not hardening your hearts:

14 We share the life of the Messiah, you see, only if we keep a firm, tight grip on our original confidence, right through to the end. 15 That’s what it means when it says, “Today, if you hear his voice, don’t make your hearts hard, as in the great bitterness.”

I have some thoughts on this "confidence" word also but maybe another time.

 

[Roger316]

You'll have to post some scripture that states that God chooses WHO will be saved.

We talked about the three passages where the apostles guarantee that God tests the faith of some people, and when they endure the trials and suffering, they are assured that their faith will persevere. We might also notice that the New Testament refers to them as "the chosen" and "the elect."

In Romans 11:7, Paul argues that God is not done with Israel, but during Paul's time, God was choosing some Israelites to save, and the rest were hardened.

In the following passage, Paul explicitly says that God chooses some for salvation By the Spirit through sanctification.

2 Thessalonians 2:13 But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth.

Man always has a choice.

Computers make choices all the time. So do animals. What makes man distinctive?

Please post some that state that we do not have a choice.

We can choose whatever we want. But don't forget, what we WANT depends on WHO we are. When we say that our choices are FREE, we mean the absence of coercion. But we are not talking about the absence of motivation. Why do we choose one alternative over another?

Our choices reflect something significant about us: they manifest our hopes, dreams, goals, aspirations, fears, loves, and cultural influences. If our motivations change, we will make different choices that will manifest our new perspective, new tastes, new orientation, new values, new loves, etc.

Being born again, born from above, born of the Spirit, refers to a person's paradigm shift. They still have free will but their motivations have changed. We put off the old man and put on the new man. We have the Spirit of Christ, we are led by the Spirit, we have our mind set on the Spirit, we are sanctified by the Spirit.

 

[studier]

Even if it is established that apostasy after believing can be chosen, there's still the debate of what apostasy actually is.
One side would say disobeying the commandments while the other asserts that it is returning the law.

Yes. Many opinions at every point, which is why I have no desire to deal with anything on a Scriptural level but one step at a time at the specific language level.

The various theological opinions and arguments I think are fairly well-known at this point.

 

[Roger316]

Roger,,,,
I can't spend time trying to figure out if your reformed.

Don't try. Let's keep our focus on the scriptures instead.

 

[CS1]

This is what you stated in post 8332:

"My comments have to do with those who think they follow the whole LAW as I believe you think you do and others here."

It sounds like you think I'm following The Law.
The Law was abolished 2 thousand years ago.

So perhaps we don't understand The law in the same way.
My question is legitimate....
words/expressions must be defined in order to continue a conversation.

It's necessary to be sure that both parties understand the word in the same way.

FYI I think doesn't mean I know what you do. that is why I asked. Do you follow the whole Law .

I am not saved by the Law I am saved by Grace through Faith in Jesus Christ. The IS Gods Standard which have failed and come short of. Do you agree ?

 

[Genez]

High quality teaching that you apparently disagree with in parts?

Do we choose to believe in God or do you disagree with this high-quality Pastor-Teacher because the Spirit taught something different than he taught?

What is your problem?

Even Paul made mistakes... not to mention Peter had quite a few.
Should we reject them?

When all is said and done, God wants us thinking for ourselves in the Spirit after we gather the provided information.
Then we are responsible before the Lord for what we choose to believe and think.

 

[Genez]

Actions speak louder than wrods.

Matthew 15:18-20
18“But the things that proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and those defile the man.
19“For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders.
20“These are the things which defile the man;

You are not willing to sit still and relearn what you learned wrongly the first time.

 

[sparkplug]

Some eighteenth-century thinkers like John Locke, Voltaire, and Immanuel Kant argued that genuine moral responsibility requires real freedom, which makes strict predestination difficult to square with divine justice (though figures like Jonathan Edwards disagreed); in simple terms, my point is that if God is truly impartial yet determines when people are born and what their generation receives, then why do certain eras uniquely produce towering figures like Isaac Newton, James Clerk Maxwell, and Albert Einstein, giving those generations extraordinary intellectual advantages, which makes predestination seem inconsistent with equal divine fairness across time.

 

[studier]

What is your problem?

Even Paul made mistakes... not to mention Peter had quite a few.
Should we reject them?

When all is said and done, God wants us thinking for ourselves in the Spirit after we gather the provided information.
Then we are responsible before the Lord for what we choose to believe and think.

So, I guess your last few sentences are the answer to my questions and I must wade through the rhetoric to get there.

It looks like we agree that we should choose to reject teaching that we learn was mistaken.

In answer to your question, I have always been led to move on at some point from teachers I found were mistaken. What you or others do is not up to me as you know and is seen in your rhetoric.

Any more questions about verb tenses since you started this recent volley?

 

[studier]

You are not willing to sit still and relearn what you learned wrongly the first time.

Are you?

 

[sparkplug]

God only hardens the heart that is already hardened...So they see what lies are like. Maybe they'll hate it. And run to him. Maybe they wont? Who knows?

 

[sawdust]

But we're not talking about menus, are we.

No, but you were making it sound like that is the type of choosing you were talking about. There is always context to the choice and without truth there can be no right choice. Some presentations of the 'gospel' I have heard ought to be prefaced with "allegedly".

NKJ John5:40 "But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life. (Jn. 5:40 NKJ)

But we are not talking about unbelievers. Believers are in Christ, that is the Lord God's promise and He always keeps His word.

Do you see the rebirth being before or after receiving Him, and believing in Him?

Do you continue to see that we choose to believe in Him and now also to receive Him?

Do you see any interactive between the will of man and the will of God?

We can come back to the rest later if you'd like.

We are reborn after believing but as Jn.1:13 says, it is not our believing which, is an act of our will, that makes us reborn. If the Lord God had not decided to do what He does to believers it wouldn't matter how much we believe or for how long, we will not become a new creation based on our will. This is why Paul would say we are saved by grace.

Believing isn't anything special to humanity, all men live by what they believe. It's the object of our belief that makes the difference. In the case of obtaining faith that would be the word, Rom.10:17 which is the truth, Jn.17:7 who is Christ. Jn.1:1&14

No-one (speaking of believers only) is perfected in their faith. We all entertain some error either by way of willful rejection of the word or ignorance of the word.

I wonder if the reason we seem to be going over the same thing all the time is because we see what constitutes faith differently. I see it as a gift, wholly dependent upon the word. Based on what you said earlier, you see it as something we produce from within ourselves. I seem to recall having a rather lengthy discussion with you some time ago regarding my views on believing and faith. I see the power of the word is what generates faith, not our will. It requires our positive volitional alignment with the word but I see no power in our will to produce the faith that saves. The power is in the truth, who is Christ. It is why we are told to come to Christ and rest Matt.11:28 and to let the word of God dwell in us richly. Col.3:16 Faith is the word of God alive and active, working in our souls to His glory. It is what gives one the security of their salvation Heb.11:1 and it is tested to differentiate the pseudo faith we claim to have as opposed to the real faith that comes from God. 1Pet.1:7

As far as interaction between our will and God's will? I would say we receive God's will as we align our will with His. Some might call it obedience, others submission, I like to call it my joy and my delight.

 

[Toknow]

Some eighteenth-century thinkers like John Locke, Voltaire, and Immanuel Kant argued that genuine moral responsibility requires real freedom, which makes strict predestination difficult to square with divine justice (though figures like Jonathan Edwards disagreed); in simple terms, my point is that if God is truly impartial yet determines when people are born and what their generation receives, then why do certain eras uniquely produce towering figures like Isaac Newton, James Clerk Maxwell, and Albert Einstein, giving those generations extraordinary intellectual advantages, which makes predestination seem inconsistent with equal divine fairness across time.

There is no justice with determinism.
They are total opposites.

 

[Musicmaster]

When ignorant, arm chair theologians tell me they will follow Jesus rather than Paul, that's a clear warning to all that they are not willing to rightly divide the word of truth nor to follow Jesus given that what Paul wrote was and is INSPIRED by Jesus.

That clownish attitude of denying Paul is like Israel denying Moses, claiming they chose to follow God rather than Moses...who ALONE was raised up and led by God to write what the Lord inspired him to write and to speak to the nation what the Lord instructed him to say.

Refusing to hear the one assigned to speak for the Lord is akin to refusing the Lord Himself.

MM

 

[Toknow]

FYI I think doesn't mean I know what you do. that is why I asked. Do you follow the whole Law .

I am not saved by the Law I am saved by Grace through Faith in Jesus Christ. The IS Gods Standard which have failed and come short of. Do you agree ?

No one is saved by The law.
The Law was abolished 2 thousand years ago, as I've stated.
Are you referring to scripture?
FOR ALL HAVE SINNED AND FALL SHORT OF THE GLORY OF GOD.

And so?

What is the point?

 

[Musicmaster]

No one is saved by The law.
The Law was abolished 2 thousand years ago, as I've stated.
Are you referring to scripture?
FOR ALL HAVE SINNED AND FALL SHORT OF THE GLORY OF GOD.

And so?

What is the point?

Anyone who knows the scriptures knows the Law was never abolished. Jesus Himself said that, wo what Jesus are you following?

That's not to say we are beholden to live it nor follow it given that we are dead to the Law, but if the Law had been abolished, then even Paul's words make no sense for him to say we are dead to what is abolished. That clearly shows to us that the Law was still in force in Paul's ministry days, which is long after the cross.

Do you ever think about the things you write before writing them?

MM

 

[Toknow]

Don't try. Let's keep our focus on the scriptures instead.

NO.

But must leave.

Many times the reformed SOUND orthodox and so my reply is a waste of time.
The only reason you can post to ME is because you know what I believe theologically/soteriologically.

 

[Toknow]

God only hardens the heart that is already hardened...So they see what lies are like. Maybe they'll hate it. And run to him. Maybe they wont? Who knows?

Reminds me of Pharoah.
Who hardened his heart anyway?
LOL
Difficult to tell from Exodus !