OSAS.... what does this really mean ?

[Gadgetere]

<<<Either God did it (making Him complicit in sin), or Pharaoh did it. Can't be both. >>>

That’s your take and understanding. That it can’t be both, is based on where or what?

Clearly, that if God hardened Pharaoh, you take it that God is complicit in the sin of Pharaoh. Now, consider this. Pharaoh had hardened his heart. If God hardened it all the more or hardened it so that there is no room for not being hard, until such time that God had accomplished whatever purpose He had in doing that, is He complicit in the sin of Pharaoh? No sir! But anyway, if you insist He is, then He is, at least based on your own thinking and standards.

I checked out the link. Anthropomorphism is far from what you are saying about “Semitic View”.

I hope you can give a link that speaks of what you say about “Semitic view”.

I don't have time to spend hours surfing, but I found
this link -- it doesn't say the words "Semitic View", but the principle is there.

Where in particular in Matt 12 are you referring to?

Verses 24-32 -- God's house cannot be divided, He can have no complicity with sinfulness. Jesus was white-hot-furious at the suggestion God did...

Do you not see that that is essentially no different when God hardened Pharaoh and Israel? What do you think it means when God give a wicked one over to uncleanness, to dishonor your body among others like him, give one up to vile passion, give one over to a debased mind? And what do you think it means when God hardens a wicked one?

God permitting men to pursue wickedness, is a Universe apart from God writing the sin into their hearts.

What do you think is the reason why God did what He did to them in Romans 1? Is it not because their heart is off and hard? Have they not hardened their heart with what they have done, since they have a knowledge of God and knows the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death?

They made the choice, God honored what they chose. It is as in Isaiah65 --- "All day long I stretch out My hands to a rebellious people, who walk in a way that is not good. I will destine you for the sword because I called and you and you did not answer, I spoke and you did not hear; you did evil in My sight and chose that in which I did not delight..."

 

[Grailhunter]

You won't call me on anything sir. Nothing is so shameful as a bully seeking to divide the church while invoking Christ.

Truth does not divide the church.

Those who are in Christ do not make a habit of sinning. Eternal security is the Gospel.

True if you do not make a practice of sinning salvation is secure....but still eternal security is not a phrase that appears in the bible.

Like I said, I don't care what you believe.

 

[Pythagorean12]

Truth does not divide the church.


True if you do not make a practice of sinning salvation is secure....but still eternal security is not a phrase that appears in the bible.

Like I said, I don't care what you believe.

Of course you care. Or you wouldn't waste your time attacking the Gospel because you're not aware eternal security is the Gospel. While you are blinded by semantics.

God's word is not occupied through Grammar. God's word is Spirit.

Now we are concluded.

 

[Gadgetere]

Taken said:
Genuine faith comes from God.



Eph 2:
[8] For by grace are ye saved through faith;
and ........(FYI)
that not of yourselves:
IT (grace, saved, faith) IS A Gift OF God

By grace..........gift OF God
Are saved........gift OF God
Through faith...gift OF God

"NOT of YOURSEVES".

That's not what Paul wrote.

Excerpt:
In what Universe could “absence-of-hearing” prevent believing (Rm10:14) if believing is the sovereign decision of God? Consider also the structure of the verse:

........................................that <subject> is not of yourselves
......................................./
“For by grace you have...../
been saved through faith {—it <subject> is the gift of God
.....................................\
......................................<subject is> not as a result of works lest anyone boast

“Through Faith” in the Greek is “Dia Pistis”, which is a prepositional phrase—just as “by grace” is, and neither can be elevated to any kind of a subject. What is the subject of this sentence? Is it God’s-free-gift-of-salvation, or is it “faith”? The subject is clearly the entire opening phrase, which New American Standard Bible footnotes as, “that salvation”. The five modifiers all point to the one subject, “SALVATION”. It is nonsensical to contend that the word “that”, is “faith”. If faith is a unilateral bequeath from God, then that “saving-faith” becomes merely more grace. And Paul would have meant, “For by grace through grace have you been saved!” That’s not what he said, and not what he meant. The word “THAT”, refers to “that salvation”, rather than “that faith”.

1. THAT SALVATION—by grace
2. THAT SALVATION—through faith
3. THAT SALVATION—is not of yourselves
4. THAT SALVATION—is the gift of God
5. THAT SALVATION—is not as a result of works
Ephesians 2:8 is properly understood to intend: ” For by grace are you saved through faith, and that salvation is not of yourselves, that salvation is the gift of God”. Peter states in 1Pet1:9 that we “Obtain as the outcome of OUR faith the salvation of our souls”.

This is A.T.Robertson's commentary:

For by grace (τη γαρ χαριτ). Explanatory reason. "By the grace" already mentioned in verse Ephesians 2:5 (NAS)
5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
Through faith (δια πιστεως). This phrase he adds in repeating what he said in verse Ephesians 2:5 (NAS)
5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
Ephesians 2:5 to make it plainer. "Grace" is God's part, "faith" ours.

And that (κα τουτο). Neuter, not feminine ταυτη, and so refers not to πιστις (feminine) or to χαρις (feminine also), but to the act of being saved by grace conditioned on faith on our part. Paul shows that salvation does not have its source (εξ υμων, out of you) in men, but from God. Besides, it is God's gift (δωρον) and not the result of our work.

 

[farouk]

Exactly that -- we are indwelt by the Son and the Spirit, or we're not saved. That's the issue -- a truly indwelt person can return to walking in sin, which means no longer indwelt.

That's why this is important to me. "Encourage one another, lest any one of you be hardened by deceitful sin to falling away from God". With all my heart I pray my words encourage each person here; for you are my treasure, if we endure we will be brothers and sisters in Christ -- forever...

Look at the end of Romans 8: verses 38-39 definitely do not teach that one can be saved today and lost tomorrow.

 

[Gadgetere]

Actually the OSAS concept is very new. The theme of the Bible is not sin all ya want and guaranteed heaven.

Good post. However -- there are three separate and distinct OSAS views, and only one openly promotes licensiousness.

1. Antinomianism/Gnosticism, corrupt FLESH (fornicating carousing drunk stealing murdering) but the SPIRIT is still SAVED. Thankfully not many promote this (easy to disprove with verses like 1Cor6:9-11, Eph5:5-6, Gal5:19-21, 1Jn3 etc), but the other two often say "backslidden-but-saved", which is Antinomianism.

2. Eternal Security -- salvation is offered to all (unlimited atonement), but once "IN" either too changed to fall, or God dynamically keeps one (sometimes ending his life that his spirit lives -- really? What sin is worthy of death but ignorable by God???).

3. Sovereign Predestined Salvation (Calvinism, Reformed Theology, and others) -- God sovereignly ordains and creates some to be righteous and live (atonement is limited and NOT offered to all but ordained for a few "favorites"), but He ordains and creates most to be wicked and perish (for reasons only He knows). No one consciously chooses, God declares the end from the beginning. The consequence is that Jesus' death did not actually affect anyone, it only DEMONSTRATES what God ordained before time (therefore only "theatrics/pageantry").

Views #2 and #3 do not promote licentiousness; but all three views are nothing other than what Eve was told in the Garden, "Don't worry, you won't really die." And Paul said we have the same risk of perishing, as she did! 2Cor11:3!!!

The description of Heaven is not that it will be filled with evildoers and God and Good people will be damned to live for eternity with evil. God has never shown a tolerance for evil, much less rewarding it with Heaven.....there is another place for that. That is one of many reasons that the Apostles kept warning Christians about sinning. The theme of the New Testament is not a complicacy for sin or a God that rewards it. Christians can sin themselves to Hell. The Christians that wrote after the biblical error showed zero tolerance for sin or the belief that evildoers would go to Heaven

Gnosticism was a deception in the First Century; all of 1Jn was written to oppose it. Especially chapter 3 really ruins Antinomianism.

OSAS had it begins in the 60's with the peace, love, smoke pot movement. Social acceptance of social morals and sinful lifestyles. The desire to modify biblical morals so they would not be so condemning of homosexuals, drug use, and sexual immorality, etc. You will see no debates in history on OSAS.

Well, perhaps Antinomianism; Calvinism of course came from the mid 1500's, Calvin was influenced by Augustine. Before Augustine no one really considered "predestined-election".

Did you see my citation on Chrysostom, 2Cor? It's extremely "OSNAS". His view was typical of the Early Church Fathers.

Why is it that people often find "new and novel understandings" more credible than what was taught by those who saw and lived with Jesus?

 

[Gadgetere]

Look at the end of Romans 8: verses 38-39 definitely do not teach that one can be saved today and lost tomorrow.

But it doesn't oppose "OSNAS", either. Earlier I posted:

Let's review the verses:
James5:19-20 -- return from "falling-away-from-the-truth", and sins re-covered
1Tim4:1 -- demons can deceive many away from the faith
Heb4:11 -- do not imitate Israel's disobedience & unbelief and fall and fail to enter God's rest
2Cor11:3 -- just like Eve was deceived by satan, we can be led astray from Jesus

Lk15:11-32 the Prodigal abandoned his father and was "dead", until he returned
Heb3:12-14 -- brethren can be hardened by sin to falling away from God!
2Pet3:17 -- do not be deceived and fall from your own steadfastness
2Jn1:7-9 -- guard against deceivers, if you go too far and leave the teachings you don't have Jesus!
1Jn2:26-28 -- guard against deceivers, abide in Him to not shrink-in-shame at His return
Col2:6-8 -- walk in Jesus, guard your faith; do not be deceived away from Christ

Okay --- WHICH of those is not "osnas"?

--------------------------

Farouk, if you "find a verse you feel supports unfallible salvation", what do you do with all of the verses that plainly warn against becoming unsaved, some of which I listed? And there are so many more.

We're supposed to consider all of "God's-inspired-Scripture" (2Tim3:16), all of the verses have to fit whatever doctrine we decide Scripture wants to teach. Betchya' agree...

 

[farouk]

But it doesn't oppose "OSNAS", either. Earlier I posted:

Let's review the verses:
James5:19-20 -- return from "falling-away-from-the-truth", and sins re-covered
1Tim4:1 -- demons can deceive many away from the faith
Heb4:11 -- do not imitate Israel's disobedience & unbelief and fall and fail to enter God's rest
2Cor11:3 -- just like Eve was deceived by satan, we can be led astray from Jesus

Lk15:11-32 the Prodigal abandoned his father and was "dead", until he returned
Heb3:12-14 -- brethren can be hardened by sin to falling away from God!
2Pet3:17 -- do not be deceived and fall from your own steadfastness
2Jn1:7-9 -- guard against deceivers, if you go too far and leave the teachings you don't have Jesus!
1Jn2:26-28 -- guard against deceivers, abide in Him to not shrink-in-shame at His return
Col2:6-8 -- walk in Jesus, guard your faith; do not be deceived away from Christ

Okay --- WHICH of those is not "osnas"?

--------------------------

Farouk, if you "find a verse you feel supports unfallible salvation", what do you do with all of the verses that plainly warn against becoming unsaved, some of which I listed? And there are so many more.

We're supposed to consider all of "God's-inspired-Scripture" (2Tim3:16), all of the verses have to fit whatever doctrine we decide Scripture wants to teach. Betchya' agree...

All your assumptions are false, here.

It defies belief that a mighty chapter such as Romans 8 supposedly teaches that faith in the wondrous work of Christ still is not supposedly enough to assure a believer of salvation and eternal security.

There is frankly no point in continuing this discussion.

 

[Tong2020]

<<<On Rom11 -- it can't mean "nations", it says "natural branches" plural; Israel is only one.>>>
In the illustration the whole trunk of the olive tree represents Israel and the natural branches are Jews. The "wild olive" tree represents the Gentile world. Paul was not speaking of individual salvation here but of God’s program for Jews and Gentiles as groups.

Why wasn't he speaking of "individual salvation"? How else can a "branch be broken off for unbelief, or restored if they do not continue in unbelief"? Why are we-wild-branches-grafted-in "not to be conceited but fear, for WE can be broken off TOO!

If that's not OSNAS, then what is it?

<<<Why wasn't he speaking of "individual salvation"?>>>

Because he was talking about Israel as a nation, as the cultivated olive tree. And he is also talking about the Gentiles as a people, as the wild olive tree. By the illustration with the olive tree, Paul was saying that Gentile salvation really depends on Israel's covenant relationship with God. However, one must not forget that this is all in the plan of God concerning the Gentiles, that it was always God's purpose to bless Gentiles (Gen. 12:1-3). Apparently, something that involves a people would be difficult, if not impossible, to explain in individual terms.

One just have to read to see that Paul was talking about Israel, as a people, a nation, and not as individuals, in there.

Many seems to forget while reading that part in Romans 11, that those of Israel who we see as coming to Jesus, are of the remnant that Paul speaks about in verse 5, saved by God according to the election of grace. They should not be mistaken as those of blinded/hardened Israel; that they are being grafted back in. No. For it will not be until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in, that all Israel be saved. That the time of the fullness of the has has come, we will see Israel as a people, to have come to Jesus .

Tong
R4699

 

[Tong2020]

I asked you to consider Hebrews 6:4-6, thinking that you will come to realize one thing and its obvious necessary strong implication. That the truth and situation for the truly and already saved Christian, is that it is impossible for them to be restored to repentance unto Christ again.

Stop -- words written in Greek, must be read in Greek. It's not "impossible" --- it is "adunatos, unable/powerless/impotent. What is the cause of the powerlessness-to-restore-them-to-repentance? Willful sin. That'ts why NASB footnote says "impossible/unable to restore them to repentance WHILE they crucify Christ to themselves anew (by repetitive sin).

It is. While you are right in pointing out the Greek word “adunatos” as to mean powerless, a great majority of the translations, if not all, got the message right. For what

<<<What is the cause of the powerlessness-to-restore-them-to-repentance? Willful sin.>>>

I think this is one where misunderstanding of the passage comes from. Firstly, the question you posed is as if the powerlessness is not on the person, but on another. If that were what the passage is saying, who then is powerless to restore/renew them to repentance? But what the passage says is that it is impossible for the person to come to repentance, that is, to change his mind yet again, back to believe in Christ Jesus. He does not have the power to do that.

You say that the cause as to why he cannot be restored them again to repentance, is willful sin. In other words you are pointing to one’s will or one’s power, as the power behind that causes him to be powerless to restored again to repentance? That by itself sounds absurd. Even if that we take that to make some sense, such power would fall in what Paul said in Romans 8:38-39, which is as follows “For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.”.

Besides, as to why it is impossible for him to be restored back is expressed in Hebrews 6:6 as follows “since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God,”.

Now, obviously this impossible thing only arises IF they fall away

Again, the Greek does NOT say "IF they fall away" --- it is aorist active participle, their falling away is a fact.

Does not take away the fact, that a situation where one falls away, renders the one as forever lost because as it is impossible for one to be renewed back to repentance, for the reason given in the end part of verse 6. And this, if at all, it could happen, renders Jesus Christ to have not fulfilled the will of the Father concerning those whom He had given to the Son to raise up in the last day unto eternal life.

It’s an absolute thing. There is no exception given that goes with this. One cannot say that they can be restored as long as they do this or that.

Doesn't matter what one says or you say or I say, the writer clearly said it was their willful sinfulness that's the problem. The context is 5:11-14 and 6:1-6 --- those who ARE FALLING, are the same ones as described in ch5 as "babes". They walk in sin and unrepentance.

Of course, what matters is what scriptures say. And we both are here trying to tell each other what, in out understanding is what scriptures say. Sadly we differ. And so we reason.

<<<the writer clearly said it was their willful sinfulness that's the problem.>>>

Nope. But yes, that is what you say.

To explain further, take for example, for the sake of illustration, that a truly saved Christian fall away into unbelief, rejecting the gospel and Jesus. When that happens, he could not be restored again to repentance, no matter what.

Not what it says.

Perhaps not to you, but it is to me.

There is nothing that he could do to be saved again. That is what Hebrews 6:4-6 is saying.

Well fine; let's just take a heavy black ink marker and mark out James5:19-20, and many others...

Why would you want to do that?

Now, what is the obvious necessary strong implication of that? It is that no truly saved Christian will fall away and be lost.

Sigh.

I understand why. Allow me to give an unsolicited advise. Just try your best to defend what it is you think scriptures is telling you and not step over the work of the Holy Spirit. Leave the work of conviction to Him.

Now why are there who are said to have fallen away into unbelief, rejecting the gospel and Jesus? Who are they if the truly saved ones can not fall away? Who else, but are the ones who are not of the truly saved ones.

You really think "enlightened", "tasted good word of God and powers of age to come" (exactly the same as "Jesus geuomai-tasted death Heb2:9), "PARTNERS in the Holy Spirit", are "never-truly/actually-saved"?

The writer labors extensively to expose them as WERE saved. The warning of 6:4-6 is the same as 10:26-29 --- if we continue sinning willfully after having (been saved), Jesus' sacrifice no longer covers us! Golly, Tong -- why doesn't Heb6:7-8 and 11-12 convince you? We can produce EITHER good fruit and be blessed, OR thorns and be burned; we need diligence to imitate those who by faith and patience inherit the promises.

No offense -- what would it have to say to be clearer?

<<<You really think "enlightened", "tasted good word of God and powers of age to come" (exactly the same as "Jesus geuomai-tasted death Heb2:9), "PARTNERS in the Holy Spirit", are "never-truly/actually-saved"?>>>

Look at Israel. Were they not enlightened when God have shown to them who He is? Have they not shared tasted the good word of God? Of course they did. However, are they all true believers?

<<<The writer labors extensively to expose them as WERE saved.>>>

Does the writer know their heart? The writer believes (by presumption) they all are. However, that does not mean that they all actually are.

The very reason, as I gather, why he writes and speak to them in such manner, is exactly because he sees not in them what is expected of a true believer in God and in Jesus Christ, in the gospel that had been preached to them by the apostles. For if that were not so, he would find no reason to write to them these things.

Tong
R4701

 

[Grailhunter]

attacking the Gospel

Attacking the Gospel! LOL You do not think that promoting sin and leading people to Hell is not attacking the Gospel?
You need a bigger shovel for that hole?

 

[Tong2020]

Tong2020 said: ↑
I call them the nominal Christians ~ those whose faith is not the kind of faith that is of and from God, but that which that is of man. They are the ones who believe that they can by their free will choose to reject the gospel and believe no longer in Jesus Christ. That such choice is real to them and that they can do it should they will to do it so, anytime and for whatever reason; and after falling to unbelief, believes that they can believe again in the gospel and in Jesus. In other words, they are those who believe that they are saved and could by their will, be unsaved and be saved again.

We have to confine our assessments to Scripture; the writer calls them "saved", geuomai-tasted/participated exactly as Jesus tasted/participated in 2:9, and partners in the Spirit. Metochos-partakers/partners is SAVED in 3:1, in 3:14, and in 12:8; it's saved here too.

Yes. The writer believes (by presumption) they all are. However, that does not mean that they all actually are. Whether they all are already saved or not, who the already saved, and who are not yet, he could only say.

I sincerely think that the Christian should consider that and ponder on what Hebrews 6:4-6 is saying and teaching.

And we just did -- the Greek forbids "they-weren't-really-saved", and it prohibits "they-didn't-really-fall".

Yes they were, yes they did; they are US if we do not heed the warnings!

Only if the writer knows their heart tha

What implication you append there to the meaning of “death” or “thanatos” depends in the context. In James 5:19-20, the context does not support that implication.

Ah -- I see! One can be "wandered-away-from-truth but still SAVED", and have "uncovered/unforgiven sins but still be SAVED." (No, he can't...)

A misbehaving child, disobedient he may be, and commits mistakes, remains a child no less, and is disciplined and chastised. James says that, him who turns a wandering (sinning) brethren back from the error of his way, will save him from death and cover a multitude of sins. James speaks of the good of bringing a wandering brethren back from the error of his way. He is not saying that one becomes the savior of the wandering brethren unto eternal life nor is the wandering brethren when brought back is saved again unto eternal life. It is not the second death that James was referring to there by “death”.

I did a search, but got nothing about “Semitic View”. If you can give me a link, that would be nice.

Earlier I included a link to "Anthropomorphism", it's the same. Charging God (or others) for what men do themselves.

As I said, I checked out Anthropomorphism in then link you provided. As you pointed out "Anthropomorphsim" is ascribing to animals or others what men do themselves. It is not ascribing to God the act what men do to themselves, which is what you suggest.

You dodged my question.

Did not. we enter by free choice, and we can leave by free choice. Look at what you are either dodging or stamping over with "NOT REALLY" (not-really-were-saved, or not-really-fell).

Tong: And may I ask, you don’t believe that Christ would not let His work and precious blood wasted in any way, shape, or form, or do you? I don’t think you believe and would believe He would.

Gadgetere: We enter His fold and become His sheep (Jn10:9, "tis-anyone") by conscious choice, but any of us can become a Prodigal if we choose. As Heb3:12-14 scaringly warns against.

I don’t see how what you say there answered my question and not dodged it.

Tong
R4702

 

[Grailhunter]

Good post. However -- there are three separate and distinct OSAS views, and only one openly promotes licensiousness.

1. Antinomianism/Gnosticism, corrupt FLESH (fornicating carousing drunk stealing murdering) but the SPIRIT is still SAVED. Thankfully not many promote this (easy to disprove with verses like 1Cor6:9-11, Eph5:5-6, Gal5:19-21, 1Jn3 etc), but the other two often say "backslidden-but-saved", which is Antinomianism.

2. Eternal Security -- salvation is offered to all (unlimited atonement), but once "IN" either too changed to fall, or God dynamically keeps one (sometimes ending his life that his spirit lives -- really? What sin is worthy of death but ignorable by God???).

3. Sovereign Predestined Salvation (Calvinism, Reformed Theology, and others) -- God sovereignly ordains and creates some to be righteous and live (atonement is limited and NOT offered to all but ordained for a few "favorites"), but He ordains and creates most to be wicked and perish (for reasons only He knows). No one consciously chooses, God declares the end from the beginning. The consequence is that Jesus' death did not actually affect anyone, it only DEMONSTRATES what God ordained before time (therefore only "theatrics/pageantry").

Views #2 and #3 do not promote licentiousness; but all three views are nothing other than what Eve was told in the Garden, "Don't worry, you won't really die." And Paul said we have the same risk of perishing, as she did! 2Cor11:3!!!

Gnosticism was a deception in the First Century; all of 1Jn was written to oppose it. Especially chapter 3 really ruins Antinomianism.


Well, perhaps Antinomianism; Calvinism of course came from the mid 1500's, Calvin was influenced by Augustine. Before Augustine no one really considered "predestined-election".

Did you see my citation on Chrysostom, 2Cor? It's extremely "OSNAS". His view was typical of the Early Church Fathers.

Why is it that people often find "new and novel understandings" more credible than what was taught by those who saw and lived with Jesus?

Good post....I have posted these things before.
And so that you know this topic has had like around 15,000 posts in different threads over the last year.

Did you see....2Cor?.....2Cor11:3????

The Calvinists are the robot religion. They are just weird.

Be Good and do good. It does not matter the denomination or specific belief or variances, if they preach that a Christian cannot sin their way to Hell, it false. If they preach that as long as you believe in Christ all sins are automatically forgiven or all amount of sins are forgiven, it is false. Bottom line they are preaching Heaven is full of evil doers and God and good people are going to have to go somewhere else.

 

[Tong2020]

What I was referring to is the condition you add (bold font in your statement).

Gadgetere: All true; yet, if we cease to do good works and turn back to unrighteousness, we perish.

<<<but no OSAS person is willing to interact with verses like Ezk18:24>>>

What is in Ezek.18:24 that you want to point out? I would expect that what it is does not contradict what I said that you said is all true.

No one can be righteous apart from Jesus and salvation, but one who WAS righteous can turn away from it (no way you or I could deny "they have left salvation"). Is there?

You don’t seem to realize the difference between people who are in Christ and are saved in Christ, and are justified in Christ, and the people under the Law who are said to be righteous by their keeping of the law, who are not in Christ. In another way, you don’t seem to realize the difference between those under the new covenant and those who are under the old covenant.

Tong: What power will he use to undo that, the new creation of God concerning him?”

Gadgetere: The power of FAITH.

Actually, "the power of faithlessness". Why do you think Jude says "building yourselves in faith, keep yourselves in God's love"? Any way he's allowing that we can NOT move-out-of-His-love?

What was Jude saying?

It even gotten worst. The power of faithlessness? Never heard that faithlessness have any power, more so, too great a power that can undo what God had created, specifically pertaining to the new man whom God created anew in Christ Jesus.

<<<What was Jude saying?>>>

He was giving some exhortation in view of the things he just told them about. In verses 3-4, we read why Jude makes the exhortation.

Sure about that? Are you saying that one who was created anew by God in Christ Jesus uses the power of faith to undo the work of God in him, that is, his creating him anew? That’s weird I have to say.

We are new creations; but then why does Scripture say (in Eph4 and Col3) to "lay aside the old sinful man and put on the new righteous one"? It's almost as if we have to do that every day, isn't it?

(Almost?)

<<<We are new creations; but then why does Scripture say (in Eph4 and Col3) to "lay aside the old sinful man and put on the new righteous one"?>>>


What do you think as to why Paul have to write such things? If not that there are those in the church who call themselves brethren yet apparently are not living up to who they supposed to be are, as true children of God, that he find the necessity to write to them to teach, or remind, or exhort, for reasons that comes to Paul’s awareness and knowledge. Paul did not write such things tell the already saved things that they should do to save themselves or get themselves remain saved or what.

Tong
R4703

 

[Tong2020]

Let's review the verses:
James5:19-20 -- return from "falling-away-from-the-truth", and sins re-covered
1Tim4:1 -- demons can deceive many away from the faith
Heb4:11 -- do not imitate Israel's disobedience & unbelief and fall and fail to enter God's rest
2Cor11:3 -- just like Eve was deceived by satan, we can be led astray from Jesus

Lk15:11-32 the Prodigal abandoned his father and was "dead", until he returned
Heb3:12-14 -- brethren can be hardened by sin to falling away from God!
2Pet3:17 -- do not be deceived and fall from your own steadfastness
2Jn1:7-9 -- guard against deceivers, if you go too far and leave the teachings you don't have Jesus!
1Jn2:26-28 -- guard against deceivers, abide in Him to not shrink-in-shame at His return
Col2:6-8 -- walk in Jesus, guard your faith; do not be deceived away from Christ

I noticed that a great number of those scriptures you cited there deals with not being deceived.

Before I go to comment on each of those verses, let me ask what is your thought on this:

When one is deceived, does that make him a sinner?

I made a thread with this topic. We can discuss this matter there.

When one is deceived, does that make him a sinner?

Tong
R4705

 

[Taken]

That's not what Paul wrote.

If "THAT" is not what Paul wrote, "THEN" I am not "addressing" what "Paul wrote"!

** Book of James notifies you there ARE...good gifts and perfect gifts......FROM GOD!

James 1:17
[17] Every "good gift' and every "perfect gift" is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.

** Book of Ephesians notifies you Gods Gifts are OF GOD.

Eph 2:8
[8] For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:


** Book of Romans notifies you there IS a "perfect gift OF "ETERNAL LIFE" FROM GOD"!

Romans 6:23
[23] For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

** Book of 1 Peter notifies you there ARE men who have received >>>THE SPECIFIC GIFT of the END of your FAITH and SALVATION of your SOUL (1 Pet 1:9 )

1 Peter 4:10
[10] As every man hath received the gift, even so minister the same one to another, as good stewards of the manifold grace of God.

** Book of Romans notifies you NOT EVERY MAN RECEIVES the SAME GIFTS....AND SOME "GIFTS" "GIVEN" are "Dependant" upon having "ReCeIVeD" a particular "ORDER" of gifts.

Romans 12:6
[6] Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith;

I am NOT interested in your attempt to argue semantics.
* ALL of Gods Gifts COME from God.
* THE "manner or form" in which Gods Gifts ARE "GIVEN" a man, IS OFF POINT.
* ALREADY KNOWN...
...God OFFERS..."UNMERITED" Gifts.
...God GIVES....."UNMERITED" Gifts.
...God OFFERS..."MERITED" Gifts.
...God GIVES....."MERITED" Gifts.
...NOT ALL MEN...RECEIVE the "SAME" Gifts.
...God MAINTAINS HIS HOLINESS, BY NOT DEALING "DIRECTLY" WITH THAT WHICH IS "UNHOLY".
... NOT A SECRET GOD IS "unseen and heard" OF that WHICH IS "unholy".
... NOT A SECRET GOD "uses" HIS HOLY SERVANTS ... TO BESTOW HIS GIFTS, TO CORRUPT men AND RESTORED human men!

Gods Grace, Gods Blessings, ARE Gifts OF GOD, "regardless" OF "HOW" His Gifts ARE "AUTHORIZED BY GOD" TO BE "GIVEN" "THROUGH HIS SERVANTS"...

"THROUGH" the Angel OF the Lord.
"THROUGH" Archangels
"THROUGH" Holy Angels
"THROUGH" Jesus...
"THROUGH" Christ...
"THROUGH" men....
"AS"...BY, THROUGH, OF.....grace, saving, offerings, baptism, blessings, or whatever manner....they are all "gifts" FROM God.

I have said BeFORE and repeat...
"According to Gods "ORDER and WAY"...


NOW BACK TO THE TOPIC...OSAS...

Gods GIFT OFFERING "OF" SALVATION...
* IS A Gift from God.
Gods GIFT OFFERING "OF" SALVATION...
* BY, THOUGH another...
IS STILL a GIFT OFFERING "OF' God.

Gods GIFT OFFERING "OF" SALVATION
"WAS" ORIGINALLY...
Offered...TO Hebrews and Tribesmen...
AND
TO BE RECEIVED, AFTER A MANS PHYSICAL BODILY DEATH!!

Gods GIFT OFFERING "OF" SALVATION
"BECAME AN EXPANDED OFFERING" TO "ALL" men
In THIS ORDER:
Jews First;
ALL Tribesmen Next;
ALL Gentiles Last.

AND
The OFFERING, ALSO EXPANDED
WHEN ANY, Jew, ANY Tribesman, ANY Gentile..COULD RECEIVE HIS OFFERING.

THE WHEN IS: BEFORE A mans PHYSICAL BODILY DEATH!

**What you REFUSE to ACKNOWLEDGE;
And DO NOT REVEAL you Comprehend...
IS:

* To hear the Word of God IS being enlightened with Gods Knowledge.
* Any man can Freely choose to Hear...or Not.
* To believe Gods Knowledge...is ALSO a mans Freewill Choice.
* Hearing a LITTLE of Gods Knowledge...God GIFTS that man with a LITTLE FAITH.
* A man BELIEVING Gods Knowledge the man Hears....God GIFTS A measure of Faith.
* IF, A man CONTINUES hearing, believing...Gods Gift of Faith INCREASES.
^ THAT IS NOT RECEIVING the Gift of Salvation
* THAT IS: a man STILL in Control of "IF" he will hear, how much, for how long.
* THAT IS: a man STILL in Control of "IF" he will STOP hearing, STOP believing.
Any man Hearing, believing....
God IS gifting that man "WITH" Faith and other Blessing.
God IS "WITH" that man.
* Any man Hearing, believing...THEN STOPS...
God STOPS gifting that man "WITH" FAITH.
God IS "NO LONGER WITH" that man.

* ANY MAN WHO...BECOMES CONVERTED "IN" Christ...HAS "SATISFIED" Gods "ORDER AND WAY", to RECEIVE GODS "GIFT OF SALVATION";
BEFORE THE mans Physical Bodily Death.

* THAT MAN BECOMES ... BY HIS WILFULL Heartful CHOICE and Admission. ONCE and FOREVER;
-Forgiven his sin
-spiritually bodily Dead
-soul restored to very good, called Saved.
-spirit quickened, called Born Again.

* The POWER OF GOD...ie Gods SPIRIT,
Enters "IN" that man, called Baptism OF the Holy Spirit, and
KEEPS "that man" Saved & Quickened Forever.
That man, FOREVER remains "WITH" God.
God, FOREVER remains "WITH" that man.
THAT ^ APPLIES to a man OSAS

If THAT DOES NOT APPLY TO YOU...that was your freewill choice to NOT ACCEPT Gods Offering of Baptism of His Holy Spirit, TO KEEP you FOReVER WITH Him!

Study and LEARN the Difference between...
"WHOSE POWER" KEEPS a man Forever Saved.
"WHEN and WHY" God is WITH a man....
Temporarily or Permanently."

Quoting Scripture after Scripture that APPLIES to a man, NOT having Received the BAPTISM of the HOLY SPIRIT.... IS IRRELEVANT, regarding a man WHO HAS received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit".

You were repeatedly told to Divide the Word of TRUTH... Apply what Applies,
And STOP trying to APPLY that which DOES NOT APPLY.

Men WHO, have NOT received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit....ARE repeatedly WARNED....they ARE in danger of losing the Gift of Salvation, bought for them; paid for for them; and Offered to them....BECAUSE THEY FREELY CHOOSE, to NOT ACCEPT...or flat out REJECT Gods Gift of Salvation.

 

[Tong2020]

Exactly that -- we are indwelt by the Son and the Spirit, or we're not saved. That's the issue -- a truly indwelt person can return to walking in sin, which means no longer indwelt.

That's why this is important to me. "Encourage one another, lest any one of you be hardened by deceitful sin to falling away from God". With all my heart I pray my words encourage each person here; for you are my treasure, if we endure we will be brothers and sisters in Christ -- forever...

Did you receive the Holy Spirit because you came to Jesus, that is, you believed in Jesus?

Tong
R4713

 

[Tong2020]

Tong2020 said: ↑
Nope. Aren’t you trying to separate two truths? One that Pharaoh hardened his heart and two that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart? Or trying to dismiss the latter?

As we discussed, "God-hardening", is a recognized literary device. "God-hardened" (Ex10:1), is really "Pharaoh-hardened-himself" (Ex9:34). Samuel agrees, 1Sam6:6. Samuel did not think God had anything to do with it...

Yes we discussed this already. And for you God-hardening is just a literary way of saying that He did not harden them whom scriptures says God hardened. On the other hand I take it God hardened those whom Scriptures says He hardened.

The point is, God hardening one’s heart is not evil nor makes God unrighteous.

Well sure it does!

God hardens whom He wills to harden. (Rom.9:18). “Semitic view” could not explain that away.

You argue that such would make God complicit in sin.

Paul answers you in the verse immediately after saying that, as follows:

19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?”

Why would Paul say that if God-hardening there is in the “Semitic view” which you use to mean that it is not actually God who hardened but that or is actually the man that hardened himself? Paul does not make any sense then of that were the case.

So certainly and definitely no. God hardening one’s heart is not evil nor makes God unrighteous.

Only in the natural mind of men who think that they know better than God what is righteous and what is not.

Come on -- in Jesus' words (Matt12), that would make God's house DIVIDED. His house is not divided, he does not conspire with sin.

Of course God does not conspire with sin. Nobody is saying that.

God does not arbitrarily harden a person’s heart. He does so according to the counsel of His will. We know the story of Pharaoh, and Israel. God’s hardening is not so different from what God did to wicked man as Paul tells us in Romans 1.

Yes it is -- God turning around and walking away from men who choose evil, is a UNIVERSE apart from God reaching down and sculpting sin into anyone's heart.

Apparently you do not see a similar effect. Anyway,….

And who is saying that God is reaching down and sculpting sin into anyone’s heart?

Tell me -- in Rom9, "does not the Potter have the right to make what he wants out of the clay?" -- are there TWO vessels in view (God takes one blank lump of clay and shapes one into "ti-me honor", and shapes the other into "atimia-dishonor-vessels-of-wrath"?

Or are there THREE vessels in view -- "ti-me-honor" (saved), "atimia-common" (saved), and a THIRD vessel that prepared THEMSELVES for wrath (as Rom2:4 says "store up wrath for themselves by their hard and unrepentant heart")? (Oops, they could not store wrath for themselves, if that heart was hardened by God!)

Two vessels, or three?

In Romans 9, 1 lump of clay. From out of that one lump God has the right to make two vessels, one for honor and one for dishonor.

Now, I may just be slow, but what is your point in bringing this up?

It is either you believe what scriptures says as written or believe what you want it to say. Scripture says God hardened Pharaoh and also Israel. On the other hand you say God did not. Who am I to believe?

Please explain how God can harden a heart into unbelief and wickedness, and not have a "divided house"?

...and how could He judge men if He's the one who hardened them?

God, hardening a heart, does not mean He makes one wicked and sin. Nope. God hardens one heart, according to the counsel of His will and His purpose. As Paul said clearly and plainly, God harden whom He wills.

Scriptures says God has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens.

Outta context; we have to read that with 11:32, "He ...has mercy on ALL MEN". Pas anthropos, no way to make that "a few", or "some-of-all-types".

Romans9:11-21 is one of the Primaries of Calvinism; it absolutely does not promote Predestined Election (that is, He creates some to receive His mercy and be righteous, but He creates the rest to be hardened and wicked). God is not a false judge.

Romans 11:32 For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all.

What Rom.11:32 says is not what you say there.

The rest of what you say there argues against a strawman, something you made up in your mind, against something that I never said.

You seem to say God does not harden whom He wills. Whom am I to believe?

Rom9:15 does use "Semitic View", and fits the theme of the whole chapter -- "Also Gentiles". Succinctly, "If God wants to have mercy on Gentiles, who are YOU oh Jewish person to object?"

I already shown you that your “Semitic View” excuse fails to explain away the truth that God hardens whom He wills to harden. See my discussion above relative to this.

Tong
R4714

 

[Candidus]

"As long as i dont backslide, i get to go to heaven".
So, do you see the problem this person has with their faith?
The problem is, "don't backslide" has become what this person believes will keep them saved.

"I can sin and win! No matter what proof I give that I am not saved, I get into heaven!"

Making spiritual failure the standard of salvation is not Biblical.

 

[GRACE ambassador]

Making spiritual failure the standard of salvation is not Biblical.

AMEN! Opposite of Making Spiritual Victory (Of CHRIST!) The Standard Of
God's ETERNAL Salvation, According To HIS ALL-Sufficient SACRIFICE,
And HIS Victorious RESURRECTION, Which Is VERY Biblical! Amen?

(2 Timothy 2:15; Romans 16:25; Ephesians 1:3-9; Ephesians 3:9 =
GRACE/Mystery Fellowship {Romans – Philemon}, For ALL “to SEE,” today?)

Please Be Richly Encouraged, Enlightened, Exhorted, and Edified!
God's Simple Will!