Loss of salvation???

[Cameron143]

It depends in part what you mean by "apart from Christ".

Jesus at minimum commands unbelievers here, personally and then through His men:

The question isn't about what is commanded. By virtue of creation, all are accountable before God and subject to His commands whether they recognize this or not.

Let's take a command...love the Lord God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength. Are you doing this currently? How do you know?

 

[Cameron143]

Both - Calvin vs. others.

Preservation is what God does. Perseverance is what man does.

 

[JayWalker]

Yes, exactly!! All the good promises apply IF we maintain faith/ obedience, and stay the course. It’s was no different in the OT (They perished, if they lost faith and were disobedient).

Yes but you see the OSAS adherents claim a person can live in sin and still be saved.

I've found over the years most OSAS adherents actually have sin in their lives that they don't want to give up so they follow the whole OSAS thing so they can feel good about themselves and it helps them push down and otherwise ignore the conviction of the Holy Spirit to repent of the secret sins they harbor in their lives and they enjoy fellowship with others doing the same.

Then in more recent times more of these people are "coming out" as sinners and they go around proudly telling everyone that they are a sinner as they do their sin right out in the open (things like smoking weed and cigarettes, using foul language, drinking, sexual perversion, watching porn, supporting godless liberal ideology such as abortion, gay agenda, communism, and the list goes on and one)

Pretty sad that some are departing from the faith to follow doctrines of demons - 1 Timothy 4:1

 

[studier]

While obedience is often coincident with belief, it does not follow that obedience is synonymous with belief. In the context, God made a promise to be "god" to Israel. What did that mean? For Yahweh to be "god" for Israel, among other things, it meant that he would protect her from her enemies. This promise was tested when God ordered Israel to enter the promised land. They didn't obey God because they didn't believe him. But Israel was without excuse because they witnessed Yahweh defeat the gods of the Egyptians.

You'll need to interact with the Text more precisely for us to have any real discussion about this. I'm simply once again looking at the grammar and seeing parallelism and epexegetical/appositional constructions in the language. There's no way for me to join in theories or narratives until if and when those constructions are dealt with.

Hebrews 3:5-6
Notice that Paul is comparing Moses and Jesus. He says that Moses was faithful in his house as a servant, while Jesus is faithful in his house as a son. This suggests that Jesus has authority over Moses because he holds a higher position, as a Son has a higher rank than a servant in the household.

Speaking in the collective "we", Paul includes himself among those in the household of God. He stands among many people who hold fast to our confidence until the end.

What he doesn't say is that some left the household. Which is what he would need to say in order to support your idea of loss.

Once again:

• You throw me a bit because I don't think Paul authored Hebrews. Once I quickly get past that:
• The conditional clause is intensified 3rd class which you'll have to explain your interpretation of before we can really discuss this.
• The conditional statements especially combined with the commands, explained by a history of failure, and warned about in light of sin's deceitfulness and helping one another IMO do more than suggest failure as a potential.
• It seems clear to me that failure of staying the course in faithfulness, in faith-obedience- excludes from His Household.

And WE will. By definition, those who don't hold fast to the faith are not in the household.

Won't be in His Household in the end as the verses speak of.

 

[studier]

The question isn't about what is commanded. By virtue of creation, all are accountable before God and subject to His commands whether they recognize this or not.

Let's take a command...love the Lord God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength. Are you doing this currently? How do you know?

I've already provided a few commands made to the unbeliever to believe in Jesus Christ, because that's what you seemed to ask about in your question. So, that's where we'll stay, or we can stop here.

 

[studier]

Pretty sad that some are departing from the faith to follow doctrines of demons - 1 Timothy 4:1

Agreed.

 

[Cameron143]

I've already provided a few commands made to the unbeliever to believe in Jesus Christ, because that's what you seemed to ask about in your question. So, that's where we'll stay, or we can stop here.

Right. But the implication is that if a command is given, then the ability to obey the command is present. You also have argued that faith is obedience. By this logic, commands cannot be obeyed apart from faith. Thus, unbelievers cannot obey.

 

[TruthDefender]

While obedience is often coincident with belief, it does not follow that obedience is synonymous with belief. In the context, God made a promise to be "god" to Israel. What did that mean? For Yahweh to be "god" for Israel, among other things, it meant that he would protect her from her enemies. This promise was tested when God ordered Israel to enter the promised land. They didn't obey God because they didn't believe him. But Israel was without excuse because they witnessed Yahweh defeat the gods of the Egyptians.



Hebrews 3:5-6
Notice that Paul is comparing Moses and Jesus. He says that Moses was faithful in his house as a servant, while Jesus is faithful in his house as a son. This suggests that Jesus has authority over Moses because he holds a higher position, as a Son has a higher rank than a servant in the household.

Speaking in the collective "we", Paul includes himself among those in the household of God. He stands among many people who hold fast to our confidence until the end.

What he doesn't say is that some left the household. Which is what he would need to say in order to support your idea of loss.


And WE will. By definition, those who don't hold fast to the faith are not in the household.

They were in the household, when they had the faith!
There is no Scripture stating what you said, that people who lost their faith were never in the household to begin with. None!!

 

[TruthDefender]

Yes but you see the OSAS adherents claim a person can live in sin and still be saved.

I've found over the years most OSAS adherents actually have sin in their lives that they don't want to give up so they follow the whole OSAS thing so they can feel good about themselves and it helps them push down and otherwise ignore the conviction of the Holy Spirit to repent of the secret sins they harbor in their lives and they enjoy fellowship with others doing the same.

Then in more recent times more of these people are "coming out" as sinners and they go around proudly telling everyone that they are a sinner as they do their sin right out in the open (things like smoking weed and cigarettes, using foul language, drinking, sexual perversion, watching porn, supporting godless liberal ideology such as abortion, gay agenda, communism, and the list goes on and one)

Pretty sad that some are departing from the faith to follow doctrines of demons - 1 Timothy 4:1

Oh wow, I wasn’t aware that they also ignore repentance. How about baptism? Many people on this platform don’t even believe in water immersion either. Odd, since its Scriptural!

 

[JayWalker]

Oh wow, I wasn’t aware that they also ignore repentance. How about baptism? Many people on this platform don’t even believe in water immersion either. Odd, since its Scriptural!

Many of them do get baptized and then claim they will still go to Heaven if they live in sin because they have been baptized.

Some of the Church of Christ people who are big on baptism think this

On repentance many falsely claim that all future sins are already forgiven so they ignore 1 John 1:9 and Proverbs 28:13 and they ignore that God's Word teaches that we reap what we sow (Gal 6:7,8) which is mocking God

 

[studier]

Right. But the implication is that if a command is given, then the ability to obey the command is present.

Agreed. God commands unbelievers to believe, so believing is obeying.

You also have argued that faith is obedience.

I've shown that Scripture says faith in God is obedience to God.

By this logic, commands cannot be obeyed apart from faith.

In the context of the single command to believe, the act of believing is the act of obeying. They occur simultaneously.

Thus, unbelievers cannot obey.

Incorrect. Unbelievers can and do believe which is logically and simultaneously obedience.


The break in logic is in the first conclusion, which does not follow from the first two premises.

1. If God commands, then ability to obey is implied.
2. Scripture says faith is obedience.
3. Therefore, when God commands someone to believe, the ability to believe - and thus to obey that command - is implied.
4. The conclusion “thus, unbelievers cannot obey” is the opposite of what the 2 premises actually produce.

 

[Roger316]

You'll need to interact with the Text more precisely for us to have any real discussion about this. I'm simply once again looking at the grammar and seeing parallelism and epexegetical/appositional constructions in the language. There's no way for me to join in theories or narratives until if and when those constructions are dealt with.

You were talking about Hebrews 3:16-19 and you concluded that belief is obedience. This seems like an incorrect generalization. So I reacted to that. I think you and I would agree that belief and obedience are often closely associated but since there are many reasons why someone might believe, and many other reasons why someone might obey, it seems unlikely that the two concepts are interchangeable.

In fact, you might have noticed that Paul often talks about the "obedience of faith" and what does he mean? In his view, unbelief is a willful choice to suppress what one already knows. Romans 1:18-23. It is worth noting Paul's conclusion in Hebrews 3:19 that Israel did not enter because of unbelief—the willful doubt in God's power and covenant faithfulness.

I agree that Hebrews 3:15 is a third-class conditional, but the meaning is more nuanced. It doesn't mean to say, "maybe you will hear his voice, or maybe you won't," Rather, it means, “Whenever God speaks — and He is speaking — your obligation is clear.” This is what grammarians call a conditional of exhortation or warning, not a conditional of uncertainty. The point is not the likelihood of hearing God’s voice. The point is the moral demand that follows the hearing. In order to obey the "hearing," one must believe what God is saying.

 

[Roger316]

They were in the household, when they had the faith!

Of course. I agree.

There is no Scripture stating what you said, that people who lost their faith were never in the household to begin with. None!!

Where in the passage does it mention the loss of faith?

 

[Cameron143]

Agreed. God commands unbelievers to believe, so believing is obeying.

I've shown that Scripture says faith in God is obedience to God.

In the context of the single command to believe, the act of believing is the act of obeying. They occur simultaneously.

Incorrect. Unbelievers can and do believe which is logically and simultaneously obedience.


The break in logic is in the first conclusion, which does not follow from the first two premises.

1. If God commands, then ability to obey is implied.
2. Scripture says faith is obedience.
3. Therefore, when God commands someone to believe, the ability to believe - and thus to obey that command - is implied.
4. The conclusion “thus, unbelievers cannot obey” is the opposite of what the 2 premises actually produce.

Unbelievers by definition do not possess faith. If faith is obedience, unbelievers do not obey. So the command to believe is impossible, by your own reasoning, by anyone but a believer.

Further, without faith, it is impossible to please God. Thus, no unbeliever pleases God. Does obedience please God?

 

[studier]

You were talking about Hebrews 3:16-19 and you concluded that belief is obedience. This seems like an incorrect generalization. So I reacted to that. I think you and I would agree that belief and obedience are often closely associated but since there are many reasons why someone might believe, and many other reasons why someone might obey, it seems unlikely that the two concepts are interchangeable.

Heb3:18-19 is simple parallelism. Heb3:16-17 is explanation that ties other words to the disobedience/unbelief.

I agree that Hebrews 3:15 is a third-class conditional, but the meaning is more nuanced. It doesn't mean to say, "maybe you will hear his voice, or maybe you won't," Rather, it means, “Whenever God speaks — and He is speaking — your obligation is clear.” This is what grammarians call a conditional of exhortation or warning, not a conditional of uncertainty. The point is not the likelihood of hearing God’s voice. The point is the moral demand that follows the hearing. In order to obey the "hearing," one must believe what God is saying.

I didn't address the condition in Heb3:15 because it seems self-explanatory and it's not the condition that we're really dealing with in this topic of willful withdrawal.

 

[studier]

Unbelievers by definition do not possess faith. If faith is obedience, unbelievers do not obey. So the command to believe is impossible, by your own reasoning, by anyone but a believer.

Further, without faith, it is impossible to please God. Thus, no unbeliever pleases God. Does obedience please God?

You're diverting from your error in logic and reverting to making assertions after inserting your theology into your first and second conclusions in your logic.

These texts don't provide for your desire to see rebirth and new heart before belief.

 

[Cameron143]

You're diverting from your error in logic and reverting to making assertions after inserting your theology into your first and second conclusions in your logic.

These texts don't provide for your desire to see rebirth and new heart before belief.

I haven't introduced rebirth or new heart. I'm specifically dealing with faith and obedience. You, not me, equated the two. I personally believe that the acquisition of faith is what leads to obedience. But in equating the two, you have unbelievers believing and obeying.

At what point does an unbeliever become a believer?

 

[JayWalker]

At what point does an unbeliever become a believer?

When they quit being an unbeliever of course!

 

[studier]

At what point does an unbeliever become a believer?

When he obeys the command to believe - this is what simultaneous and parallel faith-obedience means.

 

[Roger316]

Heb3:18-19 is simple parallelism. Heb3:16-17 is explanation that ties other words to the disobedience/unbelief.

I didn't address the condition in Heb3:15 because it seems self-explanatory and it's not the condition that we're really dealing with in this topic of willful withdrawal.

The passage lacks a parallel structure. Instead, the passage consists of three rhetorical questions.

Hebrews 3:16–18 forms a three‑question chain:

1. Who rebelled? (v. 16)
2. With whom was God angry? (v. 17)
3. To whom did He swear they would not enter His rest? (v. 18)

This is not parallelism. It’s progressive intensification:

• v. 16 → their rebellion
• v. 17 → God’s anger
• v. 18 → God’s oath of judgment