Re: #40....My friend, it would be more advisable and profitable if you spoke kinder and more gently to those whom you are looking down your nose at. Unless of course it is tongue and cheek as well as the nose. ;) I think you'd be surprised at how many on this site have the new man (eternal life). We must judge if we must, not according to appearances, but with righteous judgment.
May I suggest this for securing your eternal life?
- Thread starter John Zain
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Webers_Home
Well-Known Member
Perhaps one of those surprises might like to come out of their closet longwilliemac said:
enough to explain the apparent discrepancy between 1John 3:9 and 1John 1:8-
10 for the benefit of the other surprises. How about you? And please: if you're
only going to guess at it; don't bother. That's all we need are more
"suggestions" around here. What we really need are more people who know
what they're talking about.
†. 1Pet 4:11 . . If anyone speaks, let him speak as the oracles of God.
The koiné Greek word for "oracles" is logion (log'-ee-on) which means an
utterance, as opposed to something in writing. So the thing that Peter is
talking about is the voice of God. In other words: if you can't stand up and
say "I speak as God and for God" then it would be better for all concerned
that you shut up and return to your seat rather than muddy the waters with
yet more armchair theology.
BTW: equating the "new man" with eternal life is a gross error. The new man
has eternal life, but he is not eternal life. In point of fact, according to 2Cor
5:17 and Eph 2:10, the new man is a creature. Well; it goes without saying
that creatures aren't eternal; seeing as how a creature is a created being.
Eternal life wasn't created. According to John 1:1 and 1John 1:1-2, eternal
life has always been. Were that not true, then God would be a temporal
being instead of infinite.
Buen Camimo
/
It is very simple. He who is born of God is the part of us that is born of God. In Rom.7, Paul spoke of a situation whereby the sin that he does is not attributed to him, but rather to the sin within him, in his flesh. Our flesh and blood is condemned to die, having been positionally crucified with Christ, and will not inherit life. However, the part of us that is eternal (has eternal life) is our new man, which has been created according to God in true righteousness and holiness (Eph.4:24). That is our true identity. Our old identity, the old man, still resides in us and influences us whenever and however it can, but is not the part of us that God identifies with in relationship.Webers_Home said:
In short, when we sin, it is not held to our account for the determination of everlasting life. It is merely considered a temporary issue in our lives until that which He has started in us is completed in the resurrection. But that which has begun in us, the new man (our new spirit), cannot sin...both in God's perspective, and in reality.
This is why I have agreed with some teachers, that 1John 1:8 is a teaching of a principle rather than an instruction to the believer. There were those in that day who did not believe in the existence of sin. Therefore without the humble acknowledgment of one's sin, one will not be forgiven. If you want to find discrepancy, look no further than 1John2:1. This is the instruction to the believer. If we sin we have an advocate with the Father.
There are those who insist that 1John 1:9 is about the restoration of fellowship. However, the verse specifically states the reason for the confession of sin, which is to be forgiven and furthermore to be cleansed from ALL unrighteousness. This is a picture of the initial event some call salvation, but more accurately, is the new birth.
IMO, when a believer is first born-again, he/she receives everything necessarymusterion said:
at that time to become an overcomer and make it into heaven.
However, all of these many blessings must be maintained.
It is possible to fall from grace and salvation.
His/her righteousness needs to be maintained, and perhaps the most important way
is by seriously confessing/repenting of newly-committed sins.
I.E. It is all about continuing the right heart attitude after being born-again.
One just cannot go back to the old lifestyle of sinning, etc.
There are many NT verses about becoming holy and perfect (mature), etc.
In who's opinion? Unfortunately I missed this reply before sending mine. Perhaps you should read it (#43). The conclusion that we must maintain the gift given to us by our confession and repentance of sin, is not supported anywhere in scripture. It is drawn from one verse. I would hardly think that such an important and vital necessity is so vaguely hinted at. You would think that it would rather be mentioned a few times by a few writers. Becoming mature or holy is not connected with a maintenance program. There are other reasons for these rather than the motive of self survival.Webers_Home said:
1John 2:1 is in fact God's plan for maintaining our life. This is accomplished by Jesus, as our advocate. He is our High Priest. His sacrifice is applied perpetually to us. Otherwise how is it that all those passages concerning our assurance and our guarantee do not mention our participation in them, other than to remain in the faith? (which John says happens to be our victory that overcomes the world..OUR FAITH>1John 5:4)
Furthermore, confession and repentance are two different words with two different meanings. If I were you I would think twice about interchanging them or inserting one beside the other as though they were the same thing. And FYI, the repentance that leads to life is the repentance from unbelief. There is no passage that says to specifically repent from sin to be saved. Repentance from sin is an ongoing chapter in the life of the believer. It is the result of our new life in Him, not the path to it.
WE DO NOT SAVE OURSELVES. IT IS DONE FOR US, IN US, AND TO US BY GOD. THERE IS ONLY ONE SAVIOR.
Webers_Home
Well-Known Member
.
†. John 3:6 . .That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born
of The Spirit is spirit.
In a nutshell: 1John 1:8-10 pertains to that which is born of the flesh, while
1John 3:9 pertains to that which is born of The Spirit. In other words: people
who have successfully undergone a Spirit birth are sort of like two people
bottled up in the same body and wearing the same face.
This is one of the supernatural aspects of Christianity that doesn't get much
press because it is just too far out for the average rank and file pew warmer.
When people who have successfully undergone the Spirit birth about which
Jesus spoke at John 3:3-8, and begin telling people they now have a human
nature that's 110% sinful and a divine nature that 110% sinless, their
audience is probably going to get the impression that maybe the speaker
is a tad schizoid; viz: possessed by contradictory and/or antagonistic qualities
or attitudes. Well; according to Rom 7:14-23 and Gal 5:17, that's about the
size of it.
Buen Camino
/
†. John 3:6 . .That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born
of The Spirit is spirit.
In a nutshell: 1John 1:8-10 pertains to that which is born of the flesh, while
1John 3:9 pertains to that which is born of The Spirit. In other words: people
who have successfully undergone a Spirit birth are sort of like two people
bottled up in the same body and wearing the same face.
This is one of the supernatural aspects of Christianity that doesn't get much
press because it is just too far out for the average rank and file pew warmer.
When people who have successfully undergone the Spirit birth about which
Jesus spoke at John 3:3-8, and begin telling people they now have a human
nature that's 110% sinful and a divine nature that 110% sinless, their
audience is probably going to get the impression that maybe the speaker
is a tad schizoid; viz: possessed by contradictory and/or antagonistic qualities
or attitudes. Well; according to Rom 7:14-23 and Gal 5:17, that's about the
size of it.
Buen Camino
/
This is something I have been sharing for quite some time whenever it is relevant to a subject. Not taking accolades, just saying that I agree with this reply. In fact you said it very plainly. Well said. Another passage is 2Cor.4:7 in which Paul says we have this treasure in earthen vessels.." so that the excellence of the power may be of God and not of us". It seems that God in His wisdom saw fit to leave us stranded in a sinful body, for one thing so that we do not get full of ourselves.Webers_Home said:
Sorry, but I find it inappropriate to criticize others for not knowing this. It happens that we do not wrestle against flesh and blood. There are certain truths that the enemy does what he can to hinder the church from knowing. This is just one of them. Instead of creating walls of contention I would rather if I can, influence people to be open to teaching and correction and inspire them to finding their own understanding rather than merely believing what they are told to believe. cheers, Howie
Webers_Home
Well-Known Member
Your remark is to be expected from someone who doesn't know themusterion said:
difference between the behavior of a criminal at large, and the behavior
of a child in the home.
Prior to undergoing the birth about which John wrote at John 1:12-13 and
John 3:3-8, my sins were all crimes, every one of them. After the birth, my
sins became misbehavior; viz: Paul wrote about sins at Col 2:13 as crimes;
while John wrote about sins at 1John 1:5-10 as a child's misbehavior; in point
of fact: a small child (1John 2:1).
According to Paul; all my "crimes" have been 110% forgiven; while according to
John, my misbehavior doesn't get forgiven till I own up to it. In a nutshell:
crimes are a criminal matter; while misbehavior is a family matter. The one is
handled by the courts, while the other is handled by the parents.
The advantages of a child in the home are pretty good. In other words:
crimes merit justice; while misbehavior only merits discipline; viz: I will never
again be in danger of the wrath of God for the things I do. I might be in danger
of correction as per Heb 12:5-11, but according to John 5:24; never in danger of
justice.
†. 1John 3:1-2 . . How great is the love the Father has lavished on us, that
we should be called children of God! And that is what we are! Dear friends,
now we are children of God
Buen Camino
/
Sorry, Paul and James are examples of those who wrote to the churches that:Webers_Home said:
if they continue being sinners, they will face eternal death!
My 2 personal current favorites are ...
Romans 6:15-23 (best of luck discerning what Paul is saying) and James 1:12-16.
The whole point is ... the elect will heed all of the many dozens of warnings,
and they will co-operate with the sanctification-unto-holiness process!
News Flash ... God saw all of this, and that's why these people were elected!
They didn't earn better rewards, etc. ... they kept their eternal life.
Does anyone really believe that our Most Holy God will spend eternity with sinners?
Hello!
Webers_Home
Well-Known Member
Did you even bother to read any of that passage before citing it? Well; noevangelist-7 said:
matter; I'll just go straight to the bottom and deal with that since you seem
to have no interest in the rest of it.
†. Rom 6:23a . .The wages of sin is death
People like me are exempt from the wages of sin.
†. John 5:24 . . I assure you, those who heed my message, and trust in God
who sent me, have eternal life. They will never be condemned for their sins,
but they have already passed from death into life.
†. Rom 8:1-2 . .Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are
in Christ Jesus, because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set
me free from the law of sin and death.
Here's the rest of Rom 6:23.
"The gift of God is eternal life."
According to John 3:36, John 6:47, John 5:24, John 10:26, and 1John 5:13,
believers all have eternal life. Well; let me tell you something about eternal
life. It's a divine quality of life that's impervious to time, decay, death, and
the aging process. So then, people who have it are just as impervious to death
as God is. That's what the 6th chapter of Romans is trying to tell you where
it says believers are dead to sin and that sin no longer has any authority over
them. That's not saying they won't sin; that's saying they're in no danger of
going to hell for their sins. And why is that? Simple. Because according to the
6th chapter of Romans; believers underwent the death penalty for their sins
when Christ died. In other words: Christianity is a very lethal religion.
†. Rom 6:3 . . Or do you not know that as many of us were baptized into Christ
Jesus were baptized into his death?
†. Rom 6:6 . . Knowing this: that our old man was crucified with him
†. Gal 2:20 . . I am crucified with Christ
†. Col 3:3 . . For you died when Christ died
You know, if you would spend as much energy studying the Bible as you do
citing it; you might actually one day know what you're talking about.
Buen Camino
/
W_H,
Some day, you might understand Paul’s method of writing to the churches.
He was a super intellect.
He was trained personally in the desert regions for 17 years by Jesus Himself.
He did not want to really discourage the churches at all, but had to get the truth in there.
He did an incredibly tactful job of mixing warnings/threats with edifications, exhortations, etc.
In Romans 6, Paul is saying they have a CHOICE of who they will be a slave to!
And that’s why free will is King! ... not God and not Satan!
Re: ALL OF THE WARNINGS ABOUT SIN in Romans 6:15-23
verse 23 … “For the wages of sin is (eternal) death,
but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord”
1st part refers to ALL habitual sinners, including BACs
2nd part refers to the faithful elect, who are not sinners
Some day, you might understand Paul’s method of writing to the churches.
He was a super intellect.
He was trained personally in the desert regions for 17 years by Jesus Himself.
He did not want to really discourage the churches at all, but had to get the truth in there.
He did an incredibly tactful job of mixing warnings/threats with edifications, exhortations, etc.
In Romans 6, Paul is saying they have a CHOICE of who they will be a slave to!
And that’s why free will is King! ... not God and not Satan!
Re: ALL OF THE WARNINGS ABOUT SIN in Romans 6:15-23
verse 23 … “For the wages of sin is (eternal) death,
but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord”
1st part refers to ALL habitual sinners, including BACs
2nd part refers to the faithful elect, who are not sinners
Salvation is by grace through faith, without works to obtain or to keep it. Good works SHOULD exemplify the life of the believer but (1) good works of the non-miraculous kind can AND ARE expertly counterfeited, and (2) believers still have the old man to contend with, making the exhibition of good works rarely if ever consistent - just look at Corinth's saints, and Galatia's. Paul did excoriate them for their various sinful practices and doctrinal straying from the revelation of the mystery but never said they were not saved or were in danger of losing Christ, or more precisely, of Christ losing them. Paul is not warning saved people that they can sin away their salvation. To do so would contradict the other passages where Paul was inspired to write how eternal security in Christ is permanent and unconditional.
Rather, Paul is warning them of something he hints at in a few places in his letters, which many eternal security haters seem to miss:
Because salvation is by grace through faith, there's no humanly possible way to know with absolute 100% certainty that someone else is truly in Christ. You can BELIEVE and HOPE they are, and you might well be right, but you cannot KNOW. Only Christ knows for sure who are His.
That means NO ONE - not even Paul - could know with certainty who was truly His. Yes, he'd seen their faith and yes, he'd seen miracles among them and yes, he'd seen good works. But this is so many people seem not to notice in Paul's letters: He warns them to make sure they are in fact in the faith...to make sure FOR THEMSELVES that they are in Christ. Why would Paul order this step be taken? Not because a sinner sealed into Christ by the Holy Spirit can lose his complete justification by God for such is impossible, else God is a liar. No, Paul's warnings are to make the point that those who repeatedly indulge in sin without any sign of conviction or repentence may not actually be saved.
But even here, keep in mind the balance. Good works and externally moral behaviors alone, even coupled with a profession of Christ, cannot prove to others one is saved. Christ Himself said so, "Depart from me, ye..." Likewise, frequent sin does not automatically mean someone is not in Christ, for - don't lie! - we ALL have our besetting sins with which we struggle despite the increasing victories God grants us through His Spirit as we grow into the image of Christ.
A case study: the man in Corith who was sleeping with his mother (I hold to the view that it's very possible he was committing the worst kind of incest, not merely fornicating with his father's new wife). What did Paul order regarding this man?
First look at what Paul did NOT order be done with him. Paul did NOT order that some solid team of elders at Corinth take the man aside and preach the Gospel to him to make sure he acutally believed it, which Paul would have done had he believed the man was not a Christian - for this was Paul, the one who begs in God's stead that the lost be saved. Did Paul order them to do that with this guy?
No. Paul DID acknowledge and judge his sin (for the elders apparently had not) and ordered them to shun him and expel him from fellowship, turned over to Satan for the destruction of his flesh that he might be saved on that Day.
My point is, if Paul was absolutely sure - as a miracle-working apostle - that this man was not saved, or had LOST his salvation, he'd have treated him differently. As it was, he treated him as a BELIEVER who was to be harshly disciplined until he repented, WHICH HE DID. Note that well, gentlemen: the guy REPENTED and was RESTORED TO FELLOWSHIP. He was not kicked out of the church to be saved (or saved again!) on the OUTSIDE among heathen pagans! He truly repented, which a truly saved person will eventually do under the convicting hand of the Holy Spirit, proving Paul's treatment of him was right because that the guy really was saved, despite doubts Paul must have had.
Here's the main point: if there is one example in all of the N.T. that shows someone during the dispensation of grace obtaining salvation but then losing it, this brother in Corinth HAS to be that guy. But he never lost his salvation.
To be warned by Paul that one's unrepentant sins may be evidence he/she is not really saved (and it is for that individual to judge for sure) is NOT the same as Paul warning believers they can sin away their savlation. That is two totally different propositions. The first is found in Paul's writings. The second is not.
This is the reason we're not to judge the heart condition of those who profess the true saving Gospel of grace. We simply cannot know, but we don't need to know because God does. Judging sin (including false doctrine, which is very much sin) is a wholly different matter we are commanded to judge, for leaven always spreads unless it is stopped and removed.
But to judge someone's actually standing before God, even if they profess Christ alone as their only hope of salvation? Not even Paul dared to judge that, so some of you here need to cool out - you're arrogantly daring to step on ground that not even the greatest of the apostles dared tread, and God is watching you do it.
Rather, Paul is warning them of something he hints at in a few places in his letters, which many eternal security haters seem to miss:
Because salvation is by grace through faith, there's no humanly possible way to know with absolute 100% certainty that someone else is truly in Christ. You can BELIEVE and HOPE they are, and you might well be right, but you cannot KNOW. Only Christ knows for sure who are His.
That means NO ONE - not even Paul - could know with certainty who was truly His. Yes, he'd seen their faith and yes, he'd seen miracles among them and yes, he'd seen good works. But this is so many people seem not to notice in Paul's letters: He warns them to make sure they are in fact in the faith...to make sure FOR THEMSELVES that they are in Christ. Why would Paul order this step be taken? Not because a sinner sealed into Christ by the Holy Spirit can lose his complete justification by God for such is impossible, else God is a liar. No, Paul's warnings are to make the point that those who repeatedly indulge in sin without any sign of conviction or repentence may not actually be saved.
But even here, keep in mind the balance. Good works and externally moral behaviors alone, even coupled with a profession of Christ, cannot prove to others one is saved. Christ Himself said so, "Depart from me, ye..." Likewise, frequent sin does not automatically mean someone is not in Christ, for - don't lie! - we ALL have our besetting sins with which we struggle despite the increasing victories God grants us through His Spirit as we grow into the image of Christ.
A case study: the man in Corith who was sleeping with his mother (I hold to the view that it's very possible he was committing the worst kind of incest, not merely fornicating with his father's new wife). What did Paul order regarding this man?
First look at what Paul did NOT order be done with him. Paul did NOT order that some solid team of elders at Corinth take the man aside and preach the Gospel to him to make sure he acutally believed it, which Paul would have done had he believed the man was not a Christian - for this was Paul, the one who begs in God's stead that the lost be saved. Did Paul order them to do that with this guy?
No. Paul DID acknowledge and judge his sin (for the elders apparently had not) and ordered them to shun him and expel him from fellowship, turned over to Satan for the destruction of his flesh that he might be saved on that Day.
My point is, if Paul was absolutely sure - as a miracle-working apostle - that this man was not saved, or had LOST his salvation, he'd have treated him differently. As it was, he treated him as a BELIEVER who was to be harshly disciplined until he repented, WHICH HE DID. Note that well, gentlemen: the guy REPENTED and was RESTORED TO FELLOWSHIP. He was not kicked out of the church to be saved (or saved again!) on the OUTSIDE among heathen pagans! He truly repented, which a truly saved person will eventually do under the convicting hand of the Holy Spirit, proving Paul's treatment of him was right because that the guy really was saved, despite doubts Paul must have had.
Here's the main point: if there is one example in all of the N.T. that shows someone during the dispensation of grace obtaining salvation but then losing it, this brother in Corinth HAS to be that guy. But he never lost his salvation.
To be warned by Paul that one's unrepentant sins may be evidence he/she is not really saved (and it is for that individual to judge for sure) is NOT the same as Paul warning believers they can sin away their savlation. That is two totally different propositions. The first is found in Paul's writings. The second is not.
This is the reason we're not to judge the heart condition of those who profess the true saving Gospel of grace. We simply cannot know, but we don't need to know because God does. Judging sin (including false doctrine, which is very much sin) is a wholly different matter we are commanded to judge, for leaven always spreads unless it is stopped and removed.
But to judge someone's actually standing before God, even if they profess Christ alone as their only hope of salvation? Not even Paul dared to judge that, so some of you here need to cool out - you're arrogantly daring to step on ground that not even the greatest of the apostles dared tread, and God is watching you do it.
First, one's salvation is not complete and finalized until he/she dies!
Never fear, folks, there is plenty of time to fall into habitual sin, thus falling from grace.
Then, there is also some time to rectify the situation through sincere repentance,
which includes stopping the sinning!
There are many warning passages about the possibility of a BAC losing eternal life,
especially the ones talking about falling away (FROM WHAT? ... not being saved?),
and falling from grace. These people are BACs!
Never fear, folks, there is plenty of time to fall into habitual sin, thus falling from grace.
Then, there is also some time to rectify the situation through sincere repentance,
which includes stopping the sinning!
There are many warning passages about the possibility of a BAC losing eternal life,
especially the ones talking about falling away (FROM WHAT? ... not being saved?),
and falling from grace. These people are BACs!
Your primary motivation appears to be to make shipwreck of our faith just as someone has shipwrecked yours. But you've become repetitive, tedious and boring, ignoring wise counsel from others, so I'm going to destroy your vain imaginings right now and reveal to you just how badly Satan has deceived you.evangelist-7 said:
The Word says Christ died once for all sin, completely forgiving all who trust Him.
YOU believe forgiveness can be received but later lost, meaning your "forgiveness" was never complete and total because some degree of your sin and condmenation remained unpaid at the Cross.
But since Christ died ONCE for ALL sin, NO SINS YOU NOW COMMIT CAN BE FORGIVEN BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE HE DIDN'T COVER ALL YOUR SINS AND HE WON'T DIE FOR YOU AGAIN. That renders you, right now, unsaved AND UNSAVABLE because you have repeatedly denied the one-time sacrifice of Christ for all your sins.
That means God still counts the sins Christ didn't pay for as still squarely on YOU - by YOUR choice - and there's NOTHING you can do about them, if your soteirology is correct.
How's it feel to realize you've rendered yourself unforgivable?
How's it feel to choose to dismiss, reject, ignore, etc. the many dozens of warnings/threatsmusterion said:
written to the churches, some of which actually come out and say eternal life may be lost.
BTW#1 ... Several Moderators of other Christian forums state why they know OSAS is false.
BTW#2 ... Also in other Christian forums, it is the women who are mostly making fools of themselves.
They all agree that the warnings/threats are there for a reason!
It is one thing to admit that osas is untrue. But this does not give license to take away assurance and guarantee, which are both scriptural. It also does not give license to hinder faith or to promote self justification. Just because you can prove that a person can lose eternal life, does not automatically mean that you are correct in your ideas about how one keeps his eternal life.evangelist-7 said:
I am flabbergasted that anyone views God in such a way that all He has to motivate anyone is the threat of wrath or death or destruction. Last time I checked, John 3:16 looked more like good news than bad, and more like a promise than a threat. We love Him because He first loved us. Do you love Him because you feel obligated? Or because you are too afraid not to? Good luck with either of those.
Feel free to reject eternal security in Christ if you like. I've made the case that Paul never taught believers can lose salvation (though I do believe salvation was NOT secure in other dispensations, which fully explains the contradiction between Paul and 1 John, which I pointed out but never got a serious answer to).
I repeat the fact remains which you can deny and ignore but cannot disprove: If you can be forgiven but then cast into the Lake of Fire, that must mean there are sins hanging over your head for which Christ's one-time-only sacrifice did not atone and, in actuality, were never truly forgiven in the first place. That means you have no further sacrifice for your sins. Confessing them won't help. Your own notions leave you condemned for eternity right where you stand and there's nothing you can do about it.
Unless, of course, you're Catholic and believe in the never-ending sacrifice and death of Christ, in which case your opposition to ES makes total sense. Even if you're not Catholic you're left with the same problem they have: Christ died for sins ONCE and cannot do so again - so confess them 24/7 but any sins not atoned for at Cavlary cannot ever be forgiven.
Which, once again, means you're lost in your self-condemned in your unforgivable sins.
Prove me wrong.
Please tell me, because I respect your posts: What is it specifically that you find so evil about the very idea of ES? WHY is it so loathesome and dangerous?
I repeat the fact remains which you can deny and ignore but cannot disprove: If you can be forgiven but then cast into the Lake of Fire, that must mean there are sins hanging over your head for which Christ's one-time-only sacrifice did not atone and, in actuality, were never truly forgiven in the first place. That means you have no further sacrifice for your sins. Confessing them won't help. Your own notions leave you condemned for eternity right where you stand and there's nothing you can do about it.
Unless, of course, you're Catholic and believe in the never-ending sacrifice and death of Christ, in which case your opposition to ES makes total sense. Even if you're not Catholic you're left with the same problem they have: Christ died for sins ONCE and cannot do so again - so confess them 24/7 but any sins not atoned for at Cavlary cannot ever be forgiven.
Which, once again, means you're lost in your self-condemned in your unforgivable sins.
Prove me wrong.
OSAS/ES/UESIC is just our way of describing the assurances and guarantees you refer to.williemac said:
Please tell me, because I respect your posts: What is it specifically that you find so evil about the very idea of ES? WHY is it so loathesome and dangerous?
Webers_Home
Well-Known Member
That error is very common, and it's simply due to a lack of appreciation forevangelist-7 said:
the indestructible nature of eternal life.
Human life is nowhere near as good a quality of life as eternal life. Human
life is a created kind of life that had it's beginning in the book of Genesis.
But eternal life is infinite; viz: it never had a beginning nor will it ever have
an ending; hence the description "eternal" a.k.a. everlasting.
Everlasting life is a superior quality of life that's impervious to death. If that
were not so, then it would be possible to kill God. In point of fact,
everlasting life is so impervious to death that not even God can kill it. If that
were not so, then it would be possible for God to commit suicide. What I'm
saying is: that in order for God to take someone's eternal life away from
them, He would have to kill it to do so; but obviously that's impossible since
eternal life is indestructible.
The Watch Tower Society teaches its Jehovah's Witnesses that eternal life
isn't actually alive. To their way of thinking; eternal life is defined as simply
knowledge; viz: theology. They derive that definition from their translation of
John 17:2-3.
"You have given him authority over all flesh, that, as regards the whole number
whom you have given him, he may give them everlasting life. This means
everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the
one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ." (NWT)
In other words: in the thinking of the Watch Tower Society; eternal life is
merely Bible study. Well; if it is, then eternal life is the only kind of life I'm
aware of that's no more sentient than a motorcycle or a coffee cup.
What is it that's been keeping God alive and perky ever since infinity? Answer:
eternal life; viz: God life. There's vegetable life, bird life, fish life, beast life,
and human life. None of those kinds of life are infinite. They all had a
beginning, and they all can be easily ended too. In contrast, God life never
had a beginning, and it cannot be ended. So much for "losing" it.
We have a saying in the blue collar world that goes like this:
Start Wrong -- Finish Wrong
When people start off on the wrong foot by believing that eternal life can be
lost; then their interpretation of verses in the Bible which appear to say that
eternal life can be terminated, will be wrong. In other words: false premises
lead to false conclusions-- every time.
FAQ: if eternal life is God life; then are the people who have it divine beings?
ANSWER: eternal life doesn't make people divine. It simply makes it possible
for them to relate to God. For instance: human beings relate to one another
very well because they all have human nature. Well; human nature is fine
for humans relating to humans; but quite inadequate for humans relating to
God. That's what Jesus was getting at in John 17:2-3. Below is a much
better version of Jesus' statement than the Watch Tower Society's version.
†. John 17:1-3 . .You granted him authority over all people that he might
give eternal life to all those you have given him. Now this is eternal life: that
they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ.
Instead of defining eternal life; Jesus was actually stating the purpose of
giving eternal life to his followers; viz: so they can relate to him and his
Father; ergo: people who lack eternal life haven't a clue how God really
feels about anything. They simply can't relate to God any better than they
can relate to a cassowary.
Buen Camino
/
That's another way of stating it.Webers_Home said:
The many warnings/threats to da choiches were/are to say ...
1) if you don't really know the Father and Jesus, you don't have eternal life (now)
2) if you are (habitually) sinning, you don't have eternal life (now)
3) if these little items continue until death, you won't have eternal life (in da future)
