Loss of salvation???

[Kroogz]

Very interesting question. I wonder if the answer can be accepted without doctrinal position held by the two groups?


As a minister I teach to enter into the relationship with Christ who called you and saved you. Grow in Grace and love. God has called one to come out from the world. So if one returns to the world and lives as though they did not know Christ, I guess one could ask if they ever did. Yet those who die claiming to know Christ or did not know must be left with GOD. We cannot say or know their eternal state. However, ones life does testify to what they profess. We can know them by their fruit. Matthew 7:16-20.

I do see God is actively willing and ready to receive the prodigal Luke 15:11-32.

On this forum, we know them by their doctrine(fruit.) And the Prodigal was ALWAYS a son. But we are dead to Him if we don't have fellowship with Him. 1 John 1:9......like the prodigal son and we are back in fellowship with our Father.

 

[CS1]

On this forum, we know them by their doctrine(fruit.) And the Prodigal was ALWAYS a son. But we are dead to Him if we don't have fellowship with Him. 1 John 1:9......like the prodigal son and we are back in fellowship with our Father.

Context matters, and so does the whole chapter why did Jesus say what he said in Luke 15? Doctrine is not the fruit. It is teaching as that is what the word means.

 

[Mem]

Seems simple: A bank honors a check by cashing it. To honor a request is to accept it as valid. It's synonymous with 'allow'.

Check cashing crossed my mind earlier today. A bank requires that I present a note that says, "pay on (my) demand the amount of $4 and some cents" with the guarantor's signature. The bank honors the guarantor's promise of reimbursement. It allows me the $4 because it trusts the guarantor to provide sufficient funding.

On the other hand, I'm not going to be allowed 1cent if I try and pass off any counterfeit notes. I'm going to be left with what I have, all my debts unpaid. And this could've been remedied if I would have had just enough humility to accept the benefactor's check with thanksgiving.

 

[Kroogz]

Doctrine is not the fruit.

This is why the majority of believers are failing/falling away/rejecting/walking away/falling from grace.

If an unbeliever can do it.........It isn't fruit.

 

[CS1]

This is why the majority of believers are failing/falling away/rejecting/walking away/falling from grace.

If an unbeliever can do it.........It isn't fruit.

I am sorry I am not sure what you mean. IF a believer is failing away the word was not fully established in their life. Is that not the principle of the parable of the Sower? The seed being the word of GOD.

the devil came and took from them, so they did not believe. the pleasures and care of this life choked out of them so they did not believe, and the hard times of life cause them not to believe.

BUT those who heard and received produced fruit that was a blessing.

There are many reasons for what looks like believers failing away.

1. compromising on Holiness at the expense of Gods love.
2. false teaching and emotional experiences but no transformation.

having a form of godliness but deny the power thereof.

 

[studier]

No presupposition, it is the plainly taught in scripture.

It is called hermeneutics.

It's eisegesis. Nothing more.

If you want to bring in hermeneutics, then it's called presuppositional hermeneutics which are not to be done with doctrines like ES. Your kidding yourself if you think otherwise and so is the one telling you these things.

Proper hermeneutics are based in exegesis, not eisegesis.

Again, where'd you get this nonsense?

 

[Kroogz]

No presupposition, it is the plainly taught in scripture.

It is called hermeneutics.

Yep. "Christ is raised" is eisegesis. And being "raised with Him" is also eisegesis. Didn't you know?

Col 3:1~~Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God.

The loss of salvation crowd sure don't have their hearts set on things above.

 

[studier]

Check cashing crossed my mind earlier today. A bank requires that I present a note that says, "pay on (my) demand the amount of $4 and some cents" with the guarantor's signature. The bank honors the guarantor's promise of reimbursement. It allows me the $4 because it trusts the guarantor to provide sufficient funding.

On the other hand, I'm not going to be allowed 1cent if I try and pass off any counterfeit notes. I'm going to be left with what I have, all my debts unpaid. And this could've been remedied if I would have had just enough humility to accept the benefactor's check with thanksgiving.

The check cashing analogy was really not an analogy to be used theologically, but simply an example used in the dictionary to show that 'honor' has a range of meaning that includes an overlap with words like 'accept' in a neutral and procedural sense - IOW not giving honor/praise/glory to someone or something.

In regard to belief or unbelief, God honors/accepts both - His response to each one differs. It's no more difficult than that.

I'll honor/accept/respect your right to choose to disagree.

 

[studier]

the devil came and took from them, so they did not believe. the pleasures and care of this life choked out of them so they did not believe, and the hard times of life cause them not to believe.

Is that precisely what Luke8:13 says and maybe Luke8:14?

 

[studier]

Yep. "Christ is raised" is eisegesis. And being "raised with Him" is also eisegesis. Didn't you know?

Col 3:1~~Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God.

The loss of salvation crowd sure don't have their hearts set on things above.

Still avoiding those questions re: Col1:23 and replacing them with straw men.

BTW, I did a quick run through your linked article on ES and it looks like it avoids this verse also.

It's OK. There are arguments for and against all these ES verses. I just thought with all your learning and winner-believer status due to doctrine inculcation you'd be able to explain the language and the pros and cons for and against the differing interpretations.

 

[sawdust]

Seems like semantics to me. The use of "honor" I've shown is legitimate English within it's range of definition and use. My sense is that our disagreement is in your phrase "giving honor" which I haven't said.

I mean 'honor' as God sovereignly permitting/respecting the reality of human choices (even sinful ones) without overriding them - leading to just judgment. If 'honor' is too positive to you, then 'permits' or 'respects the freedom of' works too."

I know what you mean but if God is not "giving" honour to man's will then what is He doing by honouring man's will?. I think that distinction is more semantics at play than what you think I'm saying. But nevertheless, it's not that important. We can move past that.

As far as I am concerned it is the Lord honouring His own integrity when He allows man to freely choose to believe or disbelieve. He permits our choices, within reason, but it is His character that is honoured when those choices prove beneficial or harmful as the case may be.

Again, what's your basic concern? Going from Lewis to Manson's fantasies seems a bit extreme. Yes, God's will ultimately prevails, but this is not contrary to permitting people to chose their eternal destiny - it is His will that they do so and He gave them the choice of life or death - of accepting Him or rejecting Him.

My basic concern is I think you put too much emphasis on man's capacity. I noted your earlier comment (not to me) regarding grace. You used the term "free grace" as if that was a bad thing. At least, that is how it sounded. Does God owe us grace because we obey? At the end of the day, as Paul pointed out, we live and move and have our being thanks to God. Grace does not negate our responsibility or capacity to respond, preferably positively, but we don't achieve anything. It is the Lord who saves, transforms and creates anew. Even those who end up in the lake of fire are there, not because they decided that is what they want, but because the Lord has created reality and we either live in it or outside of it.

Maybe you don't mean it how I'm hearing it, but it sounds like you have man creating his own destiny. I have a saying "man chooses his destiny but God creates his fate". When I hear you speak it sounds more like you would say "man creates his destiny and God chooses his fate".

 

[studier]

My basic concern is I think you put too much emphasis on man's capacity.

You'd have to explain this.

I noted your earlier comment (not to me) regarding grace. You used the term "free grace" as if that was a bad thing.

It's the identity of a systematic theology group that uses the terminology about itself.

Does God owe us grace because we obey? At the end of the day, as Paul pointed out, we live and move and have our being thanks to God. Grace does not negate our responsibility or capacity to respond, preferably positively, but we don't achieve anything.

Disagree with the last clause depending on what you mean and when in our relationship you're speaking about.

It is the Lord who saves, transforms and creates anew.

Again, what are you speaking of - salvation is a process with a beginning and an end.

Even those who end up in the lake of fire are there, not because they decided that is what they want, but because the Lord has created reality and we either live in it or outside of it.

Disagree in a sense. They in effect chose their destiny just as the C.S. Lewis quote I posted said. We live in or out of either reality by our own choosing to believe or not to believe - to obey the Gospel or to not obey the Gospel.

Maybe you don't mean it how I'm hearing it, but it sounds like you have man creating his own destiny.

Choosing is not creating.

I have a saying "man chooses his destiny but God creates his fate". When I hear you speak it sounds more like you would say "man creates his destiny and God chooses his fate".

Man doesn't create or initiate anything and is not the final judge. Man responds by accepting or rejecting God. God has determined the fate of both responses and is the final judge of man's status.

 

[Qt]

In regard to Hebrews 6:4-6, once enlightened, which means to bring to light, to shed light upon or to cause light to shine upon some object, in the sense of illuminating it. John 1:9 describes Jesus, the "true Light," giving light "to every man," but this cannot mean the light of salvation, because not every man is saved. The light either leads to acceptance of Jesus Christ or produces condemnation in those who reject the light.

In regard to partakers of the Holy Spirit, the word translated “partaker” can certainly refer to a saving partaking in Christ, as we read in Hebrews 3:14, yet it can also refer to a less than saving association or participation. See Luke 5:7 and Hebrews 1:9 - "comrades, companions," which describes one who shares with someone else as an associate in an undertaking. These Hebrews who fell away had obviously in some aspect shared in the ministry of the Holy Spirit, but in what way? There are other ministries of the Holy Spirit which precede receiving the indwelling and sealing of the Holy Spirit, which only genuine believers receive.

Those who fall away absolutely could have been affiliated closely with the fellowship of the church. Such people certainly may have experienced sorrow for sin, heard and understood the gospel and have given some assent to it and have become associated with the work of the Holy Spirit while around believers and have tasted the heavenly gift and the powers of the age to come. They may have been exposed to the true preaching of the word of God yet have simply tasted and stopped there. People who have experienced these things may be genuine Christians, yet this alone is not enough to give conclusive evidence that the beginning stages of conversion (repentance unto life, regeneration, salvation, justification, etc..) have taken place for those who fell away. The experiences in Hebrews 6:4-6 are all preliminary to those decisive beginning stages of becoming a Christian, yet those who draw back to perdition after receiving the 'knowledge' of the truth do not believe to the saving of the soul. (Hebrews 10:39)

These certain individuals who fall short of obtaining salvation certainly may have become partakers of the Holy Spirit in his pre-salvation ministry, convicting of sin and righteousness and judgment to come by tasting the good word of God and temporarily responding to His drawing power which is intended to ultimately lead sinners to Christ, yet the writer of Hebrews does not use conclusive terms that these individuals were "indwelled by the Holy Spirit" or "sealed by the Holy Spirit." Genuine believers who have believed the gospel are sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession/unto the day of redemption. (Ephesians 1:13-14; 4:30)

In regard 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 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." We do not merely taste, but drink into one Spirit. (1 Corinthians 12:13)

In regard 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 the argument of a loss of salvation.

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 the evidence of spiritual life and a lack of good fruit is a sign of false believers (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 those who fell away in Hebrews 6 were 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.

It's generally stated by those who believe that salvation can be lost that it can be regained again, yet that would not be the case here if the writer of Hebrews was teaching a loss of salvation. I have heard certain individuals state they know someone who was truly saved, but later lost their salvation, yet only God truly knows the heart of individuals. Certain people "on the surface" may do a good job of looking like the real deal for a while (like Judas Iscariot, who was an unbelieving, unclean devil who betrayed Jesus - John 6:64-71; 13:10-11) yet to the other 11 disciples, he looked like the real deal, but Jesus knew his heart. There are genuine Christians and there are "nominal" Christians. There are genuine believers and there are make believers and you can't always tell them apart at first.

The context of the letter says different. Starting in chapter 2 it says, How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation, in Jesus Christ. For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succor we the holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling when tempted. (2:18-3:1) For He is faithful over His own house. Whose house we are if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the expectation firm unto the end. Wherefore (as the Holy Ghost saith, To day if ye, the partakers of the heavenly calling will hear his voice, Take heed, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God. (3:7-12) Not holding fast to the succoring when we are tempted. So exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin through an evil heart of unbelief. For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end; (3:14) hear his voice, His succoring when tempted though deceitfulness of sin. Harden not your hearts through unbelief, being disobedient. For it is impossible for us who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If we shall fall away, to renew us again unto repentance; seeing They crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame. (6:1-7)

 

[Qt]

You might enjoy some of the insights in this article. It does contain reference to Torah observance but the Hebrew info about relationship and obedience as I said may well be baked into John's use of eis. GJohn never speaks of "belief" but just the active and dynamic concept of "believing" - so it's not a static sense of believing some facts - but an active sense of living in an active believing & obeying relationship with God.

cc: @Qt

Hey there studier, I pray all is well.

From the article, "eis is a relational word. It’s not about my cognitive state of mind or my agreement with some doctrine. It’s about coming into a way of living."

And that Way is Christ. As Jesus said through John.

John 15:4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.
John 15:5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
John 15:6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.
John 15:7 If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.

We can not abide in Him unless we believe into Him. Us in Him, He in us, that the world might believe.

 

[Qt]

I also read you post to @studier ....

Unless you can clearly explain the difference between
BELIEVING IN JESUS
and
BELIEVING INTO JESUS


the vagueness will remain.

BELIEVE JESUS is different.

BELIEVING IN JESUJS
BELIEVING INTO JESUS is the same.

Good morning mam, I pray your day is well.
You can not be in Jesus unless you believe into Jesus.

I found it to be better for people to see for themselves. Which I think you do now. At least that is what I see by the post of yours that I liked.

In other langues I cannot find the expression BELIEVE INTO JESUS.

Young's Literal Translation
John 3:16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that everyone believing into Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Here is a more modern one which happens to be my favorite. Be that as it may I still use the KJV more in respect to translations.

J. P. Green's Literal Translation
16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that everyone believing into Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

I do dislike having to use the Greek since I believe we need to trust the NT tranlators...
but anyway...I also checked the original Koine Greek:


This is from the Greek:
Truly, truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do, and greater than these he will do, because I am going to the Father.

ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὁ πιστεύων εἰς ἐμὲ τὰ ἔργα ἃ ἐγὼ ποιῶ κἀκεῖνος ποιήσει, καὶ μείζονα τούτων ποιήσει, ὅτι ἐγὼ πρὸς τὸν πατέρα πορεύομαι·

Thou understandeth what thou readest? Please Don't rely on an Interlinear. No sense looking at the Greek unless one looks up the words and delves into the Grammar a little bit. We do not have to be scholars, but we do have to be able to understand the resources that are available to explain what we see.

Have blessed day

 

[Qt]

So she preaches obedience for others, but does not apply it so herself, this is typical of people who think salvation can be lost, it is always the other person they want to condemn.

Why do you say she does not apply it to herself? Do you live with her or know her to make such a claim.

Or maybe you use your own character or the characters of others you know to judge everyone?

 

[Toknow]

As you know the text is a Parable correct? And we must look at the whole chapter would you not agree?

Actually, no, I do not agree.

You're talking about context. We don't need this whole chapter of Luke 15 to understand
what Jesus is teaching in all of the examples.

Each one is teaching something different.

the chapter has many Parables:

1. The Parable of the Lost Sheep​

Then all the tax collectors and the sinners drew near to Him to hear Him. And the Pharisees and scribes complained, saying, “This Man receives sinners and eats with them.”

4 “What man of you, having a hundred sheep, if he loses one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the wilderness, and go after the one which is lost until he finds it? 5 And when he has found it, he lays it on his shoulders. rejoicing."

7 I say to you that likewise there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine just persons who need no repentance.
lost sheep speaking about sinners

The Lost Sheep
Those close to the Jesus do not need help.
It is those that WANDER AWAY that require help.
Jesus will actively seek those that WANDER AWAY form the flock.
The lost sheep would most probably have ended up dead,,,as happens in real life sheep herding...had the shepherd not found it AGAIN.
So let's check:
THE SHEEP WAS IN THE FLOCK
THE SHEEP WANDERED AWAY AND BECAME LOST
THE SHEEP WAS FOUND AGAIN


The parable teaches that salvation can be lost by wandering away.

1. The Parable of the Lost Coin​

Or what woman, having ten silver coins, if she loses one coin, does not light a lamp, sweep the house, and search carefully until she finds it? 9 And when she has found it, she calls her friends and neighbors together, saying, ‘Rejoice with me, for I have found the piece which I lost!’ 10 Likewise, I say to you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents.”
Lost coin speaking about sinner who repents

Agreed.
The coin represents the Kingdom of God here on earth.

1. The Parable of the Lost Son​

11 Then He said: “A certain man had two sons. 12 And the younger of them said to his father, ‘Father, give me the portion of goods that falls to me.’ So he divided to them his livelihood. ​

14 But when he had spent all, there arose a severe famine in that land, and he began to be in want. 15 Then he went and joined himself to a citizen of that country, and he sent him into his fields to feed swine. 16 And he would gladly have filled his stomach with the pods that the swine ate, and no one gave him anything.
as we read on we see the son came to his understanding of returning to his father's house as a servant not as entitled son.
20 And he arose and came to his father. But when he was still a great way off, his father saw him and had compassion, and ran and fell on his neck and kissed him. 21 And the son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and in your sight, and am no longer worthy to be called your son.’

The Lost Son:
This also is about repentance and the old Brother who was self-righteous and judgmental of his brother returning home after he repented. the two previous stories showed rejoicing for the one who found the lost sheep and the lost coin.
Jesus was admonishing who? "And the Pharisees and scribes complained, saying, “This Man receives sinners and eats with them.”

This is not about those who are saved and leave and return.

The lost sheep was in the fold...
he was SAVED.
He wandered off and became LOST.
He did return.

The parable is most definitely about losing ones salvation.

this is about about those who are religious and self-righteous who forgot they were sinners.
Verse 24 is speaking of each one of us who was lost and was found, who was dead and made alive. That was called to be a son of God be sin separated us from GOD, Repentance restored the relationship and all should rejoice because of that.

No sir.
You're reading into the scripture.
You're ADDING your own ideas into scripture.
This is eisegesis and should not be practiced.

Let's check out verse 24 again since you seem to have missed an important point.

Luke 15:24
24for this son of mine was dead and has come to life again; he was lost and has been found.’ And they began to celebrate.


I DO believe Jesus knew what He wanted to teach.
Jesus said that the son has COME TO LIFE AGAIN.

AGAIN means:
the son was
saved
lost
saved again


It is not speaking about someone that was lost and is saved.
The Son was a member of the household.
He asked for his inheritance.
The father gave him 2/3 of the inheritance since he was the first born.
HE LEFT THE HOUSEHOLD.
HE ABANDONED THE FATHER.
He went into the world and realized what a mistake he made.
He CAME BACK HOME and was made alive again.
He rejoined the household.


This reminds me of:

1 Pete 2:20-22
20For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first.

21For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them.

22It has happened to them according to the true proverb, “A DOG RETURNS TO ITS OWN VOMIT,” and, “A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire.”
They are
SAVED
LOST
Those that cannot accept the simple teachings of scripture do tend to make up excuses for what Jesus taught.
I believe OSAS is a dangerous teaching...
and it was NEVER a part of church teaching until very recently.
It is NOT an orthodox Christian teaching.


James 3:1
1Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we will incur a stricter judgment.

 

[Toknow]

Good morning mam, I pray your day is well.

Hi Qt
All good here. Pray the same for you.

You can not be in Jesus unless you believe into Jesus.

I found it to be better for people to see for themselves. Which I think you do now. At least that is what I see by the post of yours that I liked.

I understand that there's a nuance to INTO HIM that will not tanslate well into English...
which is why we read IN HIM.

I know this to be a fact...
some words cannot be translated properly and some may even take a few sentences to explain.

If you would care to explain better what INTO HIM means, it would be nice to know.

Young's Literal Translation
John 3:16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that everyone believing into Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Here is a more modern one which happens to be my favorite. Be that as it may I still use the KJV more in respect to translations.

J. P. Green's Literal Translation
16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that everyone believing into Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Thou understandeth what thou readest? Please Don't rely on an Interlinear.

I don't rely on an interlinear Qt.
I don't rely on the Greek.

I rely on those that translated the NT and trust that they did the best they could.
I have many versions of the bible here and have, very few times, had to check a few out.
But why?
Not because I didn't understand the teaching...
but because I was posting to someone that WOULD NOT understand it and so some deeper checking had to be done.

No sense looking at the Greek unless one looks up the words and delves into the Grammar a little bit. We do not have to be scholars, but we do have to be able to understand the resources that are available to explain what we see.

Knowing that some is lost in translation...
I believe we need to trust the NT translators.


A few years ago the Aorist tense was all the rage.
I happen to have an acquainstance that speaks 7 languages, including Greek and Hebrew.
He's a theologian and has even taught in the Middle East somewhere, can't remember where.
Surely not a Muslim country.

I asked him about this Aorist tense. He said to forget about it...it wasn't even a TIME but an ACT....
which threw me off immediately.

The NT is enough for me.

If you're interested, I'd be happy to tell you the word that was in question.

Have blessed day

You too sir.

 

[studier]

Hey there studier, I pray all is well.

From the article, "eis is a relational word. It’s not about my cognitive state of mind or my agreement with some doctrine. It’s about coming into a way of living."

And that Way is Christ. As Jesus said through John.

John 15:4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.
John 15:5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
John 15:6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.
John 15:7 If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.

We can not abide in Him unless we believe into Him. Us in Him, He in us, that the world might believe.

Thank you for your prayer and your feedback. And to you as well.

I thought the author did a pretty good job on that article. And I agree with your post.

The tendency seems to be in too many aspects of theology, IMO, to think we have to negate one so we can have the other, but this can also be a false-dichotomy, an either or vs. a both/and or even another point legitimately brought in - genuine believing is not just what we do, but also what we think.

Then, in the end, he's reviewing 2 words, not just eis, but pisteuo eis - most literally (as you know) to believe into.

So most simply, then trending then into the deeper sense of the words and the overall reality of what we're speaking about, to believe begins with being convinced of certain facts. And eis speaks of proceeding forth and into something.

These are used by John relationally and contextually in regard to accepting/believing who Jesus is and that acceptance eventuating in us entering into a living union and relationship with Him.

Then as your quoted verses tell us, that relationship is mandated to be abiding/remaining & very productive. Again as you note in giving us these verses, it is also a submission to His authority - He commands us to abide in [union] with Him - which matches what the author of the article said that is the Jewishness of pisteuo eis that John uses so dynamically & relationally - our relationship with YHWH's Christ/King and our Lord is one of obedience to Him - Paul calls it obedience [of] faith that he was tasked to bring the nations to - and this is faith-obedience - which really just trends into faithfulness - being faithful to Him according to His will.

Appreciate your response.

 

[Toknow]

No presupposition, it is the plainly taught in scripture.

It is called hermeneutics.

YOU are as far away from hermeneutics as we are to the sun...
maybe more.

But I'm here to tell you that I must be leaving for a while.
Due to time constraints.
But fear not Jeff.
Your favorite gal on these Forums shall return.
just so you could have some fun THINKING that you're upseetting her.
Something you, my dear sir, will never be able to do.
That could only be accomplished by someone I respect.