Eternal Security

[Episkopos]

I agree, (finally) :)

You agree because you see the wording in the bible. But you need to understand the meaning still...

I have done this countless times.,.,.take a verse...and change the words but not the meaning...and the vast majority will deny it. But if I put the words they are used to back in....they will agree. Conclusion: People are indoctrinated into agreeing with word patterns they don't understand.

 

[gadar perets]

You agree because you see the wording in the bible. But you need to understand the meaning still...

I have done this countless times.,.,.take a verse...and change the words but not the meaning...and the vast majority will deny it. But if I put the words they are used to back in....they will agree. Conclusion: People are indoctrinated into agreeing with word patterns they don't understand.

What is the meaning? That we are Yeshua because he lives in us? I think not. Neither is Yeshua the Father or YHWH simply because Father YHWH lives in him.

 

[Episkopos]

Word for word:

For/because - you - YHWH - my refuge - Most High - you put/set/made - your dwelling place.​

Translation:

For you put YHWH, my refuge, the Most High as your dwelling place.

WEB - "Because you have made Yahweh your refuge, and the Most High your dwelling place"
Rotherham - "Because, thou, hast made Yahweh, my refuge,—The Most High, thou last made thy dwelling-place,"
NASB - "For you have made the LORD, my refuge, Even the Most High, your dwelling place. "
JPS - "For thou hast made the LORD who is my refuge, even the Most High, thy habitation. "
KJV - "Because thou hast made the LORD, which is my refuge, even the most High, thy habitation; "

The translators are biased here...and too shy to do it properly...the transliteration is almost perfect.


כִּי-אַתָּה יְהוָה מַחְסִי ... the first 4 words read..."For You O Lord are my refuge". That means the subject of the verse is YHVH.


עֶלְיוֹן שַׂמְתָּ מְעוֹנֶךָ ....the next 3 words read...."Most High You have made your habitation"

...in the statement ....Who has made Elyon His habitation? YHVH. The "you" in the statement is YHVH...the subject of the text.

So then the whole text reads... For YOU O Lord (YHVH) are my refuge...Most High have YOU made YOUR habitation.

Look again at the transliteration.

 

[Episkopos]

What is the meaning? That we are Yeshua because he lives in us? I think not. Neither is Yeshua the Father or YHWH simply because Father YHWH lives in him.

Living through us. We are mortal....just vessels. But Jesus is a quickening Spirit. He is a source.....and ALSO a vessel...being both divine AND human.

Unless you take both of those ideas into consideration you will miss the truth every time.

 

[bbyrd009]

People don't for the most part change.

funny, i agree here, and i don't. I guess most everyone changes with their seasons, maybe? Even if that is change that most ppl even resist. I have quite a few anecdotes of...strangers doing an about face in their twilight years, i guess you do too?

 

[APAK]

Living through us. We are mortal....just vessels. But Jesus is a quickening Spirit. He is a source.....and ALSO a vessel...being both divine AND human.

Unless you take both of those ideas into consideration you will miss the truth every time.

Epi: I would like to follow along, now on this latest discussion on of how Christ is’ in us’ and he is in a believer. Because Jesus is a quickening spirit and that Jesus is both human and divine as you say, and a vessel, how is he ‘in us’ again?

How is the causal observer going to get anything out of you just blurting out random things of Jesus that you believe in? How are these things logically connected in writing?

Can you provide scripture that says ‘hypostatic union’ exists with Christ? And what about the theory of ‘incarnation?’ Can you also provide scripture that says Jesus is the ‘source’ as you say, rather than God Almighty, as I would say? I can provide scripture and a commentary to boot.

I get the impression that you slide like grease lightning, away from the subject when confronted head-on that requires some thought and detail; of subjects you seem ill-prepared for.

There is nothing wrong with taking a deep breath and saying I believe, or IMO, or I don’t know at this point etc. Using expressions like 'this is the only way,' or this the truth, or to say something like, if you don't believe that Jesus was a deity on earth

then you will die in you sins, is a bit of a stretch and not supported explicitly by scripture. I guess JBF has said something like this before. I guess you might agree with him on this point as well? Jesus​

today is immortal and divine only because of his Father. And Jesus was Always in his Father since his birth. This is supported by scripture.

We are all human and even though at times as believers (immature or mature) the spirit guides us we still can overreach this guidance. I do it, and I correct myself when the subject arises again, or I'm conscience of it to and bring it up again without the overextended reach. This is the way we learn God’s word. Well, one of the way's for me.


Bless you,



APAK

 

[gadar perets]

The translators are biased here...and too shy to do it properly...the transliteration is almost perfect.


כִּי-אַתָּה יְהוָה מַחְסִי ... the first 4 words read..."For You O Lord are my refuge". That means the subject of the verse is YHVH.

I don't see "O" or "are" in there.

עֶלְיוֹן שַׂמְתָּ מְעוֹנֶךָ ....

the next 3 words read...."Most High You have made your habitation"

...in the statement ....Who has made Elyon His habitation? YHVH. The "you" in the statement is YHVH...the subject of the text.

So then the whole text reads... For YOU O Lord (YHVH) are my refuge...Most High have YOU made YOUR habitation.

Look again at the transliteration.

I do not believe the verse should be translated that way since it does not harmonize with the FACT that YHWH IS the Most High and therefore cannot dwell IN the Most High. Another thing to consider is that "elyon" doesn't necessarily have to be a title. It could be used as an adjective meaning "highest/high" as in Deuteronomy 26:19, 1 Kings 9:8, etc.

"Because you, YHWH, my refuge, you make the highest places your habitation" or something similar.​

 

[amadeus]

I gather that you were saying what Jesus said in Matthew 7:21-23; but you were not clear enough to avoid us misunderstanding that you might be trying to say to us that those people who reject Jesus Christ are more likely to be saved than those who have received Him.

I apologize for my lack of clarity.

I will grant it to you that there are plenty of people who identify themselves as "Christian" and who call Him, "Lord, Lord" but do not have the saving knowledge of who He is.

OK.

Nevertheless those people who reject Him outright most definitely do not have a relationship with Him; and to say otherwise is to be in contention with what Jesus said in John 14:6.

We must remember that even as you misunderstood my words here due to my lack of clarity others may also fail to properly express their position with words. This is one reason why God is the final judge. He never misunderstands us for any reason.

Again, I apologize if I have been misunderstanding you: but I would ask that you make your position clearer so that we can all understand what you are trying to say.

No need to apologize. I do try to proofread what I write before transmitting, but I know I still sometimes say things the wrong way. I also apologize for this.

 

[gadar perets]

Living through us. We are mortal....just vessels. But Jesus is a quickening Spirit. He is a source.....and ALSO a vessel...being both divine AND human.

Unless you take both of those ideas into consideration you will miss the truth every time.

Yeshua became a quickening Spirit after his resurrection. Before that he was a 100% human being with the Holy Spirit of the only true Deity dwelling inside him.

 

[amadeus]

funny, i agree here, and i don't. I guess most everyone changes with their seasons, maybe? Even if that is change that most ppl even resist. I have quite a few anecdotes of...strangers doing an about face in their twilight years, i guess you do too?

Sometimes being literal can still get us into trouble because what is literal to you may not be literal to me. Communication can always be a problem.

You agree that they are the same but disagree because they are not. In spite of communication problems I think I do understand.

Maybe to God we are all the same until He is allowed to change us. Not all men are able to really see changes in us because they are sometimes so blind in their self centeredness that they did not really pay attention to what we were like before the change. To them there has been no change as per God or as per men.

Then again as you suggest we change at times according to our seasons. Yes, I could tell some stories of changes in people as of from night to day. Some them related directly to God and some of them did not. Probably all of them really did relate to God somehow even though we might not be able to see it.

 

[justbyfaith]

Gal 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
Gal 5:20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
Gal 5:21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
We are to worship the only true God (Yeshua's Father - John 17:3). To worship any other being as the only true God is idolatry. It is not wrong to "worship" Yeshua in the true sense of that word, unless that worship is directed at him as the only true God, which is exactly what you and others here are doing.

To worship "Yeshua" at all would be idolatry if He is not the only true God.

And since He is the only true God, to worship Him as such is not idolatry.

Plain and simple.

 

[justbyfaith]

Jesus, today, exists in human flesh; as He is a Man sitting on the right hand of the throne of God (and also in the throne of His Father, Revelation 3:21).

As the second Person of the Trinity, the Son, God in the flesh, He is a Man, and He is come in the flesh (1 John 4:1-3, 2 John 1:7).

He is made a quickening Spirit through the happenstance that took place in Luke 23:46.

For the Spirit of Jesus is Jesus (1 Corinthians 12:3 w/ 2 Corinthians 3:17) in the form of the 3rd Person of the Trinity.

He is a Man dwelling in a finite human body (again, 1 John 4:1-3, 2 John 1:7) and He also rose to fill all things (Ephesians 4:10, Luke 23:46).

Therefore you have Jesus as the 2nd and 3rd Persons of the Trinity; in that He is a finite Man (2nd Person) and also the Omnipresent Holy Ghost (3rd Person). And as the 1st Person of the Trinity He is the pre-incarnate, Omnipresent Father.

Now don't you go saying I am a modalist for proclaiming these things. Each Person of the Trinity, in my view, has His own consciousness and is distinct from each other Person within the Godhead (although all three Persons exist in the bodily form of the Son...Colossians 2:9...as they are in fact, one Person/God).

 

[gadar perets]

To worship "Yeshua' at all would be idolatry if He is not the only true God.

Only if you use the Christian definition of worship. Using the Biblical definition, no.

And since He is the only true God, to worship Him as such is not idolatry.

Plain and simple.

In that case, continue on rejoicing in your sin.

 

[gadar perets]

Jesus, today, exists in human flesh; as He is a Man sitting on the right hand of the throne of God (and also in the throne of His Father, Revelation 3:21).

As the second Person of the Trinity, the Son, God in the flesh, He is a Man, and He is come in the flesh (1 John 4:1-3, 2 John 1:7).

He is made a quickening Spirit through the happenstance that took place in Luke 23:46.

For the Spirit of Jesus is Jesus (1 Corinthians 12:3 w/ 2 Corinthians 3:17) in the form of the 3rd Person of the Trinity.

He is a Man dwelling in a finite human body (again, 1 John 4:1-3, 2 John 1:7) and He also rose to fill all things (Ephesians 4:10, Luke 23:46).

Therefore you have Jesus as the 2nd and 3rd Persons of the Trinity; in that He is a finite Man (2nd Person) and also the Omnipresent Holy Ghost (3rd Person). And as the 1st Person of the Trinity He is the pre-incarnate, Omnipresent Father.

Now don't you go saying I am a modalist for proclaiming these things. Each Person of the Trinity, in my view, has His own consciousness and is distinct from each other Person within the Godhead (although all three Persons exist in the bodily form of the Son...Colossians 2:9...as they are in fact, one Person).

Simple enough @Nancy ?

 

[justbyfaith]

Can you provide scripture that says ‘hypostatic union’ exists with Christ? And what about the theory of ‘incarnation?’

We have shown scripture on the subject; but it has been rejected with carnal reasoning.

To give more scripture on the subject at this point would be to "sow among thorns." (see Jeremiah 4:3).

 

[justbyfaith]

Only if you use the Christian definition of worship. Using the Biblical definition, no.


In that case, continue on rejoicing in your sin.

Since my "sin" means that I will not die in my sins, I think I will do just that.

And likewise, your "righteousness" means that you will die in your sins.

Seems confusing?

The reality is that what I am doing is not sin, and what you are doing is.

 

[justbyfaith]

Simple enough @Nancy ?

I know that the reason you don't understand is because you are looking at it with the natural mind, apart from the illumination of the Holy Ghost.

1 Corinthians 2:13-14.

 

[gadar perets]

I know that the reason you don't understand is because you are looking at it with the natural mind, apart from the illumination of the Holy Ghost.

1 Corinthians 2:13-14.

I can say the same for you, but I choose not to make such an assumption. If you are wrong about me not having the illumination of the Holy Spirit, then you are accusing the Holy Spirit of having a natural mind. I sure would not want to be in your shoes.

 

[Nancy]

Simple enough @Nancy ?

Yes, quite simple. @justbyfaith s post has served only to strengthen my belief in the Trinity doctrine :)

 

[justbyfaith]

I can say the same for you, but I choose not to make such an assumption. If you are wrong about me not having the illumination of the Holy Spirit, then you are accusing the Holy Spirit of having a natural mind. I sure would not want to be in your shoes.

I certainly don't think that your pov is foolishness. I think that it is what anyone might think is the right way if they didn't have the Holy Spirit to show them the truth (see also Proverbs 14:12, Proverbs 16:25).