Dead faith.

[justbyfaith]

I did not get any further in your post than this.

Where is it written "so they never had everlasting life" ? I think that is presumptive - as in assuming tradition is right instead of just believing God's Word as God Says.

Do you contend that a man can fall away and yet will continue to have everlasting life?

Because such an idea is heretical to say the least.

 

[justbyfaith]

You will have to quote me about ignoring your posts or whatever..... I think you mixed me up with someone else .....

If you go back and read the entire post...you will see that I was talking to @BreadOfLife at that particular juncture.

 

[Joseph77]

nvm

 

[Joseph77]

nvm

 

[Joseph77]

nvm

 

[BreadOfLife]

In Luke 8:13, the person believes for a while, and then falls away....so they never had everlasting life.

But in John 6:47, believing means you currently have everlasting life....this is a life that will last for ever; and therefore it can never come to an end...which means that the person who believes can never lose his salvation.

I conclude that either a person can fall away and continue to have everlasting life (which is heresy), or else there are two different types of faith.

One is born again – and one isn’t.

One has a full, experiential knowledge (epignosis ) of Christ - and the other is simply “dabbling” in Christianity.

Apples and oranges.

And we shall...which does not preclude that our salvation isn't by faith alone. For upon believing, we are sealed by the Holy Spirit (Ephesians 1:13-14, 2 Corinthians 1:22, 2 Corinthians 5:5) and the influence of this seal (this Holy Spirit) is such that He will motivate us to automatically adhere to whatever guidelines might be there for us to hold to. See Ezekiel 36:27 "cause you" and Philippians 2:13. We will hold to these guidelines because of our faith (because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts, Romans 5:5, Galatians 3:14) whether we know what they are or not. Because love is the fulfilling of the law (Romans 13:8-10, Galatians 5:14, 1 John 5:3, 2 John 1:6, Romans 8:4).

I have already addressed this contention; more than once on this very thread. And you say that I ignore your posts.

And once again – you cherry-pick verses to make your points on the false doctrine of Eternal Security.

I gave you over FIFTEEN passages of Scripture that, when read in CONTEXT with the verses YOU present, show that our cooperation with God’s grace is necessary to maintain our security.
That’s what free will is ALL about . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

If you go back and read the entire post...you will see that I was talking to @BreadOfLife at that particular juncture.

Right off the top of my head – Matt. 7:21 puts these verses in context:

Matt. 7:21
"NOT EVERYONE who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but ONLY THE ONE WHO DOES THE WILL OF MY FATHER who is in heaven.

I also gave you EIGHTEEN other passages that destroy the Eternal Security fallacy.

 

[justbyfaith]

One is born again – and one isn’t.

One has a full, experiential knowledge (epignosis ) of Christ - and the other is simply “dabbling” in Christianity.

Apples and oranges.

So then, the one who is born again...with full, experiential knowledge of Christ, has everlasting life (John 6:47)...

I'm not sure how you don't see how this means they cannot lose their salvation.

If they lost their salvation, their spiritual life would come to an end...and therefore it could not be identified as everlasting from the getgo.

Right off the top of my head – Matt. 7:21 puts these verses in context:

Matt. 7:21
"NOT EVERYONE who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but ONLY THE ONE WHO DOES THE WILL OF MY FATHER who is in heaven.

I also gave you EIGHTEEN other passages that destroy the Eternal Security fallacy.

This does not in any way destroy the concept of eternal security; and neither do any of your other verses.

The one who has everlasting life will be obedient to the will of the Father, is what this is saying (because they are indwelt by the Holy Spirit and motivated by Him to do good works)...

No contradiction whatsoever to John 5:25, John 6:47, or John 10:27-30.

 

[BreadOfLife]

So then, the one who is born again...with full, experiential knowledge of Christ, has everlasting life (John 6:47)...

I'm not sure how you don't see how this means they cannot lose their salvation.

If they lost their salvation, their spiritual life would come to an end...and therefore it could not be identified as everlasting from the getgo.

This does not in any way destroy the concept of eternal security; and neither do any of your other verses.

The one who has everlasting life will be obedient to the will of the Father, is what this is saying (because they are indwelt by the Holy Spirit and motivated by Him to do good works)...

No contradiction whatsoever to John 5:25, John 6:47, or John 10:27-30.

It is so simple – it’s difficult for me to see how you can’t understand it.

Let’s say I hired 2 people to do a job and I have a thousand dollars for each of them – guaranteed.
However – ONE of them works for an hour and walks off the job - while the other one stays.

The money was GUARANTEED to the first one but he chose NOT to stay – so he loses it.

It’s the SAME with God’s grace inh relation to everlasting life. We have the promise of life everlasting – but we are expected to cooperate with God. We don’t get to keep that everlasting life if WE decide to walk away from it.

This is the very definition of Free Will.

 

[justbyfaith]

It is so simple – it’s difficult for me to see how you can’t understand it.

Let’s say I hired 2 people to do a job and I have a thousand dollars for each of them – guaranteed.
However – ONE of them works for an hour and walks off the job - while the other one stays.

The money was GUARANTEED to the first one but he chose NOT to stay – so he loses it.

It’s the SAME with God’s grace inh relation to everlasting life. We have the promise of life everlasting – but we are expected to cooperate with God. We don’t get to keep that everlasting life if WE decide to walk away from it.

This is the very definition of Free Will.

Your scenario has within it a concept of salvation by works...something that is categorically denied by the word of the Lord.

The righteousness of the Lord is given to us as a free gift (Romans 5:15-19, Romans 6:23) and this righteousness is practical in our lives (1 John 3:7, Romans 5:19, Matthew 5:6). It is a gift nevertheless...a gift of righteousness (Romans 5:17); in which the Lord changes us on the inside so that we are inclined toward doing good works.

However, we are saved by the transformation; not by the works that result out of the transformation.

As a matter of fact, the transformation is the salvation that we receive...and we receive the transformation by grace through faith; and not of works.

Iow, ye must be born again.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Your scenario has within it a concept of salvation by works...something that is categorically denied by the word of the Lord.

The righteousness of the Lord is given to us as a free gift (Romans 5:15-19, Romans 6:23) and this righteousness is practical in our lives (1 John 3:7, Romans 5:19, Matthew 5:6). It is a gift nevertheless...a gift of righteousness (Romans 5:17); in which the Lord changes us on the inside so that we are inclined toward doing good works.

However, we are saved by the transformation; not by the works that result out of the transformation.

As a matter of fact, the transformation is the salvation that we receive...and we receive the transformation by grace through faith; and not of works.

Iow, ye must be born again.

WRONG.

It’s not “salvation by works”. As I have explained ad nauseam – we can’t take credit for our works because they were prepared FOR us BY GOD (Eph. 2:10). It’s salvation through cooperation with God’s grace. This is why Paul uses terms like “Sunergos” (co-workers) with God (1 Cor. 3:9).

The idea that we can be saved – then live ANY kind of life that we want and expect that promise of salvation is a falsehood of BIBLICAL proportions that was invented in the 16th century.

As I have shown with almost 2 dozen passages of Scripture – this is NOT what the Bible teaches – and is NOT been a teaching of the historic Christian faith from the beginning. Salvation is NOT just a gift from Heaven for no reason. That gift of grace requires our response to be effective – just like ANY other gift.

If God gave you the gift of a beautiful voice, but you refused to sing – what good is that gift?

 

[justbyfaith]

WRONG.

It’s not “salvation by works”. As I have explained ad nauseam – we can’t take credit for our works because they were prepared FOR us BY GOD (Eph. 2:10). It’s salvation through cooperation with God’s grace. This is why Paul uses terms like “Sunergos” (co-workers) with God (1 Cor. 3:9).

Methinks thou dost protest too much.

In other words, the reality is that you believe in salvation by works; but are doing your best to deny that this is what you believe, because you know that it is an un-biblical stance for you to take.

The idea that we can be saved – then live ANY kind of life that we want and expect that promise of salvation is a falsehood of BIBLICAL proportions that was invented in the 16th century.

In Psalms 37:4, it is written that if we delight ourselves in the LORD, He will give us the desires of our heart.

But in Jeremiah 17:9, it is written that the heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked; who can know it?

So then, does God give us according to the deceitfulness of our heart?

Or, does He change our heart (see Ezekiel 36:25-27, Luke 8:15) so that the desires of our heart are no longer based on a deceitfulness of character?

I believe that it is the latter.

When a man is born again, his desires change so that what he wants is on the level of what is righteous rather than what is wicked.

And therefore, if you are born again, you can indeed do whatever you want (for what you want will be righteous); and it is not that you expect the promise of salvation but that you already have it.

Salvation is NOT just a gift from Heaven for no reason.

Salvation is indeed a free gift (Romans 5:15-19, Romans 6:23).

That gift of grace requires our response to be effective – just like ANY other gift.

Yes...and the only response that is required is faith (Romans 5:1-2).

 

[justbyfaith]

And MEthinks that YOU doth lie too much.

You're a dishonest person who is completely unable to have a charitable and honest discussion. You have completely disregarded everything I have explained about the Catholic position on Salvation in favor of your anti-Catholic presuppositions.

If you're ever ready to have an honest discussion, where you actually pay attention to somebody is telling you - let me know . . .

And you are bearing briers and thorns unto me. I have done nothing to you except to try to convince you of my pov.

Mat 7:15, Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
Mat 7:16, Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
Mat 7:17, Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
Mat 7:18, A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
Mat 7:19, Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
Mat 7:20, Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

Luk 6:43, For a good tree bringeth not forth corrupt fruit; neither doth a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
Luk 6:44, For every tree is known by his own fruit. For of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes.
Luk 6:45, A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.

And also, in calling me a liar you have three fingers pointing back at you.

Mat 7:1, Judge not, that ye be not judged.
Mat 7:2, For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
Mat 7:3, And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Mat 7:4, Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
Mat 7:5, Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

Luk 6:41, And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but perceivest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Luk 6:42, Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother's eye.

 

[justbyfaith]

@BreadOfLife,

I think that I am going to take @Joseph77's advice and also follow his example by putting you on Ignore.

 

[BreadOfLife]

And you are bearing briers and thorns unto me. I have done nothing to you except to try to convince you of my pov.

thanks

 

[BreadOfLife]

@BreadOfLife,
I think that I am going to take @Joseph77's advice and also follow his example by putting you on Ignore.

That's fine - but I'll still expose your anti-Catholic posts . . .

 

[justbyfaith]

And you are bearing briers and thorns unto me. I have done nothing to you except to try to convince you of my pov.

That's another lie - but thanks anyway.

Okay...what did I do to you?

I changed my mind about putting you on Ignore.

But since you are accusing me of lying, prove it.

Show the nature of my lie by using the quote feature and explain to me just how I have lied to you. What did I do to you other than try to convince you of my pov?

 

[justbyfaith]

That's fine - but I'll still expose your anti-Catholic posts . . .

I could care less about whether you are Catholic or not. You call my posts anti-Catholic; I am merely attempting to defend Pauline theology.

If Pauline theology is anti-Catholic, then I accept it...guilty as charged!

In such a case Catholic doctrine would be anti-Pauline theology.

Because Paul came before the Catholic church and its order of things.

You do understand the history of the Catholic Church...that Constantine was the first Pope; and that this was in the 4th Century A.D..

 

[Joseph77]

nvm

 

[Illuminator]

I could care less about whether you are Catholic or not. You call my posts anti-Catholic; I am merely attempting to defend Pauline theology.

If Pauline theology is anti-Catholic, then I accept it...guilty as charged!

In such a case Catholic doctrine would be anti-Pauline theology.

You refuse to admit it was by the authority of the Catholic Church that proved Paul's letters to be inspired, and admitted them into the canon. You blindly assume them to be inspired. Assuming and proving are not the same thing.

Because Paul came before the Catholic church and its order of things.

This is blatant ignorance of Scripture and all of Christian history.

QUESTION: CATHOLIC: Where did the word originate?
ANSWER: It comes from the Greek word Katholikos, which was later Latinized into Catholicus.

QUESTION: What is the meaning of the word?
ANSWER: It means 'Universal', which in itself means, 'of or relating to, or affecting the entire world and ALL peoples therein'. It means, ALL encompassing, comprehensibly broad, general, and containing ALL that is necessary. In summation, it means ALL people in ALL places, having ALL that is necessary, and for ALL time.

QUESTION: But is it Biblical?
ANSWER: Yes it is. It is in Matthew 28:19-20, "Go, therefore and make disciples of ALL nations...teaching them to observe ALL that I have commanded you; And behold, I am with you ALL days, even unto the consummation of the world."
That is a statement of Universality, Katholicos, Catholicus, Catholic.

Romans 1:8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is being reported all over the world.
πρωτον μεν ευχαριστω τω θεω μου δια ιησου χριστου υπερ παντων υμων οτι η πιστις υμων καταγγελλεται εν ολω τω κοσμω
That is a statement of Universality, Katholicos, Catholicus, Catholic.

Acts 1:8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, (the entire known Christian world of the time when Paul wrote this) and to the ends of the earth."
Acts 1:8 Greek Text Analysis

That is a statement of Universality, Katholicos, Catholicus, Catholic.

The Greek words ‘kata’ (about) and ‘holos’ (whole) give rise to the term ‘katholou,’ meaning ‘on the whole.’ The Greek adjective ‘katholicos’ based on ‘katholou’ means ‘universal.’
Catholic (term) - Wikipedia

The first recorded use of the word is in St. Ignatius of Antioch's letter to the Smyrneans, paragraph 8, of 106 A.D.,
"Where the Bishop appears, there let the people be, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church."
Undoubtedly the word was in use before the time of this writing. Constantine was born in 272 AD, 164 years later.

Catholic Church found in...

Ignatius, Letter to the Smyrneans 106AD;
Martyrdom of St. Polycarp 155AD;
Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis 202AD;
Cyprian, Unity of the Catholic Church 251AD;
Cyprian, Letter to Florentius, 254AD

"Christian is my name, and Catholic my surname. The one designates me, while the other makes me specific. Thus am I attested and set apart... When we are called Catholics it is by this appellation that our people are kept apart from any heretical name."
Saint Pacian of Barcelona, Letter to Sympronian, 375 A.D..
(this does not apply to Protestants because Protestantism did not exist in 375 AD.)