Eternal Security

[amadeus]

@"ByGrace" @amadeus Triumph's wife passed....on Photo thread

I just now read this. Thank you for bringing it to our attention.

 

[amadeus]

As you know I don't change where I stand.
In most things we agree...in a few things likes OSAS and the restoration of all things...we differ...and on this issue too.

Just the openness without bitterness or anger is good. Does God expect more from us? If He does, let us open up to Him and let Him do the necessary work within...

But what I can never understand ...why do the legalists ( that are so sure that they understand and interpret scripture perfectly)
...get so up-in-the-air and angry about the disagreements??

I find the anger and name calling perplexing.

This Helen is the nature of the beast which the old man of us is. It is this beast within us along with all of our beasts that wisdom when allowed to work will kill:

"Wisdom hath builded her house, she hath hewn out her seven pillars:
She hath killed her beasts; she hath mingled her wine; she hath also furnished her table." Prov 9:1-2

Why do they feel that it is " life or death" and why do they so often say that those who don't believe just like they believe are "not real christians"...or wont be saved.
Heretic is a word which get thrown around far too easily.

I personally believe that the vicious legalists are far more in jeopardy than the lovers are...

I find it all a mystery.

It is a mystery only to those that do these things without understanding that it is themselves they hurt perhaps the worst in the end of it. Getting rid of such attitudes [spirits, beasts] is moving toward God. Even if our doctrine for which we argue is basically good, that which is good is lost when such a spirit or beast takes control. We need to have God's wisdom to kill these beasts.

 

[Helen]

That is so sad. I feel sorry for you. You have come so far in your walk as the Spirit led you, but now you won't walk any further? You believe you have all the truth now and cannot receive anything further from the Holy Spirit?

No you are right. That came out all wrong.
If you knew me better as Amadeus does, you would know that I have said so many times on this Forum Site said that- "most things" I hold lightly.. I was writing/responding to him in that post ( we have known each other about 15 years now...) and he knows that I take the love of God further than most...so, On Grace, and The Refining Fire issue, I stand. (He is Annihilalist )
But yes, you are right...it did sound like I was saying that I am unteachable. God forbid.

Most people seem to believe that everything that they believe is a beach to die upon...I don't.
My "beach" is the love and integrity of God's nature. On that I will stick...on the rest I hold lightly .

 

[gadar perets]

My "beach" is the love and integrity of God's nature. On that I will stick...on the rest I hold lightly .

Then what I wrote applies to you concerning that "beach". It is still wrong to have any "beach". That does not give the Holy Spirit room to work and lead us into all truth.

 

[Helen]

Then what I wrote applies to you concerning that "beach". It is still wrong to have any "beach". That does not give the Holy Spirit room to work and lead us into all truth.

Cannot agree my friend.
Paul taught us to be established.
But...are you saying that you even see the Love of God and His integrity and Nature..."Up for grabs"? ...Not something to be firm and established in?

Yes... are always learning and moving into deeper depths in Him...but we must be established on a firm foundation...if not , we are blown with the wind in every direction!! The Nature of the Enemy is forever " Hath God said.." and " If you be a son of God then..."
Surly on these things we must be "established in the faith" and on a firm foundation when the Liar comes sniffing around us and trying to cause us to doubt our Father?

 

[justbyfaith]

Are we to forget scriptures that don't seem to fit our present beliefs? Putting something on the shelf for a while because we do not understand it at the moment is one thing, but to throw it out completely is hardly a good solution. If your conclusion is correct that the Baptist was and is in the kingdom why not explain it with scriptures? I would not mind hearing such an explanation.

Simply, that the idea that one of the Lord's prophets might not be in the kingdom is preposterous. Common sense should tell you that. This is something that doesn't even need to be proved by scripture.

Not to mention, whether JTB was in the kingdom or not has no real bearing on the discussion as far as I can tell. If you see that it does have a bearing one way or another, then tell me what that bearing is so that I may have more of a reason to argue the point. Otherwise, know that the only things that I really even make an effort to contend for are things that have to do with defending major doctrines of the word. Because arguing (debate) for arguing's sake is a sin in my book (and also in the Bible...2 Timothy 2:23-26, Romans 1:29 (kjv), 2 Corinthians 12:20-21 (kjv)).

 

[bbyrd009]

That is so sad. I feel sorry for you.

those who are righteous in their own eyes often feel pity i guess

 

[gadar perets]

those who are righteous in their own eyes often feel pity i guess

I assume, by this, that you think I am being self-righteous? My statement to @ByGrace had nothing to do with doctrine or whether I am right or wrong. It has to do with the fact that we should never stop learning because we think we already know the truth.

 

[Episkopos]

I assume, by this, that you think I am being self-righteous? My statement to @ByGrace had nothing to do with doctrine or whether I am right or wrong. It has to do with the fact that we should never stop learning because we think we already no the truth.

So there is hope for you.

But then there is...always learning but NEVER coming to the knowledge of the truth. That is to look at legalistic notions ABOUT God but never knowing Jesus.

 

[gadar perets]

Are we to forget scriptures that don't seem to fit our present beliefs? Putting something on the shelf for a while because we do not understand it at the moment is one thing, but to throw it out completely is hardly a good solution. If your conclusion is correct that the Baptist was and is in the kingdom why not explain it with scriptures? I would not mind hearing such an explanation.

I would add that John 3:5 - "Yeshua answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God" and 1 Corinthians 15:50 - "Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption", both show that a resurrection from the dead must take place before we can literally enter the Kingdom. When Matthew 11:11 and Luke 7:28 were spoken about John, he was still alive.

This whole discussion started when someone quoted Mathew 11:11 - "Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he." It was then misinterpreted to mean that since John was the greatest MAN to ever live (rather than the greatest PROPHET to ever live - Luke 7:28) and since Yeshua is obviously greater than John, then Yeshua must not be a man, but God.

 

[Episkopos]

I would add that John 3:5 - "Yeshua answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God" and 1 Corinthians 15:50 - "Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption", both show that a resurrection from the dead must take place before we can literally enter the Kingdom. When Matthew 11:11 and Luke 7:28 were spoken about John, he was still alive.

This whole discussion started when someone quoted Mathew 11:11 - "Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he." It was then misinterpreted to mean that since John was the greatest MAN to ever live (rather than the greatest PROPHET to ever live - Luke 7:28) and since Yeshua is obviously greater than John, then Yeshua must not be a man, but God.

The kingdom of God does not come with observation. Jesus said it was in our midst. The spiritual world of Zion is here...in the Spirit. One day this kingdom will become the reality for everyone. But at this time we are to seek for it. That doesn't mean we are to seek for death.

So you're overly physical interpretations reveal that you are stuck in the carnal world. All your doctrines deal with the physical. For you, if you can't see it with carnal eyes....you don't know it.

But he who is born again can see it. It is revealed by spiritual faculties.

The carnal man doesn't understand these things...being limited to what is natural for all men. Spiritual things are foolishness to him.

 

[gadar perets]

The kingdom of God does not come with observation. Jesus said it was in our midst. The spiritual world of Zion is here...in the Spirit. One day this kingdom will become the reality for everyone. But at this time we are to seek for it. That doesn't mean we are to seek for death.

So you're overly physical interpretations reveal that you are stuck in the carnal world. All your doctrines deal with the physical. For you, if you can't see it with carnal eyes....you don't know it.

But he who is born again can see it. It is revealed by spiritual faculties.

The carnal man doesn't understand these things...being limited to what is natural for all men. Spiritual things are foolishness to him.

I see you did not address the verses I quoted. Just more personal attacks.

 

[justbyfaith]

@amadeus wrote:

Are we to forget scriptures that don't seem to fit our present beliefs? Putting something on the shelf for a while because we do not understand it at the moment is one thing, but to throw it out completely is hardly a good solution. If your conclusion is correct that the Baptist was and is in the kingdom why not explain it with scriptures? I would not mind hearing such an explanation.

Did John the Baptist have faith in Jesus? If He did (and I believe that scripture bears out that He did indeed), then Romans 5:1-2, Ephesians 2:8-9, and a plethora of other verses are sufficient to make my point quite adequately.

re #1720.

 

[justbyfaith]

so, On Grace, and The Refining Fire issue, I stand.

Is that Universalism?

If it is, I suppose it is okay to believe in it as long as you yourself have entered in through the narrow gate and also don't preach it (Universalism). Because if you preach it and end up being wrong, the people to whom you preach could end up in eternal punishment (Matthew 25:46), having trusted in what you said, that everyone enters in eventually, so they don't have to enter in through Jesus in the present moment.

 

[justbyfaith]

I see you did not address the verses I quoted. Just more personal attacks.

Not attacks...attempts to get you to wake up and open your eyes.

 

[justbyfaith]

Something that has not been answered except with an accusation against me that I am narrow-minded (PRAISE THE LORD!) is that you should answer the question, "who is the Lord?" is it the Father (Matthew 11:25, Luke 10:21) or Jesus (1 Corinthians 12:3, 1 Corinthians 8:6) or both (Mark 12:29 (kjv) and previous verses)? And if it is both, how can it be that there is only one Lord God (Ephesians 4:5, Jude 1:4 (kjv))?

 

[gadar perets]

Something that has not been answered except with an accusation against me that I am narrow-minded (PRAISE THE LORD!) is that you should answer the question, "who is the Lord?" is it the Father (Matthew 11:25, Luke 10:21) or Jesus (1 Corinthians 12:3, 1 Corinthians 8:6) or both (Mark 12:29 (kjv) and previous verses)? And if it is both, how can it be that there is only one Lord God (Ephesians 4:5, Jude 1:4 (kjv))?

I didn't realize I did not reply to this. There are two "Lords" that are over believers, but only one of them is "the Lord God" which in Hebrew would be either "YHWH Elohim" or "Adonai YHWH". "YHWH Elohim" is Yeshua's Father. "YHWH Elohim" is the ultimate "Lord" who made Yeshua to be our "Lord" (Acts 2:36).

 

[justbyfaith]

I didn't realize I did not reply to this. There are two "Lords" that are over believers, but only one of them is "the Lord God" which in Hebrew would be either "YHWH Elohim" or "Adonai YHWH". "YHWH Elohim" is Yeshua's Father. "YHWH Elohim" is the ultimate "Lord" who made Yeshua to be our "Lord" (Acts 2:36).

Actually, there is one Lord, period (Ephesians 4:5)...not two! And He is God (Mark 12:29 (kjv)). Therefore if Jesus is the Lord (and He is...1 Corinthians 8:6, 1 Corinthians 12:3), then He is God.

 

[Heart2Soul]

I didn't realize I did not reply to this. There are two "Lords" that are over believers, but only one of them is "the Lord God" which in Hebrew would be either "YHWH Elohim" or "Adonai YHWH". "YHWH Elohim" is Yeshua's Father. "YHWH Elohim" is the ultimate "Lord" who made Yeshua to be our "Lord" (Acts 2:36).

In Revelation Jesus is called King of Kings and Lord of Lords and He is exalted above every living thing....."Jesus being King of kings and Lord of lords means that there is no higher authority. His reign over all things is absolute and inviolable. God raised Him from the dead and placed Him over all things, “far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all” (Ephesians 1:21–23)". What does it mean that Jesus is King of kings and Lord of lords?
But God is over Jesus....and Jesus is here to do the Father's Will.....and God is ruler of heaven...the 3rd Heaven....Jesus is sitting at His right side.
Both are Lord's in their own domain.

 

[justbyfaith]

Jesus is sitting in the throne of the Father...Revelation 3:21!

Since Jesus is the Lord (1 Corinthians 8:6, 1 Corinthians 12:3 (kjv)), and the Father is the Lord of heaven and earth (Matthew 11:25, Luke 10:21), but if they are not the same Lord, then that is two Lords. But Ephesians 4:5 says, One Lord, one faith, one baptism, and 1 Corinthians 8:6 also testifies to the fact that there is only one Lord...and that Lord is Jesus Christ...He is the Lord of heaven and earth! See Matthew 11:25, Luke 10:21, 1 Corinthians 12:3 (kjv).

1 Corinthians 2:14 reveals to us the reason why this preaching is not acceptable to your natural minds...

You must at the very least consider the claim of kjv-onlyism, that if it is true, you cannot wiggle your way out of scriptural truth by going with itching ears to other translations.

If the only thing you can bring up against it is that it exalts the resurrection of Jesus Christ as a holiday, then you are severely lacking in your evidence against it...because the original autographs have been lost to us and God the Holy Spirit may have indeed chosen at that time in history to exalt Easter as a holiday by including the word Easter in that passage; for that God exalts the day of the resurrection and the devil desires to undermine it...